Skip to main content

Full text of "A dictionary of the Bible .."







Eev. J. M. FULLER, M.A. 

:}-j^^^y m ^^^^^^ 

Seconti dBuitton. 



1893. , 

The right of Translation is reserved. 


The Map of JEKUi^ALEsi, Plate I., to face page 1596. 
Do. do. Plate II. to face page 1646. 

Do. da Plate III., to face page 1654. 





EL-ZA'BAD ("rnt^X = God hath given. Cp. 
Theodore et sim. ; B. 'E\ia^ep, A. 'E\efa/3a5 ; 
Elzahad). 1. The ninth of tlie eleven Gadite 
hfiroes who came across the Jordan to David 
when he was in distress in the wilderness of 
Jiidah (1 Ch. xii. 12). 

2. B. 'E\7]Ca0dd, A. 'EXCafidS. A Korhite 
Levite, son of Shemaiah and of the family of 
Obed-edom ; one of the doorkeepers of the " house 
of Jehovah " (1 Ch. xxvi. 7). [G.] [F.] 

EL-ZA'PH AN Q^f?^ = God hath lyrotevtcd. 

€p. Phoen. ^ra3D'i* [MV."] ; 'E\iffa(l>dv; Elsa- 
phan), second son of (Jzziel, who was the son of 
Kohath son of Levi (Ex. vi. 22). He was thus 
cousin to Moses and Aaron, as is distinctly stated. 
Elzaphan assisted his brother Mishael to carry 
the unhappy Nadab and Abihu in their priestly 
tunics out of the camp (Lev. x. 4). The name 
is a contracted form of the more frequent 
Elizai'han. [G.] [F.] 

EMBALMING, the process by which dead 
bodies are preserved from putretaction and decay. 
The Hebrew word tO^H (chanat), employed to 
denote this process, is connected with the 
Arabic Ja>-», which in conj. 1 signifies "to be 

i-ed," as leather which has been tanned ; and in 
conj. 2, " to preserve with spices." In the 1st 
and 4th conjutrations it is applied to the ripening 
of fruit, and this meaning has been assigned to 
the Hebrew root in Cant. ii. 13. In the latter 
passage, however, it probably denotes the red 
colour of the ripening figs (see Delitzsch in loco). 
The word is found in the Chaldee and Syriac 

dialects, and in the latter jAAjQjsj (cliuntetho) is 
the equivalent of (ily/j-a, the confection of myrrh 
and aloes brought by Nicodemus (John xix. 39). 

The practice of embalming was most general 
smong the Egyptians, and it is in connexion with 
this people that the two instances which we meet 
with in the O. T. are mentioned (Gen. 1. 2, 26). 
Mummies exist which are to be dated just before 
and after this period (Ebers). Of the Egyptian 
method of embalming there remain two minute 
accounts, which have a general kind of agree- 
ment, though they differ in details. 

Herodotus (ii. 86-88. Cp. Wilkinson, Anc. 
Egypt, ii. 383, &c. [1878])— whose account is 



on the whole accurate — describes three modes, 
varying in completeness and expense, and prac- 
tised by persons regularly trained to the pro- 
fession, who were initiated into the mysteries of 
the art by their ancestors. The most costly 
mode, which is estimated by Diodonis Siculus 
(i. 91) at a talent of silver (about i!250 , was 
said by the Egyptian priests to belong to him 
whose name in such a matter it was not lawful 
to mention, viz. Osiris. The embalmers first 
removed part of tlie brain through the nostrils, 
by means of a crooked iron, and destroved thi 
rest by injecting caustic drugs. An incision 
was then made along the flank with a sharp 
Ethiopian stone, and the whole of the intestines 
removed. The cavity was rinsed out with palm- 
wine, and afterwards scoured with pounded 
perfumes. It was then filled with pure myrrh 
pounded, cassia, and other aromatics, except 
frankincense. This done, the body was sewn 
up and steeped in natron (subcarbonato of soda, 
Ebers) for seventy days (cp. the extract given 
by Ebers from the Setnan papyrus). When the 
seventy days were accomplished, the embalmers 
\yashed the corpse and swathed it in bandages of 
linen, cut in strips, and smeared with gum. They 
then gave it up to the relatives of the deceased, 
who provided for it a wooden case, made in the 
shape of a man, in which the dead was placed, 
and deposited in an erect position against the 
wall of the sepulchral chamber. Diodorus Siculus 
gives some particulars of the process which are 
omitted by Herodotus. When the body was laid 
out on the ground for the purpose of embalming, 
one of the operators, called the scribe (ypa/j.- 
/narevs), marked out the part of the left flank 
where the incision was to be made. The dis- 
sector (irapa<rxta-rr]s) then, with a sharp Ethio- 
pian stone (black flint, or Ethiopian agate, 
Rawlinson, Herod, ii. 141), hastily cut through 
as much flesh as the law enjoined, and fled, 
pursued by curses and volleys of stones from 
the spectators. When all the embalmers (rapj- 
Xfvral) were assembled, one of them extracted 
the intestines, with the exception of the heart 
and kidneys ; another cleansed them one by one, 
and rinsed them in palm- wine and perfumes.'' 
The body was then washed with oil of cedar, 
and other things worthy of notice, for more than 

« Ebers allocates these duties somewhat differently, 
and adds the names and special functions of other ofBcers. 




fhirtv (lays (according to some JISS. forty), ami 
afterwards sprinkled with myrrh, ciiinainon, and 
other substaucos, which possess tlie ]>n)perty not 
only of preserving the body for a long period, 
but also of communicating to it an agreeable 
smell. This process was so effectual that the 
features of the dead could be recognised. It is 
remari^able that Diodorus omits all mention of 
the steeping in natron. 

The second mode of embalming cost about 20 
minae (about £60). In this case no incision was 
made in the body, nor were the intestines re- 
moved, but cedar-oil was injected into the 
stomach by the rectum. The oil was prevented 
from escaping, and the body was then steeped in 
natron for the appointed number of days. On 
the last day the oil was withdrawn, and carried 
of} with it the stomach and intestines in a state 
of solution, while the flesh was consumed by the 
natron, and nothing was left but the skin and 
bones. The body in this state was returned to 
the relatives of the deceased. 

The third mode, which was adopted by the 
poorer classes, and cost but little, consisted iu 
rinsing out the intestines with syrmaea, an in- 
fusion of senna and cassia (Pettigrew, p. 69), and 
steeping the body for the usual nmnber of days 
in natron. 

Porphyry {Be Ahsf. iv. 10) supplies an omis- 
sion of Herodotus, who neglects to mention what 
was done with the intestines after they were 
]-emoved from the body. In the case of a person 
of respectable rank they were placed in a separate 
vessel and thrown into the river. This account 
is confirmed by Plutarch (Sept. Sap. Conv. c. 16). 

Although the three modes of embalming are 
so precisely described by Herodotus, it has been 
found impossible to classify the mummies which 
have been discovered and examined under one or 
other of these three heads. Dr. Pettigrew, from 
his own observations, confirms the truth of 
Herodotus' statement that the biain was re- 
moved through the nostrils. But in many 
instances, in which the body was carefully pre- 
served and elaborately ornamented, the brain 
had not been removed at all ; while in some 
mummies the cavity was found to be filled with 
resinous and bituminous matter. 

M. Rouyer, i^u his Notice sur Ics Emhaumcments 
lies Anck'iis Ejijptiens, quoted by Pettigrew, 
endeavoured to class the mummies which he 
examined under two principal divisions, which 
•were again subdivided into others. These were 
— I. Mummies with the ventral incision, pre- 
served (I) by balsamic matter, and (2) by natron. 
The first of these are filled with a mixture of 
resin and aromatics, and are of an olive colour — 
the skin dry, flexible, and adhering to the bones. 
Others are filled with bitumen or asphaltum, 
and are black, the skin hard and shining. Those 
prepared with natron are also filled with resinous 
substances and bitumen. II. Mummies without 
the ventral incision. This class is again sub- 
divided, according as the bodies were (1) salted 
and filled with pisasphaltum, a compound ot' 
asphaltum and common pitch, or (2) salted onlv. 
The former are supposed to have been immersed 
in the pitch when in a liquid state. 

The medicaments employed in embalming were 
various. From a chemical analysis of the sub- 
stances found in mummies, ]M. Rouelle detected 
three modes of embalming — 1, with asphaltum, 


or .Jew's pitch, called also funeral gum, or </ti)n 
of muinviies ; 2, with a mixture of asphaltum 
and cedria, the liquor distilled from the cedar; 
3, with this mixture together with some resinous- 
and aromatic ingredients. The powdered aro- 
matics mentioned by Herodotus were not mixed 
with the bituminous matter, but sprinkled into 
the cavities of the body. 

It does not aj-jjcar that embalming, properly 
so called, was practised by the Hebrews. Asa 
was laid "iuthe bed which was filled with sweet 
odours and divers kind of apices prepared by the 
apothecaries' art " (2 Ch. xvi. 14) ; and by the 
tender care of Xicodemus the body of Jesus was 
wrapped in linen cloths, with spices, "a mixture 
of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound 
treight ... as the manner of tlie Jews is to burv " 
(John xix. 32, 40). 

The account given by Herodotus has been 
supposed to throw discredit upon the narrative 
in Genesis. He asserts that the body is steeped 
in natron for seventy days, while in Gen. 1. o it 
is said that only forty days were occujiied in 
the whole process of embalming, although the 
period of mourning extended over seventy days. 
Diodorus, on the contrary, omits altogether the 
steeping in natron as a part of the operation ; 
and though the time which, according to him, 
is taken up iu washing the body with cedar oil 
and other aromatics is more than thirty days, 
yet this is evidently only a portion of the whole 
time occupied in the complete process. Heng- 
stenberg {Egupt and the Books of Moses, p. 69, 
Eng. tr.) would reconcile this discrepancy by 
supposing that the seventy days of Herodotus 
include the whole time of embalming, and not 
that of steeping in natron onl}' ; others, with 
more probability, explain any differences ot 
detail and variations of practice by local or 
dynastic customs (cp. Dillmann, Genesis,^ in loco). 
Ebers thinks that there are grounds for be- 
lieving that the embalming tlie body of Jacol> 
would have been after the manner of Memphis. 

Their religious views suggested to the Egyp- 
tians the idea of embalming. They practised it 
in accordance with their doctrine of the trans- 
migration of souls (see further, Egypt, p. 872, 
col. 2). The actual process is said to have lieen 
derived from "their first merely burying in the 
sand, impregnated with natron and other salts, 
which dried and preserved tlie body " (Rawlin- 
son, Herod, ii. 142). Drugs and bitumen were 
of later introduction, the latter not being gene- 
rally employed before the 18th dynasty. When 
the practice ceased entirelv is uncertain (cp. 
Wilkinson, Anc. Egi/pt. ii. 398 [1878]). 

The subject of embalming is fully discussed, 
and the sources of practical information well- 
nigh exhausted, in Dr. Pettigrew's Historg of 
Egyptian Mummies. See also Ebers in Riehni's 
HWB. s. n.« Einbalsamiren.' [W. A. W.] [F.] 

EMBEOIDEKER. This term is given in the 
A. V. as the equivalent of rohein (Qp/1), the pro- 
ductions of the art being described as "needle- 
work " (nJDi'5'1). In Exodus the embroiderer is 
contrasted with the " cunning workman," chosheb 
(2^'U): and the consideration of one of these 
terms involves that of the otlier. Various ex- 
planations have been offered as to the distinction 
between them,but most of these overlook thedis- 




tinction marked in the Bible itself, viz. that the 
rokcm wove simply a variegated texture, without 
gold thread or figures, and that the choshcb inter- 
wove gold thread or iigures into the variegated 
texture. We conceive that the use of the gold 
thread was for delineating figures, as is imiilied 
in the description of the corslet of Amasis (Her. 
iii. 47), and that the notices of gold thread in 
some instances and of figures in others were but 
difl'erent methods of describing the same thing. 
It follows, then, that the application of the term 
''embroiderer" to ro/icwi is incorrect; if it belongs 
to either, it is to choshcb, or the " cunning work- 
man," who added the figures. But if "em- 
broidery " be strictly confined to the work of 
the needle, we doubt whether it can be applied 
to either, for the simple addition of gold thread, 
or of a figure, does not involve the use of the 
needle. The patterns may have been worked 
into the stuff by the loom, as appears to have 
been the case in Egypt (Wilkinson, Anc. Eijijpt. 
ii. 81 [1878]; c]). Her. loc. cit.), whore the 
Hebrews learned the art, and as is stated by 
Josephus {olvOt] iuvcpavrai. Ant. iii. 7, § 2). The 
distinction, as given by the Talmudists, and 
which has been adopted by Gesenius (Thesaur. 
p. lull) and Biihr {Symboiik, i. 266), is this — 
that was rihmah, or " needlework," where a 
pattern was attached to the stuff by being sewn 
on to it on one side; and that was the work of 
thec/jos/ie6 when the pattern was worked into the 
stuff by the loom, and so apjieared on both sides. 
This view appears to be entirely inconsistent with 
the statements of the Bible, and with the sense 
of the word rikmak elsewhere. The absence of 
the figure or the gold thread in the one, and its 
presence in the other, constitutes the essence of 
the distinction. In support of this view we call 
attention to the passages in which the expressions 
are contrasted. Rikinah consisted of tlie fol- 
lowing materials, " blue, purple, scarlet, and 
fine twined linen " (Ex. xxvi. 36, xxvii. 16, 
xxxvi. 37, xxxviii. 18, xxxix. 29). The work of 
the c/ios/ic'^ was either '"fine twined linen, blue, 
purple, and scarlet, icith cherubim" (Ex. xxvi. 
1, 31 ; xxxvi. 8, 3.5), or '■'■gold, blue, purple, 
scarlet, and fine twined linen " (xxviii. 6, 8, 15 ; 
xxxix. 2, 5, 8). Again, looking at the general 
sense of the words, we shall find that choshcb 
involves the idea of invention, or designing 
patterns ; rikmah the idea of texture as well as 
variegated colour. The former is applied to 
other arts which demanded the exercise of in- 
ventive genius, as in the construction of engines 
of war (2 Ch. xxvi. 15) ; the latter is applied to 
other substances, the texture of which is remark- 
able, as the human body (Ps. cxxxix. 15). Fur- 
ther than this, rikmah involves the idea of a 
regular disposition of colours, which demanded 
no inventive genius. Beyond the instances 
already adduced, it is applied to tessellated pave- 
ment (1 Ch. xxix. 2), to the eagle's plumage 
(Ezek. xvii. 3), and, in the Targums, to the 
leopard's spotted skin (Jer. xiii. 23). In the 
same sense it is applied to the coloured sails of 
the Egyptian vessels (Ezek. xxvii. 16), which 
were e-ither chequered or worked according to a 
regular!}' recurring pattern (Wilkinson, Anc. 
Egypt, i. 413 [1878]). Gesenius considers this 
passage as conclusive for his view of the dis- 
tinction, but it is hardly conceivable that the 
patterns were on cue side of the sail only, nor 

does there appear any ground to infer a departure 
from the usual custom of working the colours 
by tlie loom. The ancient Versions do not con- 
tribute much to the elucidation of the point. 
The LXX. varies between itoi/ciAtvjs and ^a(pi- 
SeuTTjs, as representing rokem, and ttoikiAtvj? 
and v<pavr))s for choshcb, combining the two 
terms in each case for the work itself, tj iroiKiXia 
rov pa<j)tSevrov for the first, epyov ixpavrhv 
ttolkiKtov for the second. The distinction, so far 
as it is observed, consisted in the one being needle- 
work and the other luom-uork. The Vulgate 
gives generally jp/w//2arms for the first, and polij- 
mitarius for the second; but in Ex. xxvi. 1, 31, 
plumarius is used for the second. The first of 
these terms (jplumarius") is well chosen to express 
rokem, but piolgmitarius, i.e. a weaver who 
works together threads of divers colours, is as 
applicable to one as to the other. The rendering 
in Ezek. xxvii. 16, scutulata, i.e. " chequered," 
correctly describes one of the productions of the 
rokem. We have lastly to notice the incorrect 
rendering of the word j^2t^' in the A. V. — 
"broider;" "embroider" (Ex. xxviii. 4, 39; R. V. 
" chequer-work "). It means stuff worked in a 
tessellated manner, i.e. with square cavities, such 
as stones might be set in (cp. r. 20). The art of 
embroidery by the loom was extensively practised 
among the nations of antiquity. The Baby- 
lonians wei'e also celebrated for it, but em- 
broidery in the proper sense of the term, i.e. 
with the needle, was a Phrygian invention of 
later date (Plin. viii. 48). [W. L. B.] 

EMEEALD C^Qb ; LXX., &vepa^ ; K. T. and 
Apoc, cTfidpaySos), a precious stone, first in the 
second row on the breastplate of the high-priest 
(Ex, xxviii. 18, xxxix. 11), imported to Tyre from 
Syria (Ezek, xxvii. 16), used as a .seal or signet 
(Ecclus. xxxii. 6), as an ornament of clothing 
and bedding (Ezek. xxviii. 13 ; Judith x. 21), and 
spoken of as one of the foundations of Jerusalem 
(Rev. xxi. 19 ; Tob. xiii. 16). The rainbow 
round the throne is compared to emerald in Rev. 
iv. 3, ofioios opdaet (T/j-apayBivcji. 

The etymology of T]SJ is uncertain. Gesenius 
suggests a comparison with the word "JJ-IQ, a paint 
with which the Hebrew women stained their 
eyelashes. Kalisch on Exodus xxviii. follows 
the LXX., and translates it carbuncle, trans- 
ferring the meaning emerald to D/'H'' in the 
same v. 18. The Targum Jer. on the same verse 
explains TjS!) by ii2^'212 :^ carchedonius, carbuncle 
(so R. V. marg.). Riehm (HWH. 'Edelsteine,' 
Xo. 13) prefers •' granat." [H. W. T.] 

EMEEODS (D'-^Sr Dnint? ; '^Spa; anus, 
nates ; Deut. xxviii. 27 ; 1 Sam. v. 6, 9, 12, vi. 
4, 5, 11). The probabilities as to the nature of 
the disease are mainly dependent on the probable 
roots of these two Hebrew words ; the former of 
which" evidently means "a swelling;" the 
latter, though less certain, is most probably from 

» Closely akin to it is the Arab. \ ^C which means 

tumor qui apud viros oritur in posticis pariibus, apud 
mulieres in anteriore parte vulvae simili.': herniac 

3 2 



a Syriac verb, r'''^< meaninc; " anhelavit sub 
onere, enixus est in exoiierando ventre " (Park- 
hurst and Gesenius) ; and the Syriac noun 

pQjst^ from the same root denotes (I) such 
etlbrt as the verb implies, and (2) the intcstinum 
rectum. Also, whenever the former word occurs 
in the Hebrew Xethib,^ the Keri gives the latter, 
except in 1 Sam. vi. 11, where the hitter stands 
in the Kethib. Now this h\st passage speaks of 
the images of the emerods after they were ac- 
tually made, and plated in the Ark. It thus 
appears probable that the former word means 
the disease, and the latter the part affected, 
which must necessarily have been included in 
the actually existing image, and have struck the 
eye as the essential thing represented, to which 
the disease was an incident. As some morbid 
swelling, then, seems the most probable nature 
of the disease, so no more probable conjecture 
has been advanced than that haemorrhoidal 
tmnours (R. V. Deut. marg. Or, tumours or 
plague boils ; in 1 Sam. text "tumours," marg. 
or plague boils), or bleeding piles, known to the 
Romans as mariscae (Juv. ii. 13), are intended. 
These are very common in Syria at present ; 
Oriental habits of want of exercise and improper 
food, producing derangement of the liver, con- 
stipation, &c., being such as to cause them. 
The sense of plague-boils, a disease found among 
the Druses, is preferred by others (see Dillmann^ 
on Deut. /. c). The words of 1 Sam. v. 12, " the 
men that died not were smitten with emerods," 
show that the disease was not necessarily 
fatal. It is clear from its parallelism with 
" botch " and other diseases in Deut. xxviii. 27, 

that DvQy is a disease, not a part of the body; 
but the translations of it by the most approved 
authorities are various and vague. ° Thus the 
LXX. and Vulg., as above, uniformly render 
the word as bearing the latter sense. The men- 
tion by Herodotus (i. 105) of the malady, called 
by him driXeia vovcros, as afRicting the Scythians 
who robbed the temple (of the Syrian Venus) in 
Ascalon, has been deemed by some a proof that 
some legend containing a distortion of the Scrip- 
tural account was current in that country down 
to a late date. The Scholiast on Aristophanes 
(Achai-n. 231) mentions a similar plague (fol- 
lowed by a similar subsequent propitiation to 
that mentioned in Scripture), as sent upon the 
Athenians by Bacchus.* The opinion mentioned 
by Winer (s. v. Philister), as advanced by 
Lichtenstein, that the plague of emerods and 
that of mice are one ami the same, the former 
being caused by an insect (solpuga) as large as a 
field-mouse, is hardly worth attention. [H. H.] 

E'MIM (D*P''N; B. 'Ou^aeiV, A. 'OojueiV 
[y. 10], 'O/xfueiv [y. 11], only twice mentioned, 

^ Parkhurst, however, s. v. QipQy, tliiuks, on the 
authority of Dr. Kcntiicott's Codices, that D"'"lint3 is in 
all these passages a very ancient Hebrew varia lectio. 

"= Josephus, Ant. vi. 1, $ 1, Svcrei^repCa ; Aquila, to 
T^? (J)aYc6ain)s 4'/Vkos. 

"i Pollux, Onom. iv. 25, thus describes what he calls 
fiov^uiv. o'iSriiJ.a ixera. (fiXeynovT)'; at/xop/ioC ylveTai. koto 
Trji/ (SpOiV c>'T05, ecTTt 6e 6/xoia/xiipot9 wju.01?. Cp. Bochart, 
Hierozoic. i. 381. 


Gen. .xiv. 5 [LXX. cm.] and Deut. ii. 10, 11). 
As a Semitic word the name appears to mean 
" terrors," and is used of the idols of Chaldea, 
which " is a land of graven images, and they 
are mad upon their idols " (Jer. 1. 38). It 
appeal's that the Emini were the aborigines of 
Moab : they "dwelt therein aforetime, a people 
great, and many, and tall as the Anakim " (K. V.). 
They may have been of the same race as the 
Re])liaim in Bashan, the Zuzim in Ham, and the 
Horites in ]\Iount Seir. It is not, however, at 
all certain that tliey were of Semitic race, 
although the woi'd presents a Semitic plural. 
The Hittites are believed by scholars to have 
been non-Semitic, and the Emim may have 
belonged to the ancient Turanian people, who 
preceded the Semitic stock in Chaldea, as the 
Emim preceded the sons of Lot in Moab. If 
these aborigines were really what is called 
Turanian, the meaning of the word is to be 
sought in Turanian languages. In this case it 
would be comparable with the widely diffused 
word aima for a '• horde " or " tribe " (Tunguse 
aiman, Buriat aiinah, Mongol aimak, Livonian 
aim, " tribe "). The name of the Hittites occurs 
in the Bible with a Semitic plural attached. In 
the A. Y (but not in the R. V.) the English 
plural has in like manner been added to the 
Hebrew — Emims being a case in point. [C. R. C] 

EM'MAUS ('E/x^aoys), the village (KUfi-n) 
to which the two disciples were going when our 
Lord api)eared to them on the way, on the day 
of His Resurrection (Luke xxiv. 13). The only 
indication of position is the distance from Jeru- 
salem, which St. Luke gives as 60 stadia* (A. V. 
threescore furlongs) or about 6fj English miles. 
St. Mark (xvi. 12) simply says that the disciples 
were on their way into the country {eh aypov). 
Josephus (/y. J. vii. 6, § 6) mentions a place 
(xonpiov) called Emmaus, which was the only 
portion of Judaea exempted from the general 
lot of being sold. It was given by Titus to 800 
men discharged from the army, and the distance 
from Jerusalem is stated to have been 60, or, 
according to the Latin copies, 30 stadia. This 
last feature has led to the general supposition 
that it is the same place as the Emmaus of the 
N. T. Six sites have at various times been 
proposed for Emmaus. 

1. Eusebius and Jerome {OS.'' p. 2.57, 21 ; 
p. 121, 6) identify it with the city of Elmmaus, 
'Amieds, afterwards called Nicopolis, which was 
176 stadia, or about 20 English miles, from Jeru- 
salem, and situated on the maritime plain, at the 
foot of the mountains of Judah. This view was 
held by all Christians down to the 12th century 
(Sozomen, H. E. v. 20 ; Abbot Daniel, Ixii.), and 
has been maintained in modern times by Dr. 
Robinson (iii. 147 sq.), and by Gucrin (Jud^c, 
1. 301 sq. Cp. Schiffers, Amwds, das Emmaus 
d. hi. Lucas, 160 Stad. v. Jerus. 1891). It 
necessitates a journey of 40 miles in one day, 
and is at variance with the circumstances of the 
narrative. The two disciples having journeyed 

» The Sinaitic MS., supported by I, K, and N, has 160 
stedia ; but the best MSS. are decisive In favour of 60 
stadia (sre Westcott and Hort). If the Sinaitic be one 
of tho MSS. of the N. T. prepared by Eusebius, at the 
command of Constantine, it is possible that lie altered 
the text to bring it into agreement with the distance 
of Emmaus-Nicopolis, 'Amivas, from Jerusalem. 


from Jerusalem to Emmaiis in part of a day 
(Luke xxiv. 28, 29), left the latter again after 
the evening meal, and reached Jerusalem before 
it was very lato {vi\ 33, 42, 43). Now, if we 
take into account the distance, 20 miles, and the 
naluro of tlie road, leading up a steep and 
didicult mountain, we must admit that such a 
journey could not be accomplished in less than 
from six to seven hours, so that they could not 
have arrived in Jerusalem till long past mid- 
night. The expressions used i)y St. Luke, "a 
village named Emmaus," and by St. Mark, 
''into the country," would hardly have been 
em])Ioyed if the disciples had been going to the 
well-known fortress-city of Emmaus-Nicopolis 
(Rel.'iud, pp. 427, 758 ; Thomson, L. and B. 
p. 534). 

2. Kunjct el-Eiiah, about 06 stadia from 
Jerusalem, on the road to Jaffa, has been pro- 
l)osed by the Kev. G. Williams {Diet, of Gk. and 
Ilmn. Geoij.) and Thomson (Z. and B. p. GOG). 
The arguments in its favour are, a not very 
ancient Greek tradition, the distance from Jeru- 
salem, and proximity to Kustid (Castellum) and 
Kulonieh (Colonia). Kuryet, however, is an 
ancient name, Kirjath, and is not likely to have 
been also known as Emmaus. 

3. Kulonieh, about 3G stailia from .Jerusalem, 
on the road to Jaffa. In Josh, xviii. 2G men- 
tion is made of a town MozAir, really ham- 
Motsah ('A/Utocra). which is believed to be the 
same place as the Jlotsali mentioned in the 
Mislina {Succah, iv. § 5), which was also a 
Colonia. Ham-Motsah is in all probability the 
Ammaous which, according to the Latin copies 
of Josephus, was 30 stadia from Jerusalem 
{PEFQij. Stat. 1881, p. 237). It is identified 
by Schwarz (Z>. hcil. Land, p. 98) and Ncubauer 
(J-icoq. du Talmud, pp. 152, 153) with Kulonieh, 
but is more probably the ruin Beit Mizza, in 
the immediate vicinity. The arguments in 
favour of identifying Kulonieh with the Emmaus 
of St. Luke are very fully given by Sepp {Jer. 
u. d. hcil. Land, i. 54-73), who identifies Kustul 
with the Castellum Emmaus of the Crusaders, 
and by Ewald {Gesch. d. Volkes Lsr. vi. G75 sq.). 
See also Furrer in Schenkel, B. L. s. v. Kulonieh 
was, and still is, a place to which the inhabitants 
of Jerusalem went out for recreation. 

4. The claims o( cl-Kubeibeh have been well set 
forth by Zschokke (Das N. T. Kmmaus), and are 
maintained by Baedeker-Socin (Hdbk. p. 141), 
the Franciscans, Schick, Riehm (HWB. s. v.), and 
others. It is about 63 stadia N.W. of Jerusalem, 
on an old Koman road leading through Beit 
Ljikia to Lndd, Lydda; and at the head of one 
branch of the valley in which Kulonieh lies. 
The tradition connecting E. with cl-Kuheibeh 
does not appear to be earlier than the 14th 
century, and cannot be considered ti'ustworthy. 
A monastery of Latin monks was established 
there in 18G2 (PEF. Mem. iii. 17, 131). 

5. Etam (Mm 'Atwi) and Urtds, near " Solo- 
mon's Pools," have been proposed bv Lightfoot 
{Chor. iv. § 3) and Mrs. Finn (PLFQi/. Stat. 
1883, pp. 53-64). The distance from Jerusalem 
is about GO stadia; but the place is not likely 
to have been selected as the site of a Roman 
colony ; and it may be inferred from Josephus 
(Antig viii. 7, § 3) that the name Etam had not 
been superseded by Emmaus. 

6. Kh. cl-Khamasa, 72 stadia in a direct line, 



and 86 by road, from Jerusalem, and close to one 
of the Roman roads leading to the j)lain near 
Beit Jibfin. The arguments in its favour, of 
wlii<h the princijial is the name, are given by 
Coiider {I'ICF. Mem. iii. 36) and (ieikie {llobj 
Land and the Bible, ii. 142, 143). The distance 
from Jerusalem, however, is far too great, and 
all tradition points to a site further north. 

The indication of ])Osition is so slight that no 
positive identification can be made : the choice 
seems to lie between Kulonieh, or Beit Mizza, 
and cl-Kubeibeh, [W.] 

EM'MAUS, or NICOP'OLIS ('E/xixaois ; 
Joseph. 'Efxnauvs and 'A/u/ioous), a town on the 
Maritime i)lain, at the foot of the mountains of 
Judaea, 22 Roman miles from Jerusalem, and 10 
from Lydda (/tin. IFieros. ; Reland, jjp. 306, 427- 
430; Jerome, Com. ad Dan. ch. xii.). The name 
does not occur in the 0. T. ; but the town rose 
to importance during the later history of the 
Jews, and was a place of note in the wars of the 
Hasraoneans. In 164 li.C. Lysias, Governor- 
general of Syria, sent an army under Ptolemy, 
Micauor, and Gorgias to invade Judaea. The 
army encamped on the plain near Emmaus 
(1 Mace. iii. 40); and in this position was 
attacked by Judas Maccabaeus, who had moved 
down from Jerusalem and pitched his camp on the 
S. side of Emmaus (i\ 57). The battle resulted in 
the complete defeat of the Syrians (1 Mace. iv. 
3-25). Emmaus was fortified, with other towns, 
by Bacchides, the general of Antiochus Ejiiphanes 
(1 Mace. ix. 50; Joseph. Ant. xiii. 1, § 3). 
Under the Romans it was the chief town of a 
toparchy (Josei)h. B. J. iii. 3, § 5 ; Plin. H. N. v. 
14). It was reduced by Cassius to a state of 
slavery {Ant. xiv. 11, § 2 ; B. J. i. 11, § 2) ; and 
was aftei'wards (4 a.d.) burned by oi-der of 
Varus {D. J. ii. 5, § 1), as a punishment for an 
attack made on a company of soldiers carrying 
corn and weapons to the Roman army (4, § 3). 
When the Jews divided the country into military 
districts, after the defeat of Cestius, Emmaus 
formed part of the district of John the Essene 
(/?. J. ii. 20, § 4). Vespasian, during the 
Jewish war, established a fortified camp at 
Emmaus, and occupied the passes leading thence 
to Jerusalem (Z?. J. iv. 8, § 1) ; and, prior to the 
siege jf Jerusalem, the 5th Legion marched up 
from Emmaus {B. J. v. 1, § 6), and joined Titus 
at Gabaoth-Saul (2, § 3). 

In 131 A.D. Emmaus was destroyed by an 
earthquake ; and in the 3rd century, about 221 
A.D., it was rebuilt, under the title Nicopolis., 
in consequence of the representations of a native 
of the place, Sextus Julius Africanus, the 
Christian historian, who went as an envoy to 
the Emperor Heliogabalus (Chron. Fas. ad A.C. 
223 ; Jerome. De Vlr. ill. Ixiii.). According 
to Sozomen (v. 20) and Nicephorus (x. 21), 
Emmaus was called ^>icopolis after the capture 
of Jerusalesn, and to commemorate that event. 
To Eusebius and Jerome, Emmaus-Xicojjolis was 
the Emmaus of Luke xxiv. 13 {Onum., and Jerome, 
Per. S. Paulae, v.), and such was the general 
belief to the 14th ceuturj'. Sozomen (v. 20) 
mentions a spring endowed with miraculous 
powers which it owed to the touch of Christ. 
This spring was closed by order of the Emperor 
Julian to suppress the Christian belief attached 
to it (Theophanes, Chron. 41) ; but it ajijiears to 




have been open again in the Sth century {Itin. 
S. Willibaldi, xiii.) ; and at a later period (Will, 
of Tyre, vii. 24). 

It is now 'Amwas, a small village, near the 
foot of the mouutains, to the left of the road 
from Jaffa to Jerusalem. There are the ruins 
of a Byzantine church, rock-hewn tombs, a 
spring, 'Aiii N'ttii, and a well, Inr et-2'ddun, 
" Well of the Plague," which probably derives 
its name from the plague of Emmaus which 
desolated the i\Ioslem army after the conquest 
of .Syria. The church was excavated by the 
French in 1881, and an account published in 
Les ^fissions Catlwliqxics, 3rd Jlarch, 1882. For 
a description of the ruins, see PEF. Mem. 
iii. 14, 63 ; Sepp, Das heil. Land, i. 42 ; Guerin, 
Jude'e, i. 29 sq. ; and Clermont-Ganneau in 
PEFQy. Stat. 1874, pp. 149, 160, 162; 1882, 
pp. 24-37. 

The later Jewish legends are given by Neu- 
bauer (Geo(j. dti Talmud, pp. 101, 102). Bishops 
of Emmaus attended the Council of Nicaea, the 
second Council of Constantinople, and the 
meeting at Jerusalem in 5'!6 A.D. 

The name Emmaus was also borne by a village 
of Galilee close to Tiberias ; probably the ancient 
HAMMATir, i.e. hot springs. The springs are 
mentioned by Josephus, Ant. xviii. 2, § 3 ; 
B. J. iv. 1, § 3. [W.] 

EM'MER (B. 'EmV» ^- '^Ml^'fiP > Semmerl), 
1 Esd. ix. 21. [Immer.] 

EM'MOR CE/jifitvp, Westcott and Hort ; 
Einmor), the father of Sychem (Acts vii. 16). 

ENA'JIM, more correctly as in E. V. Enaim 
(D.''3T), is the marginal reading of the A. V. for 
" an open place " (Gen. xxxviii. 14), and "openly " 
(u. 21). The LXX. have Alvdv. The Vulgate 
renders it by in hivio. The Talmudists con- 
sidered it to be the name of a place (Tal. Bab. 
Sotah, 10 a), and identical with Enam in the 
neighbourhood of Adullam. In Pesik. rab. 23 
mention is made of a Kefar Enaim. Philo and 
Eusebius also regard it as a place, and modern 
commentators consider it the same as Enam 
(see Delitzsch and Dillmann* in loco). [W.] 

E'NAM (with the article, Ql'^VT] = the 
duichlc S2)ring, Ges. Thes. p. 1019 a; B. MaIa^'6t, 
A. 'Uvaiifn; Enaim), one of the cities of Judah 
in the Shefelah or lowland (Josh. xv. 34). From 
its mention with towns (Jarmuth aud Eshtaol, 
for instance) which are known to have been 
near Timnath, this is very probably the place 
in the " gate " of which Taniar sat before her 
interview with her father-in-law (Gen. xxxviii. 
14). In the A. V. the words Patliacli cnayim 
(□^3'y nnS) are not taken as a proper name, 
but are rendered "an open place" (see Enajim); 
but " the gate of Enaim " (or the double spring) 
is the translation adopted by the LXX. (reus 
■KvKais AiVac), It. V., and now generally accepted. 
In Josh. XV. 34, for "Tappuah and Enam," the 
Peshitto has " Pathuch-Elam," which supports 
the identification suggested above. Miiller (iu 
Riehm, HWB. s. n.) suggests Beit 'Anun, but 
this place is far to the N. and not on the road 
from Adullam to Timuath. Schwarz (p. 73) 
identifies it with the village Beth Ani, perhaps 

Beit 'Anon ; Conder {Hdbk. to Bible, p. 410) more 
probablv with Kh. Wddy 'Alin near 'Ain Shems, 
Bethshemesh. [AiN.] [G.] [W.] 

E'NAN (\yV; Ali/dv; Enan). Ahira ben- 
Enan was " prince " of the tribe of Naphtali at 
the time of the numbering of Israel in the 
wilderness of Sinai (Num. i. 15, ii. 29, vii. 73, 
83, s. 27). [G.] 

ENA'SIBUS (B. 'Evaaei^os ; Eliasib), 1 Esd. 
ix. 34. [Eliasuiu.j 

ENCAMPMENT (HanO, machaneh, in all 
places except 2 K. vi. 8, where ni3nn, tachanoth, 
is used). The word primarily denoted, the 
resting-place of an army or company of travel- 
lers at night* (Ex. xvi. 13; Gen. xxxii. 21), and 
was hence applied to the army or caravan when 
on its march (Ex. xiv. 19 ; Josh. x. 5, xi. 4 ; 
Gen. xxxii. 7, 8). Among nomadic tribes war 
never attained to the dignity of a science, and 
their encampments were consequently devoid of 
all the appliances of more systematic warfare. 
The description of the camp of the Israelites, 
on their march from Egypt (Num. ii., iii.), 
supplies the greatest amount of information on 
the subject: whatever else may be gleaned is 
from scattered hints. The Tabernacle, corre- 
sponding to the chieftain's tent of an ordinary 
encampment, was ]i]aced in the centre ; and 
around and facing it (Num. ii. l),"" arranged in 
four grand divisions, corresponding to the four 
points of the compass, lay the host of Israel, 
according to their standards (Num. i. 52, ii. 2). 
On the east the post of honour was assigned to 
the tribe of Judah, and round its standard rallied 
the tribes of Issachar and Zebulun, descendants 
of the sous of Leah. On the south lay Reuben 
and Simeon, the representatives of Leah, and 
the children of Gad, the sou of her liandmaid. 
Rachel's descendants were encamped on the 
western side of the Tabernacle, the chief place 
being assigned to the tribe of Ephraim. To this 
position of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, 
allusions are made in Judg. v. 14 and Ps. Ixxx. 
2. On the north were the tribes of Dan and 
Naphtali, the children of Bilhah, and the tribe 
of Asher, Gad's younger brother. All these 
were encamped around their standards, each 
according to the ensign of the house of his 
fathers. In the centre round the Tabernacle, 
and with no standard but the cloudy or fiery 
pillar which rested over it, were the tents of the 
priests and Levites. The former, with Moses 
and Aaron at their head, were encamped on the 
eastern side. On the south were the Kohathites, 
who had charge of the Ark, the table of shew- 
bread, the altars and vessels of the sanctuary. 
The Gershouites were on the west, and when on 
the march carried the Tabernacle and its lighter 
furniture ; while the Merarites, who were en- 
camped on the north, had charge of its heavier 
appurtenances. The order of encampment was 
preserved on the march (Num. ii. 17), the signal 
for which was given by a blast of the two silver 
trumpets (Num. x. 5). The details of this 

» Whence DiTl niiH (chanOth hayyom), "the 
camping-time of daj'," r.e. the evening, JudR. xix. 9. 

b The form of the encampment was probably circular, 
and not square, as it is generally represented. 




aocoiint supply Prof. lUunt with some striking 
illustrations of the undesigned ooincideiices of 
the ISooics of Moses (L^nilcs. Cuincid. pp. 75-86). 

In this description of the order of the encamp- 
ment no mention is made of sentinels, who, it is 
reasonable to suppose, were placed at the gates 
(Ex. xxxii. 20, '27) in the four (piarters of the 
<.'am]). This was evidentlv the case in the camu 
of the Levites (cp. 1 Ch. ix. 18, 2-1; '2 Ch. 
.\xxi. 2). 

The sanitary regulations of the ("imp of the 
Isratdites were enacted for tlie twofold jiurpose 
of jireserving the health of the vast multitude 
and the purity of the camp as the dwelling-place 
of God (Num. v. 3; Deut. xxiii. 14). With this 
object the dead were buried without the camp 
(^Lev. X. 4, 5): lepers were excluded till their 
leprosy departed from them (Lev. xiii. 40, xiv. 
:') ; Num. xii. 14, 15), as were all who were 
visited witli loathsome diseases (Lev. xiv. 3). 
All who were defiled by contact with the dead, 
whether these were slain in battle or not, were 
kept without the camp for seven days (Num. xxxi. 
19). Cajitives taken in war were compelled to 
remain for a while outside (Num. xxxi. 19 ; 
Josh. vi. 23). The ashes from the sacrifices 
were poured out without the camp at an ap- 
pointed ]ilace, whither all uncleanness was re- 
moved (Deut. xxiii. 10, 12), and where the 
•entrails, skins, horns, &c., and all that was not 
otlered in sacrifice, were burnt (Lev. iv. 11, 12; 
vi. 11 ; viii. 17). 

The execution of criminals took place without 
the camp (Lev. xxiv. 14; Num. xv. 35, 36; 
.losh. vii. 24), as did the burning of the young 
bullock for the sin-offering (Lev. iv. 12). These 
■circumstances combined explain Heb. xiii. 12, 
and .John xix. 17, 20. 

The encampment of the Israelites in the desert 
left its traces in their subsequent history. The 
Temple, so late as the time of Hezekiah, was 
5till "the camp of Jehovah" (2 Ch. xxxi. 2; 
cp. Ps. Ixxviii. 28); and the multitudes who 
flocked to David were "a great camp, like the 
<'amp of God " (1 Ch. xii. 22 ; R. V. " host " 

High ground appears to have been uniformly 
selected for the position of a camp, whether it 
were on a hill or mountain side, or in an in- 
accessible pass (Judg. vii. 18). So, in Judg. x. 
17, the Ammonites encamped in Gilead, while 
Israel pitched in Mizpeh. The very names are 
■significant. The camps of Saul and the Philis- 
tines were alternately in Gibenh, the " height " of 
Benjamin, and the pass of Michmnsh (1 Sam. xiii. 
1!, 3, 10, 23). When Goliath defied the host of 
Israel, the contending armies were encamped 
on hills on either side of the vallev of Elah 
■(1 Sam. xvii. 3) ; and in the fatal battle of Gilboa 
Saul's position on the mountain was stormed 
by the Philistines who had pitched in Shunem 
(1 Sam. xxviii. 4), on the othur side of the valley 
of Jezreel. The carelessness of the Rlidianites 
in encamping in the plain exposed them to the i 
night siirprise by Gideon, and resulted in their 
consequent discomfiture (Judg. vi. 33 ; vii. 8, 12). 

Another important consideration in fixing 
upon a position for a camp was the propinquity 
of water : hence it is found that in most instances 
camps wore pitched near a spring or well 
(Judg. vii. 3; 1 ilacc. ix. 33). The Israelites 
at Jlount Gilboa pitched by the fountain in 

.Tezreel (1 Sam. xxix. 1), while the Philistines 
encamped at Aphek, the name of which indicates 
the existence of a .stream of water in the 
neighbourhood, which rendered it a favourite 
place of encampment (1 Sam. iv. 1 ; 1 K. xx. 26 ; 
2 K. xiii. 17). In liis ])tirsuit ofthe Amalekites, 
David halted his men by the brook liesor, and 
there left a detachment with the camp furniture 
(1 Sam. XXX. 9). One of Joshua's decisive en- 
gagements with the nations of Canaan was 
fought at the waters of Mcrom, where he sur- 
prised the confederate camp (Josh. xi. 5, 7 ; cp. 
Judg. V. 19, 21). (iideon, before attacking tiio 
Midianites, encamped beside the well of Ilaiod 
(Judg. vii. 1), an(^ it was to draw water from 
the well at Bethlehem that David's three 
mighty men cut their way through the host of 
the Philistines (2 Sam. xxiii. 16). 

The camp was surrounded by the rOiVD, ma- 

guldh (1 Sam. xvii. 20), or 75^0, ma'gal (1 Sam. 
xxvi. 5, 7), which some, and Thenius among 
them, explain as an earthwork thrown uj) round 
the encampment, others as the barrier formed 
by the baggage-waggons. The etymology of 
the word points merely to the circular shape of 
the enclosure formed by the tents of the soldiers 
pitched around their chief, whose spear marked 
his resting-place (1 Sam. xxvi. 5, 7), and it 
might with propriety be used in either of the 
above senses, according as the camp was fixed or 
temporary. We know that, in the case of a 
siege, the attacking army, if possible, surrounded 
the place attacked (1 Mace. xiii. 43), and drew 
about it a line of circumvallation (p.^"n, duijc/;, 
2 K. XXV. 1), which was marked by a breastwork 
of earth (ri?pP, m'silldh, Is. Ixii. 10; H^pb, 
soriuh, Ezek.'^x.xi. 27 [22] ; cp. Job xix. 12)Vfor 
the double purpose of preventing the escape of 
the besieged and of protecting the besiegers from 
their sallies.*^ But there was not so much need 
of a formal entrenchment, as but few instances 
occur in which engagements were fought in the 
camps themselves, and these only when the 
attack was made at night. Gideon's expedition 
against the Midianites took place in the earlv 
morning(Judg. vii. 19), the time selected by Saul 
for his attack upon Nahash (1 Sam. xi. 11), and 
by David for surprising the Amalekites (1 Sam. 
XXX. 17 ; cp. Judg. ix. 33). To guard against 
these night attacks, sentinels (D^IDIi^, shom'r'un) 
were posted (Judg. vii. 20; 1 Mace. xii. 27) 
round the Gimp, and the neglect of this pre- 
caution by Zebah and Zalmuana ))robably led 
to their capture by Gideon and the ultimate 
defeat of their army (Judg. vii. 19). 

The valley which separated the hostile camps 
was_ generally selected as the fighting ground 
(nX', sudch, '-the battle-field," 1 Sam.'iv. 2, 
xiv. 15 : 2 Sam. xviii. 0), upon which the contest 
was decided, and hence the valleys of Palestine 
have played so conspicuous a part in its history 
(Josh. viii. 13 ; Judg. vi. 33 ; 2 Sam. v. 22, viii. 
13, Sir.). When the figliting men went forth to 
the place of mai'shalling (HDirO, ma'urdcu/t, 

<^ The aialdee renders nSurO (1 Sam. .wii. 20) and 
p'l'^ (2 K. XXV. 1) by the same word, Dip"13> °r 
NOipISi tliC Greek xapafcwjua. 



1 Sara. xvii. 20), a detachment was left to 
jirotect the camp auJ baggage (1 Sam. xvii. 22, 
.\.\x. 24). The beasts of burden were j)robably 
tethered to the tent pegs (2 K. vii. lU ; Zecli. 
xiv. 15). 

The njn^, machaneh, or movable encamp- 
ment, is distinguished from the 3-^D, matstsab, 

or 2*V3. n'i^i'^ (- S-'""- -''•'^■'''- 1* ; 1 ^h- -'''• ^^)' 
which appear to have been standing camps, like 
those which Jehushapliat established throughout 
Judah (2 Ch. xvii. 2), or advanced posts in an 
enemy's country (I Sam. xiii. 17 ; 2 Sam. viii. 
(J), from which skirmishing parties made their 
]iredatory excursions and ravaged the crops. It 
was in resisting one of these expeditions that 
Shammah won himself a name among David's 
lieroes (2 .Sam. xxiii. 12). Machaneh is still 
further distinguished from "lV2p, mibtsdi; " a 
fortress" or "walled town" (Num. xiii. 19). 

Camps left beliind them a memorial in the 
name of the place where they were situated, as 
among ourselves (cp. Chester, Grantchester, &c.). 
:Mahaneh-Dan (Judg. xiii. 25) was so called from 
the encampment of the Dauites mentioned in 
Judg. xviii. 12. [Maiianaim.] The more 
important camps at Gilgal (Josh. v. 10, ix. 6) 
and Shiloh (Josh, xviii. 9; Judg. xxi. 12, 19) 
left no such impress; the military traditions of 
these places were eclipsed by the greater splen- 
dour of the religious associations which sur- 
rounded them. [W. A. W.] 

ENCHANTMENTS. 1. D'-pb or D''pn^, 
Ex. vii. 11, 22, viii. 7; <, LXX. 
(Grotius compares the word with the Greek 

A.tTaO ; secret arts, from t3-V, to cover ; though 
others incorrectly connect it with DH?, a flame^ 
or the glittering blade of a sword, as though it 
implied a sort of dazzling cheironomy which 
deceives spectators. Several Versions render the 
word by " whisperings," insusurrationes ; but it 
seems to be a more general word, and hence is 
used of the various means (some of them no 
doubt of a quasi-scientific character) by which 
the Egyptian Chartummim (R. V. "magicians") 
imposed on the credulity of Pharaoh. 

2. D''Dti'3 ; (pap/jLaKiiai, (papfiaxa, LXX. (2 K. 
ix. 22 ; Mic. vi. 12; Xah. iii. 4); veneficia, malc- 
ficia, Vulg. ; " maleficae artes," " praestigiae," 
•' muttered spells." Hence it is sometimes ren- 
dered by ejrootSoi, as in Is. xlvii. 9, 12. The belief 
in the power of certain formulae was universal 
in the ancient world. Thus there were cannina 
to evoke the tutelary gods out of a city (Macrob. 
Saturn, iii. 9), others tj devote hostile armies 
(^Id.), others to raise the dead (Maimon. de Idol. 
xi. 15 ; Senec. Ocdip. 547), or bind the gods 
(Seffjuol QiSiv) and men f Aesch. Fur. 3ol), and 
even influence the heavenly bodies (Ov. Met. vii. 
207 sq., xii. 263 ; " Te quoque Luna traho," 
Virg. Ed. viii., Aen. iv. 489 ; Hor. Epod. v. 45). 
They were a recognised part of ancient medicine, 
even among the Jews, who regarded certain 
sentences of the Law as efficacious for healing. 
The Greeks used them as one of the five chief 
resources of ]iharmacy (Pind. Pyth. iii. 8, 9 ; 
Soph. Aj. 582), especially in obstetrics (Plat. 
Theaet, p. 1-15) and mental diseases (Galen, de 
Sanitat. tuenda, i. 8). Homer mentions them as 


used to check the flow of blood (Od. xix. 456), 
and Cato even gives a charm to cure a disjointed 
limb (dcRc Rud. ICO; cp. VWn. H. N. xxviii. 2). 
The belief in charms is still all but universal iui 
uncivilised nations : see Lane's Mul. Ejypt. i. 300,. 
306, &c., ii. 177, &c. ; Beeckman's Voyage to- 
Borneo, ch. ii. ; JleroUer's Conijo (in Pinkertou's. 
Voyages, xvi. pp. 221, 273) ; Hue's Chincty i. 
223, ii. 326 ; Taylor's New Zealand, and Living- 
stone's Africa, ))assim, &c. ; and hundreds of 
such remedies still exist, and are considered 
efficacious a:nong the uneducated. 

3. D'^i^n?, Eccles. x. 11 ; ^\ll6vpl(T|x6s, LXX., 

from \^'V\7. This word is especially used of the 
charming of serpents, Jer. viii. 17 (cp. Ps. Iviii. 
5; Ecclus. xii. 13, Eccles. x. 11, Luc. ix. 891 — a 
parallel to '' cantando rumpitur anguis," and 
'• Vii)ereas rumpo verbis et carmine fauces," Ov. 
Met. 1. c). Maimonides {de Idol. xi. 2) ex- 
pressly defines an enchanter as one " who uses 
strange and meaningless words, by which he im- 
jioses on the folly of the credulous. They say, 
lor instance, that if one utter the words before- 
a serpent or scorpion it will do no harm "" 
(Carpzov, Annot. in Godivinnm, iv. 11). An 
account of the ]\Iarsi who excelled in this art is- 
given by Augustin {ad Ocn. ix. 28), and of the 
Psylli by Arnobius {ud A'at. ii. 32); and they 
are alluded to by a host of other authorities. 
(Plin. vii. 2, xxviii. 6; Aeliau, //. A. i. 57; 
Virg. Aen. vii. 740 ; Sil. Ital. viii. 495. They 
were called '0(pio5i(vKTai). The secret is still 
understood in the East (Lane, ii. 106). 

4. The W'Ord D"'t^'n3 is used of the enchant- 
ments sought by Balaam, Num. xxiv. 1, It pro- 
perly alludes to ophiomancy, but in this place has- 
n general meaning of endeavouring to gain omens- 
(eis avvoLVT-qaiv rots olaivo7s, LXX.). 

5. "13n is used for magic. Is. xlvii. 9, 12. It- 
comes from 15'^, tobi7id{cp. KaTaSiw, $a(rKa'iVU\ 
bannen), and means generally the process of ac- 
quiring power over some distant object or 
person ; but this word seems also to have beert 
sometimes used specifically of serpent charmers, 
for Kashi on Dent, xviii. 11 defines the "12111 
"iSn to be one " who congregates serpents an(J 
scorpions into one place." 

Any resort to these methods of imposture was 
strictly forbidden in Scripture (Lev. xix. 26 ; 
Is. xlvii. 9, &c.), but to eradicate the tendency 
is almost impossible (2 K. xvii. 17 ; 2 Ch. 
xxiii. 6), and we find it still flourishing at the 
Christian era (Acts xiii. 6, 8, viii. 9, 11, yoT}Tf ia ; 
Gal. v. 20; Rev. ix. 21). All kinds of magic are 
frequently alluded to in the Talmudic writings 
(see Bcrachoth, f. 53. 1, f. 62.1 ; Pesachim,f. 110. 
1, 2 ; Soich, f. 48. 1 ; Baba Bathra, f. 58. 1, and 
multitudes of other passages collected by Mr. 
Hershon in his Talmudic Miscellany, pp. 230— 

The chief sacramenta daemomaca were sup- 
posed to be a rod, a magic circle, dragon's eggs, 
certain herbs, or " insane roots," like tlie hen- 
bane, &c. The fancy of poets both ancient and! 
modern has been exerted in giving lists of 
them (Ovid and Hor. U. cc. ; Shakspeare's Mac- 
beth, Act iv. 1 ; Southey's Curse of Kehama^ 
Cant. iv. &c.). [WiTCiicnArxs ; "Amulets ; 
Divination.] [F. W. F.] 




EN-DOK (I'Tpr = spriwj of Dor ; EnJor), 
a ))lacc which with its " daughter-towns " 
(m33) was in the territory of Jssachar, and 
yet |>osses,seil by Manasseh (Josh. xvii. 11 ; 
LXX. cm.). Tiiis was the case with five other 
places which lay partly iii Asher, jiartly in 
Issachar, and seem to have formed a kiud of 
district of their own called "the three, or the 
triple, A'cp/u't/i." 

Endor was long held in memory by the Jewish 
])eople as connected with the great victory over 
Sisera and Jabiu. Taauach, Megiddo, and tiie 
torrent Kishon all witnessed the discomiiture of 
the huge host, but it was emi)hatically to Endor 
that the tradition of the death ot' the two chiefs 
attached itself (Ps. l.\.\.\iii. 9, 10). Possibly it 
was some recollection of this, some fame of 
ianctity or good omen in Endor, which drew the 
unhappy Saul tiiither on the eve of his last 
engagement with the Philistines (1 Sam. xxviii. 
7 ; 13. 'AeASup, A. Nrii/Suip). Endor is not again 
mentioned in the Scriptures; but it was known 
to Eusebius, who describes it as a large village 
4 miles S. of Tabor. Here to the north of Jcbcl 
Diilvj (the " Little Hermon " of travellers), and 
at the foot of the volcanic Tell el-'AjJiU, the 
name still lingers, attached to a considerabl.s but 
now deserted village. The rock of the mountain, 
on the slope of which Eiidiir stands, is hollowed 
into caves, one of which may well have been 
the scene of the incantation of the witch (Van 
de Velde, ii. 383 ; Rob. ii. 360; Stanley, p. 34-5). 
There are a few rock-hawn tombs, and from 
one of the caverns issues a small spring. From 
the slopes of Gilboa to Endor is 7 or 8 miles, 
partly over difficult ground. [G.] [W.] 

ENEAS. [Aeneas.]. 

EN-EGLA'IM (D^^irPy = wring of two 
heifers ; 'EvayaWeifj. ; Emjallim), a place named 
only by Ezekiel (xlvii. 10), apparently as on the 
Dead Sea; but whether near to or lar from 
Engedi, on the west or east side of the Sea, it is 
impossible to ascertain from the text. In his 
comment on the passage, Jerome locates it at 
the embouchure of the Jordan; but this is not 
supported by other evidence. By some (^e.ij. 
Gesenius, T/ies. p. 1019) it is thought to be 
identical with Eglatm, but the two words are 
•Hrterent, En-eglaim containing the Ain, which 
is rarely changed for any other aspirate. The 
LXX. B. by reading BaidayAaa/j. (Josh. xv. G) 
seems to identify Beth-hoglah with En-eglaim. 

Tristram (^Bib. Places, p. 93) identifies it with 
Beth-hoglah, 'Ain Hajlah ; Riehm (I/WB.) with 
'Acii Feshkhah, both near the N. end of the Dead 
Sea. There is an 'Ain 'AJjiil, " calf's spring," 
near Lake Ili'deh, in the northern portion of the 
Jordan vallev, but this would appear to be too 
far from the'Dead Sea. [G.] [W.] 

ENEMES'SAR ('E^/g/ieo-o-op, "Eveixiacrapos) 
is the name by which the well-known king 
Shalmaneser (iV.) of Assyria is designated in 
the book of Tobit (i. 2, 15. &c.). This book is 
not of any historical authority, being simply a 
work of imagination composed probably by an 
Alexandrian Jew between the years 300 and 
150 B C. The author of Tobit represents Ene- 
messar as the king who carried the children of 
Israel into captivity (i. 2, 10) to Nineveh (where 

Tobit became purveyor to Enemessar), having 
followed closely the narrative of the Book of 
Kings (2 K. xvii. 3-G, xviii. 9-11), where it is 
related that lloshea rebelled against Shalmaneser, 
who besieged Samaria and " carried Israel away 
unto Assyria." [AssviiiA ; Sir.\LMANESEU.3 
lie likewise mentions Sennacherib not only as 
the successor, but also as the son of Enemessar 
(Tobit i. 15), and in this he has evidently fol- 
lowed his own interpretation of the Book of 
Kings. As we know from the Assyrian inscrip- 
tions, Sennacherib was the son of Sargon, the 
first king of a new Assyrian dynasty, and pro- 
bably, therefore, wholly unrelated to Shal- 
maneser IV., so that Sennacherib cannfit by anj' 
means be regarded as being descended from him. 
Tlie form Enemessar for Shalmaneser is a cor- 
ruption, being apparently juit for Senemessar 
(sh changed to s and then to the light breathing, 
as in Arkeanos [^ hpKiavos] for Sargon), / being 
dro])ped, and the m and n transposed. The 
Hebrew Shalmaneser is itself a corruption or 
shortening of the Assyrian Siilman-asarid or 
Salmanu-asarid, [T. G. P.] 

ENE'NIUS (B. 'Evrivios ; Emmanius), one 
of the leaders who returned with Zorobabel from 
the Captivity (1 Esd. v. 8). There is no name 
corres]ionding to it in the lists of Ezra and 
Mehemiah. [F.] 

EN'GADDI (B. tV ai.yia\o7^, 5s'=-* "EvyaSSoTs ; 
in Cades'), Ecclus. xxiv. 14. [Engedi.] 

EN-GAN'NIM (□'•jrpr = sj^ring of gar- 
dens). 1. A city in the low country of Judah, 
named between Zanoah and Tajipuah (Josh. xv. 
34). The LXX. in this place is so ditierent from 
the Hebrew that the name is not recognisable. 
Vulg. Aen-Ganniin. It is now probably Umm 
Jina, 3 miles X.W. of Ziinua, Zanoah (J^EF. 
Mem. iii. 42). 

2. A city on the boi-der of Issachar (Josh. xis. 
21; B. 'Itttiv Ka\ To/Uyudv, A. ''tivyavvifj.; En~ 
Gannivi); allotted with its "suburbs" to the 
Gershonite Levites (xxi. 29 ; Wr^y]) ypafi/xdrciiv ; 
En-Gaunini). These notices contain no indication 
of the position of En-ganuim with reference to 
any known j>lace, but there is great probability 
in the conjecture of Robinson (ii. 315) that it is 
identical with the Giuaia of Josephus (^Ant. xx. 
6, § 1), which again, there can be little doubt, 
survives in the modern Jenin, the first village 
encountered on the ascent from the great plain 
of Esdraelon into the hills of the central country. 
Jcn'ui is still surrounded by the " orchards " or 
" gardens " which interpret its ancient name, 
and the " spring " is to this day the characteristic 
object in the place (Rob. ii. 315 ; Stanley, p. 349, 
note ; Van de Velde, p. 359 ; PEF. Mem. ii. 44 ; 
Guerin, Samarie, i. 327). The i)Osition of Jcnht 
is also in striking agreement with the require- 
ments of Beth-hag-Gan (A. V. "the garden- 
house;" 'QatQyav), in the direction of which 
Ahaziah fiod from Jehu (2 K. ix. 27). The 
rough road of the ascent was probably too much 
for his chariot, and keeping the more level 
ground he made for Jlegiddo, where he died 
(see Stanley, p. 349). 

In the lists of Levitical cities in 1 Ch. vi. 
Anem is substituted for En-gannim. Possibly it 
is merely a contraction. [G.] [W.] . 




EN'GEDI (n^ py = spring of the hid. 
The Arabic (_/Jo>- ^^yJ^ preserves the same 

meaning; '£770854 aud 'E77a5Sai), the present 
'AinJidy on the western shore of the Dead Sea. 
The old name appears to have been "IDn"|^f^*n. 
Hazazon Tamar (see Oen. xiv. 7 ; "2 Ch. xx. 2) 
In the latter passage (r. ItJ) the "ascent of Ziz " 
(]**^n) is also mentioned as near Engedi (perhaps 
we should read ]*'^'n). The old name is usually 
rendered "])alm prunings," and Engedi was once 
famous for its palms, but the root also gives the 
word ]*^n, " gravel," and north of Engedi there 

is stiU an important valley called JTasasa, (C'liu 

\jo\tai^-i "the valley of gravel." When first 

mentioned, this place was held by the Araorites. 
It appears under its name Engedi as a town of 
Judah " in the wilderness " (Josh. xv. 62). Euse- 
bius (^Onoin. s. v. Gadda) supposes Hazar Gaddah 
(.Josh. XV. 27) to be perhaps the same, but this 
is clearly inadmissible. The Samaritan Version 

(Gen. xiv. 71) renders Hazazon Tamar ''13 31?D, 
" the ravine of Cadi," probably for '•13 (i.e. 
Engedi). In Ezekiel (xlvii. 10) it is mentioned 
apparently as near the shores of the Dead Sea. 
In the Song of Solomon (i. 14-) the vineyards 
of Engedi are mentioned, and in Ecclesiasticus 
(xxiv. 14) the palms of Engedi. Pliny, speaking 
of the Essene hermits, says that they lived at 
Engadda, and notices groves of palms (^H. N. v. 
IT). In the Talniud (Tal. Bab. Sahh. 26 a) the 
balm which was gathered between Engedi and 
liamatha (perhaps L'ameh, in the Ghor v;s Seis- 
aban, east of the Jordan, opposite Jericho) is 
noticed. The name is also found in Ptolemy 
(quoted by Reland, Pal. p. 462), and in Josephus 
{Aiitiq. ix. 1, § 2), but these authors add little to 
our information as to the site. Josephus places 
it 300 stadia (oTj Roman miles) from Jerusalem, 
the true distance being about 25 English miles. 
In later ages the place seems to have been little 
known. Jerome gives no clear account of its 
position, though he re]>resents St. Paula looking 
from Caphar Barucha (now Beni is'aini) towards 
the balm gardens and vines of Engedi (i?pii./'a!«/ae 
xii.). From the site in question, on a hill over- 
looking the desert of Judah, south of Hebron, 
the vicinity of Engedi can be seen. 

The desert of Engedi was the hiding-place of 
David (1 Sam. xxiv. 1-4), and the " rocks of the 
wild goats " are the clifl's round this site where 
the ibex is still found. The Crusading chronicles do 
not mention the place, but according to Ludolph 
of Snellen (/?(.''/ Colonics Franques, p. 250) the 
}]est vineyards in Palestine were here found in the 
12th century, and the Templars took thence 
Islips which they planted in Cyprus at Baffo. 
These vineyards seem to have existed in the 15th 
century, and, according to Hasselquist, even as 
late as IT^SO, A.D. There are neither palms nor 
vines at Engedi now, but the local Arabs believe 
that the Christians once had vineyards in this 
desert, which is no doubt a tradition of 
Crusading cultivation. ' The place is mentioned 
by Mejr ed r)in in 1405 A.D., and by Seetzen in 
1806. It seems to have been first visited aud 
recovered by Robinson in 18:38, and two years 
later by Lynch, since which time several travellers 
have visited the spot. 

The site of Engedi presents some of the finest 
wild scenery west of the Dead Sea. [See the 
drawing under Sea, the Salt.] The great 
valley (Wddij cl-lj/a'ir) here forms a deep 
gorge with precipitous sides, called Wiidy cl- 
'■Arcijch (" valley of ascent "). The cliffs north 
of the spring present a sheer wall of rock nearly 
2,000 feet high, above which is a barren ])lateau 
660 feet above the ]\lediterranean ; and from it, 
a little further north, rises a solitary peak 
(Ras esh Shukf, 1227 feet above same level). A 
very narrow winding descent, partly cut in the 
face of the cliff, leads down 1.140 feet to the 
bank or undercliff, where the spring issues from 
under a great boulder. The water is sweet, and 
has been found at various times to be from 81° to 
95° F., or less than the air temperature. A 
jungle of canes marks the line of the brook or 
cascade which flows down a deep descent to the 
Dead Sea — 600 feet beneath. The 'Oshir tree 
{Calotropis proccra) or apple of Sodom grows 
beside the water, and the Solanum or egg plant. 
The Sidr or Zizyphus, and the tamarisks (7*. 
tenuifulius), with alkali plants {Iluheihih) and 
other desert shrubs, are also found, but the sur- 
rounding cliffs and slopes are very barren. There 
is a fine view of the Dead Sea and of the western 
cliffs, and on the east side of the lake the castle 
of Kerak is w^ell seen. The hopping thrushes, 
black grackle, bulbul, and other birds of the 
Jordan valley here haunt the spring. There are 
traces of ruined terraces just below it, perhaps 
remains of the former vineyards, and a curious 
sort of platform of large rudely-shaped stones, 
measuring 15 ft. square and 3 ft high. To the 
south is a ruined tower (Kusr cl-^Airijch), 
apparently not very ancient, but perhaps of 
Crusading date : it was supplied by an aqueduct 
from the spring, and resembles the ruined mediae- 
val sugar mills near Jericho. In the s;orge are 
ancient ruck-cut tombs or chambers, perhaps the 
hermitages of the Essenes, or of later Christian 
Eremites. There is another spring in this gorge. 
The salt brought from Jebel Usdum is carried 
np by the ascent, and the path may be very 
ancient, as it would appear that by it the 
Idumaeans and their allies reached the jdateau of 
the Judaean desert when advancing to attack 
Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xx.). [C. R. C] 

ENGINE, a term exclusively applied to 
military affairs in the Bible. The Hebrew 
pncJT! (2 Ch. xxvi. 15) is its counterpart in 
etymological meaning, each referring to the 
injcnuit;/ (engine, from iwjeniuni) displayed in 
the contrivance. The engines to which the 
term is applied in 2 Ch. were designed to 
propel various missiles from the walls of a 
besieged town : one, like the hnlista, was for 
stones, consisting probably of a strong spring 
and a tube to give the right direction to the 
stone; another, like the catapiilta, for arrows, 
an enormous >tationary bow. The invention of 
these is assigned to Uzziah's time — a statement 
which is supported both by the absence of such 
contrivances in the representations of Egyptian 
and Assyrian warfare, and by the traditional 
belief that the balista was invented in Syria 
(Pliny, vii. 56). Luther gives Brustwehrcn, i.e. 
"parapets," as the meaning of the term. Another 
war-engine, with which the Hebrews were ac- 
quainted, was the battering-ram, described iu 


l^zelc. xxvi. as r?2p ^HO, lit. a heating of that 
u-hkh is in front, hence a ram for striking walls ; 
and still more precisely in Kzelc. iv. 2, xxi. 22, as 
"13, a ram. The use of this instrument was 
well known both to the Egyptians (Wilkinson, 
i. 387 [1878]) and the Assyrians. The references 
in Ezekiel are to that used by the latter jieople, 
consisting of a high and stoutly built framework 
on four wheels, covered in at the sides in oi'der 
to protect the men moving it, and aimed witii 
one or two pointed weapons. Their appearance 



K^ Sly "^y \ 



As5} riau war-engm8s. (From Botta, pi. 

was very diflierent from that of the lloman aries 
with w^hich the .lews afterwards became ac- 
quainted (Joseph. B. J. iii. 7, § 19). No notice 
is taken of the tcatuJo or the vinea (cp. Ezek. xxvi. 
9, Vulg.) ; but it is not improbable that the 
Hebrews were aciiuainted with them (cp. 
Wilkinson, i. 387 [1878]). The A. V. marginal 
rendering em/incs of shot (Jer. vi. 6, xxxii. 24 ; 
Ezek. xxvi. 8) is incorrect. [W. L. B.] 

ENGRAVER. The term :^n^, so translated 
in the A. V., applies broadly to any artifcer, 
whether in wood, stone, or metal : to restrict it 
to the enijravcr in Ex. xxxv. 35, xxxviii. 23. is 
improper (R. V. marg. craftsman): a similar 
latitude must be given to the term rtFlS, which 
expresses the operation of the artificer: in Zech. 
iii. 9, ordinary stone-cuttiug is evidently in- 
tended. The specific description of an engraver 
was ]2^ t^'"l^ (Ex. xxviii. 11), and bis chief 
business was cutting names or devices on rings 
and seals ; the only notices of engraving are in 
connexion with the high- priest's dress — the two 
onyx-stones, the twelve jewels, and the mitre- 
plate having inscriptions on them (Ex. xxviii- 
11, 21, 36). The previous notices of signets 
(Gen. xxxviii. 18, xli. 42) imply engraving. 
The art was widely spread throughout the 
nations of antiquity, jiarticularly among the 
Egyptians (Diod. i. 78 ; Wilkinson, ii. 337 
[1878]), the Aethiopians (Her. vii. 69), and 
the Indians (Von Bohlen, Indien. ii. 122). 

[W. L. B.] 

EN-HAD'DAH (n"^n-pr = sharp or swift 
spring [Gesen.] ; B. Al/xapeK, A. 'UvaSSa; En- 
hadda), one of the cities on the border of Issachar 
named next to En-gannim (Josh. xix. 21). Van 
de Velde (i. 315) would identify it with 'Ai7i Hand 
on the western side of Carmel, and about 2 miles 
only from the sea. But this is surely out of 
tlie limits of the tribe of Issachar, and rather 


ill Asher or Manasseh. Comlor, with more pro- 
bability, has suggested {I'KF. Mem. ii. 45) Jufr 
Addn, near Jenin, En-gannim. See other sug- 
gestions iu Dilimanu- in loco. [G.] [W.] 

EN-HAK-KO'RE, A. V. En-hakkore (pr 
N"ni5n = the spring of the crier ; irijyjj rov 
(TTiKaKovfievov -j'ons invocanti.'i), the spring which 
burst out in answer to the " cry " of Samson 
after his exploit with the jawbone (Judg. xv. 
19). The name involves a i)lay on the word 
in V. 18, ijihera (N"1pV 
A. V. "he called"). The 
word maldesh, which in 
the story denotes the 
"hollow place" (liter- 
ally, the "mortar") in 
the jaw, and also that for 
the "jaw" itself, lechi, 
are both names of jilaces. 
The spring was in Leiii, 
in the territory of Judah, 
and apparently at a 
higher level than the 
rock Etam (Judg. xv 
9-19); but the position 
yrfT/ of neither of these jdaces 

has yet been identified. 
Aquiia and Symmachus 
translate Lehi by "Ziaywv, and Josephus knew 
the place by the same name {Ant. v. 8, §§ 8, 9), 
Glycas {Ann. ii. 164) states that, in his time, 
the spring was shown at Eleutheropolis under 
the name ir7]y7) '2,ia'y6vos. The spring is alluded 
to by Jerome {Ep. S. Paulae, 18), and it is 
mentioned as being at Eleutheropolis by An- 
toninus Martyr (p. 32). The spring intended 
by these writers is apparently the Blr Umm 
Judei'a, at Beit Jibrhi, Eleutlieropolis. Conder 
connects Kh. es-S'iugh, E. of 'Ain Shcms, with 
'Siayciv, and En-hakkore with 'Ayuji Kara, N.W. 
of Zoreah {Tent Work, i. 277). Van de Velde 
{Memoir, p. 343) endeavours to identify Lechi 
with Tell el-Lekiyeh, 4 miles N. of Beersheba, 
and En-hakkore with the large spring between 
the Tell and Khuweilfeh. But Samson's adven- 
tures appear to have been confined to a nan-ow 
circle, and there is no ground for extending 
them to a distance of some 30 miles from Gaza, 
which Lekhjeh is, even in a straight line. A 
more probable position is in the neighbourhood 
of Wddg Urtas, and 'Ain Atdn, Etam (2), near 
Bethlehem. [Etam, the Rock.] [G.] [W.] 

EN-HA'ZOR ("11 Vn pr = spring of the 
village: irriyri 'Aaop; Enhasor), one of the 
"fenced cities" in the inheritance of Naphtali, 
distinct from Hazor, named between Edrei and 
Iron, and a]iparently not far from Kedesh (Josh. 
xix. 37). Renan, 3Jissio7i de Phe'nicie, identifies 
it with Kh. Ilatlreh, where there is a remark- 
able tomb called Hazzi'ir. Conder {PJ-.'F. Mem. 
i. 204, 22.3, 239) follows Renan. Guerin {Gali- 
lee, ii. 118) raises the objection that there is 
no spring at Hazireh, to represent the En of 
Enhazor, but does not suggest auv other identi- 
fication. ■ [G.] [W.] 

EN-MISHPAT (•OSP'P pr, fountain of 
judgynfnt : r\ irrjyr] rijs Kplcreais ; fans Misphat), 
Gen. xiv. 7. [Kadksh.] 



E'NOCH, and once HE'NOCH (yf]:n = 
dedication: Philo, dc Post. Caini, § 11, epjurji'eue- 
Toi 'Ev^x X"/"^ "''"' ' 'E»''^X ; Joseph, "avooxos : 
Henoch). 1. The eldest son of Cain (Gen. iv. 
17), who called the city which he built after 
his name (v. 18). Ewald {Gesch. i. 356, note) 
fancies that there is a reference to the Phrygian 
Iconium, in which city a legend of one "P^vvaKos 
was preserved ; but the legend is evidently 
derived from Biblical and Jewish accounts of 
the father of Methuselah (Steph. Byz. s. v. 
'Ikoviov, Suid. s. c. Nacraxos), and owes much of 
its existence to the similarity of name (Riehm, 
IIWB. s. n. "Henoch"). Other places have 
been identified with the site of Enoch, but with 
little probability ; e.g. Amichta in Susiana, the 
Ileniochi in the Caucasus, &c. (see Dillniann,^ 
Delitzsch [1887] in loco). 

2. The son of Jared (IT = a descent, cp. 

Jordnd), and father of Methuselah (n?^-inp = 
a man of nnns ; Philo, I. c, § 12, MaOovcraAffx 
f^anoffToXT] Bavdrov; Gen. v. 21 sq.; Luke iii. 
28). In the Epistle of Jude («. 14, cp. Enoch 
Ix. 8) he is described as " the seventh from 
Adam ; " and the number is probably noticed as 
conveying the idea of divine completion and rest 
(cp. August, c. Faust. .\ii. 14), while Enoch was 
himself a type of perfected humanity, "a man 
raised to heaven by pleasing God, while angels 
fell to earth by transgression" (Iren. iv. 16, 2). 
The other numbers connected with his history 
appear too symmetrical to be without meaning. 
He was born when Jared was 162 (9x6xo) 
years old, and after the birth of his eldest son in 
his 65th (5x6 + 7) year he lived 300 years. 
From the period of 365 years assigned to his 
life, Ewald (i. 356), with very little probability, 
regards him as "the god of the new year," but 
the number may have been not without influence 
on the later traditions which assigned to Enoch 
the discovery of the science of astronomy 
{affrpoAoyia, Eupolemus ap. Euseb. Praep. Ev. 
ix. 17, where he is identified with Atlas). 
After the birth of Methuselah it is said (Gen. v. 
•22-24) that Enoch " walked with God three hun- 
dred years . . . and he was not ; for God took him " 

(np7, ix€Te6riKiv, LXX. [here only] ; tuUt, 
Vulg.), The phrase " walked with God " 

(D''n7Xn"nX "^.Vnnn) is elsewhere only used of 
Noah (Gen. vi. 9 ; cp. Gen. xvii. 1, &c.), and is 
to be explained of a prophetic life spent in im- 
mediate converse with tlie spiritual world 
(Enoch xii. 2, " All his action rvas with the holy 
ones, and v:ith the uatchers during his life "). 
There is no further mention of Enoch in the 
0. T., but in Ecclesiasticus (xlix. 14) he is 
brought forward as one of the peculiar glories 
(ovVs €is (KTidOr] oios 'E.) of the Jews, lor he 
was taken up {ave\ri(j)6T), A. fxeTereerj) from the 
earth. " He pleased the Lord and was trans- 
lated [into Paradise, Vulg.], being a ]jattern of 
repentance " (Ecclus. xliv. 14). In the Epistle 
to the Hebrews the spring and issue of Enoch's 
life are clearly marked. '• By faith Enoch was 
translated (fifTfTedT), translatus est, Vulg.) that 
he should not see death . . . for before his trans- 
lation (/ueTo^eVeois) he hath had witness borne 
to him that he had been well-pleasing to God " 
(si. 5, R. V. ; cp. Riehm, I. c). The contnist to 


this Divine judgment is found in the constrained 
words of Josephus : •• Enoch departed to the 
Deity (^ai'fx^pV<yf "Tphs rb 6e7ov), whence [the 
sacred writers] have not recorded his death " 
(Ant. i. 3, § 4). A Uuther contrast is sometimes 
drawn between the translation of Enoch and the 
apotheosis of a Hercules, a Ganymede, &c. (see 
Kiehm, I. c). It is more interesting to refer to 
the Chaldaean tradition of the apotheosis of 
Xisuthros, the tenth of the antediluvian Patri- 
archs (see Smith'.s Chaldaean Genesis, pp. 42-6). 
The comjiaratiA'e sobriety of the Biblical narra- 
tive will be, in all these cases, apparent. 

The Biblical notices of Enoch were a fruitful 
source of speculation in later times (for Talmudi- 
cal views, see Hamburger, PP.- ' Henochsage '). 
Some theologians disputed with subtilty as to 
the place to which he was removed ; whether it 
was to Paradise or to the immediate Presence of 
God (cp. Feuardentius ad Iren. t. 5), though 
othei's more wisely declined to discuss the 
question (Thilo, Cud. Apocr. N. T., p. 758). On 
other points there was greater unanimity. 
Both the Latin and Greek Fathers commonly 
coupled Enoch and Elijah as historic witnesses 
to the possibility of a resurrection of the body 
and of a true human existence in glory (Iren. 
iv. 5, 1 ; Tertull. de Pesurr. Cam. 58 ; Hieron. 

c. Jean. Hierosol. §§ 29, 32, pp. 437, 440) ; anJ 
the voice of early ecclesiastical tradition is 
almost unanimous in regarding them as "the 
two witnesses" (Rev. xi. 3 sq.) who should fall 
before " the beast," and afterwards be raised to 
heaven before the great judgment (Hippol. Fra;/. 
in Dan. xxii. ; de Antichr. xliii. Cosmas Indic. 
p. 75, ap. Thilo, koto, t^v iKKXyjaiaaTiK^v 
irapdSoffiv ; Tertull. de Anima, 29 ; Ambros. in 
Pscdm. xlv. 4 ; Evanq. Nicod. c. xxv. on which 
Thilo has almost exhausted the question : Cod. 
Apoc. N. T. pp. 765 sq.). This belief removed a 
serious difficulty which was supposed to attach 
to their translation ; for thus it was made clear 
that they would at last discharge the commou 
debt of a sinful humanity, from which they 
were not exempted by their glorious removal 
from the earth (Tertull. dc Anima, 1. c. ; August. 
Op. imp. c. Jul. vi. 30). 

In later times Enoch was celebrated as the 
inventor of writing, arithmetic, and astr<iuomy 
(Euseb. Praep. Ev. ix. 17. Cp. Schiirer, Gesch. 

d. Jiid. Volkes ini Zeitalter Jesu Christi,^ ii. 
p. 627). He is said to have filled 300 books 
with the revelations which he received, and 
is commonly identified with Idris (i.e. the 
learned), who is commemorated in the Koran 
(ch. 19) as one " exalted [by God] to a high 
place " (cp. Sale, 1. c ; Hottinger, Jlist. Orient. 
pp. 30 sq.). But these traditions were pi-o-' 
bably due to the apocryphal book which beai'.s 
his name (cp. Fabric. Cod. Pscudep. Y. T. i, 
215 sq.). 

Some writers ( Ewald), arguing from the 
meaning of the name ("dedicator" or "be- 
ginner") and the length of his life (365 years), 
have considered Enoch a sun-god, a good spirit 
to whom men would appeal to bless any fresh 
undertaking. Baethgen (Beitrii/ie z. Scinit. 
Pelijionsfieschichte, pp. 152-3) has well shown 
the untrustworthiness of such conjectures. 

Some (Buttm. Mijthol. i. 176 sq. ; Ewald, 1. c.) 
have i'ound a trace of the history of Enoch in 
the Phrygian legend of Annacus ("AwoKoy, 


lidvvaKOs), who was distinguished for his piety, 
lived I50U years, and jiredicted the (lelui;e of 
Deucalion. [Enoch, 1.] In the A. V. of 
1 Ch. i. 3. the name is given as Hknocii. 

3. The third son of MiJian, the son of 
Abraham by Keturah (Gen. xxv. 4, A. V. and 
li. V. JIanoch ; 1 Ch. i. 33, A. V. Henoch, R. V. 

4. The eldest son of Reuben (A. V. and R. V. 
JIanoch; Geu. xlvi. 9; Ex. vi. 14; 1 Ch. v. 3), 
from whom came "the family of the llanoch- 
ites " (Num. xxvi. 5). 

5. In 2 Esd. vi. 49, 51, Enoch stands in the 
Latin (and Eng.) Version for Behemoth in tlie 
Aethiopic. [B. F. \V.] [1<\] 

ENOCH, THE BOOK OF, is one of the 
most important remains of that early apocalyptic 
literature of which the Book of Daniel is the 
great prototype. From its vigorous style and 
wide range of speculation the booic is well 
worthy of the attention which it received in the 
(irst ages, and recent investigations have still 
left many points for farther inquiry. 

1. History. — The history of the book is re- 
markable. The first trace of its existence is 
generally found in the Epistle of St. Jude {vv. 14, 
15 ; cp. Euocli i. 9), but the words of the Apostle 
leave it uncertain whether he derived his quota- 
tion from tradition (Hufmann, Schriftbeueis, i. 
420) or from writing (^f-trpo(priTevcrev . . . 'Evcox 
\4yuv), though the wide spread of the book in 
the second century seems almost decisive in 
favour of the latter supposition. It appears to 
have been known to Justin (^Apo!. ii. 5), 
Irenaeus (^Adv. Hacr. iv. 16, 2), and Anatolius 
(Euseb. B. E. vii. 32). Clement of Alexandria 
(^Eclorj. p. 801) and Origeu (yet cp. c. Cels. v. 
52. The patristic references are collected by 
Schiirer, ii. 628) both make use of it, and 
numerous references occur to the " writing," 
"books," and "words" of Enoch, the Book of 
Jubilees, and in the Testament of the XII. 
Patriarchs, which present more or less re- 
semblance to passages in the present book (Fabr. 
Cod. Fseudep. V. f. i. 161 sq.; Gfrorer, Froph. 
Pseudep. 273 sq. ; Schurer, ii. 627). TertuUian 
(Z)e Cult. Fern. i. 3 ; cp. De Idol. 4) expressly 
quotes the book as one which was " not received 
by some, nor admitted into the Jewish canon " 
(m ai-mui-'Mni Juddicmn), but defends it on 
account of its reference to Christ (lecjimus 
omnem scripturam aedificationi habilem divini- 
tus inspirari). Augustine (De Civ. xv. 23, 4) 
and an anonymous writer whose work is printed 
with Jerome's (^Brev. in Psalm, cxxxii. 2 ; cp. 
Hil. ad Psalm. 1. c.) were both acquainted with 
it ; but from tlieir time till the revival of 
letters it was known in the Western Church 
only by the quotation in St. Jude (Dillmaun, 
Einl. Ivi.). In the Eastern Church it was 
known some centuries later. Considerable frag- 
ments are preserved in the Chronographia (ed. 
Dindorf, i. 20-3, 42-7) of Georgius Syncellus 
(c. 792 A.D.), and these, with the scanty notices 
of earlier writers, constituted the sole remains 
of the book known in Europe till the close of 
the last century. Meanwhile, however, a 
report was current that the entire book was 
preserved in Abyssinia; and at length, in 1773, 
Bruce brought with him on his return from 
Egypt three MSS., containing the complete 


Aethiopio transJation. Notwithstanding the 
interest whicli the di>covery excited, the first 
detailed notice of this translation was only 
given by Silvestre de Sacy in 1800, and it was 
not i)ublished till the edition of Archbishop 
Lawrence in 1838 (LiOri Enoch versio Acthiopica 
. . . Oxon.). But m the interval Lawrence 
published an English translation, with an in- 
troduction and notes, which passed through 
tliree editions (The Booh of Enoch, &c. by R. 
Lawrence. Oxford, 1821, 1833, 1838). The 
translation of Lawrence formed the basis of 
the German edition of Hollmann (Bus Buch 
Henoch, Jena, 1833-38); and Gfrorer, in 1840, 
gave a Latin translation constructed from the 
translations of Lawi'ence and Hoffmann (/Vo- 
phetae veteres Pseudepigraphi, Stuttgart., 1840). 
All these editions were superseded by those of 
Dillmann, who edited the Aethiopic text from 
five MSS. (Liber Henoch, Aethiopice, Lii)siae, 
1851), and afterwards gave a German transla- 
tion of the book, with a good introduction and 
commentary (Z'as Buch Henoch, . . . von Dr. A. 
Dillmann, Leipzig, 1853). The discovery of a 
small Greek fragment (ch. 89, 42-9) in the 
Vatican, published by Mai in facsimile (Pah'uiii 
nova Biblioth. ii.), and deciphered by Gilder- 
meister (ZDMG. for 1855, pp. 621-4), led to 
the hope that more might be found, but this 
hope has been disappointed (cp. Merx, Archie, 
ii. 243). In 1882 an English translation from 
the original Etliiopic, with introduction and 
notes, was published by Dr. Schodde. The 
work of Dillmann gave a fresh impulse to the 
study of the book (cp. also his article on the 
subject in Herzog, RE."). Among the essays 
which were called out by it, the most important 
were those of Ewakl (Ueber dcs Aethiopischen 
Buches Henoch Entstehung, &c., Gottingen, 
1856) and Hilgeufeld (B. Jtidische Apokalyptik, 
Jena, 1857). The older literature on the sub- 
ject is reviewed by Fabricius (God. Pseudep. 
V. T. i. 199 sq.). 

2. Original Language. — The Aethiopic trans- 
lation was made from the Greek, and it was 
jirobably made about the same time as the 
translation of the Bible, with which it was 
afterwards connected, or, in other words, to- 
wards the middle or close of the fourth 
century. The general coincidence of the trans- 
lation with the patristic quotations of corre- 
sponding passages shows satisfactorily that tiie 
text from which it was derived was the same 
as that ourreut in the early Church, though one 
considerable passage quoted by Georg. Syncell. 
is wanting in the present book (Dillm. p. 85). 
But it is still uncertain whether the Greek text 
was the original (Volkmar in ZDMG. 1860, 
p. 131 ; Philippi, Das Buch Henoch, p. 126, 
1868), or itself a translation. One of the 
earliest references to the book occurs in the 
Hebrew Book of Jubilees (Dillm. in Ewald's 
Jahrb. 1850, p. 90), and the names of the Angels 
and winds are derived from Aramaic roots (cp. 
Dillm. pp. 236 sq.). In addition to this a 
Hebrew book of Enoch was known and used by 
Jewish writers till the thirteenth century 
(Dillm. Einl. Ivii.), so that on these grounds, 
among others, many (J. Scaliger, Lawrence, 
Hoffmann, Dillmann, and Schiirer, who refers 
especially to Halevy, Joum. Asiat. 1867, 
pp. 352-95) have considered it very probable 


that the book was first composed in Hebrew 
(Aramaean). lu such a case no stress can be 
laid upon the Hebraizing style, wliich may 
be found as well in an author as in a translator ; 
and in the absence of direct evidence it is 
ditficult to weigh mere conjectures. On the 
Diie hand, if the book had been originally 
written in Hebrew, it miglit seem likely that it 
would have been more used by Piabbinical 
teachers ; but, on the other hand, the wiitur 
certainly appears to have been a native of 
Palestine,* and therefore likely to have em- 
ployed the popular dialect. If the hypothesis 
of a Hebrew original be accepted, which as a 
hypothesis seems to be the more plausible, the 
history of the original and the version finds a 
good parallel in that of the Wisdom of Sirach. 


3. Contents. — In its present shape the book 
consists of a series of revelations supposed to 
have been given to Enoch and Noah, which 
extend to the most varied aspects of nature an J 
life, and are designed to offer a comprehensive 
vindication of the action of Providence. [Enoch.] 
It is divided into five parts. The frst part (chs. 
1-36, Dillm.), after a general introduction, con- 
tains an account of the fall of the angels (Gen. 
vi. 1) and of the judgment to come upon them 
and upon the giants, their offspring (chs. G-IG) ; 
and this is followed by the description of the 
journey of Enoch through the earth and lower 
heaven in company with an Angel, who showed 
to him many of the great mysteries of nature, 
the treasure-houses of the storms and winds, 
the fires of heaven, the prison of the fallen, and 
the land of the blessed (chs. 17-36). The 
second 2K(rt (chs. 37-71) is styled "a vision of 
Avisdom," and consists of three "parables," in 
Avhich Enoch relates the revelations of the higher 
secrets of heaven and of the spiritual world 
■which were given to him. The first parable 
(chs. 38-44) gives chiefly a picture of the future 
blessings and manifestation of the righteous, 
with further details as to the heavenly bodies : 
the second (chs. 45-57) describes in splendid 
imagery the coming of Messiah and the results 
which it should work among " the elect " and 
the gainsayers : the third (chs. 58-69) draws 
out at further length the blessedness of "the 
elect and holy," and the confusion and wretched- 
ness of the sinful rulers of the world. The 
ihinl part (chs. 72-82) is styled " the book of 
the course of the lights of heaven," and deals 
with the motions of the sun and moon, and the 
changes of the seasons ; and with this the 
narrative of the journey of Enoch closes. The 
fourth part (chs. 83-91) is not distinguished by 
any special name, but contains the record of a 
dream which was granted to Enoch in his youth, 
in which he saw the history of the kingdoms of 
God and cf the world up to the final establish- 
ment of the throne of Messiah. The fifth part 
(chs. 92-105) contains the last addresses of 
Enoch to his children, in which the teaching of 
the former chapters is made the groundwork of 
earnest exhortation. The signs which attended 
the birth of Noah are ne.xt noticed (chs. 106-7) ; 

» The calculations by which Lawrence 
endeavoured to fix the locality of the writer in the 
neighbourhood of the Caspian are inconclusive. Cp. 
Dillmann, p. li. 


and another short '• writing of Enoch " (ch. 108) 
forms the close to the whole book (cp. Dillm 
Eiiil. i. sq. ; Liicke, Versuch cincr voUstdnd. 
Einl. &c., i. 9o sq. ; Schodde, pp. 17-19 ; Schiirer, 
ii. 617-9). 

4. Integrity and Date. — If a certain general 
unity marks the book in its present form, 
yet internal coincidence shows clearly that 
different fragments are incorporated into the 
work, and some additinns have been probably 
made afterwards. Different " books " are men- 
tioned in early times, and variations in style 
and language are discernible in the present 
book. The belief, once prevalent, that the work 
is the work of one man written at one time, is 
entirely given up by modern critics (Schiirer, ii. 
G20). To distinguish the original elements and 
later interpolations is the great problem which 
so many have set themselves to solve. Hofmann, 
Weisse, and Philippi place the composition of 
the whole work after the Christian era; the 
first and the last think that St. Jude could not 
have quoted an apocryphal book (Hofmann, 
Sc.'iriftbeiccis, i. 420 sq.), and Weisse seeks to 
detach Christianity altogether from a Jewish 
ibundation (Weisse, Evaugelienfrage, p. 214 sq.). 
It seems to be now generally acknowledged that 
the second part (chs. 37-71) was the work of one 
compiler, whose date is variously placed in 
Christian times (Hilgenfeld and Volkmar agree- 
ing here with Hofmann, Weisse, and Philippi) or 
in pre-Christian (the date ranging from B.C. 
144-64; see Schiirer, ii. 621). The rest or 
groundwork of the whole (chs. 1-36, 72-108) 
is with great unani-mity (Volkmar excepted) 
placed in the second century B.C. Thus Ewald 
])laces the composition of the groundwork of the 
book at various intervals between 144 B.C. and 
c. 120 B.C., and supposes that the whole assumed 
its present form in the first half of the century 
before Christ. Liicke (2nd ed.) distinguishes 
two great parts, an older part including chs. 
1-36 and chs. 72-105, which he dates from the 
beginning of the Maccabaean struggle, and a 
later, chs. 37-71, which he assigns to the perioil 
of the rise of Herod the Great (B.C. 141). He 
supposes, however, that later interpolation.s 
were made without attempting to ascertain their- 
date. Dillmann upholds more decidedly the 
unity of the book, and assigns the chief part of 
it to an Aramaean writer of the time of John 
Hyrcanus (c. 110 B.C.). To this, according to 
liim, "historical" and " Noachian additions" 
Were made, probably in Greek translation 
(IJinl. lii.). Kostlin (quoted by Hilgenfeld, p. 96, 
&c.) assigns chs. 1-16, 21-36, 72-105, to about 
110 B.C.; chs. 37-71 toe. B.C. 100-64; and the 
"Noachian additions "and ch. 108 to the time of 
Ikrod the Great. Hilgenfeld liimself jilaces the book (chs. 1-16; 20-36; 72-90; 91, 
1-19; 93; 94-105) about the beginning of the 
first century before Christ (a. a. 0. p. 145, n.). 
This book he supposes to have passed through 
the hands of a Christian writer who lived 
between the times " of Saturninus and Marcion "" 
(p. 181), who added the chief remaining portions, 
including the great Messianic section, chs. 37-71. 
In the face of these conflicting theories (see them 
and others collected in Schodde, pp. 20-6) it is 
evidently impossible to dogmatize, and the 
evidence is insufficient for conclusive reasoning. 
The interpretation of the Apocalyptic histories 


(chs. 5C>, 57 ; 85-9U), ou which the ciuKf stress 
is laid for fixing tlie Jate of tlie book, iuvolves 
uecossarily minute criticism of details, whicli 
belongs rather to a commentary than to a general 
introduction. Some inconsiderable interpolations 
liave been made, and large fragments of a much 
earlier date were nni'.oubtedly incorporated into 
the work ; but as a whole, a work thus gradually 
created may be regarded as describing an im- 
jrortant j)hase of.Iewish oj)inion shortly before 
the coming of Christ.'' 

5. Doctrine. — In doctrine the book of Enoch 
e.xhibits a great advance of thought within the 
limits of revelation in each of the great divisions 
of knowledge. The teaching on nature is a curious 
attempt to reduce the scattered images of the 
0. T. to a physical system. The view of society 
and man, of the temporary triumph and final 
discomfiture of the oj)i)ressors of God's people, 
carries out into elaborate detail the pregnant 
images of r)aniel. The figure of the Messiah is 
invested with majestic dignity as " the Sou of 
God" (eh. 105, 2 only), "Whose Name was 
named before the siin was made " (ch. 48, 3), 
and Who e.xisted " aforetime in the Presence of 
God " (ch. 62, 6 ; cp. Lawrence, Prcl. Diss. li. f.). 
And at the same time His human attributes as 
" the son of man," '• the son of woman " (ch. 
ti2, 5 only), " the elect one," " the righteous 
one," "the anointed," are brought into con- 
spicuous notice. The mysteries of the spiritual 
world, the conne.xiou of Angels and men, the 
classes and ministries of the hosts of heaven, 
the power of Satan (ch. 40, 7 ; ch. 65, 6), and 
the legions of darkness, the doctrines of resur- 
rection, retribution, and eternal punishment 
(ch. 22 ; cp. Dillm. p. .\i.\.), are dwelt upon with 
grow-ing earnestness as the horizon of speculation 
was extended by intercourse with Greece. But 
the message of the book is emphatically one of 
"faith and truth " (cp. Dillm. p. 32); and while 
the writer combines and repeats the thoughts of 
Scripture, he adds no new element to the teach- 
ing of the Prophets. His errors spring from an 
undisciplined attempt to explain their words, 
and from a proud exultation in present success. 
For the great characteristic by which the book 
is distinguished from the later apocalypse of 
Ezra [EsDUA.s, 2nd Book] is the tone of trium- 
l)hant expectation by which it is pervaded. It 
seems to repeat in every form the great principle 
that the world, natural, moral, and spiritual, is 
xmder the immediate govei-nment of God. Hence 
it follows that there is a terrible retribution re- 
.serred for sinners, and a glorious kingdom pre- 
pared for the righteous, and Messiah is regarded 
as the Divine Mediator of this double issue (chs. 
00, 91). Nor is it without a striking fitness 
that a patriarch translate! from earth, and 
admitted to look upon the Divine INIajesty, is 
chosen as the " herald of wisdom, righteousness, 

•> ScIiUrer's examination of chs. 85-90, as the only 
passage which is lielpful in fixing a date of com- 
position, leads him to agree as to points of interpreta- 
tion {e.g. the. shepherds = Angels) and exposition of the 
numbers with Hofmann, Ewald, and Dillmann ; and he 
assigns a"; the date the third quarter of the second 
century is.c. Further, he concludes that chs. 37-71 are 
of Christian origin, the "Noachian sections" and chs. 
106-8 being interpolations whose date cannot be fixed 
(ii. 621-7). 



and judgment to a jieople who, even m suffering, 
saw iu their tyrants only the victims of a 
coming vengeance." 

6. lieccption. — Notwithstanding the quotation 
in St. .lude, and the wide circulation of the 
book itself, the ai)Ocaly[)se of Enoch was uni- 
formily and distinctly separated from the 
canonical Scriptures. Tcrtullian alone main- 
tained its authority {I.e.), while he admitted 
that it was not received by the .lews. Origan, 
on the other hand {<-. Ci Is. v. p. 267, ed. 
Sjienc), and Augustine {dc Cic. xv. 23, 4), 
definitively mark it as apocryjihal, and it is 
reckoned among the a])ocryplial books in the 
Ajiostolic Constitutions (vi. 16), and in the 
catalogues of the Synopsis S. Scripturae, Nice- 
])horus (Credner, Zur Gesch. d. Kan. p. 145), 
and Montfaucon {Bibl. Coislin. p. 193). 

7. Literature. — The literature of the subject 
is very voluminous. The English edition of 
Schodde places within the reach of the student 
the most important materials for the study of 
the book ; and notices of all the important 
works which have been published .'>ince the first 
edition of this Dictionary will be found in his 
book, in Schiirer, ii. 629-30, and in Zockler, 
in Strack u. Zbckler's Kgf. Koinui. zu d. heil. 
Schrijten A. it. N. T., ' Die Apokryphen des A. 
T.'s nebst einem Anhang iib. die Pseud-epi- 
graphenlitteratur,' p. 430. [B. F. W.] [F.] 

ENOCH, CITY. [Enoch, No. 1.] 

ENON. [Aexox.] 

ENOS (t^'13X = man as treak, not etymo- 
logically but iu accordance with usage, see 
MV^" ; 'Evws ; Enos'), son of Seth the son of 
Adam (Gen. iv. 26). Kenan was his firstborn 
(Gen. V. 9). His length of life is given as 905 
years. The R. V. gives the name under the 
form Enosh in the 0. T. reK (see also 1 Ch. i. 1), 
but reads Enos in Luke iii. 38. [F.j 

ENOSH CA. V. and li. V. in 1 Ch. i. 1). 


EN-EIM'MON (fl?3-| ]''l} = fountain of pome- 
granates; B. omits, A. iv 'Pe/xfjidv ; et in Eini- 
moii), one of the places which the men of 
Judah re-inhabited after their return from the 
Captivity (Neh. .\i. 29). From the towns iu 
company witli which it is mentioned, it seems 
very probable that the name is the same which 
in the earlier Books is given in the Hebrew and 
A. V. in the separate form of •' Ain and Rim- 
mon " (Josh. xv. 32 ; see Dillmann in loco), 
"Ain, Remmon " (xix. 7 ; and see 1 Ch. iv. 32), 
but in the LXX. combined, as in Nehemiah 
[Ain, 2]. Van de Yelde {Mem. p. 344) identifies 
it with Umm er-Ilumumhi between Beit Jihrin 
and Blr es-Scb'a. See also FEF. Mem. iii. 392, 
398. [G.] [W.] 

EN-EO'GEL (^yi pr = fountain cf thefuUcn 
trriyu] 'PoiynK ; Fans Fof/ef), a spring which 
formed one of the landmarks on the boundary- 
line between Judah (Josh. xv. 7) and Benjamin 
(xviii. 16). It was the point next to Jerusalem, 
and at a lower level, as is evident from the use 
of the words "ascended" and "descended" in 
these two passages. Here, apparently concealed 



from the view of the city, Jonathan and Ahimaaz 
remained, after the flight of David, awaiting in- 
telligence from within the walls (2 Sam. xvii. 
17), and here, " by the stone Zoheleth, which 

is close to (7^^) Eu-rogel," Adonijah held the 
feast, which was the first and last act of his 
attempt on tlie crown (I K. i. 9). These are all 
the occurrences of the name in the Bible. By 
Josephus on the last incident (^Ant. vii. 14, § 4) 
it.s situation is given as " without the city, in the 
royal garden," and it is without doubt referred to 
by him in the same connexion, in his description 
of the earthquake which accompanied the sacri- 
lege of Uzziah (Ant. ix. 10, § 4), and which " at 
the place called Eroge " * shook down a part of 
the eastern hill, " so as to obstruct the roads, 
and the royal gardens." 

In the Targum, and the Arabic and Syriac 
Versions, the name is commonly given as '• the 

spring of the fuller" (Nl^'p, JaJ). and this is 

generally accepted as the signification of the 

Hebrew name — Iligel being derived from ?J*1 
in the sense of " to tread," in allusion to the 
practice of the Orientals in washing linen. 

En-rogel has been identified with (a) the 
present " Fountain of the Virgin," 'Aim, Unun 
ed-Dcraj — spring of the mother of steps — the 
perennial source from which the Pool of Siloam 
is supplied; and (6) with Bir Eijuh, the "well 
of Job," 125 ft. deep, below the junction of the 
valleys of Kedron and Hinnom, and south of the 
Pool of Siloam. Tlie arguments in favour of 
the " Fountain of the Virgin " are briefly as 
follows : — 

1. The "Fountain of the Virgin " is the only 
real spring close to Jerusalem. Bir Eijub is a 
well, not a spring (En) ; and, except after heavy 
rain, the water in it is generally 70 ft. or 80 ft. 
below the level of the ground. Thus, if the 
former be not En-rogel, the single spring of this 
locality has escaped mention in the Bible. 

2. Exactly opposite the '• Fountain of the 
Virgin," and only separated from it by the 
breadth of the valley, there is a rude flight of 
rock-hewn steps which leads, up the precipitous 
face of a ledge of rock, directly to the village of 
Siloam. This place, called by the villagers ez- 
Zehweileh, a name identical with Zoheleth, is 
supposed by M. Clermont-Ganneau (PEFQy. 
Stat. 1869-70, p. 253) to mark the position of 
*' the stone Zoheleth which is close to En-rogel." 

3. The " Fountain of the Virgin " must always 
have been a well-known spring, and as such a 
suitable landmark on the boundary between 
Judah and Benjamin. The date of Bir Eijuh 
is unknown ; it is very possibly later than the 
time of Joshua. 

4. Bir Eyiib does not suit the requirements of 
2 Sam. xvii. 17. It is too far off both from the 
city and from the direct road over Olivet to the 
Jordan ; and is in full view of the city, which 
the other spot is not. 

5. The martyrdom of St. James was effected 
by casting him down from the Temple wall into 

« This natural interpretation of a name only slightly 
corrupt appears to have first suggested itself to Stanley 
(.?. d- /'. p. 184). 


the valley of Kedron, where he was finally 
killed by a fuller with his washing-stick. The 
natural inference is that St. James fell near 
where the fullers were at work.'' Now Bir Eijub 
is too far ofl' from the site of the Temple to allow 
of this, but it might very well have happened at, 
the Fountain of the Virgin (see Stanley's Ser- 
7nons on the Apost. Age, pp. 3oo-4). 

G. Deraj and Rogel are both from the same 
root, and therefore the modern name may be 
derived from the ancient one, even though at 
present it is taken to allude to the "steps" 
by which the reservoir of the Fountain is 

Add to these considerations (what will have 
more significance when the permanence of 
Eastern habits is recollected) — 7. Tliat the 
Fountain of the Virgin is still the great resort 
of the women of Jerusalem for washing ami 
treading their clothes : and also — 8. That the 
king's gardens must have been above Bir Eyuh 
and below the Fountain of the Virgin, which 
thus might be used without difliculty to irrigate 
them. A reminiscence of these gardens perhaps 
lingers in the name Wddy Fer'aun, " Pharaoh's 
valley," equivalent to " valley of the king," 
which the fellahtn of Siloam apply to the section 
of the Kedron valley between the S.E. angle of 
the Harani wall and the junction of the Kedron 
and Hinnom valleys. 

The tradition that Bir Eijiih is En-rogel is 
apparently first recorded by Brocardus. In an 
early Jewish Itinerary (Uri of Biel in Hottinger's 
Cippi Hebraici) the name is given as " Well of 
Joab," as if retaining the memory of Joab's con- 
nexion with Adonijah — a name which it still retains 
in the traditions of the Greek Christians. The 
chief arguments in its favour are, that being below 
the junction of the two valleys its situation agrees 
better with the common boundary of Judah and 
Benjamin than the " Fountain of the Virgin," 
but see above (3) ; and that in the Arabic ver- 
sion of Josh. XV. 7, 'Ain Eyub, or " Spring of 
Job," is given for En-rogel. Neither of these 
arguments is of much weight. 

For descriptions of the " Fountain of the 
Virgin " and Bir Eyiib, see Robinson, i. 331-334 ; 
Williams, Holy City, ii. 489-49.5 ; Notes to 0. S. 
of Jerusalem, p. 84 ; and PEF. Mem., " Jeru- 
salem," pp. 365-375. [Jerusalem.] [G.] [W.] 

EN-SHE'MESH Qypy-]'')} = spring of the 
sun ; T] 7r7J77; rov t]\iov, 71-7777? 'Baida'aft.vs ; En- 
semes, id est, Fojis Sulis), a spring which formed 
one of the landmarks on the north boundary of 
Judah (Josh. xv. 7) and the south boundary of 
Benjamin (xviii. 17). From these notices it 
appears to have been between the " ascent of 
Adummin " — the road leading up from the 
Jordan valley south of the Wfidy Kelt — 
and the spring of En-rogel, in the valley of 
Kedron. It was therefore cast of Jerusalem and 
of the Mount of Olives. The only spring at pre- 
sent answering to this position is the 'Ain Hand 
— the" Well of the Apostles," — about a mile below 
Bethany, the traveller's first halting-place on 
the road to Jericho. Accordingly this spring 
is generally identified with En-Shemesh (see 

•> So Jerome, Quaest. Ueb. on 2 Sam. xvii. 20: " An- 
cilla quasi, lavandi gr.itia, cum pannis ad fontem Eogel 




Dillmann on Josh. xv. 7). The aspect of 'Ai)i 
Jlatul is such that the rays of the sun are on it 
the wliole day. This is not inappropriate in 
a fountain dedicated to that luminary (PEF. 
Mem. iii. 42). [G.] [W.] 

ENSIGN (D3 ; in tiio A. V. generally *' en- 
sign," sometimes " standard ; " ?i^, " standard," 
with tlie exception of Cant. ii. 4, "banner;" 
niN, " ensign "). The distinction between these 
tluee Hebrew terms is sufliciently marked by 
their respective uses: ncs is a signal; deijel a 
military standard for a larije division of an army ; 
and otii, the same for a small one. Neither of 
these latter words, however, expresses tlie idea 
which "standard " conveys to our minds, viz. a 
jiaij ; the standards in use among the Hebrews 
probably resembled those of the Egyptians (see 
below). (1.) The notices of the ncs or " en- 

Egyptian StaniJarJs. (From Wiliinson.) 

sign " are most frequent ; it consisted of some 
well-understood signal which was exhibited 
on the top of a pole from a bare mountain 
top (Is. xiii. 2, xviii. 3) — the very emblem 
of conspicuous isolation (Is. xxx. 17). Around 
it the inhabitants mustered, whether for the 
purpose of meeting an enemy (Is. v. 26, xviii. 
.3, xxxi. 9), which was sometimes notified 
by the blast of a trumpet (Jer. iv. 21, li. 27); 
or as a token of rescue (Ps. Ix. 4 ; Is. xi. 10 ; Jer. 
iv. G); or for a public proclamation (Jer. 1. 
2) ; or simply as a gathering point (Is. xlix. 
22, Ixii. 10). What the nature of tlie signal 
was, we have no means of stating ; it has been 


inferred from Is. xxxiii. 23 and Ezek. xxvii. 7, 
that it was a flag : we do not observe a Hag 
dejjicted either in Egyptian or Assyrian repre- 
sentations of vessels (<;p. Wilkinson, ii. 127 
[1878]; Bonomi, \>\<. lG(j, 1(37); but, in lieu of 
a flag, certain devices, such as the ])hoenix, 
flowers, &c., were embroidered on the sail ; 
whence it appears tliat the device itself, and 
perhaps also the sail bearing the device, was the 
ncs or " ensign." It may have been sometimes 
the name of a leader, as implied in the title 
which Moses gave to his altar, " Joliovah-nissi " 
(Ex. xvii. 15). It may also have been, as 
Michaelis {Suppl. p. 1G48) suggests, a blazing 
torch. The important point, however, to be 
observed is, that the ncs was an occasional signal, 
and not a military stand.ird, and that elevation 
and conspicuiti/ are implied in the use of the 
term : hence it is appropriately applied to the 
" pole " on which the brazen serpent hung 
(Num. xxi. 8), which was indeed an "ensign" 
of deliverance to the pious Israelite; and again 
to the censers of Korah and his company, which 
became a " sign " or beacon of warning to Israel 
(Num. xvi. 38). (2.) The term degcl is used to 
describe the standards which were given to each 
of the four divisions of the Israelite army at the 
time of the Exodus (Num. i. 5'2, ii. 2 sq., x. 14 
sq.). Some doubt indeed exists as to its meaning 
in these passages, the LXX. and Vulgate re- 
garding it not as the standard itself, but as a 
certain military division annexed to a standard, 
just as vexilhmi is sometimes used lor a body of 
soldiers (Tac. Hist. i. 70 ; Liv. viii. 8). The 
sense of compact and martial array does certainly 
seem to lurk in the word ; for in Cant. vi. 4, 10, 
the brilliant glances of the bride's eyes are 
compared to the destructive advance of a well- 
arrayed host, and a similar comparison is em- 
ployed in refeience to the bridegroom (Cant. v. 
10) ; but on the otlier hand, in Cant. ii. 4, no 
other sense than that of a " banner " will suit, 
and we therefore think the rendering in the 
A. V. and K. V. correct. In Ps. xx. 5 most 
scholars accept the term "banners" (see De- 
litzsch, Perowne, and Schultz in loco). A 
standard implies, of coui'se, a standard-liearer ; 
but the supposed reference to that oflicer in 
Is. X. 18 (A. V. and R. V. text) is probably 
incorrect, the words meaning rather as when a 
sick manpineth away (R. V. marg. Cp. Delitzsch,* 
Dillniiinn* in loco) ; similar!}', in a somewhat 
parallel passage (Is. lix. 19) the marg. translation 
of R. v., the Spi7-it of the Lord shall lift up a 
standard, is not now so generally adopted as that 
of the text. The character of the Hebrew military 
standards is quite a matter of conjecture; they 
probably resembled the Egyptian, which con- 
sisted of a sacred emblem, such as an animal, a 
boat, or the king's name (Wilkinson, i. 342-3 
[1878]). Rabbinical writers state the devices to 
have been as follows : for the tribe of Judah, a 
lion ; for Reuben, a man ; for Ephrairn, an ox ; 
and for Dan, an eagle (Carpzov. Ciit. App. 
p. 667); but no reliance can be placed on this. 
As each of the four divisions, consisting of three 
tribes, had its standard, so had each tribe its 
" sign " {otK) or " ensign," probably in imitation 
of the Egyptians, among whom not only each 
battalion, but even each company, had its ])ar- 
ticular ensign (Wilkinson, I. c). We know 
nothing of its nature. The word occurs figura- 

3 P 



tivelv in Ps. Ixxiv. 4, as some think in reference 
to the images of idol gods (but see Comm. in 
loco). [W. L. B.] [F.] 

ENSUE (Fr. cnsuivre, Lat. iiiseqtior) = to 
follow after (1 Pet. iii. 11, A. V. The R. V. 
has " pursue." Cp. Ps. .xxxiv. 14, Prayer Book 
version). L"-'-] 

EN-TANNI3I. [Dragon Well.] 

EN-TAP-PU'AH (n-ISn-py = spring of 
apple or citron ; B. tniy)} Qaipdaid, A. -ij y^ 
@ae<pud, B"""'^. NacpfO; Fons Taphmc). The 
boundary of Manasseh went from facing Shechem 
"to the inhabitants of En-tappuah" (Josh. -wii. 
7). It is probably identical with Tappuah, the 
position of which will be elsewhere examined. 
[Tappu.vii.] Conder {Ifbk. to Bible, p. 263) iden- 
tifies it, with some probability, with a spring 
near Yasuf, S. of Nahlus, Shechem, and at the 
head of a branch of the " brook Kanah," Wudu 
Kdnah, which is the next point mentioned on the 
boundary. Guerin (Samarie, i. 259) would place 
it at 'Ain el-Fdruh, N.E. of Ndblus, but this is 
too far from 17. Kdnah. [G.] [W.] 


EPAENETUS (^'EnaiviTos; Epaenetus,yn\g. 
Clem., but earlier spelling varies considerably), 
a name meaning " praiseworthy." He is men- 
tioned immediately after Prisca and Aquila in 
Rom. xvi. 5. He is described (R. V.) as " the 
firstfruits of Asia unto Christ." The A. V. gives 
"Achaia" for "Asia." This is undoubtedly an 
error, as the reading "Asia" has much better 
documentary support, and the position of first- 
fruits of Auhaia is elsewhere (1 Cor. xvi. 15) 
assigned to other persons ; namely, the house- 
hold of Stephanas. Asia is the province of which 
Ephesus was the capital (Asia) ; and Epaenetus 
was probably an Ephesian converted by Prisca 
and Aquila after they were left there by St. Paul 
(Acts xviii. 19). When they departed to Rome 
(implied in Rom. xvi. 3), Epaenetus may very 
naturally have accompanied them. [E. R. B.] 

EPAPHRAS ('E:ro(f)pas ; Epaphras), a 
Colossian (Col. iv. 12), who was with St. Paul 
at the time of his writing his Epistle to that 
Clmrch. He had probably been the principal 
instrument in the foundation of the Churches of 
the Lycus — viz., Colossae, Laodicea, and Hiera- 
polis, "which had not as yet seen St. Paul's face 
in the flesh (Col. ii. 1). Epaphras felt responsi- 
ble for their spiritual welfore (Col. iv. 13), and 
it is probable that his uneasiness about the 
heresy wnich had shown itself in Colossae 
was the cause of his visit to St. Paul, and the 
occasion of the Epistle being written. St. Paul 
implicitly contrasts the teaching which the 
Colossians had originally received from Epaphras 
with the speculations now rife among them 
(Col. i. 7 anil ii. 6, 7). The position of Epaphras 
is much cleared by the reading adopted in the 
R. V. (jifxHv for vficcv). He is described by 
St. Paul as " a faithful minister of Christ on 
our behalf" (see Lightfoot on Col. i. 7, note). 
The Apostle regards him as his delegate in the 
rainistrv of Christ to the Colossians. As 
Epaphroditus represented the Philippians in his 
ministry to the Apostle's personal needs, so con- 


versely Epaphras represented the Apostle in liis 
ministry to the spiritual needs of the Colossians. 
As we find Epaphras sending greeting in Col. 
iv. 12, we may conclude that he did not return 
when the letter was despatched. The expression 
" my fellow-captive " applied to liim in Philem. 
V. 23 may possibly give the reason for this ; viz 
tliat he had in some way become involved in 
St. Paul's lot of imprisonment. But more pro- 
bal)ly he was voluntarily sharing it. The 
objection taken to this sense of the Greek word, 
<rvvaixiJ-d\u>Tos (Lightfoot on Col. iv. 10, note), 
may be met by regarding it as a continuation 
of the metaphor implied in " fellow-soldier " 
(crvvrpaTioirris). They were engaged in warfare 
for Christ, and therefore their captivity was 
that of prisoners of war. [E. R. B.] 

EPAPHRODPTUS ('ETra^ptiSiTos ; Epa- 
phroditus). The name is a common one, and means 
" attractive " or " charming." He is described 
by St. Paul as " my brother and fellow-worker 
and fellow-soldier, and your messenger and 
minister to my need." He had come to St. Paul 
in his captivity at Rome as the bearer of gifts 
from the Philippians (Phil. iv. 18). He "had 
remained with him, both to do him personal 
service and also to help him in "the work of 
Christ " (Phil. ii. 30). His exertions in both 
ways had led to or aggravated a dangerous 
illness. He had risked his life to do all tha't his 
brethren at Philippi would have desired to be 
done for St. Paul on their behalf. Now his 
affectionate nature was distressed on account of 
the auxietv which his friends at Philippi were 
feeling at the news of his illness. He desired 
to return, and St. Paul was desirous to send 
him. With his usual delicacy and sympathy, 
he represents the mission of Epaphroditus as 
being for his pleasure because it was for theirs 
(■' that I may be the less sorrowful," Phil. ii. 28). 
On the title " messenger " (a-jToaToXov) applied to 
Epaphroditus, see art. Apostle. Epaphroditus 
was almost certainly the bearer of the Epistle 
to the Philippians (see Lightfoot " on Philippians, 
p. 36), and may possibly be intended by the 
expression " true yokefellow " (Phil. iv. 3). 
Although Epaphras is merely a shortened form 
of Epaphroditus, yet the longer form of the 
name is always used of the Philippian delegate 
and the shorter of the Colossian teacher. The 
identity of the two is most improbable (see 
Lightfoot - on Philip., p. 00, note). [E. R. B.] 

EPENETUS (Rom. xvi. 5). [Epaenetus.] 

E'PHAH (HQ-'y; A. Ti(pdp, DE. Tatcpap 
[Gen.]; B. Ta(pip, A. Taicpap [1 Ch.] ; Epha), 
placed first in order among the sons of Midian 
(Gen. XXV. 4 ; 1 Ch. i. 33), and connected by 
Isaiah (l.x. 6, 7) with the Midianites, the Ke- 
turahite Sheba, and the Ishmaelites. both in 
the position of their settlements and in their 
wandering habits ; but no satisfactory identi-fica- 
tiou of the tribe has been discovered. The 

Arabic word HJu^ (Ghcijfeh), which has been 

supposed to be the same as Ephah, is the name 
of a village near Cairo ; but this is far from the 
Jlidianite settlements, and the tradition that 
Ephah settled in Africa does not rest on suffi- 
cient authority. [Midian; Sheba.] Fried. 


Delitzscli (Wo liiij ikis Faradics? p. 304-) and 
SchraJor (KAT." \>[>. 14G sq., 61.')) comiJaru it 
with the cuncif'onn ILijapa, a North Araijian 
tribe, and Ilalevy believes tliat HST as a i)er- 
sonal name is to be rea.l in the Sat'a inscrijition.s 
(see Dillmanu^ on Gen. /. c\). [E. ii. P.] [F.] 

E'PIIAH (nS''];; ; U. ratcpa^K iraWaicv, A. 
VaKpa ■}} iraW. ; J'Jpha). 1. Concubine of Caleb, 
in the line of Jiidah (1 Ch. ii. 4(J). 

2. BA. VaKpa. Son of Jahdai ; also in the 
Jine of Judah (1 Ch. ii. 47). 


ETHAI (following the A'cr!, '•2>r ; but the 

original text is ''Q)V = Opiiai ; and so LXX. B. 
'l(i)(pf, a. ixpfT ; Ophi), a Netophathlte, whose 
sons were among the " captains (*"lti') of the 

forces" left in Judah after the deportation to 
Babylon (Jer. .\1. 8). They submitted theni- 
.selves to Gedaliah, the Babylonian governor. 
and were apparentlj' massacred with him bv 
Ishmael (.\li. 3, cp. x\. U). [\V. A. \V.] [F.]' 

ETHEK (-131; ; 'A(p4p [Gen.], 'Ocpep [1 Ch.] ; 
Ophcr, Ephcr), named second in order among the 
sons of Midian (Gen. xxv. 4, 1 Ch. i. 33), but not 
mentioned in the Bible except in these genea- 
logical passages. His settlements have not been 
identified with certaintj-. According to Gesenius, 
the name is equivalent to the Arabic Ghijr, 

j^, signifying " the young of the cow " [i>ro- 

bably meaning the bovine antelope called the 
wild cow], and " a small beast or creeping 
thing or an insect " (Lane, Ar. Lex. s. v.). Two 
tribes bear a similar appellation, Ghifur 

but since one was a branch of the 


first Amalek, the other of the Ishmaelite Kinaueh 
(cp. Caussin de Perceval, Essai stir I'llist. dcs 
Arabes, i. 20, 297, 298; and Abulfedae Hist. 
Anteislamica, ed. Fleischer, p. 196), we can only 
identify one of them with the Biblical Epher by 
assuming a confusion to have arisen in respect to 
these nearly related tribes. The first settled 
about Yethrib (Jledina) ; the second, in the 
neighbourhood of Mekka. Delitzsch [1887] and 
Dillmann * (on Gen. /. c.) adopt Wetzstein's 
view that the name corresponds with 'Ofr, a 
place between the Tihama range and Aban, from 
which that district of Arabia acquired the name 
of the A'efd of ' Ofr. [E. S. P.] [F.] 

ETHER ("lay, a calf; B. "Acpep, A. Tacpep ; 

1. A son of Ezra, among the descendants of 
-Tudah; possibly, though this is not clear, of 
the family of the great Caleb (1 Ch. iv. 17). 

2. '0<pfp. One of the heads of the families 
of JIanasseh on the east of Jordan (1 Ch. v. 
-24). [G.] [W.] 

EPHES-DAM'MIM (D'-Kl'n DSX ; 'E^ep/teV, 
I>. -jue/i, A. 'AfpeffSofifxeiv ; in finibus Dcmnnim), 
a place between Socoh and Azekah, at which the 
Philistines were encam{)ed before the affray in 
which Goliath was killed (1 Sam. xvii. 1). The 
meaning of the word is uncertam, but it is 


generally explained as the "end " or " boumlary 
of blood," in that case ])robably derived from its 
being the scene of frequent sanguinary encounters 
between Israel and the Pliilistines. According to 
Neubauer, Oeo;;r. du 'Jalmud, j). 158, the term 
.Maaleh Aduniim is applied to Ephes-dammim in 
the Talmud. Under the shorter form of Pas- 
DA.MMIM it occurs once again in a similar con- 
nexion (1 Ch. xi. 13). For tiie situation of the 
place, .see Klaii, Valley of. [G.] [W.] 

EPHE'SIAN CE<p€(rios ; Ephesius), an in- 
habitant of Ephesus. In the singular it is 
applied to Trophimus (Acts xxi. 29), and in the 
jilural to the people of Ephesus (Acts xix. 28, 
34, 35). [F.] 


(J I. Title, p. 947. 
$ 2. (a-c) OniCUMSTANCES, p. 947. 
(d) r>UKPOSE, p. 949. 
(^e) Stkuctl'ke, p. 950. 
^ 3. Althenticitv, p. 952 : — 

(1) External evidence, p. 952. 
(.2) Uistory of the enquirij, p. 952. 
(_3) Is the Epistle genuine? p. 954. 

(^a-d) Objections to genuinenes.'!, p. 954. 
(e) Literary relations to Colossians aiul 

other books, p. 957. 
(/) Summary and conclusion, p. 963. 
»^ 4. Text — Literatuke, p. 904. 

§ 1. Title. 

The title (with amplifications) irphs 'E(pe(TL0Vi 
is attested by all extant MSS. and \'ersions. But 
Marcion, and possibly others in his train (" haere- 
tici," Tertull. c. Marc. v. 11), adopted the title 
" ad Laodiceuos." Tertullian's statement to this 
effect is confirmed by Epiphanius {Ilacr. 42, vol. 
i. p. 811, Migne), who makes JIarciou quote 
Ephes. iv. 5, 6, from his " Epistle to the Laodi- 
ceans." It is true that in a previous passage (p. 
708), when enumerating the Epistles in Marcion's 
canon, he includes, as well as Ephesians, Ka\ rfys 
■Kphs Aao5. Keyopevr]s jJ-ip't). But in the face of 
the quotation just mentioned, and of Tertul- 
lian's plain statement, this must be set down 
to a confusion on the part of Epiphanius simi- 
lar to that noticed by Bp. Lightfoot {Col. p. 292) 
in the Muratorian Canon. To Marcion, then, 
the title was " ad Laodicenos." But there is no 
evidence (Bleok, Einl. § 169, notwithstanding) 
that this was due to anything but a critical 
conjecture on Marcion's part. Tertullian's 
language, moreover, is positive proof that the 
usual title of our Epistle was given to it on 
grounds independent of the disputed reading. 
He accuses ibarcion of tampering with the title, 
not with the v:ords, of the Epistle, " tituluni. 
ei aliquando interpolare gestiit, quasi et in isto 
(liligentissimus explorator " {ibid. 17. The sug- 
gestion of Davidson, Alford, &c., that "titulus" 
may include the greeting of the Epistle, is lin- 
guistically admissible, but far from likely). 
Tertullian makes no allusion to the words 
in dispute, and therefore cannot have read 

§ 2. Circumstaxces, Purpose, and Structure. 
(a.) For what readers '/ — The decision depends 
upon the foUowmg considerations, which call 
for a more extended discussion than is possible 
here. We state results only. 

3 P 2 


(a) The genuineness of eV ''E.<pi(T(f (i. 1). The 
evidence (collecteil by Tiscliendorf) goes to show 
that from the first the Epistle was circulated 
both with these words aud without them, but 
that I't <nthcr cise {supra, § 1) it was known as 
an Epistle to the Ephesiaus. 

(j8) The connexiiin of the Epistle with 
Ephesus may accordingly be regarded as certain, 
independeatly of the reading of ch. i. 1. The 
readers are moreover 

(7) Geatiles(i. 13; contrast r. 12 ; ii. 1, 11-13, 
19; iii. 1 ; v. 8), and a definite group of persons 
(i. 15;vi. 21). 

But (S) the Epistle was not intended for 
Ephesus only. This follows from the fact that 
.St. Paul is personally unknown to at any rate 
the mass of his readei-s (i. 15, cp. iv. 21, iii. 2, 3). 
Xow the Apostle's labours at Ephesus, though 
fruitful of result outside the city (1 Cor. xvi. 
9 ; Acts xix. 10, 26), had been carried on entirely 
in Ephesus itself (Acts xx. 18, rhv TrdvTo. xpovov) ; 
he had not visited even the Lvcus vallev (Col. 

(e) It is therefore as impossible to limit the 
range of the letter to Ephesus as it is to exclude 
Ephesus from it altogether. That the Epistle 
was primarily addressed to Laodicea (greetad 
through Colossae, Col. iv. 15), or that it was 
purely catholic in its destination (see supnt, y), 
cannot be maintained. That it was addressed 
merely to the Gentile element in tlie Asiatic 
churches (Milligan in Encyd. Brit.) is an ap- 
])roximation to the view regarded by the writer 
of this article as probable : but this view postu- 
lates an explanation of rols oviriv in i. I which 
will not commend itself to all, and overlooks 
St. Paul's frequent custom of addressing a Church 
or Churches of mixed origin as if purely Gentile 
(Rom. i. 13, xi. 13 sqq., and contrast 1 'I'hess. i. 9 
with Acts xvii. 3, 4). 

(5") The Epistle then was probably (1) ad- 
dressed to Ephesus, but intended by St. Paul* to 
circulate '' among " the churches of Asia," and 
(2) identical with the letter iK AaoSiKeias of 
Col. iv. 16. The latter identification is based on 
the vei'se just cited, combined with the close 
relation of our Epistle to Colossians (see below), 
and the identity of the bearer, Tychicus. The 
identification of our Epistle with that "from 
Laodicea " is of course denied by those who 

» The omission of iv 'E<i>t<7ti> would thus correspond in 
purpose to that of iv 'Piufj-n (Rom. 1. 7) in O, g (Cod. 
Born.), an omission possibly (see article Romans, and 
Lightfoot in Jaurn. (if Phil. 1870) indicative of a circu- 
lation of that Epistle (in a form aliridged by the omis- 
Bion of XV., xvi.) as an encyclical letter. 

»> The "circular " destination of the Epistle has been 
miiintained, with numerous modifications and subsidiary 
hypotheses, by a host of scholars from Beza, Usher, and 
Bengel onwards, including Hug, Xeamler, RUckert, 
Credner, Harless, Anger, Olshausen, Klostermann, 
Sahatier, Reuss, Ellicott, Holtzmann ("for choice," 
Einl.'i p. 286), Weiss (Herzog, RE.^ Suppl. i. 481, &c.), 
AVold. Schmidt (in Herzog, HE:^ xi. 373, and in Cth ed. 
of Meyer). Schenkel (Christusbild dcr Apo!:t. 1879, 
p. 88) was a convert to it, while Bishop Lightfoot, who 
had promised a full discussion of the two kindred 
questions in his long-'ooked-for introduction to Ephe- 
sians, meanwhile expressed his belief tliat educated 
opinion is tending, however slowly, in this direction. 
(See also his remark, Ign.^ ii. p. 63, that the Ephesians 
were " the chief, though probably not the sole, re- 
tipieuts " of the Epistle.) 


maintain its exclusively Ephesian destination 
(see supra, 5), and by those who reject its 
authenticity while maintaining the genuine- 
ness and integrity of the Epistle to the Colos- 
sians (Davidson ; Renan, St. Paul, xii. ; Ewald, 
S. S. p. 157 ; and Von Soden snbstantially)i. 
Others, however, rejecting Ephesians entirely 
and Colossians wholly or in jjart, see in CoL 
iv. 16 a reference to our Epistle (Baur, I'aulus,, 
ii. 47 ; Volkmar, Apoc. 67 ; Hitzig ; Hausrath, 
Ap. I'aulus ; Holtzmann, Krit., passim, and 
Einl.- p. 294). The great mass of those critics who 
accept both E])istles as genuine aud regard Ej>he- 
sians as in any sense a circular letter take tlie 
same view (Anger. Ucber den Laod.-brief, 1843 ; 
Keuss, Jlist. A. r.'§§ 119, 120, in Eng. tr. ; and 
especially Lightfoot, Col. p. 274 sq., where the 
question is discussed in all its bearings and with 
full references to the literature of the subject). 
The objections (restated by Weiss, Einl. p. 262) 
turning on the difficulties as to the method of 
circulation aud the movements of Tychicus are 
not generally regarded as very serious. 

(b.) Place and Date of Composition. — The- 
Epistle was written at the same time as those 
to Colossians and Philemon, and carried by 
Tychicus (vi. 21), who, with Onesimus the Isearer 
of the letter to Philemon (Philem. v. 13), was also, 
charged with the delivery of that to Colossae- 
(Col. iv. 7). St. Paul was a prisoner at the time 
(Ephes. iii. 1, iv. 1, vi. 20; Philem. v. 10); this 
fixes us to the alternative "^ of either his two- 
years' imprisonment at Caesarea (Acts xxiii. 35, 
xxiv. 27), or his two years' imprisonment at 
Rome (Acts xxviii. 30). The former has been- 
contended for by some modern scholars, but is 
certainly to be rejected* [Colossians, Epistle to 
the]. The silence of St. Paul as to the earth- 
quake which reduced Laodicea, as well as Hiera- 
polls and Colossae according to Eusebius, to ruins 
in Nero's reign, is explained by the fact that the 
disaster had taken place at least two years pre- 
viously (a.d. 60) if we follow Tacitus {Ann. 
xiv. 27), or else did not take place till at least 
a year later (a.d. 64, Eus. Chron.). 

Taking Rome then as the place of writing-, 
the date depends (1) on the date of St. Paul's 
arrival there [see Festus; Paul]; (2) on the 
order of the Epistles written from Rome (see 
Lightfoot, Phil. Introd., and articles COLOS- 
SIANS and Philippians). Assuming St. Paul 
to have reached Rome in the beginning of 
A.D. 61, and the Philippians to be the first of 
his Roman Ejnstles, our group would come at 
the very end (Philem. v. 22) of the Sierla (Acts 
xxviii. 31), i.e. at the beginning of the year 63. 

(c.) Occasion. — St. Paul when he wrote had 
reason to hope for a speedy release, and intended 
to visit Asia at once upon regaining his liberty 
(Philem. r. 22). But, in addition to the possibility 
of his former disappointment (Philip, ii. 24) being 
repeated, tleere were strong motives for his 
icriiiny, and that without delay. (1) The rapid 

« St. Paul's other imprisonments (2 Cor. vi. 5, xi. 23 ; 
cp. Ac's xvi. 23) cannot have been of the duration 
implied in the language of these Epistles (Col. iv. 18). 
The " second " and final imprisonment is of course not to 
be thought of (contrast 2 Tim. iv. 6 with Philem. v. 22). 

d See Lightfoot, Coloss. p. 37 sq., and on tbe other 
side AVeiss, Einl. p. 260 ; Rcubs, Jfist. A', T. Script^ 
Eng. Tr. p. 106. 


fjrowth of Gentile Christianity in proconsular Asit 
iiail fur some time been filling him with eager 
.ami iuci'ea.sing anxiety (Coi. ii. 1 and Eplies. 
througliout) for the healthy growth, ami settle- 
ment iu the one true Israel of God (Gal. vi. 16 ; 
Ephcs. ii. 1"2), of the converts from the un- 
circumeision. From Epaphras (Col. i.7, iv. 12), 
who evidently entered into all that he felt, ho 
Jie.ird of their love and faith, their ditliciilties 
with the Jewish element in the Church (Kphes. 
ii. 11, and iv. 3?), and longed to impart to them 
(as he had done to the original Gentile Church 
•of Aiitioch years before. Acts xi. 2t}) the special 
Xaptcrna (Horn. i. 11, 13 b) of his apostleship 
(Gal. ii. 7, 8; Rom. .\i. 13). (2) An equally 
strong and even more urgently pressing motive 
was //((• st ltd of thinijs in the Lijcus vidlcij [see 
Coi.OSSiANS]. It would seem indeed almost 
probable that the (3) return of Onesimiis to his 
master at this particular time was suggested by 
the o])portunity of the mission of Tychicus, rather 
than the converse : the desirability of sending him 
with all possible promptitude (Philem. vv. 14, 
la) would at any rate make the oi)portunity 
thus offered one to be seized. [Philemon.] 

It would appear (see below, § 3 e) that St. 
Paul at first contemplated, in addition to the 
private letter to Philemon, a single letter to the 
Churches of Asia, embodying his anxiety for the 
spiritual growth of the Gentile Christians ; for 
their j)rogressive realisation of their position in 
the commonwealth of Christ's Body, of all that 
that position meant, and of its claims upon their 
practical life. But upon the arrival of Epaphras 
with the news from Colossae, it became impos- 
sible to meet the special requirements of that 
Church and neighbourhood with an epistle fitted 
for the widely-spread communities of j)roconsular 
Asia. The Epistle ultimately took shape in two 
forms : * a special letter for the Colossians, and 
a general letter which the Apostle finally ad- 
dressed to Ephesus, the metropolis in the faith 
(Acts six. 10, 26) of the entire province. The 
relative jiriority of the two Epistles is on this 
Tiew unimportant: while it is psychologically 
more natural for the general idea to precede its 
special application, it is quite in harmony with 
this that, when the time for writing came, the 
more special letter was written first. The ques- 
tion cannot be decided, however, upon such a 
priori grounds : nor is the relation between the 
Epistles to the Galatians aud Romans an exact 
parallel. Bp. Lightfoot, numbering Phiiippians, 
■Colossians, Philemon, 1, 2, and 3 respectivelj' in 
this group, evidently regards Ephesians as written 

(d.) 3fain Purpose and leadinj Ideas. — The 
Epistle as finally drafted carries out the aim 
indicated above. Its object is accordingly 
"much more definite than it is often thought to 
be . . . These views [of Weyer, Scheukel, Alford, 
Harless, Gloag, Lightfoot] may be all partially 
correct, but they are not enough. In this very 
setting forth of the greatness of the Church, 
in this description of her life, in this present- 
ing of her to us in all the ideal glory of her 
state as united to her Lord, the Apostle has 
a farther and immediately practical aim — to 

e So Weizsacker, Ap. Zeitalter, p. 565 (rejecting both 
Epistles), "The two wcra probably cumposcd, not 
successively but simultiueuus'.y." 


show us that this ideal glory contemplated from 
the first the union of both .Jews and Gentiles in 
e(iual enjoyment of the ])rivileges of God's cove- 
nant, and that to the completeness of the body 
of Christ the latter are as necessary as the 
former, and tliat it is only when both are 
togetlier iu Christ tliat His fulness is realised 
and manifested" (Milligan, /i'/icyc. lirit. p. 462; 
the whole section should be consulted). The 
Epistle is in fact the Gospel of the Gentiles, St. 
Paul's own Gospel in its positive expression. 
For his Apostleship of the Gentiles to be fxr} eis 
Kev6v (Gal. ii. 2, and see Philip, ii. 16), it was not 
enough to have vindicated their riglits against 
Judaising demands: they must realise and justifv 
their position as fellow-citizens of the saints 
(Ephes. ii. 19), as living branches of the sacred 
olive-tree (Rom. xi. 17), of the ancient and 
renovated (Ephes. iv. 13, 24 ; v. 25, 26) congreo-a- 
tion of God, into which, in consummation of God's 
eternal purjiose (iii. 5, 11, &c.), they had been at 
length engrafted. This central purpose' of the 
Epistle is (!) immediately suggested by its 
general character aud by the Gentile origin of 
its readers (supra, § 2, a 7), and (2) brought out 
with irresistible clearness by an examination of 
its structure (infra, e). 

Reserving for the present a general discussion 
of the theological contents of the Epistle and its 
relation to St. Paul's other writings (§ 3), wu 
will now point out how its central purpose is 
worked out. St. Paul traces the calling of the 
Gentiles to the eternal (i. 4) counsel of God, now 
at last in the fulness of time made known to all 
His creatures (i. 9, 10; iii. 9-11), to sum up all 
things once again in Christ (avaKeipaXaiuxraadai, 
i. 10: so Bengel ; Schenkel, Christusbild ; Weiss, 
B. T. ; the sense of ava- is marked by Tertull. 
Monog. 5, " ud initium reciprocare ; " Pesh., Vulg., 
Goth.). This again carries us back to the 
original cosmic mediation of the Son, a jirinci- 
ple presupposed in all St. Paul's teaching 
(1 Cor. viii. 6 : cp. Weiss, B. T. § 79, c ; and 
Lightfoot, Col. p. 116), and brought out pro- 
minently in the companion Ejiistle (Col. i. 16), 
but in our Epistle tacitly taken for granted. 
The unity of all in Christ, involved both in His 
original relation to creation and in the corre- 
s|)onding eternal purpose of God to sum up again 
{vy. air KaraWdffffeiv, Col. i. 20, 21) all things 
in Him, is as a matter of fact in abeyance. The 
reason of this, the great problem of the later 
Gnostics, St. Paul does not discuss : but sm is 
here, as in the earlier Epistles (Rom. i. 21 ; viii. 
20), assumed as the cause (Ephes. ii. 1), while 
an original personal source of the cosmic discord 
(ii. 2, vi. 12) is pointed to. In relation to man, 
this severance or estrangement has come (1) be- 
tween man and his Creator (v. 18; cp. Col. i. 21), 
involving the former in darkness (v. 8), death, 
and the wrath of God (ii. 3-5, iv. 22) ; and (2) 
between Jews and Gentiles, as a wall of division 

f Baur, Ewald, Holtzmann, and others have pointed it 
ont, but their perception i,f the truth has been embar- 
rassed by assumptions as to date and authorship, and 
consequently the iloctrinal perspective of the whole has 
been missed. Kspeclally, too much has been made of 
the " conciliatory " (iv. 3 ) purpose of the letter, supposed 
to be exemplified in the languacrc applied to the Jens 
(ii. 12, Haur), to the older Apostles (ayioi, iii. 5"i, and 
to the author of the Apocalypse {Trp6<f>r)Tai, Holtzmann !), 
and even iu the use made of 1 Peter (\Veiss), 


(iv. 13 sqq.; cp. Col. i. 28, iii. 11), uutil all ex 
elusive distinctions :ive effaced within her, God's 
eternal purpose in Christ is unsatisfied (i. 10, 
&c.). It is this, then, that St. Paul " agonises " 
(Col. ii. 1) to impress upon the Gentile Christians 
ot Asia, praying again and again (Ephes. i. 15 ; 
iii. 1, 14) that they may learn more and more 
to what they have been called, until they grow 
to the measure of the stature of the fulness of 
Christ. The key-note to the Ejiistle is strucic 
in the word iniy^/coais (i. 17), ])r()gressive en- 
lightenment, not merely intellectual, but of a 
kind that will be fully realised only hereafter 
(1 Cor. xiii. 12 ; on the word, see Lightfoot on 
Col. i. 9 and Phil. i. 9). With this growth in 
spiritual wisdom will come mutual toleration 
(iv. 2) and forgiveness, the fruit of Christ's- 
redemptive grace (iv. 32; cp. ii. 15), and a life 
worthy of their calling. 

(e.) Structure. — The analysis given below aims,, 
not at following the secjuence of ideas into- 
every detail, which in the case of this Epistle- 
would involve a commentary, but at bringing out 
the main flow of the thought. The Epistle is 
characterised by great simplicity in this respect, 
coujjled with extraordinary complexity and 
length in its parenthetic matter. Its lack of 
argumentative sequence is compensated by the- 
intense unity of purpose which runs through it,, 
compelling the writer back to a thread whic'n is- 
constantly dropped, but never lost .sight of from 
beginning to end. St. Paul, after blessing God for 
the privileges bestowed in Christ (i. 3), prays for 
the progress of his readers in knowledge of what 
these privileges imply (i. 15-18). This prayer,, 
after a reminder of the great change from their 
past to their present condition (ii. 1, 5, 8, 11-13),. 
he reiterates (iii. 1, 14) with deeper fervency and 
significance, the climax culminating in a dox- 
ology. He exhorts them to carry out their 
privileges to their normal practical issues, unity,, 
renunciation of Gentile vices, fidelity to social 
and moral obligations, the armour of God,, 
prayer. Such is the outline of the Epistle, the 
expression of St. Paul's burning anxiety that the 
Gentiles should understand, and justify, their 
fellow-citizenship with the saints and Israel of 
God. But the peculiar distinction of the Epistle 
is due to the fulness of substance which the 
simple theme draws up at every joint and turn 
from the underlying springs of the unsearchable 
riches of Christ. The following table will make 
this plain : — 

1. 1-2. Apostolic salutation. 
I. i. 3-14. Blessed be God for the blessings bestowed in Christ upon all Christians. 
[These blessings involve — 

4-G. God's eternal purpose of our adoption in Christ. 

7-14. Our redemption and forgiveness through His Blood, by virtue of the riches of His- 
grace, to which also we owe — 

8-10. Knowledge of God's purpose to sum up all things in Christ. 
111. This purpose includes us all, both 

12. Jews, Toil? TrporjATTiKOTa? (who had previously hoped in the Christ"), 
13, 14. Yoo Gentiles also wlio accepted the sood tidings and were accordingly sealed 
with the Spirit to the destiny in store for the Israelites (eis in. t^s Sofjjs 
avToO repeateil).]3 
II. i. 15-23. For this reason (God's calling of the Gentiles) I also (/.c. as corresponding to God's purpose) ^j-o.y 
for your enlightenment by Cod, that you may grovj in knowledge of Him. 

[18, 19. This involves enlightenment concerning the hope and heritage to which you are 
called, and particularly concertiing 
20-23. The Power of God e.\erted in Christ, and shown 

/ Resurrection, 
in Hi < Exaltation, 

'■Consequent relation to the Chvrch.J 


(ii. 14) and a state of hostility {lb. 15, 16). In 
relation to this latter jjoint, the case has a two- 
fold aspect, only to be understood in relation to 
the respective functions of Covenant and Law as 
laid down in St. Paul's older Epistles (cp. Gal. iii. 
•3-29 ; Koin. iii. 1, 2, 9, &;c. The paradox is 
expressed Kom. xi. 28 ; cp. Rom. iii. 20). On 
the one hand, the " commonwealth of Israel " 
(Ephes. ii. 12) was founded by God (Gal. iii. 16 ; 
Kom. iv. 13) as a first step in the reconciliation 
of man to his Creator. Israel was united to 
God by a covenant, and enjoyed the privilege of 
hope, on the ground of Divine ;:)romiSt's (Ephes. ii. 
12). Moreover, this iroKireia was to endure for 
ever (Rom. iii. 3, xi. 29). It was as Abraham's 
seed that the "many nations " (Rom. iv. 13, 17) 
were to be called : the Gentiles were in God's 
good time (Ephes. i. 10) to take their -jilace within 
'•the Israel of God" (Gal. vi. 16). The removal 
of the (jLeadToixov rov cppajfiov, visibly embodied 
in the ordinances (ii. 15 ; cp. v. 11) which 
sharply severed Jew from Gentile, was not to 
destroy the " household of God," but to bring 
within its bounds those who had previously been 
excluded. The contiwnti/ of the Church thus 
lies at the vei'y root of St. Paul's conception of 
it (cp. Pfleiderer, Pauiinisin, ii. 40 sq.). But, on 
the other hand, the Israelite stood in no less 
need of redemption than the Gentile: " We were 
by nature children of wrath as well as the rest " 
(ii. 3). The " ordinances " set an (X^P°- ""^ 
only between them ami the rest of mankind, but 
between them and God (cp. Rom. iv. 15 ; Col. 
ii. 14). They that were " near," not less than 
they that were " afar of^','' needed " peace " and 
" access to the Father " (Ephes. ii. 17, 18). Both 
in being reunited to God were reunited to one 
another (c]i. Rom. iii. 30) by the death of Christ 
(Ephes. i. 7 ; ii. 16). It follows from this that, 
great as were the privileges of the -iroX'iTeLa tov 
'\(Tpai\K, they were provisional and prospective, 
awaiting completion with the fulfilment of the 
Promises. In other words, the restoration of 
the individual involves that of the Church. In 
Christ, she receives (i. 23) a Head, a new princi- 
ple of life an«-l organic unity (iv. 16); in Him 
she is redeemed, saved, cleansed {vv. 23-27), she 
is His body; in Him she realises the highest and 
tenderest Old Testament ideal (Hos. ii. 16, 19; 
Is. liv. 5, &c.) of the relation of God to His People 
(Ephes. V. 25); in her His function in relation 
to the Universe finds its complete realisation 
(i. 23). Until the Church has grown into one 


in. ii. l-Il). i'uu loo, once dead in Centilc sins, or rather 
[since wo Jews were in no better case] 
MS (ritj.a<;, »ii. •), 5, including vit.a';, v. 1, and T)ixa.^, v. 3), God raised to life in Christ. 
[7-10. Import of this (1) us donujnstratiiiK (iod's grace for all future ages, 7, 
(2) as the fouiid.-ilinii of Christian etliics, 8-10.] 
11-22. Jlear in niitul, then, this mumcnUnis (hantjr in your stale; once aliens, now feUoiv-ciUzens of the 
saints (19). 

[13-18. TliiB cfreclcd hy tlic hlood-shedding of Christ, wliicli lias removed tlie barrier (fieo-or. 

ToO <|)p.) and made both one. 
20-22. Vou arc now being built into God's habitation, reared upon the Ajiostlcs and Prophets, 
and upon Christ as corner-stone.] 
IV. iii. 1-19. To this end (your complete incorporation into the Edifice of the Cliurch) / I'aul, in virtue of my 
special charge ocer i/ou Gentiles, of which my bonds (1) and tribulations (13) are the pledge, 

[2-6. This charge, of which you have heard, or may learn from what I have written, is a 
stewardship, or gift entrusted to me, namely the revelation of a secret, to be made 
known at last, of tiic inclusion of the Gentiles in the jiromise, 
7-9. Which secret 1 am to proclaim to the Gentiles, 
10-12. In order that to Powers unseen may be revealed God's manifold Wisdom, correspond- 
ing to His eternal purpose iu Christ,] 
hotii my knees to the one Father that He may inwardly confirm and enlighten you, to compt-ehend 
the love of Christ (is b, 19 a), that you may be brought to Christian perfection. 
20, 21. Doxology : climax of the foregoing description of God's unlooked-for bountj% of which 
the Church is the eternal monument. 
V. iv. 1-vi. 9. Therefore, walk worthily of your calling, 

[2, 3. General characteristics of this:] 
iv. ."b-lG. Endeavouring to realise Unity : 

[4-G. Principles of Unity : One Lord, &c. 

7-12. Means divinely provided for its maintenance : 

7, 8. Individuals variously gifted liy the exalted Christ (9, 10, a point 
iu reference to His Exaltation), 
9-13. And specially, for various oflBces, all subserving the progress of 
the Church toward (unifying) completeness. 
14-13. This completeness characterised— 

(1) negatively, in relation to their old life, 

(2) positively, in relation to Christ the Head and source of life to the 

/S. :t. 17-v. 14. Henouncing heathen habits and conduct, and, in general, exchanging the old 
self for the neiv : 

l_iv. 25-v. 4. Various details to be avoided. 

(iv. 30-v. 1, 2. Counter-principles interjected — 

(1) The Spirit not to be grieved. 

(2) Filial imitation of God. 

(3) Re.-ponse to the Love shown in Cbrist'3 

V. 5, 6. Warning as to consequences. 
V. 7-14. Contrast of Light and IJarkness."} 
\. 15- vi. 9. Walking wisely and redeeming the time, especially with regard to 

(1) V. 18-21. Sobriety in body and mind {Spiritual Songs). 

(2) v. 22-vi. 9. Family and social relations. 

[a. v. 22-33. AVives and husbands. 

[[24-32. CliniST AND THE ChOKCH.]] 

b. vi. 1-4. Children and parents. 
c. vi. 5-9. Slaves and masters.] 
Yl. vi. 10-24. Conclusion. 

a. 10-20. J^iwaZ Exportation.- (1) Be strong in the Lord. 

[The whole armour of God.] 
(2) Prayer, generally (18) ; 

.specially for St. Paul (19, 20). 
p. 21-24. Epistolary matter. 

Tychicus and his mission. 
Final peace and benediction. 

It will be observed, firstly, that with every 
desire to steer clear of exegetical assumptions on 
debated points in analysing the Euistle, it is im- 
possible to do so entirely s ; secondly, that tlie 
commonly made division into a " doctrinal " 
(i.-iii.) and " practical " (iv.-vi.) portion is 
scarcely indicative of the main lines of cleavage 
(against Holtzm. Krit. pp. 191, 218). The Epistle 

s e.g. the clo.'^e connexion of iii. 1 and iii. 14 is assumed 
■with many of the very best authorities, in the face of 
others (Ciirysostom, Mey; r, &c.), who mike v. 1 into a 
self-contained clause by what must be called the arbitrary 
and ungainly insertion of a verb neither expressed nor 
implied in the Greek. 

contains no systematic exposition of doctrine : its 
doctiinal richness is subsidiary to and illustrative 
of the practical purpose which binds the entire 
Epistle into one (for instance, the cardinal 
doctrine of Christ as Head of the Church appears 
in i. 23, iv. 16, and not least in v. 24-32), while 
the practical precepts (iv.-vi.) come under the 
general head vf apices TrepnraTTJfrai (iv. 1), and so 
iall into the main current of the Epistle. Full 
enlightenment, and a life worthy of their calling, 
were not to be thought of as sejiarable; each was 
e([ually necessary on the part of the Gentile 
Church, if St. Paul was not to " have run in 
vain " (Philip, ii. IC). 


§ 3. Authenticity. 

If the above view of the purpose of the Epistle 
be correct, it establishes a presumption in favour 
of its Pauline origin. It is dirticult for us to put 
ourselves into St. Paul's iiosition with reference 
to tlie admission of the Gentiles to the Divine kiu;^- 
dom. To us this admission is a truism. To him 
"this amazing Gospel was always fresh: there 
was a touch of strangeness in it to the last " (Dale, 
Led? xii. p. 202). Nor is it easy to believe that 
anvone even in the generation which immediately 
succeeded St. Paul, and which entered upon his 
labours, could have felt the novelty of this reve- 
lation with its first freshness. To the writer of 
this Epistle, not indeed the existence, but the 
full naturalisation witiiin the Churches of Gentile 
Christendom, is still on its trial ; it is a great 
task, a matter demanding fervent prayer and 
full of an.xiety, to show them their rightful place 
as heirs to God's promises and fellow-citizens of 
the saints. Now after the fall of Jerusalem the 
Church no longer had a Jewish metropolis; Jewish 
Christianity fell more and more into the back- 
ground (cp. Lightfoot, Gal? pp. 300 sqq. ; Har- 
nack, Dojtivj? pp. 97, 215 sqq.; also Schenkel, 
Christtis'iiki, p. vii. sqq.) ; after 70 a.d. the composi- 
tion of such a letter as ours would be im]irobable ; 
bv 100 A.D. almost impossible. Such a presump- 
tion, however, might be outweighed by strong 
contrary evidence ; and contrary evidence has iu 
this case convinced critics of weighty authority. 

(1.) External evidence. The apostolic author- 
ship of the Epistle was fully recognised in the 
earlier decades of the 2nd centurv (Mangold in 
lileek, Einl."^ p. 288 ; Holtzm. Krii. p. 278). Of 
writers who show reminiscences of its language 
may be mentioned Clement of Rome [see in- 
dex of passages in Lightfoot or Gebhardt; no 
single instance is decisive, but taken all together 
they fairly imply a knowledge of the Epistle] ; 
PoLVCARP, Ep. ad Phil, i., cp. Ephes. ii. 8, 9, and 
xii. [quotes Ephes. iv. 26 as from the " Scrip- 
tures " ; the chapter has with others been re- 
garded as the work of an interpolator, on grounds 
which Lightfoot (/'/n. i. 586) has shown to be 
arbitrary ; there is, however, the possibility that 
Polycarp is dircctljj quoting two separate " Scrip- 
tures " (Ps. iv. 5, Deut. x.\iv. 13, 15), especially as 
he couples the two clauses by an et; but the 
combination would in that case be an e.xtraordi- 
nary coincidence with Ephes. iv. 25 (yet the 
composite quotation might be from a common 
source ; see Hatch, Essays in Bib. Greek, pp. 203 
sqq.)]; Heiimas \_M/.ind. x. 2 = Ephes. iv. 30, 
Sim. is. 13 = Ephes. iv. 4] ; Letter to Diognetus 
[c. ii., cp. Ephes. iv. 21-24-?]; JuSTiK \_Dial. 39, 
87 (from Ps. Ixviii. 18) = Ephes. iv. 8, Dial. 120 
= E}ihcs. i. 21]. A direct reference to the Epistle 
is made by Ignatius, who, in writing to the 
Ephe.sians (§ 12), addresses them as Yla.v\ou 
(TVjxuvo'Tai, CIS fv Ttacri ciricrT oXr)^ fxvT]p.ovfVfi 

'' The phrase iv irdcrTj eirio-T-dATj is open to some doubt. 
The translation (of Kiene, St. Kr. 18G9, p. 286) "in an 
entire letter" is scarcely tenable. We must choose 
lictween (') "in every letter" (Lightfoot, /jrn. 2, p. C->), 
who relics on Horn. xvi. 5, 1 Cor. xv. 32, xvi. 8, 19, 
2 Cor. i. 8 s<i., 1 and 2 Tim. — passages which scarcely 
satisfy the langu-ige of Ignatius, as they rionc of them 
refer to the Ephesian Church ; and (2) " in every part 
of his letter" (Westcott, Can* p. 4"): this use of Tras 
without the article is borne out by such passages a? Acts 


vfiuv. Setting aside Meyer's arbitrary explana- 
tion of L'/ioir as not referring to the Ephesians 
at ail (but " to Pauline Christians as such " !), it 
is difficult not to see in avixfxvcnai a reference to 
the language of our Epistle (e.g. iii. 4, v. 32), 
especially as the Epistle of Ignatius bears other 
traces of its language ; compare Ign. Ephes. i. 
with E])hes. i. 3-6, 9, 11, and cp. Ephes. v. 1, 2 
(also other letters of Ign. : e.g. Fobjc. 5, cp. 
Ephes. v. 25 ; Smyrn. 6, cp. Ephes. i. 21 ; 
Trail. 11, cp. Ephes. iv. 25, v. 30). Ignatius, 
then, regarded our Epistle as written by St. Paul. 
To this body of evidence we must add that 
of the Gnostic sectaries. From the Ophites 
downward, the quotations from their writings 
in Hippolytus show that our Epistle was known 
to them. It is not, indeed, always certain 
whether this or that individual heresiareh 
(Basilides, Valcntinus ; cp. Westcott, Can.* pp. 
291, 295 sq.), or merely his followers, are stated 
by Hippolytus to have used the language quoted,- 
for he uses the words (/)ao-i, (prjcri convertibly, 
and that even when speaking of a sect as 
distinct from a person (see Salmon, Introd.^ 
pp. 69, 73 ; Holtzm. Einl." p. 136, n.). But when 
we find the Epistle commonly acknowledged 
among these schools, it is unreasonable to ex- 
clude their founders, especially as the case of 
Marcion at least is beyond all doubt. The 
Valentininns (and, as Westcott, uhi supra, shows 
ground for believing, Valentinus himself) quoted 
Ephes. iii. 4-18 as ypaip-i) (Hipp. Phil. vi. 34), and 
Heinrici (Die Vul. Gliosis u. die h. Schrift, pp. 184, 
192, Berl. 1871) has further shown grounds for 
believing that they actually commented upon it. 
By the close of the second century our Epistle was 
universally received as St. Paul's : Irenacus, the 
Jluratorian Canon, TertuUian, Clement of Alex- 
andria, imite the testimony of widely £e{iarated 
Churches : it is unnecessary to do more than 
mention their names, or to refer to evidence 
later in date. Thus strongly attested by tm- 
contradicied tradition, the Pauline authorshiii 
of the Ejiistle was unquestioned until the third 
decade of the present century. 

(2.) 3Iodern Enquiries — (a.) Negative cri- 
ticism. Doubts as to the authenticity of the 
Epistle were first expressed by Usteri (Paid. 
Lchrbegriff, 1824), but purely on the ground 
of its relation to Colossians. He regarded the 
character of the Epistle as thoroughly Pauline, 
and uses it throughout his book as a standard 
for St. Paul's doctrine. He derived his doubts 
from Schleiermacher's lectures, which however, 
as published, merely express tlie opinion (" very 
improbable," Bleek) that Tychicus, the bearer 
of Colossians, was charged by St. Paul witii 
the composition of this as a companion Epistle 
(pp. 165 sq., 194). De Wette (^Introduction * and 
Commentanj, 1843) rejected the Epistle on in- 
ternal grounds also, as un-Pauline in language 
and ideas, and a mere " verbose amplification " 

xvii. 20, eiTi TravTo^ irpotTioirov T>is 7^? (according to the 
correct reading), Arist. JUlh. Xic. i. xiii. 7, xal wai' o-u^xa, 
p;issages wliicli can hardly be brought under the rebut- 
ting principle laid down by Lightfoot in loco. The great 
exaggeration involved in the former alternative almost 
vanishes with tlie adoption of the latter, as the Epistle 
to the Ephesians, in spite of its lack of local or personal 
references, is throughout closely addressed to the par- 
ticular spiritual needs of its readers. 


of Colossiaiis. He ascribed tlio Kpistle to a 
disciple (it'St. Paul and to tlu' Mii)- Apostolic age, 
as also (lid Ewald QSicbcn i>e>ulsc/ir. ties iV. Ji. 
pp. lo.'i sqq. ; Hist, of Isr.^ viii. 19U sqq., E. 
Tr.), who dated it about A.D. 75. A similarly 
negative attitude towanl the Epistle is taken u]) 
by Kenan, Daviilson, Hausiatli (Apost. Paul, and 
/list, of' J.V. 'J'. 'J'iincs), Kitschl (Ittv/itfcrt. v. 
Versijhn.^ ii. p. 244-, &c.\ Weizsiicker (Apost. 
Zeitaltcr, 1886, pp. oSO, 5(31, &i-.), and others, 
in addition to those to be mentioned presently. 
De Wette's objections were answered by Liine- 
mann (i/c Up. ad Eph. authentia, Gott. 18515), 
and among others who have defended the ICpistle 
may be mentioned here Bleek {Lectures, and 
Introd. to N. 7'.), Schenkel (in the 1st ed. of 
Lange's iV. T. and elsewhere), Klopjier (tic o/vV/mt' 
Epp. ad Eph. et Col., Greifsw., 1853), Jleyer, 
W. Schmidt, Reuss, and Weiss. 

(b.) Jlerely negative criti<:ism was incomplete 
without some attempt to give n positive account 
of the origin of the Epistle. This attempt was 
iirst made by Schwegler (in tlie llicol. Jahrh. 
1844) and Baur {Panlus,^ 18+5), who found in 
the Epistle traces of Gnostic and even Jlontanist 
language and ideas, and assigned it, along with 
■ that to the Colossians, to the middle of the 2nd 
century ; the main theme and underlying idea of 
the "twin" letters being the reconciliation, in 
Christ as Head of the Universe and of the Church, 
of all opposing princi[des, and more especially 
of Judaism and Gentilism ; the author a Pauline 
Christian writing in order to conciliate the 
Jewish element in the Church, and offering "as 
concessions" the recognition of the earlier pre- 
rogative of the Jews (Ephes. ii. 12), and of 
good works as on a par with faith (ii. 8 sqq.). 
This construction was adopted by the Tubingen 
School generally (Zeller, Volkmar, &c.), and is 
maintained in a modified form by Hilgenfeld 
and by PHeiderer, who deny, however, the single 
authoisliip of the two letters ; the former {Einl. 
pp. Gt56, 677) regarding the two as successive 
editions by distinct hands, at an interval of 
some twenty years, of a work designed by a 
gnosticising Pauline Christian to re-assert the 
diminished authority of St. Paul against the 
opposite extremes of Gnosticism and Jewish 
Christianity which had thrust it into the back- 
ground in the Asiatic Churches (against this 
assumption cp. Lightfoot, Col. pp. 50-62) ; while 
Pfleiderer regards our Epistle as quite distinct 
in aim from that to the Colossians, and as the 
■work of a Pauline Jewish Christian, aiming at 
the reconciliation of opposing parties in the 
Church, and as chiefly directed against a hyper- 
Pauline or rather Asiatic and Gnostic ( Urchristen- 
tum, pp. 3S4 sq., 093) Antinomiauism coupled 
with practical licence (Paulinism, ii. 162). Lastly, 
Weizsiicker (.4/5. Zeitalter, 1886, p. 561) sees in 
the two Epistles the work of one hand, and 
an attempt to rehabilitate in Asia Minor the 
.forgotten authority of St. Paul. It may fairly 
be said that the " tendency criticism " of the 
Tubingen School, whether in its original shape 
or in its later modifications, has failed to reach 
any consistent result as to the origin of the 
two Ejiistles. 

(c.) More definite results were to be expected 
from the method of literary anali/sis, especially 
with regard to the mutual relations of Ephesians 
and Colossians. If the genuineness of either is 


called in question, their relative priority (to- 
gether with their literary relation to other N.T. 
writings; becomes a vital jiroblem. Mayerhoff 
(13j8) had decided the question of priority in 
favour of Ephesians, while questioning the 
genuineness of either Epistle. But the majority 
of critics decided in favour of Colossians until a 
new departure was made by Hitzig (Zur Kritik 
paulin. Ilricfe, 1870), who suggested (following 
a hint of Weisse in his I'hilos. Dofjmntik, 1855) 
the possibility of inutual priority, the wholly 
spurious Epistle to the Ephesians having been 
written in the time of Trajan, and then used 1)V 
its comjioser in order to interpolate a genuine 
Epistle of St. Paul to the ('olossians. This sug- 
gestion was followed up by Honig, who however 
made the " Interpolator " a third person (Zcilschr. 
f. vjiss. T/tCol. 1872), and by Holtzmann, whose 
elaborate essay (Kritik des Ephescr- und Kolosser- 
hriefe auf Grund einer Analyse ihrer Veruand- 
schaftsverlililtnisse, 1872) presents the problem 
with a thoroughness which leaves nothing to be 
desired. (His theory will be discussed below : it 
is conveniently summarised in his Einleitung,- 
pp. 291 sq. ; but for its thorough appreciation 
the original work is indispensable.) While Holtz- 
mann's general idea has been endorsed, but 
with deviations in detail, by Hausrath, Pflei- 
derer, Mangold (in Bleek, Einl.*) and others, 
no one critic has so far adopted the theory 
in its original and most consistent form. His 
most recent and able follower, Von Soden 
(" Colosserbrief," in Jahrb. Prot. Theol. 1885; 
" Epheserbrief," ihid. 1887), has reduced Holtz- 
mann's theory almost to a vanishing point, by 
re-asserting the genuineness of Colossians with 
the exception of nine verses, and the spurious- 
ness and dependence of Ephesians only. With a 
remarkable reservation as to the latter (to be 
noticed below), he thus brings back the ques- 
tion to the status quo ante, and leaves it where 
Weisse and Hitzig tbund it. His theory may be 
summarised as follows: — The Ejustle to the 
Ejihesians is un-rauline in many of its ideas 
and in much of its language (cp. infra, (3) c), 
and is the work of an imitator thoroughly 
familiar with the writings of St. Paul (worked 
out by Von Soden in an elaborate criticism 
of " reminiscences," with little or no proof 
that the resemblances are due to anything but 
identity of authorship). The main interest 
of the writer is in the ultimate destiny of the 
Christian (p. 460) in relation to the glorified 
Christ, and in conne.xion with His cosmic function. 
In this cosmic redemptive process, of which the 
Church (p. 463) is the instrument, there are two 
stages: (1) Peace between Jews and Gentiles 
(formation of the Church) ; (2) perfect 7-calisa- 
tion of the Church as the irXTjpai/j.a of Christ, 
with whom the Church is thus quasi-identified, 
occupying the place which St. Paul himself 
assigns rather to the individual (1 Cor. xi. 3, 5; 
Gal. ii. 20). The letter accordingly is an attempt 
to further the fusion of Jewish and Gentile 
Christians after the fall of Jerusalem by an 
appeal as from St. Paul in view of the peculiar 
circumstances of the time, and is in fact (p. 495) 
much what St. Paul ^yould have written had he 
lived till then. 

The problem of the relation of Ephesians to 
Colossians is got rid of by the denial of any 
special relation between them (except in the 

9j4 epiiesians, epistle to the 

S.i rejected verses of Colossians and the " practical 
portion " of Ephesians). Of this contention, to 
which Von Sodeu devotes several pages (109-1'Jl) 
of laboureil proof, it is enough to say to7s 
{paivofievois<r&r]T(7 ivapyws {e.g. he will 
not allow an)' marked parallelism between 
Ephes. iii. 2, J-7, and Col. i. '25-27 I ). The dis- 
cussion below [(:)) e, a] will therefore take 
account of Holtzmann rather than of Von Sodeu. 

(3) Is the Epistle genuine "/ Tlie jjurely 
negative points will be considered first, then 
evidence supposed to point to some positive date 
later than St. Paul, lastly the literary relations 
of the Epistle to other New Testament books, 
especially to Colossians. The latter relation, 
however, enters into so many problems belong- 
ing to our Epistle that in discussing the author- 
ship of the one it is seldom possible to exclude 
all reference to the other. 

(a.) The historical sitmtion. — The points urged 
are (1) absence of local or personal references; 
(2) absence of personal acquaintance' between 
St. Paul and his readers. These objections, 
pointedly summed up by Kamphausen in 
his verdict that the Epistle was " either not 
written by Paul or not written to the Ephe- 
sians," fall to the ground with the result of 
our discussion (§ 2, a) of the destination of the 
Epistle. (3) Tliat it is unworthy of St. Paul to 
have copied himself, as he must have done if 
both Colossians and Ephesians are genuine 
(against this, see above, § 2, c, and below). It 
may be added here that the Epistle to PiiiLEMOX, 
the genuineness of which has not been seriously 
questioned, lends a historical contest and corro- 
boration to its two companions, so much so that 
Baur, condemning the two latter, rejected Pliile- 
mon on that ground alone ; his highly fanciful 
explanation of its origin will be found in Paulus, 
ii. p. 93.J Tlie remark of Holtzmann {Krit. p. 14 ; 
more smartly put by Von Soden, p. 473) that 
if the Epistle is genuine its traditional inscrip- 
tion is a standing jjuzzle (against this see above, 
§ 2, a) suggests tlie reply that this is still more 
the case if it be spurious. If the imitator of 
St. Paul wrote tV 'E<pe(r(!} (i. 1), he must have 
been singularly lacking in ingenuity to have 
avoided all reference to .St. Paul's intercourse 
with the Ephesian Church. If he did not, how 
are we to explain such a daring deviation from 
his model ? Holtzmanu's answer to this ques- 
tion (p. 131) will scarcely satisfy anyone but 
himself. Von Soden's (p. 479) is ingenious, but 
does not meet the difficulty. 

0>.) Absence of characteristic Pauline ideas. — 
It must be remembered in limine that it is one 
thing to take the Pauline "homologumena" 
(Galatians, Corinthians, Romans) as the standard 
of Pauline doctrine and language, but quite 
another thing to demand that St. Paul shall 

' Holtzmann insists on the contrast b^^tween the 
colourlessness of our Kpistle in this respect and the 
richness of prrson?.! details in Actsxx. 17-38, or in Rom. 
xvi. 3-lC, wliere "we have a gennine greeting from th • 
Apostle to Eplicsian Christians." For the reasons which 
have led a number of scholars (Renan, Reuss, Farrar, 
&c., first suggested by Keggermann, 1767) to see in 
Rom. xvi. l-2ft th'3 fragments of a lost letter to the 
Ephesians, see Romans, Epistle to the. 

J Baur's view is revived by Weizsacker, Jp. Ziltr. 
1886, p. 565 : see Renan {St. Paul, p. xi.). 


never be permitted to step beyond their sjjccial 
vocabuiaiy or sjiecial mental horizon, never be 
sujiposed to be occupied with any problems or 
Controversies nther than those of the jieriod of 
his life to which they belong, nor to give to 
conceptious developed in the conflicts of that 
critical epoch a more positive and final expres- 
sion. The same caution applies in some measure 
to the attempt to compare such an Epistle as 
ours with the four earlier ones in concentration, 
power, and intensity. Such a psychological 
crisis as marks the period of tliose letters does 
not come twice in a man's life, nor does it last 
long'' (see also the remarks in article on COLOS- 
SIANS). It leaves its mark behind: but while 
it lasts, it must draw from depths of the spirit 
which less stirring conditions fail to sound. 
Since the last Epistle of the main group was 
written, nearly five years had passed, and much 
had happened. The Epistle to the Romans was 
St. Paul's last word on the question of principle 
between himself and the Judaisers. If the latter 
were still at work, St. Paul did not think it 
necessary to re-open against them a question 
which liad been ;irgued out (see Philip, i. 17, 
iii. 2). The Gentile Churches were growing, 
and now difficulties and dangers were threaten- 
ing them. 

The main Pauline characteristics missed by 
the Clitics of our Epistle are: (1) Foieinic against 
Judaisers. This is met by what has been said. 
Our Epistle is probably at least a year later than 
Philippians, where no such doctrinal polemic is 
entered upon. The Asiatic Churches were now 
exposed to a new Judaising influence (Col. ii. 16, 
&c.), not to be met in the old wa}% (2) Justifica- 
tion bg faith. It is certainly true that this Epistle, 
like that to Colossians, contains no mention oi" 
this doctrine. "The word 'justification' does 
not occur; the specific idea for which the word 
stands does not occur" (Dale). But "to St. 
Paul the doctrine of justification by faith was 
not a statement of Christian truth : " the 
idea of justification had been the common ground 
between St. Paul and his Judaising ojiponents ; 
he had met their iiisistance upon the authority 
of law by the doctrine of justification by faith, 
"a conception of the Christian redemption ex- 
pressed in terms of law : " this particular 
expression of i belonged, then, to a controversy 
of which already in the Epistle to the Philip- 
pians (iii. 9) we catch merely the echo. "The 
Fact which his account of Justification by Faith 
represented in one form is represented here in 
another. His mind and heart are filled with 
the Divine Grace" (Dale, Ject.^ x., pp. 170-177). 
Wliile TTto-Tis. the human factor in salvation, is 
not lost sight of (ii. 8, iii. 17. vi. 23), it is over- 
shadowed bv the Divine and Creative (Ephes. 
ii. 10, iv. 22-24; 2 Cor. v. 17) factor xap'J» 
conceived in a manner admittedly Pauline 
(Holtzm. Krit. p. 213). Hence the " catholic 
synthesis of faith and works" (id.), a rock of 
ofll'uce to hostile critics, but here (ii. 10), as in 
the older Epistles (Rom. vi. 4, 14 ; viii. 3, 4), 
regarded as the work of the Spirit, resulting 

k Against the view (current in Germany) that the 

Epistle to the Galatians was written not less than three 

years hcfoic those to the Corinthians and Romans, see 

Galatians, and Lightfoot, Oal. Introd. iii. (especially 

, on the close relation between Gal. and 2 Cor.). 


from union with Goil throngli and in Christ. ' 
(Tlif transition tn the Epliesian furm of tins , 
doctrine is to be found in Philip, ii. 12, 13.) We 
may add tiiat the i)syclK)U)!:;ical and anthropo- 
loi^ical assumptions of tlio oKler Epi.stli;s are also 
to be found here [c.(j. the conception of trapl as 
the seat of lust and sin (ii. 3, Col. ii. 11), and 
the intermediate position of the vovs, needing, 
yet susceptible of, renewal (Col. ii. 18; Ki)lies. 
iv. 2o ; c)>. lioni. vii. '2.'!, 25). The use of Trz/ef/yua 
(iv. 23) is not more surprising than that in 
2 Cor. vii. Ij. On tlie identity of the teaching 
of this E|)istle with that of the main Epistles on 
the previous jiosition of Jews and Gentiles, see 
above, § 2 d (and on this ])art of the subject 
generally, Weiss, JJlbl. T/wJ. §§ 100, 101, the 
ifeneral validity of whose results is allowed by 
Holtzin. Krit. ]■>. 205). So far, then, as ideas 
characteristic of the "homologumena" are absent 
from our Epistle, there is nothing in the fact 
inconsistent with the genuineness of the latter. 
But there remains the more crucial inquiry, 
whether the Epistle contains ideas inconsistent 
with the known mind of St. Paul, or wholly 
foreign to it, or to anything in his historical 
environment, and whether its form betrays the 
work of another hand. 

(c.) Lc'finitchj un-PmiUno Features. — i. T'o- 
cahulary,^ Style, and Constructions. It is an easy- 
method of impugning the genuineness of any 
book to ascribe divergencies of language to 
diversity of authorship, and coincidences to 
imitation. Hcdtzmanu. in his elaborate verbal 
analysis (pp. 113-120, 131-148) of the Epistle, 
has not always ke{)t clear of this method, 
although he is of course alive to its fallacy. 
His test (correspondence of idea) is satisfactory 
so far as it goes, but diversity of idea, even 
where the language is strikingly alike, does not 
demonstrate uniutelligeut imitation (compare 
e.g. the similar passages, Rom. iv. 15, v. 13, 
vii. 8, each distinct from the others in idea and 
connexion). Peculiar expressions there certainly 
are in our Epistle, such as vi. 11, /iefloSfia rou 
Sta^oAov (St. Paul always says aaTapcis, not 
5ja/3oAoy, except in 1 and 2 Tim.); v. 5, "tare 
yivaxTKovTes ; iii. 21, els irdaas ras yeveas tov 
a'lwvos rcav aldivcev., and others : but many are 
objected to with no show of fairness : e.g. St. 
Paul may imply (Rom. vi. 21), but may not 
expressly state (Ephes. v. 11), that Gentile sins 
are S»cop7ra ; he may combine (Rom. v. 21) 
afiaprla and irapdirrccua in the singular, but not 
in the plural, at least not with /cai (Ephes. ii. 1); 
he may give two lists of church officers (1 Cor. 

' As to the vocabulary, the facts are these. The 
Epistle contains about 2,400 words, that to the Colosslaiis 
about 1,600. Of the former, 36 are uTraf Keyo/jLeva (in 
the N. T. But this is nothing unusual ; the Secund 
Kpistle to the Corliithians, with something more than 
r),000 words, lias lOO ii-a^ Aeydfiti/a, i.e. nearly 2 per 
cent., as against Ij- per ceiit. in our Epistle). The 
Kpistle to the Culossims has 33, just 2 per cent. Our 
Epistle has 18 words (Colossians I'as lO jieruli-ir to S . 
I'aul (.omitting the Epistles to Colossians, Tinn'thy, and 
Titus fiom the argument ">, 39 New Te^tament words 
not elsewhere used by St. Paul (Colotsians has 15); while 
of the (nearly) 600 words common ti> both Epistles, 10 
.ire peculiar to them in the N. T., r, peculiar to St. Paul, 
G N. T. words not elsewhere used by St. Paul (see 
Holtzmann, Krit. pp. 100, HI, and the Appendi.x to 
Thayer's Lexicon of y. T. Greek). 


xii. 28; Rom. xii. 5), but must not give a third 
(Ephes. iv. 11); he may speak of ayairav ruv 
Oihv (Rom. viii. 28) and <pLKi7u tuv Kvpiov 
(I Cor. xvi. 21), but on no account of ayairai^ 
Thu Ki'ptov (Ephes. vi. 24-); he may call his 
converts '• beloved children " of his own (1 Cor. 
iv. 14, 17), but not ''beloved children" o/ God 
(v. 1; Holtzmann, p. 102, singles out this as 
'■a speaking example"). Ditluseness, tauto- 
logy, catchwords and tricks of style (such 
as fondness for indirect questions after verbs 
of knowledge, (pairi^^fiv ti rh ttXovtos and 
the like, i. 18, iii. 9), combination of cognate 
words (i. 6, ii. 4, iii. (>,, strings of genitives 
(i. 6, 10, 18, 19, &c.), the use of -jray, especially 
to intensify abstract nouns, are more or less 
decided peculiarities of this Epistle and that to 
the Colossians, many of which, however, are 
found (with less frequency) elsewhere in St. 
Paul. But when we are told (Holtzm. Krit. 
p. 139) that the occurrence of a word 
(^avf^iXvia.<TTos) only in Rom. xi. 33 and Ephes. 
iii. 8 is a proof that one place borrows from the 
other, or that the writer of Ephes. iii. 14 can 
only have derived the idea of bowing his knees 
to God from the study of Rom. xi. 4 or xiv. 11, 
we realise the deceptiveness of verbal comci- 
dences. The style of the Epistle is further 
objected to as lacking the syllogistic structure, 
the sharj) dialectical spring, the nerve and spon- 
taneity of the acknowledged writings of St. 
Paul. This criterion is to some extent subjec- 
tive : so far as it rests on tangible data (such as 
the infrequency of yap, so charactei'istic of Rom., 
Gal., Cor. ; apa ovv, once only Ephes. ii. 19, 
eight times in Rom., but only once in Gal., 
1 Thess., not in Cor. ; ^i6, five times in our 
Epistle, quite as frequent as elsewhere), it is 
amply explained by the fact that St. Paul is 
not here engaged in argument. Nor is it 
reasonable to look for uniformity or equality of 
style in the letters of a man of action (see the 
interesting parallel case of Xenophon, in Salmon, 
Iittrod.,* ]). 419, note). 

ii. Ideas. — (1) Christologij. The relation of 
Christ's Redemptive Work to the Universe (" the 
mere presence of which shows the later point of 
view," Holtzm.) is certainly a prominent thought 
in our Epistle (i. 10 ; Col. i. 20), but it cannot 
surprise us in the writer of Rom. viii. 18-23. 
His original mediation in creation (Col. i. 18) is 
admitted to be already expressed in 1 Cor. viii. 6. 
From 1 Cor. xv. 27 the transition (through 
Philip ii. 9, 10, as Holtzmann admits in Zeitschr. 
wiss. Theol. 1881, p. 102, n.) to the doctrine of 
our Epistles is not great, nor in any way incon- 
sistent with the final virord^ts of the Son to the 
Father as expressed in 1 Cor. xv. 28 (see also 
Colossians). Von Sodeu has made a very re- 
markable discovery in this connexion (pp. 440 
sqq.). After drawing out (most admirably) the 
way in which Christ pervades the Epistle from 
end to end, standing always as the Centre of 
Christian laith and hope, conduct and life, as 
the Bond of all Christian relations, as the 
Source of all Christian graces, he api>eals to this 
leading characteristic of tiie letter, not indeed 
as decisive proof, but as a contirmation of the 
other proofs, of its 7/n-Pauline authorship! To 
realise the contrast, he bids us read Colossians 
or Philippians, and note the difference of atmo- 
sphere. It is certainly a novel test of an un- 


Pauline work— th;it it is too full of Christ! 
But Von Soden goes on to suggest (p. 443) 
that the author is reacting against a post- 
apostolic and failed grasp of Christ as the 
Centre of life and thought. The importance 
of this admission is to be carefully noted. 
Von Soden cannot refuse to see the gulf 
between our Ei>istle with its energetic grasp 
of a living Christ, and the whole group of 
Apostolic Fathers and apologists to which he 
supposes it to belong. Von Soden goes on to 
remark that the Christology of the Epistle is 
its most Pauline characteristic. (2) Anjeloloiji/. 
The addition of OpSvoi (Col. i. 16) and KvpwTriTfs 
(Ephes. i. 21) to the terms applied in the earlier 
Epistles (Rom. viii. 38 ; 1 Cor. xv. 24) to angelic 
beings (cp. Ephes. iii. 10) cannot reasonably be 
objected to: their mention in connexion with 
the exaltation of Christ (Ephes. i. 20) reminds 
us of Philip, ii. 10, which also supplies a point of 
contact for the iirovpavia of our Epistle, which 
term, however, is here used in a more definitely 
local sense (i. o, 20; ii. 6 : iii. 10; vi. 12). The 
demonology (Ephes. ii. 2 ; iv. 27 ; vi. 11, 12, IH) 
is paralloie'd by 1 Cor. x. 20, and elsewhere, save 
that 6 Sid^oXos or 6 irovnphs (Ephes. vi. 16) is 
here substituted for the older aaravas. (3) The 
Church, and Christ as Head of the Church. It is 
objected that whereas St. Paul knows of local 
churches (e.i/. xi. 16), we here for the first time 
find the idea of the Church (but see Gal. i. 3; 
1 Cor. X. 32) ; and further, that whereas in the 
older Epistles the many members of Christ stand 
in organic relations with one another through 
Him (Rom. xii. 5 ; 1 Cor. xii. 13. 27), Christ 
being the vital principle uniting (1 Cor. vi. 17) 
and pervading the whole (1 Cor. xii. 12), in 
those to l^phesians and Colossians (Ephes. i. 23, 
iv. lo; Col. ii. 19, &c.) Christ is the "Head," 
i.e. a. member of the organic whole, the Church 
as such being reduced to a trunk ! (Holtzm, Krit. 
p. 240.) As this criticism has been gravely 
adopted by several German scholars (e.;/. Von 
Soden, CJ/. p. 514, also A>/ifs. p. 467), it may 
not be superfluous to point out that although 
the former metaphor may be the more adequate, 
either metaj)hor is perfectly natural, and ex- 
pressive of jiart of the truth (cp. 1 Cor. xi. 3), 
but that any metaphor may be pressed too far. 
It should be furtho- remarked that as the head 
is incomplete without its body, so the Church is 
the irhitpuifxa of Christ, its Head (i. 23), inasmuch 
as it is only in the Church that God's purpose in 
the KivaxTis of his Son is comjileted (Ephes. i. 10 : 
cp. Philip, ii. 7, 9, 10; Rom. viii. 21 ; 1 Cor. xv. 
25). (4) InteUectualism. It is certainly true 
that iiriyvdiffis and its cognate ideas (i. 17, iv. 
13 : cp. avviCTis, iii. 4 ; (ppovqcris, crocpia, i. 8, 17 ; 
diroKctA.ui/'is, i. 17, iii. 3, 5, 10 ; yvupi^fir, 
<pa)Tl^€tv, i. 18, iii. 9: see a mora complete list in 
Holtzm. Krit. 217) play a very prominent part 
in our Epistle, the key-note to which (see above, 
§ 2, d sub Jin.) is the earnest desire of St. Paul 
for the increase in spiritual enlightenment of the 
Gentile Christians. It should be noted that here 
aojain the Ejjistle to the Philippians comes to our 
aid (Philip, i. 9, 10), opening in the same strain, 
and revealing the same desire on St. Paul's part 
on behalf of another Gentile community at a 
slightly earlier date (cp. also Philip, iii. 15, 
(\>povfivy aiTOKa\vi:rtiv, and Philip, iv. 8, also 
1 Cor. i. 5 sqq.). That St. Paul should recognise 


wisdom as a, factor in Christian perfection (cp. 
1 Cor. ii. 6, iii. 1 snq., xiv. 2i>, «Scc.) is not 
surprising : to see a " theosophical " tinge in the 
enlightenment which he desires for his readers 
is j)urely arbitrary. The thought (of 1 Cor. ii. 
6-10, &c.) that the revelation of Christ is the 
deepest wisdom satisfies even such passages as 
Col. i. 26, 27, ii. 2, 3 ; Ephes. iii. 3 sqq. The 
IJ.v(iT7]piov of these Epistles is no esoteric or 
abstruse doctrine, but St. Paul's "gospel" of 
the calling of the Gentiles (the use of the word 
in Ephes. v. 32 stands by itself. On the word 
/xvcTTTipiov in these Epistles, see Lightfoot on 
Col. i. 26, 28 ; on iiriyvwa-is, see his note on 
Philip, i. 9). The prominence given to iirlyvcixrts 
and its cognates in this Ejiistle is quite explicable, 
therefore, in view of the phenomena of Philip- 
pians on the one hand, and of St. Paul's earlier 
teaching on the other. For a more thorough 
discussion, see Weiss, D.T., § 102; also cp. Von 
Soden, p. 456 sq. 

(d.) Indications of post-Apostolic date. — (1) 
General. To this head belongs the alleged 
" studied assumption of St. Paul's personality " 
(iii. 1-3, 7 ; iv. 1 ; vi. 20); the expressions aytoi 
air6(TTo\oi, iii. 5 ; iKaxicrSrepos, iii. 8 (" an 
extravagant imitation of 1 Cor. xv. 9 ") ; the 
enumeration of church-officers, iv. 11 (irotfifves 
ical SiSdcTKaKoi, " union of the two offices late : 
the gifts of miracles and tongues have ceased, as 
is shown by comparison with 1 Cor. xii. 28"); 
'■ the destruction of Jerusalem has taken place." 
(Holtzmann, Krit. p. 160, infers this from Col. 
iii. 1, 2 ; Ephes. ii. 6, comparing Heb. xii. 22, but 
why not Gal. iv. 26 ?) Lastly, the age is one of 
many sects (iv. 13, 14; Baur, Ewald, Holtz- 
mann, &c., importing too much into the Greek). 
It is not necessary to examine at length all 
of the above and some other lesser objections, 
urged by almost every adverse critic of tht- 
Epistle ; but those founded on the difficult pass.-vge 
iii. 3, 4, and on the phrase cited above from iii. 
5, are not so easy to meet. Of the last no very 
satisfactory explanation has been given — see 
Meyer in loco and Schmidt — and taken alone 
it would certainly appear to reveal a writer who 
looked upon the Apostles and Prophets with the 
distant veneration of a later date rather than as 
one of their number. But it must be remarked 
that the epithet 07101 stands in close connexion 
with the parallel passage in Colossians (i. 26), 
in which to?s ayiois avrov corresponds to the 
To7s ayiois cnrotrroKois avrov Kal TrpocpTirais of 
our present passage. The ayioi in general are 
the mediate or general {itpavepwdri), the oir. k. 
irpop. the immediate or special (airfKaKiKpOr]), 
recipients of the revelation. Is it not possible, 
then, that the word 071015 was meant to have 
the same sense in our passage as it had in 
Col. i. 26, but that the words as they stand 
have in some way been dislocated ? Reuss 
(Gcsch. i\". r." p. 166) suggests that this is due 
to a gloss. But even leaving the passage as it 
stands, this difficulty alone will only turn the 
scale if the other evidence is more niceiy balanced 
than the writer of this article can regard it as 
being. The problem is not unlike that involved 
in Rev. xxi. 14, where the twelve Apostles seem 
to be looked at by the writer ab extra. 

(2) Gnosticism. — Baur (Paulus, ii. pp. 10-25) 
regarded the two Epistles as belonging to the 
earlier stages of the Gnostic development, "at 


which the Gnostic ideas still passed as unohjee- 
ti<iiiable Christian specuhitiou." (Mis arj^unients 
to provo tliat they also bear traces ut' early 
Montanist ideas — irpoKprjTou, ]irogressive maturity 
of the Church, the Sjiirit, holiness of the Church, 
&c. — need no longer be examined : they break 
down in the face of Marcion's jMissession of our 
Jlpistle, and "would )irove almost any Ei)istle 
of St. Paul to be Montanist," Holtz. Arit. 
}>. 270.) His main arguments, in which he was 
I'oUowed by the Tiibiugen School generally, and 
in part by Holtzmann and others, are the use of 
the term ■rrXripaifj.a — but in these Epistles it is 
alwavs, excei)t Col. i. It) (where the context 
suggests TTJs 6fOT.), a relative term, ■wKrjpw/j.d 
Tivos, whereas in the Gnostic systems it is used 
ahsolutclij, as a term with a fixed denotation : 
see also Lightfoot's discussion (^Coloss. p. 2.57 
sijq.) — the use of alwi/fs (" personified as the 
veliicles of divine ideas," a conception wholly 
foreign to this P^pistle), yeftat (not " spiritual 
«!sistences," but human generations ; cp. Ephes. 
iii. 5), ami, in connexion with this, the Christo- 
logy and Angelology (on which see above), the 
" Syzygia" of Christ and the Church — the descent 
into hades, Ephes. iv. 8 (not peculiar to Gnostics, 
cp. 1 Pet. iii. 18 ; but the reference is disputed) — 
the " intellectualism " of the Epistles (the anti- 
jiodes of esoteric Gnosis : see above). Doubtless 
there are coincidences with Gnostic terminology, 
but they are most simply explained by Gnostic 
borrowings from St. Paul. Moreover, if it be 
contended that our Epistle, without betraying 
traces of any particular Gnostic system, yet 
anticipates Gnosticism in its glances into tran- 
scendent and mystical regions, this may be 
allowed, in the sense in which we can trace "a 
Gnostic element in Paulinism" itself (Holtz. 
Einl." p. 134:). For a fuller discussion of the 
question, the article of Dr. Jlilligau (iit supra) 
may be consulted. 

(3) Faded Paulinism. — The adequate discus- 
sion of this note cf time would involve a dis- 
cussion of current theories of the history of the 
sub-Apostolic age, and of the manner in which 
the various elements which the Church included 
from the first (Jewish, Gentile, Pauline, &c.) 
became assimilated. That this was on a basis 
common to all follows from the nature of the 
problem. That this again involved mutual aji- 
proximation and the formation of a common or 
average presentment of doctrine, in wiiich much 
of the individuality of such a teacher as St. 
Paul would be missed, is no more than may 
fairly be gathered from the character of (say) 
the Epistle of Clement. To show that the 
essential and moving faith of the Gospel was not 
involved in any such process would be possible 
in the proper place. But what concerns us here 
is the question whether we have before us a 
product of the peculiar mmd of St. Paul (Paul- 
inism in the strictest sense), or merely the 
reflex of his teaching in a mind other than his 
own, under the influence of later circumstances, 
and able to enter only into the general forms, 
not into the inmost personal spirit, of the 
Apostle of the Gentiles. What has been pointed 

j:phesians, epistle to the 957 

out above (§ 2, d, and preliminary remarks to 
the i)ie>ent § ; see also § 3, b) goes far, it 4s 
submitted, to decide for the former alternative. 
It may be admitted that the shar]) outlines of 
the conflict which colours the earlier Epistles 
have faded in that to the Ephesians: but this 
was already the case in Philippians (see above, 
§ 3, b). The general character o( the post- 
Apostolic age is found (see c.rj. Holtzmann, 
Juni:- ]>. 100) in a " Christian legalism," a co- 
ordination of faith and works, a tendency to- 
translate Pauline ideas into ethical generalities. 
Now, as far as our Epistle is concerned, the main 
exaniijle of this tendency is found in ii. 8-10, a 
passage wholly similar in idea to Philip, ii. 12, 13 ; 
nor can it be justly said that Christian ethics 
are in either passage placed on a ioundation 
different from that of Kom. vi. 1 sqi|. (see Weiss, 
Ilib. I'heol. § 101 b, and note o; also Pfleiderer's 
admissions as to " successful harmonising," &c. ; 
Faulinisiii, ii. p. 189). To take one more ex- 
ample, I'fleiderer (ib. p. 181) objects that the 
Epistle gives an ethical turn (i. 7, ii. 4, v. 25, 
but especially v. 2) to the Death of Christ, thus- 
showing that the writer " was not familiar with 
the idea of an exjiiatory death." This, again, 
is a charge which might equally be brought 
against the Ejnstle to the Philip])ians (ii. 8, 
iii. 10); but is not the distinction between 
dvffia (Ei)hes. v. 2) and 'i\a(TT7ipiov (Rom. iii. 
27) rather a precarious sujiport for so sweeping 
a conclusion? As a matter of fiict, in speaking^ 
of the Death of Christ St. Paul goes back inva- 
riably to the ultimate moral ideas upon which 
the compound and symbolic idea of sacrifice rests : 
only in Eplies. v. 2 is the term irpoo-cfopa or 
Bvaia expressly applied to it. (See Weiss, B. T. 
§ 80 c, notes 8-10 ; on the relation of Christ's 
death to the reconciliation of Jews and Gentiles, 
a point also objected to by Pfleiderer, see above, 
§ 2. d.) 

We are unable, therefore, to regard as suc- 
cessful any attempt to identify the date of our 
Epistle with some definite period of the post- 
Apostolic .Tge. But can we not, by an analysis 
of its relations to other N. T. writings, trace it 
definitely to an imitator of St. Paul ? 

(e.) Literarij genesis of the Epistle. — a. Relation 
to Colossians. This is the touchstone of the- 
entire question of authorship: it was the first 
ground tJjat raised the question (siqjra, § 3, (2) 
a), and upon it depends almost every problem 
relating to the Epistle. It is necessary first to 
show the extent of the correspondence between 
the two Epistles. It may be said that with the 
exception of the Christological passages (Col. i. 
15 sq. ; ii. 3, 9, 10, 14, 15), the passages relating 
to the Colossian heresy, certain personal matter 
(Epaphras, Onesimus, &c.), and one or two lesser 
features {e.g. Col. i. 24 ; iii. 1-4 ; iv. 6), the 
whole of the Epistle to Colossia7is is more or less 
directlji reproduced in that to the Ephesians, The- 
table "' of strictly Darallel passages does not 
do full justice to the facts : many passages 
which at first appear peculiar to Colossians cor- 
respond, though not verbally, to passages of the- 
sister Epistle. To take an example unpromising 

" The following list of parallelisms is fairly complete : for the convenienc? of the discussion in the text it i» 
divided, in accordance with Holtzmann's hypothesis, into two classes. It is impossible to denote the exact degree 
of similarity in each place; it varies from entire paragraphs to single words or expressions. This also explains 
the fact that portions of the same verse in some cases appear in iotli cl -.sees of parallelisms. For other tables, see 


at first sight, compare Col.iii. 11 with Ephes. ii. 
15, i. 23, iv. 13 (unity of Cliurch in Christ, who 
is all in all, in context vsith the idea of the 
corporate new or perfect man, oftaciug pre-existinc; 
linos of division). To show it in detail would 
involve a comparative analysis of the two 
Epistles : but the converse might also be shown, 
that, excepting the topics of the relations of 
Jew and Gentilo. the unity of the Church as 
including both, the marriage of tlie Church to 
Christ, the Spirit, the contrast of darkness and 
light, and the armour of God, there is little in 
our Epistle that is not also to be found in 

Starting from the argument that literal 
simultaneitu is iinpossible, Holtzmann lays stress 
on the cul de sac in which both critics and 
defenders of the Epistles find themselves, in 
face of the question which of the twin Epistles 
came first into the world. (In particular 
he poises the Ka\ i>fj.e7s of Ephes. vi. 21 — no 
KOL in Col. iv. 7 — against the koI v/lIeIs of 
Col. iii. 8 — no koI in Ephes. iv. 22 — the koI 
in either case appearing to presuppose a similar 
message already penned for other readers.) 
Assuming that this holds good (against the view 
taken above, § 2, c), he proceeds to his first 
main step, the proof that neither Epistle can 
claim priority throufjhoiit (as had been assumed 
in earlier discussions). While in many passages 
Colossians shows indisputable originalitv, the 
same can be shown of Ephesians in other cases. 
He then propounds the explanation of a common 
original in the shape of a short Pauline Ejiistle 
to Colossians, used (with other genuine Epistles 
of St. Paul) by the composer of Ephesians. The 
latter Epistle is tiicn used by it.-i composer to fill 
out the original Epistle, which also receives 
Christological and polemical additions, directed 


against an early form of Gnosticism ; the result 

j being our present, " half- Pauline, half-Ephesian," 

I E]nstle to Colossians. The theory is then further 

corroborated (p. 130), first by the fact that the 

parallelisms which are due to the original Pan- 

I line letter occur in diflerent order in the two 

I Epistles, while those due to the " Autor ad 

i Ephesios " proceed pari passu, owing to the 

systematic use of his own work made by the 

^ latter in his interpolations (a glance at the 

list given in note "' will show that this is not 

everywhere the case): secondly, by a most 

minute analysis of the Epistles, with the aim of 

i showing (1) the dependence of Ephesians through- 

j out upon St. Paul's admitted Epistles, but 

especially upon the alleged original Epistle to 

! Colossians ; (2) that the latter is unmistakably 

! Pauline and original, in addition to hanging 

I better together than the existing Epistle to 

, Colossians ; (3) that the latter is marked by 

; repetitions corresponding to the double use 

; alleged to have been made of it (" doublets "), 

and that it has in every way a double look, — 

style, theology, the heresy combated, all in 

some respects like what we know of St. Paul, 

while in others they present features of a later 

date. Finally, after a glance at analogous cases 

of interpolation (successive forms of apocryphal 

acts, kc, Epistle of Polycarp, but especially 

Ignatian Epistles), and an examination of the 

doctrinal characteristics of the two Epistles, 

their relation to the rest of the K. T. literature 

is estimated, and the date, motives, and historical 

circumstances of their production hypothetieally 


In order to estimate the force of this indict- 
ment against our Epistle, we must remember 
that Holtzmann relies throughout on the 
A'alidity of the negative criticism (see above, a-d), 

Meyer, Jntrod. to tliis Ep. ; Holtzni. Krit. p. 
passages about wliich Holtzmann appears now 

(1) Alleged priority on side of Colossians. 

Col. i. 1, 2 = Ephes. i. 1, 2. 

Col. i. 3, 4 = Ephes. i. 16, 15. 

Col. i. 5 = Ephes. i. 3, 12, 13, 15. 

Col. i. 9 = Ephes. i. 15, 16. 

Col. i. 10 = Ephes. iv. l. 

Col. i. 13 = Ephes. ii. 2, 3. 

Col. i. 21 = Ephes. ii. 1, 2, 10, 13, 15. 

Col. i. 22 = Ephes. ii. 13, 16. 

Col. i. 23 = Ephes. iii. 1. 

Col. i. 25 — Ephes. iii. 2, 7, S. 

Col. i. 29 = Ephes. iii. 7, 2U. 

Col. ii. 4 =; Ephes. iv. 17 : v. G. 

Col. ii. 6, 7i> = J:phes. iv. 17, 20, 21. 

Col. ii. 8» — Ephes. iv. 14. 

Col. ii. 12 = Epiies. i. 20; ii. 6. 

Col. ii. 13 = Ephes. i.. 1, 4, 5. 

Col. ii. 14, 20 = Ephes. ii. i:,. 

Col. iii. 3'' =: Ephes. iii. 9. 

Col. iii. 12, 13 = Ephes. iv. 2, 32 ; v. 1, 2. 

Col. iii. 17 = Ephes. v. 2u. 
Col. iv. 2, 3», 4''= Ephes. vi. 18-20t>. 

Col. iv. 5 = Ephes. v. 15, 16. 

Col. iv. 6 = Ephes. iv. 29. 

Col. iv. 7, 8 = Ephes. vi. 21, 22. 

25, and (more complete) Einl." p. 291. The asterisks (*) denote 
(Jiinl.-) to have changed his mind. 

(2) Alleged priority 071 side of Ephesians. 

Ephes. i. 4 = Col. i. 22. ! 

Kphes. i. 6, 7 = Col. i. 13 (t. iy.), 14. 

Ephes. i. 7-11 = Col. i. 9, 16, 17, 19, 20. 

Ephes. i. 17 = Col. i. 9, 10. 

Ephes. i. 18 — Col. i. 27 ; cp. iii. 4. 

Ephes. i. 19, 20 -. Col. i. 11 ; ii. 12 (ttio-t.) ; iii. 1. 

Ephes. i. 21-23 = Col. i. 16, 18, 19; ii. 10. 

Ephe.s. ii. 2, 3 = Col. iii. 7. 

Ephes. ii. 10 = Col. i. 10. 

Ephes. ii. U = Col. ii. 11, 13. 

Ephes. ii. 12, 13-17 — Col. i. 20, 21 (in part) ; .' ii. 11 (5jy.). 

Ephes. ii. 20 = Col. iii. 7 (cttoik.). 

Ephes. iii. 1 = Col. i. 24. 

Ephes. iii. 3, 4, 5, 9, 16 — Col. i. 26, 27. 28 (cp. iv. 3).* 

Kphes. iii. 10 
Ephes. iii. 13 
Ephes. iii. 17 
Ephes. iii. 18 
Ephes. iv. 3, 4 
Ephes. iv. 13 
Ephes. iv. 15, 10 
Ephes. iv. 18 
Ephes. iv. 19 
Ephes. iv. 21-24 
Ephes. iv. 25-31 
Ephes. v. 3-6 
Ephes. v. 19 
Ephes. V. 22-25, 28 
Ephes. V. 23 
Ephes. vi. 1, 4-9 
Ephes. vi. 20» 

= Col. i. 16 ; cp. ii. 15. 

= Col. i. 24. 

= Col. ii. 7. 

= Col. i. 23, 27; ii. 2.* 

= Col. iii. 14, 15. 

^ Col. i. 28 (TTcirr.). 

— Col. i. lg»; ii. 19;* cp. ii. 2, 

= Col. i. 21. 

= Col. iii. 5.* 

= Col. iii. 9, 10.* 

= Col. iii. 8, 9»*? 

= Col. iii. 5, 6,* 8 (cp. ii. a^). 

= Col. iii. 16.* 

— Col. iii. 18, 19.* 

= Col. i. 18. 

= Col. iii. 20-iv. ].* 

= Col. iv. 3\ 4«. 


wliich he re-states with the fjreatest lucidity and 
incisiveness, and seeks to siiiii)ienient hy a positive 
account of the plu'ncniena. If the negative 
criticism holds good, some theory of the kind is 
needed : if what has been alleged in reply has 
any weight, and if the account (supra, 2, c, d) 
of the Pauline origin of the Epistle is natural and 
probable, the hypothesis becomes unnecessary 
and artilicial. Kemembering this, we proceed to 
test it on its niei'its. 

Jloltzjminn's /ii/pothesis examined. — So far as 
the hypothesis depends on phenomena peculiar 
to tlie Colossian Epistle, we may refer to the 
article upon it, and to Lightfoot's commentary, 
where the essential homogeneity of that Epistle 
and the consistency of its ideas and notes of time 


(especially with reference to the heresy combated 
and the internal unity of the composition) are 
clearly shown. It may be ailded that manv of 
tlie phenomena relied on liy Holtzniann have 
been shown by Von Soden (see infra) to warrant 
no such inference as Holtzmann supposed. This 
latter fact also destroys what at fiist seems a 
strong recommendation of the hypotliesis, viz. the 
cnincklence in supjjort of it of so many indejjen- 
dent tests (Krit. j.p. 'JO, l;)0). The facts in 
reality yield no sncli certain sound as is taken 
for granted : the hypothesis is ready before their 
investigation is begun, and all that they have to 
do is to fall, whether they will or no, into their 
assigned place. This stares us in the face, so 
soon as we examine Iloltzmann's case in detail. 

(i.) Instances of prior it>j. 

Christ the Ikad of the Church 
Ephcs. iv. 16. 

OS (CTTIV )) K€(^aA>i, XplCTTOS, 

c^ oS TTOiv TO <rioixa 
OTJi'opfioAoyov^ei'Oi' koI <rv)j.^ifia(6ixevov 

(car' ercpyeiai' iv neVpw ei'bs cKatTTOu 

^jL^povs TTjr av ^rjatv tov trtu/aaTos 

TTOttiTai tis oifCoSofiJjr iavToi) cv ayaTrj). 

Col. ii. 19. 

TTjc Ke^aKiji/, 

€^ ov Trai' TO citifia 

OLOi riiiv a<l)u)f KaX trvvSdo'fJ.Oit' 

TTixopr^yovfjiivov koI (rui'^i/Safo/iierof 

ai'i'et Trji' av^rjo'ii' rov &eov. 

Here the passage in Colossians has the ad- 
vantage in point of conciseness and jierspicuity, 
gained however at the expense of the idea of 
mutual interdependence among the members, 
which the language in the Ephesian parallel 
labours to bring out. On this ground, coupled 
with the greater fitness of e'l ou after the 
masculine Xpiaros, the naturalness of the jiassage 
in its Ephesian rather than in its Colossian 
context, the " un-Pauline " sense of ivixop7]ye7v 

(cp. Gal. iii. 5; 2 Cor. ix. 10), and of aiilfiv 
(av^dviw only transitive in tit. Paul), Holtzmann 
{Krit. pp. 5i, 142, 158) regards the Ephesian 
pnssage as the original. The precariousness of 
every one of these numerous tests is sufficiently 
shown by the fact that, in spite of them all, he 
now regards the Colossian passage as original 
and genuine {Einl.- p. 296, line 25, so also Von 
Soden), while Pfleiderer regards it as spurious, 
but as the original of the other (ii. pp. 100, 103). 

Hymns and Spiritual Sonr/s- 
Epbes. v. 19. I 

AoAoui'Tf? eaurois il/aAjUOis ical v/xfots koX wSai? £tBacrKorres koX I'oufleToOi'Te? eauTOvs ifiaAfiOis 

l^JTvivixaTiKoii} a.Sovre'; Koi \l/a.\\ovT€i Tiff KapSia ujauv , il/xfocs oiSaZs TrrevjuaTiKats er [ri/] ;^apiTt aSoi'res iv 
Tip Kvpioj- rals KapSi'ais i/jj-iiv to 

Col. iii. IG. 


Here the Colossian passage is the more ex- 
panded of the two : the \a\ovvTes of 
is replaced by a more definite phrase : on these 
grounds and on that of the more obvious con- 
nexion in Ephcsians, the latter is regarded by 

Holtzmann as the original. But, in spite of the 
"nn-Pauline" (Krit. p. 1G4-) language of the 
p.issage, it is now (Ei7il.- ubi supra, and Von 
Soden, Col. p. 528) restored to the Apostle, and 
the priority previously inferred is inverted. 

Col. 1, 20-22. 
KaX Si' aiiTov anoKaTaK- 
Act^at Ta TTCLi/ra ets auTor, elprj- 
I'OTTO t^<Ta9 Sia. ToO atjaaTO? 
Tou aTaupov avToO, [fit' avTov] 
«tTe Ta (TTL T^9 yijs eire to. iy TOis 
ovpavoi'; • Kat v/xa? TToie oi'Ta? 
CLTTrjWoTpLUixei'Ovi Kal ixBpov^ 
TTj diavoia er TOt? €pyot5 TOts 

TTOITIPOIS, in)vl &i aTTOKaTTjA.- 

Xa^€v iv Tw cw/u-aTt t^s o^op- 
Kos aiiToO itd TOV BavaTov. 

The question of priority as between these 
three passages (see Holtzmann, Krit. pp. 63 sq., 
92 sq., 137, 151 ; Pfleid. ii. p. 179 sq.) is highly 
complicated. The Ephesian passage is connected 
with Col. i. b\- the ideas of an enmity reconciled, 
peace being made, and that through the Cross, 
and by the phrases iv . . . araifxari and ttjs 
crapKos (ti7 aapKi) — with Col. ii. by the references 
to the abolition of ioyixara, to the removal of a 
piaov, to the Cross, and by the supplementary 

The lieconciliation wrought by Christ. 
Ephes. ii. 14-16. 

aurbs yap ecTTir -q eip^nj vfiuiv b Trot^(Tas 
Ta d(ix</)0T6pa iv Koi to /necroTOixoc tow 
<j)payfx,ov \v(Ta^, ttji' ex6pav iv tj) crapKi 
auTO V, to J' voixov r^v ivrokuiv ef S6yiJ.a.<Ti 
K'aTapyTjo'a?, iva tov? Svo KTia~p iv avTw ei5 
eVa icaii'bi' arSpoirrov, ttoliov eip^fijr, 
Kal (XTrOKaTaAAdfrj Tovs d/x(^OTe'pous ev 
ivl (TOifJLari riZ SctZ 6td tov tTTdVpov, 
diroKrea'a? Trji" e\Spai' iv avTiZ. 

Col. ii. 14. 

i^a\eCi}/a<; to Kafl' ij|uwi' ^^ipo- 
ypa4>ov Tois So-y/aaat o rjv 
vnevavTLOv r)p.iv, Kal aiiTo 'jpKei' 
€« TOV ^e'crov 7rpooT)Aw<7as 
avTo Tcu o"Tavpui'd7re/c5i;(7dj[xeros 
. . . . ei' avTtu. 

statement as to sometiiing accomplished by the 
instrumentality of the latter (eV aiirw following 
an aorist participle in both places). The Ephesian 
passage, thus closely connected with the others 
by its wording, yet embraces quite a distinct 
idea. Common to all tiiree is the thought of the 
Cross as the instrument of man's reconciliation 
to God ; but while in Col. i. this is deduced from 
the idea of its cosmic efficacy, and in Col. ii. is 
connected with that of cancelling a bond or 

9j0 ephesians, epistle to the 

iuilictment (and while in each of the two 
(Jolossian passages the process has reference also 
to superhuman beings), in Ephes. ii. the common 
reconciliation of Jew and Gentile to God (r. IG) 
is in close relation (supra, § 2, d, e) with the re- 
moval of the ancient barrier between the two ; the 
iileas ex^P^' ^^^P^^'ti l^^^ov, S6yfi.a, are adapted to 
this specitic reference ; and lastly the Colossian 
phrase iv tQ aiiifxari ttjs capKhs avrou assuines 
a new colour, the verbally parallel «V kvl ffwixari 
(cp. Col. iii. 15) referring to the (mystical) body 
of Christ regarded as embracing all reconciled 
mankind without distinction, while iv rp aapKi 
avTov {y. 15) preserves the idea of the literal 
body of the Cruciried, but with the secondary 
instrumental reference. Tlie Ephesian passage 
is therefore regarded b}' both Holtzmann and 
rfleiderer as, at least mainly, modelled upon its 
parallels, the writer having thrown his subject 
(the reconciliation of Jew and Gentile in Christ) 
into confusion by borrowing from the passages 
in Colossians language there used to e.x|jress a 
different idea. Hence the changed sense of 
aHofia, and the irrelevant ev Trj crapKL ai/rov, 
irrelevant because " the slain body of Christ can- 
not well be regarded as a means of reconciliation 
. . . between Jew and Gentile " (Pfleiderer, p. 180). 
This extravagant criticism comes strangely from 
Pfleiderer, who has so clearly drawn out tlie 
significance of Christ's death to St. Paul in this 
respect !i. p. 7, ii. p. 44-). The whole argument, 
in fact, for the priority of Colossians in this 
parallelism is open to the charge of ignoring, 
firstly, the main idea of the Epistle to the 
Ephesians (supra, § 2, d) ; secondly, the fact 
that, of the leading thoughts respectively dis- 
tinctive of the three passages (cosmic efficacy of 
Christ's death, abolition of the law and consequent 
unification of all in Christ, abolition of the law 
as a hostile bond), that of Ephes. i'i. 14- is in most 
immediate contact with the earlier teaching of 
St. Paul, — whence Holtzmann expunges, inter 
alia, all cosmic references from the tirst passage, 
while Von Soden also condemns part of the 
third ; — thirdly, the extremely plain and 
straightforward connexion of the whole passage 
in Ephesians (ii. 11-20), the spontaneous flow 
of which absolutely forbids the idea of such 
laboured and unintelligent compilation as its 


supposed genesis involves. — The above is on the 
whole the strongest case of supposed priority; 
and if the result of a direful examination is so 
indecisive, may we not reasonably say that the 
method itself is open to suspicion? (Cp. Von 
Soden, Col. p. 328, " But who does not know 
how ])recarious are all conjectures, in literary 
criticism, as to the relative priority of parallel 
passages ? ") 

ii. Critical Analysis of Ephesians. This test 
is supposed to bring to liglit a more or less 
studied " literary dependence " on St. Paul's 
earlier Epistles. The " auctor ad Ephesios," 
while borrowing most directly from the ijcnuine 
Colossians, the whole of which, with the excep- 
tion of its personal and polemic matter, he care- 
fully uses up, has also shown himself a careful 
student of the rest of the Pauline literature. 
Of course, in applying this test, everything 
depends on distinguishing such resemblances and 
differences as naturally follow from the identity 
of the writer from such as betray the imitator. 
But this is exactly the weakest part of Holtz- 
mann's discussion. To substantiate this, in 
addition to the few instances given above (c. i.), 
it may be well to examine one or two cases in 
detail. (1) The parallelism last given (Ephes. 
ii. 14, <S:c.) is a case in point. The words fX^P~ 
(Rom. xi. 28), airoKOLTaWdcrcreiv (kotoAA.. Uom. 
xi. 15, 2 Cor. V. 18 sq.), crihixa (Rom. vii. 4), 
aTTOKreiveiv (Rom. vii. 11, 2 Cor. ii. 6), arc, it 
is argued, borrowed from St. Paul to express 
ideas foreign to their original place in his vo- 
cabulary. But St. Paul's mind was more elastic 
than that of his critics : the ideas of slaying 
and enmit}' lend themselves to more metaphors 
than one ; while the word ffH^a, is admittedly 
used by him of the Church, and the transition 
from the literal to the mystic sense of it (Col. i. 
22 ; Ephes. ii. 16) has a strict jiarallel in 1 Cor. 
X. 16, 17. To take another example : (2) the 
alleged imitation of 1 Cor. xv. 20, 23-25, 27, 
28, in Ephes. i. 20-23, is clearly due to the 
natural connexion of ideas, which in a subject so 
habitually on the Apostle's lips would inevitably 
bring with it a standing collocation of terms. 
Once more (3) let us examine the ]iassages 
Ephes. iv. 22 sqq., Col. iii. 8-10, together with, 
their parallels in other Epistles. 

Kphe«. Iv. 22-24. 

t /, . o ■ - - • - • I- - 

aTToaeaaat vju.a; Kara Tr\v npOTepav avaa'Tpo<pt)v toi' 
TraAaib;' avQ ptoirov tov <}}9eLp6^€vov /cara rds eniOv- 
/LLi'as T)J5 oLTrdn)?, avaveouo'dai Sk Tip Trceu'/xart ToC fob? 
vy.CiVy KaX ef6ua'a(rdai TOf Kaivov av6p(oiTov toj/ 
Kara dehv icTi'o'flci'Ta fv Si 
T^5 aAijSei'as. 

oiKaiooTiyri Kai otrioniTi 

Col. iii. 8-10. 
•-vi'l ie anoOecBe koX i/atts ra vaura .... aircK- 
5u<Tdfxevot Tov TraKaihv avOpiDnov ffvc Tais Trpajtirir 
avrov, Kal € vSv(Tap.evoi. TOi' veov tov avajcaivov- 
fiivov €15 iTriyvuicnv kolt i'lKova toO KTicravTOS avjhvf 
oirou OUK ivi K.T.\. 

Cp. Rom. vi. 6. b ffoAaibs rjfilav a.vdpumo';. 
2 Cor. iv. 16. ci KaX 6 e|u> t)ix.u>v OLvOpuiiroi Siarf>9eCpeTai, aAX' o Ijoj ^/xu)C a.vaKa.iVOVTa.(. ... 2 Cor. 
V. 17, KaLvr] KTtVts (and Gal. vi. 15). 
Bom. xiii. 12, 14. awoBiofieBa ovv . . . dAAd tVSi/o'a<r&£ toc Kvpiov 'Irjcrovv Xpto-TOf. 

In 1872 the latter passages were supposed to 
have been laid under contribution by the com- 
piler of Ephesians, who subsequently abridged 
his patchwork in the passage Col. iii. In 1886 
tiie latter is supposed to be from the hand of 
St. Paul (Holtzm. Einl.- ; Von Soden, Col. 
p. 253), the borrowing from the older Epistles 
on the part of Ephesians being, as a consequence, 
restricted to the least obvious points of resem- 
blance ((l>dftp6fj.fyov?^. Resemblances which 

were formerly proofs of the " dependence " of 
Ephesians are now allowed to prove the Pauline 
authorship of Colossians. If we further recollect 
that (although Pfleiderer, ii. 188. sees in Ephes. 
iv. 24 an unintelligent reproduction of Col. iii. 
10) the words koI vfj.(7s, Col. iii. 8 (of which 
Von Soden is therefore anxious to get rid)^ 
strongly suggest that the writer had in his 
mind a similar summons addressed to other 
readers, — a fact which, taken with Ephes. iv. 


22, 25, makes it far more natural to assume 
that the priority, if any, is here on the side of 
Ephesians, — the examination of this single in- 
stance will have sutlicoil to show the precarious 
character of Holtzmann's canon of dependence. 

One more example shall be given, this time 
in his own wonls, and without comment (^Krit. 
p. 141). " What is said of love, iv. 3, has its 
double in Rom. xiii. 10, the reference to ev 
(Tw/j-a Kol li' Truiv/xa, iv. 4, in 1 Cor. x. 17, xii. 
4, Koni. xii. 5. That Ka\e7v is constructed with 
iv, in preference to the favourite els, follows the 
example of 1 Cor. vii. 15," &c. Holtzmann has 
certainly collected an admirable mass of illus- 
trative matter for our Epistle (even if not 
always quite fairly selected), but what evidence 
does he offer that furnishes solid ground for his 
theory ? 

iii. The " oriijinal Epistle to the Colossidiis." 
As the result of the comi)arative and critical 
processes which we have described (^parturiunt 
monies . . .), Holtzmann arrives at a supposed 
genuine relic of St. Paul, — in reality a cento of 
words and phrases from the Colossian Epistle, in 
connexions of his own. He analyses it verse by 
verse with the aim of showing the conformity 
of its lanjruage to the Pauline standard, and 
does so, we may admit, with success. But, 
with every wish on his part to avoid the pitfall 
(K/it. p. 184), it strikes the reader at every 
turn that the very same phenomena which 
betray imitation elsewhere are here the cre- 
dentials of authenticity. For example, while 
Holtzmann is unable to approve " the kingdom 
of Christ and of God " (Ephes. v. 5), the phrase 
in Col. i. 13, ttji- jSacr. rov vlov . . . avTov (tt]s 
ayairris is condemned), is in his eyes " an in- 
disputable trace of the Apostle's hand" (p. 172); 
to Pfleiderer (ii. 112) it is the very reverse. In 
its reduced form the letter is supposed to gain 
in clearness, unity of purpose, consecutiveness, 
and compactness of structure. The two latter 
are more than doubtful : the " purpose " is the 
very general one Treptirarfiffat v/xas a^ioos rov 
&eov (Col. i. 10) ; the whole is a laboriously 
dovetailed piece-work, without colour, point, or 

iv. Improbability of Holtzmann's hypothesis. 
We now come to an unanswerable objection to 
the hypothesis, quite independent of the fore- 
gofng strictures. Could such a process of inter- 
polation have been carried out without leaving 
its traces upon the textual evidence ? It is no 
answer to appeal to admitted interpolations 
such as those of the Ignatian letters, for the 
latter have survived in their earlier form as 
well. Nor is the appeal to interpolations in 
classical writers legitimate : for in the case of 
N. T. writings the evidence is abundant enough 
to bear traces even of very early alterations in 
the text [COLOSSiAXs]. The most elementary 
principles of evidence, then, are fatal to such a 
theory as Holtzmann's. He has, it is true, 
made some concession to the force of this objec- 
tion, in his assumption of the identity of the 
Ephesian compihr and the interpolator of 
Colossians. Every addition to the dramatis 
personae aggravates the unlikelihood of the plot 
by widening the circle of persons acquainted 
with the original Pauline letter, and so adds to 
the force of the demand for evidence of its 
having ever existed. But the necessity of 



assuming that the interpolator " rescued " this 
precious relic " from oblivion ' (^Krit. p. 305) 
only to relegate it thither again, — in other 
words, that its existence was known to one 
person alone, — is in its turn a sudicient reductio 
ad ahsurdum. Accordingly the tendency now is 
to reduce the number of interpolated passages 
to such limits as leave the relation between 
Ephesians and Colossians exactly where Holtz- 
mann found it. Under his guidance we find 
ourselves as much in a cul de sac as ever. 

V. Probable Solution. It is fatal to the theory 
of reciprocral priority to give up the identity 
of compiler and interpolator, as has been done 
by most of those critics who have expressed 
partial " ajiproval of Holtzmann's scheme. We 
have then to choose between complete depend- 
ence on one side or the other, and simultaneous 
composition by a single author. The former 
alternative Holtzmann's analysis has shown to 
be inadmissible. His instances of " priority of 
Ephesians," for example, may be shown (as by 
Von Soden) to fall short of proving their case : 
but the same may be shown of the instances 
alleged in favour of the converse relation. To 
both classes of instances, however, we can con- 
sistently allow an equal negative validity, as 
disproving that, the contrary of which they fail 
to establish. Holtzmann, as is so commonly the 
case, succeeds in pulling down the assumptions 
of others, but fails in proving his own. A con- 
tinuous survey of the language and thought" of 
the two Epistles shows the impossibility of 
carrying out any hypothesis of simple depend- 
ence on either side, while the only consistently 
worked out attempt at a more complex solution 
breaks down, both from the indecisiveness of the 
internal evidence, from the absolute lack of 
external proof, and from the improbability of its 
historical presuppositions. 

There is, then, on the assumption of literary 
dependence, no consistent hypothesis in the field. 
What then prevents our accepting as true that 
account of the origin of these letters which they 
bear upon their face, — that they were simul- 
taneously composed by St. Paul, and sent by 
him to the same province by the same mes- 
senger ? Simply the supposed impossibility of 
simultaneous comi)osition on the one hand ; the 
improbability, on the other, of St. Paul copying 
his own letters. But this objection must be 
regarded as altogether unreal. Are not the 
phenomena of our Epistles such as we should 

" The principal names are Hausrath (^Ap. Paulus,- 
&ndi Zeitgesch.- yo\. iii. "differs in details"); Pfleiderer 
(see above) ; Von Soden (in Jahrbiicher fur prot. Theol. 
1885, 1887), who merely expunges eight and a half 
verses of Colossians, and except as to these substantially 
goes back to the old view cjf De Wette, &c. ; Schmiedel 
(in Eisch and Gruber, 1886) ; Mangold (Bleek,'' p. 602). 
These critics generally reject Holtzmann's distinctive 
hypothesis (reciprocity of relations), but approve the 
Ifiea of interpolations in Colossians, and dependence of 
Ephesians, ascribing the latter to a third hand. 

The contention (Hiinig. Zeitschr. wiss. Theol. 1872; 
Pfleiderer, il. 99, 165, &c.) that tlie two Epistles betray 
diversities of thought incompatible with unity of author- 
ship has been incidentally anticipated (^^^ 2, d ; y, c). 
But on the special points of supposed difference, a 
reference to Lightfoot's notes and Excursus, and ofteo 
to Hultzmann's discussions, will show the inconcluslve- 
ness of the reasons alleged. 

3 Q 


expect in letters written to different persons, 
but on partially identical subjects, by the same 
writer, and possibly on the same day ? 

j8. Relation to the First Epistle of St. Peter. 


The resemblances between the two Epistles are 
such in number P and in kind as to exclude the 
idea of accidental coincidence. One iustancu 
may be discussed in full : — 

Ephes. i. 20-22. 

tyei'pas avTOV Koi Kodiaa? iv 
Sefia aiiToO iu Tois enovpavioii 
virepavio TraoTjv «PX^s (cal e^ov- 
(Tias Kal Swdixeu)^ .... Koi 
iravTa vTre'rafe*' wto tous iroSas 

What attracts our attention here is the 
correspondence of the ideas with which the 
exaltation of Christ is associated in the two 
Epistles. On the one hand the subjection, to 
the risen Christ at the right hand of God in 
heaven, of Angels and powers (passages 1 and 2), 
on the other the exaltation (here only in N. T.) 
coupled with the descent into hades (passages 2 
and 3 : the reference to the latter doctrine is 
disputed, but probaljly correct, in the Ephesians, 
and overwhelmingly probable in 1 Peter : the 
latter passage at any rate appears to be founded 
upon the other, so much so that Holtzmann calls 
it the first known commentary upon it). The two 
Epistles are moreover linked by several marked 
words and expressions applied by either writer 
in the same way, e.g. irph KaTa^oKrjs Kocrfiov, 
avaffTpoKp-q, &yvoia, cLKpoyooviaios, 5ia/3oA.os ; — by 
the similarity of their opening, — by the scheme 
of household relations and duties, — by the en- 
cvclical character of either, — by the reproduction 
of the idea of Ephes. iii. 10 in 1 Pet. i. 12 
(Angels spectators of the work of Redemption), 
&.C. It is impossible to resist the conclusion 
that the writer of one Epistle was directly in- 
fluenced by his knowledge of the other. If the 
Epistle of Peter is regarded as prior in date, and 
spurious — so Pfleiderer, Hilgenfeld, &c. — ^our 
Epistle of course is condemned also. If 1 Peter 
is prior but genuine, we have to suppose that 
St. Paul borrowed from St. Peter. This is the 
hypothesis of Weiss {Petr. Lehrhegriff, v. 5 ; 
Introd. § 25, 6), which is at once obliged to face 
the fact that 1 Peter shows equally striking 
correspondences with other Epistles of St. Paul 
(notably Piomans, e.g. Rom. vi. 10, 1 Pet. iv. 1 ; 
Rom. ii. 28, 1 Pet. iii. 4, and above all Rom. xii., 
xiii.). Weiss accepts the challenge by assuming 
that there also St. Paul is the borrower, a con- 
tention (connected with an elaborate theory as to 
the diffusion of Christianity in Asia Minor at a 
very early date, and with a special view as to 
date and readers of 1 Peter) which cannot be 
discussed here [Peter, First Epistle of ; 
Romans, Epistle to], but which, in common 

Descent and Exaltation of Christ. 
1 Pet. iii. 19, 21. 
19. ev <Z KoX T019 ev tjtvKaKJj nvev- 
/uao'i iropeiidets eKijpv^e .... 

21 Si' avacrracreio^ 'IijcroO 

Xpi(7Tov, OS i<mv ev Se^ia 6eov 
TTopevflels ei? ovpavov iiwoTay- 
e'rTeov avTco ayyeAwv Kal efou- 
eriioi' Kal Swafiieiov. 

Ephes. iv. 8-10. 
TO Se arcjSr) Tt ((TTiv ci jurj OTi 
Kal KaT£'/3i} eis Ta KaruTepa. fiepi; T^s 
y^s ; o Karo^Sas aiixd? e<rTi.v Koi 6 
ava^ai vTTipavu) ndvTuii' t£)v ovpa- 
viov .... 

with almost every one whose opinion is entitled 
to respect, we regard as untenable. (It is sup- 
ported by Kiihl in the last issue of Meyer's Com- 
mentary on 1 Peter. Holtzmann, Einl.^ p. 517, 
calls it " the most desperate step upon which 
modern apologetics have ventured." Weiss' last 
restatement of his case, Introd. to N. T. § 40.) 
The other alternative, that 1 Peter borrows 
from Ephesians, does not affect the genuineness 
of the latter, and the questions involved in it 
will be discussed in the art. Peter, First 
Epistle of. It is necessary, however, to men- 
tion the attempt of Seufert [Zeitsch, wiss. 
Theol. 1881, pp. 178, 332) to show that both 
Epistles are the work of a single author, pro- 
bably the compiler of the Third Gospel and the 
Acts. It should in fairness be observed that 
Seufert only follows up a hint thrown out by 
Holtzmann {Krit. p. 265, 1. 24), without, 
however, securing even his master's agreement 
with the result. That the order of ideas in 
the two Epistles is " on the whole (Krit. 
ibid., and Seufert repeatedly) similar," is a 
generalisation which will not bear statement in 

y. Relation to other New Testament writings. 
The points of contact with the Synoptic Gospels 
(Holtzm. Krit. p. 248) are numerous though 
slight : they prove nothing more than that the 
writer of our Epistle was acquainted with the 
ireTr\ripo<poprifi4va of the Apostolic preaching. 
The connexion with the Third Gospel (xap'ToCi', 
■Kavo-KXia, d<n6T7}s, &c.) is slightly more marked : 
that with the Acts (cp. supra, § 2, a, /3) is not 
peculiar to our Epistle (cp. e.g. Acts xsvi. 18 
with Col. i. 12-14) and forms part of the larger 
question of the Pauline affinities of the thircj 
Evangelist [ACTS ; GosPELS]. The like applies 
to the coincidences with Hebrews (e.g. Ephes, 
V. 26, Heb. xiii. 12, and the Christology), which, 
it may be added (in agreement with Von Soden, 
pp. 483-486), are not such as to suggest the 
dependence of our Epistle (against Holtzm. 
p. 255, and passim), ^ith regard to the 
Johannine writings, while Dr. Salmon's remark 

p The foUowing are among the most striking : a fuller list in Weiss (_Einl. ^ 27, 6, note 2, and Petr. Lehrhegriff, 
p. 425 sq.) : 

1 Pet. i. 3 = Ephes. i. 3. 

1 Pet. i. 14 = Ephes. v. U (.md ii. 3). 

1 Pet. i. 16-18 = Ephes. iv. 22. 

1 Pet. 1. 18-20 = Ephes. i. 4, T ; iv. 17. 

1 Pet. ii. 1 = Ephes. iv. 21, 25, 31. 

1 Pet. ii. 4-6 =: Ephes. ii. 20 sq. 

1 Pet. ii. 9 = Ephes. v. 8. 

1 Pet. ii. 16 = Ephes. vi. 6. 

1 Pet. ii. 18 = Ephes. vi. 5. 

1 Pet. iii. 1 = Ephes. v. 22. 

1 Pet. iii. IS = Ephes. ii. 18. 

1 Pet. iii. 19, 21, 22 =: Ephes. Iv. 8, 9 ; i. 20-22. 

1 Pet. iv. 3 = Ephes. v. 7-14. 

1 Pet. iv. 10 = Ephes. iii. 10 ; iv. 12 ? 

1 Pet. V. 2 = Ephes. iv. 11 (iroin-)- 

1 Pet. V. 8, 9 = Ephes. vi. 11. 


(p. 487, note) that "St. John read and valued 
St. Paul's writings " is on any theory a sufficient 
explanation of tlie few but striking resemblances 
between the Gospel and our Epistle (those in 
1 John are very faint), the relations of the 
latter to the Apocalypse re()uire a little more 
discussion. Holtzmaun confidently includes the 
Apocalypse among the material's used by the 
compiler of Ephesiaus, and even sees in Rom. 
xvi. 26 (jypa<p. irpocp. — see below), Ephes. ii. '20, 
iii. 5, iv. 11, an express reference to the prophetic 
(Rev. x.\ii. 9) author of the former ! In this, as 
when he derives the phrase ciyiot aTrocrr. (Ephes. 
iii. 5) from the indisputably wrong reading of 
Kev. xviii. 20, and refers Ephes. iii. 18 to 
the dimensions of the heavenly city in Rev. 
xxi. 16, we recognise the old fallacy of 
reading into the phenomena more than they 
really tell us. The undoubted resemblances 
(Ephes. i. 15, T. R., and Rev. ii. 4, ii. 20, cp. 
Rev. xxi. 14 ; iii. 5, cp. Rev. x. 7 ; iii. 9, cp. 
Rev. iv. 11; v. 11, cp. Rev. xviii. 4; v. 25 
sq., cp. Rev. xix. 7, xxi., xxii., &c.) are partly 
explicable (as in the last instance mentioned) by 
common use of 0. T. symbolism, and partly lend 
themselves at least as easily to Dr. Salmon's 
explanation as to that of Holtzmann. 

It remains to add a few supplementary remarks 
as to the relation of our Epistle to St. Paul's 
undoubted writings. Rejecting the idea of 
literary dependence, as the result of an arbitrary 
method of investigation (as shown by its now 
generally admitted failure as applied to the 
greater portion of Colossians), and taking as 
admitted the general conformity of our Epistle 
to the Pauline theology, we remark : (1) the 
peculiar resemblance to it, in language and 
ideas, of the doxologyin Rom. xvi. 25-27 (Ephes. 
iii. 5, 20 sq., &c.). Holtzmann ascribes the 
doxology to his " Autor ad Ephesios," and there 
are well-known textual grounds which warrant 
the suggestion that the doxology may be nearer 
in date to our Epistle than to that of which it 
now forms the conclusion (see Romans and 
Gilford's Introduction to that Epistle). (2) Use 
made of the Old Testament. To estimate the 
influence of the LXX. upon the forms both of 
thought and of language in our Epistle, recourse 
must be had to the commentaries : a glance at 
the text as printed by Westcott and Hort will 
show the most conspicuous instances, but by no 
means all. The quotations are mostly according 
to the LXX., but not in every case dependent 
upon it : in particular, iv. 8 (Ps. Ixviii. 19) 
betrays familiarity with rabbinical exegesis (cp. 
V. 32 and Meyer on both places) ; v. 31, iv. 25, 26, 
&c., are free quotations and combinations quite 
in St. Paul's manner, while v. 14 (cp. Is. xxvi. 19, 
Ii. 17, Iii. -1, Ix. 1, 2; Ps. xliv. 23) presents a 
problem closely analogous to that of 1 Cor. ii. 9 
(^fypairrai). Moreover the characteristic ideas 
of our Epistle — Christ the Corner-stone, Peace 
preached to those far and near, the heavenly 
ai-mour, the Church wedded to her Lord (see 
above, S 2, d), &c. — find close points of contact 
in the Old Testament. 

Relation to Philippians. The use frequently 
made of that Epistle in the foregoing discus- 
sions brings the genuineness of Ephesians into 
close reciprocal connexion with the order of 
the Epistles of the Imprisonment. The latter 
fall into two sub-groups, of which Philip- 


plans by itself constitutes one. If our Epistle 
is genuine, the sub-gx"oup to which it belongs 
must be placed after, not as has usually been 
supposed before, the other. If, again, there 
are independent grounds for putting Philippians 
earlier in the Roman imprisonment than has 
been usually inferred, and as near as possible to 
the great polemic group (Lightfoot, Philipp., 
Introd. ; Philippians), not only is a real psycho- 
logical objection to the Pauline authorship of 
our Epistle (ably put by Ptleiderer, i. p. 31, 
note) removed, but an important link is re- 
covered between our Epistle and the " Pauline 
homologumena." This is consjiicuously true of 
the Christology (allowed by Holtzmann, supra, 
c. ii.), of the stress laid upon firiyi'oicns and 
cognate ideas, of the position assigned to good 
works(Philip. ii. 12, 13), of the practical teaching 
(Philip, i. 27, cp. Ephes. iv. 1, 4), of the " wealth " 
of God in Christ (Philip, iv. 19 ; Ephes. i. 18, &c.), 
of the true and false Trepirofx.!) (Philip, iii. 3 ; 
Ephes. ii. 11): cp. also Ephes. iii. 19 with Philij). 
iii. 8, iv. 7 ; Ephes. ii. 6 with Philip, iii. 20 ; 
Ephes. V. 21 with Philip, ii. 3 ; Ephes. v. 19 with 
the tone of Philip, iv. 4, 6. Considering the short- 
ness of the Epistle to Philippians and the great 
proportion of it taken up with personal matter, 
the instances given — and they might be multi- 
plied — of its affinity in ideas and language with 
our Epistle are striking enough. If it reaches 
out one hand (see Lightfoot"s parallel passages) 
to the Pauline homologumena, it touches Ephe- 
sians and Colossians with the other. (The 
points of contact with Colossians are not limited 
to the matter common to Ephes. Col., but make 
in the same direction as those here given ; a list 
is given by Von Soden, Col. p. 541.) 

f. Summary of literary question and conclu- 
sion of question of Authenticity. — An examination 
of the relations between our Epistle and other New 
Testament writings has shown the failure of all 
attempts hitherto made to construct, upon that 
basis, an account of its origin which can weigh in 
the balance against that which the letter bears 
upon its face. The ablest and only complete at- 
tempt of the kind, that of Holtzmann, has been 
adopted, in its essential points,by nobody, although 
it has been before the world for nineteen years. An 
examination of it upon its merits has not gained 
us over to its side. On the contrary, the Epistle's 
own account of itself has received incidental con- 
firmation from more sources than one. Since, 
then, literary and historical indications (supra, d) 
alike fail to confront that account with any rival 
or counter-theory, and since the purely negative 
objections are, to say the least, indecisive (supra, 
a-c), what is there to stay judgment in the case ? 
True, it is easier to meet specific charges than 
to prove positively the Pauline character of an 
Epistle. If we take as the tests of the " pectus 
Paulinum " mystical depth, dogmatic firmness, 
warmth of personal feeling, polemic incisiveness — 

I the last being excluded by the scope of our Epistle 
— then the others, we venture to say, are all 
there. Still, the appeal must be, from the nature 
of the case, lectori cordato ; the matter is one of 
taste and feeling, not one to be argued. 

Without attempting, therefore, to prove what 
is no subject for demonstration, we accept the 
Epistle's own account of its authorship, sup- 
ported as it is by the unanimous testimony of 

i antiquity, and uncontradicted by any decisive 

3 Q 2 


test or by the claims of any equally probable 
theory of its origin. We will only add, in the 
words of Erasmus, to which modern investiga- 
tions have only lent an added significance, " uon 
est cuiusvis hominis Pauli pectus ellingere." If 
the exact theological idiosyncrasy of St. Paul, 
*' so Jewish in its foundations, so anti-Jewish in 
its results " (as in this Epistle, iupra, § 2, d), 
was so little understood by the generation which 
succeeded him, — if, in fact, '' Paulinism as a 
living whole existed but once, and that in the 
mind of its original exponent " (Holtzm. Einl. 
)>. 105 sq.), then the attempt to insert the Epistle 
to the Ephesians in the sub-apostolic cycle, to 
class it with the Epistles of Clement and Bar- 
nabas, the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, and 
the other literature of that singularly uncrea- 
tive period, is a histoi'ical paradox, and nothing 

§ 4. Text — Literature. 

(1) The text of Ephesians has suffered less 
from assimilation than that of Colossians : the 
longer and more general would seem to have 
somewhat overshadowed the shorter and more 
special Epistle. But there are striking assimila- 
tions of Ephesians to Colossians in such passages, 
among others, as i. 15, ttjj' ayairriv, N°D., Vulg., 
^yr. Verss., many Fathers ( = Col. i. 4); om. 
JJAB., Orig., Hier., &c. (see WH) ; iii. 7, t7> 
SodeTffav, D'^E., &c., and Greek Fathers ( = Col. i. 
■25) : Tfjs SoOeiaris, NBD.*, Vulg., &c. ; v. 22, 
inrordcraeffde, KL., Syr., Chrys. ( = Col. iii. 18, 
but -ffOaicrai', NA. Verss., Greek Fathers, &c. = 
ws av, Col. ?) : om. B. and MSS. seen by Jerome. 
Among textual cruces may be mentioned iii. 9, 
irdvTas ; iii. 11, eV t^ XptcTToi : while in iii. 5 
the view of 07101^ suggested above is adopted by 
Lachmann and Tregelies, who place a comma 
after the word, — the suggestion of some primitire 
distui-bance in the text finding support in a certain 
confusion in the readings (Orig., Theodt. omit 
aryiois ; B, Ambrst omit airocrr. ; several MSS. 
and Fathers put avrov before aTrotrr.), coupled 
M'ith the fact that in eai'ly times the ditlicultv 
of the words as they stand would scarcely be 
felt. On the materials for the text, see Colos- 
sians, but add that with the exception of C, 
which contains only ii. 18-iv. 16 of our Epistle, 
the materials for Ephesians are slightly more 
abundant (^e.g. for the Old Lat. r. contains 
Ephes. i. 16-ii. 16). 

(2) Literature. — For general commentaries 
on St. Paul's Epistles, see Ro.mans, Epistle to 
THE, and the Introd. to Meyer's Romans (E. Tr.). 
For patristic commentaries on our Epistle, see 
Colossians (and cp. Lightfoot in Galatians, 
p. 223 sq.). For Ephesians, Cramer's Catena 
preserves many valuable fragments of Origen's 
commentary (see Did. Christ. Biog. vol. iv. 
p. 118). For a full list of modern commentaries, 
see the Introd. to Meyer's Ephesians (Eng. 
Tr.); another list in the last Gemian edition 
by Schmidt. Among the older special com- 
mentaries on Ephesians (mentioned in the 1st 
ed. of this Diet.), Harless (1834, 2nd ed., 1858) 
stands pre-eminent for point and thoroughness, 
and still well repays consultation. The most 
recent German commentaries (in addition to 
Ewald's Seiidschreiben des Ap. Paulus, 1 857 ; 
Siehen Sendschr. des N. B. 1870) ai-e those of 
Schenkel in the 1st ed. of Lange's Bibehcerk 


(2nd separate ed., 1867, when Braune's com- 
mentary took the place of it in Lange), Bleek 
(1867), and Woldemar Schmitlt (6th German ed. 
of Meyer, 1886, very judiciously retouched). 
Ellicott (3rd ed. 1864) remains the standard 
English edition; that of Llewelyn Davies (2nd 
ed., 1884) is brief, but able, reverent, and often 
suggestive ; while that by Moule {Cainb. Bib. 
Sch. 1886) is careful and concise, though the 
exegesis is apt to be founded iipon doctrinal 
presuppositions. The doctrine and ethics of 
the Epistle are the subject of the Lectures of 
K. W. Dale (3rd ed., 1887), a masterpiece 
of insight and theological grasp, and the best 
possible introduction to the thought of the 
Epistle. Bishop Lightfoot's Colossiaris contains 
much incidental matter relating to Ephesians : 
his commentary on the latter, promised in the 
Introduction to Colossians, was not completed. 
Beet and Klopper have published editions 
(1891), and one by Von Soden is announced. 
Of works other than commentaries, Holtz- 
mann's Eritik (1872), so often quoted above, 
is, whatever may be thought of its method 
and conclusions, a thorough and luminous 
manual of almost everything bearing upon 
the question cf r.uthorship ; Von Soden, in 
Jahrb. fiir Prot. Thcol. 1887, is most able, espe- 
cially o;. the theology of the Epistle, although 
the viovr taken by him is not that maintained 
in the present article. It has been referred to 
above as " Von Soden " simply. " Von Soden, 
Col." refers to his articles on Colossians, 1885. 
Of articles on the Epistle, the most recent is by 
Schmiedel in Ersch and Gruber's Encycl. (1886, 
commended by Holtzmann) ; that in Herzog - 
(under " Paulus ") is by Wold. Schmidt, and is 
worth consulting (the article in Herzog * by 
Weiss has been referred to above). Nothing 
new will be found in Riehm's HWB. (" Ephe- 
sus "). In the Bibel-Lex. the article is Schenkel's 
own ; that by Dr. Milligan in the Encycl. Brit.^ 
is excellent. [A. R.] 

EPHESUS ("Ec^eo-os), an illustrious city in 
the district of Ionia (nSXis 'lairtas eivKpave- 
crrdrrt, Steph. Byz. s. t.), nearly opposite the 
island of Samos, and about the middle of the 
western coast of the peninsula commonly called 
Asia Minor. Not that this geographical term 
was known in the 1st century. The Asia of 
the N. T. was simply the Roman province which 
embraced the western part of the peninsula 
(Conybeare and Howson's Life and Epistles of 
St. Paid, ch. viii. See especially Marquardt's 
Eomische Altci'thUmer, vol. iv.). Of this pro- 
vince Ephesus was the capital. 

Among the more marked physical features of 
the peniusHila are the two large rivers, Hermus 
and Maeander, which flow from a remote part 
of the interior westward to the Archipelago, 
Smyrna (Rev. ii. 8) being near the mouth of one 
and Miletus (Acts xx. 17) of the other. Be- 
tween the valleys drained by these two rivers is 
the shorter stream anci smaller basin of the 
Cayster, called by the Turks Kiichuk Mendere, 
or the Little Maeander. Its upper level (often 
called the Caystrian meadows) was closed to the 
westward by the gorge between Gallesus and 
Pactyas, the latter of these mountains being a 
prolongation of the range of I\Iessogis which 
bounds the valley of the Maeander on the north, 


the former more remotely connected with the 
range of Tmolus wliicli boiimls the valley of the 
Hermus on the south. Ueyond the gorge and 
towards the sea tlie valley oj)ens out again into 
an alluvial flat (Herod, ii. 10), with hills rising 
abruptly from it. The ])lain is now about five 
miles in breadth, but fortnerly it must have 
been smaller ; and some of the hills were once 
probably islands. Here Ephesus stood, partly 
on the level ground and partly on the hills. 
The early history of Ephesus was an oscillation 
between the ascendency of the Greek city on 
the hills and the old Asiatic temple on the 



Of the hills, on which a large portion of the 
city was built, the two most important were 
Prion (or Pion) and Coressus, the latter on the 
S. of the plain, and being in fact almost a con- 
tinuation of Pactyas, the former being in front of 
Coressus and near it, though separated by a deep 
and definite valley. The height of the Acropolis 
on Coressus is about 1250 ft. ; that of Prion, 
about 500 ft. On the east side of Prion is a 
church, cut in the solid rock, which is said to 
have been dedicated to the Seven Sleepers of 
Ephesus (.J in 3rap, p. 970). Further to the N.E. 
is another conspicuous eminence, about 250 ft. 
high. It seems to be the hill mentioned by Pro- 

Ephesus from the Theatre. (From Laborde.) 
In the centre are the ruins of the "Great Gymnasinm," with the "Civil Port " beyond them, and 
a hill cron-ned with the " Prison of St. Paul " in the middle distance. To the left of this hill are the 
slopes of Coressus, and, to the right, the windings of the Caystms. 

copius (de Aedif. v. 1) as one on which a church 
dedicated to St. John was built ; and the present* 
name of the village on its slopes, Ayasoluk, is 
a corruption of "A7tos @eo\6yos. Considerable 
remains of a church were found in excavations 
on the hill : these may perhaps be identified 
with St. John's church, which was in existence 
when the Council of Bishops assembled in 
431 A.D. Among the coins found under the 
Turkish pavement on the site of the temple of 
Diana were a number bearing the legend moneta 
quae fit in Theologo. 

Ephesus is closely connected with St. John, 
not only as being the scene (Rev. i. 11 ; ii. 1) 
of the most prominent of the churches of the 
Apocalypse, but also in the story of his later life 

as given by Eusebius. Possibly his Gospel and 
Epistles were written here. The so-called " Tomb 
of St. Luke," S. of Prion (F in Map), is a Greek 
polyandrion (Prof. W. M. Ramsay's Historical 
Geograplui of Asia Minor, 1890, p. 110). "St. 
Paul's Prison " is the name fancifully given to 
the other ruins of an ancient fort on the crest 
of a hill between the " Civil Port " and the sea 
(L in Map). There is a tradition that the mother 
of our Lord was buried at Ephesus, as also 
Timothy and St. John : and Ignatius addressed 
one of his epistles to the church of this place 
(t]7 eKK\7jala rfj a^ioixaKapiTrw, rfj ovarj iv 
'E(j)eaci) TT)s 'Aar'tas, Hefele, Pat. Apo^tol. p. 154 ; 
Lightfoot's Ignatius, p. 27), which held a con- 
spicuous position during the early ages of 



Christianity, and was in fact the metropolis of 
the churches of this part of Asia. But for 
direct Biblical illustration we must turn to 
the life and writings of St. Paul, in following 
which minutely it is remarkable how all the 
most characteristic features of ancient Ephesus 
come successively into view. 

1. Geographical Ilelations. — These may be 
viewed in connexion, first with the sea and then 
with the land. 

All the cities of Ionia were remarkably well 
situated for the growth of commercial pros- 
perity (Herod, i. 142), and none more so than 
Ephesus. With a fertile neighbourhood and an 
excellent climate, it was also most conveniently 
l)laced for traffic with all the neighbouring parts 
of the Levant. In the time of Augustus it was 
the great emporium of all the regions of Asia 
within the Taurus (Strabo, xiv. p. 950) : its 
liarbour (named Panormus), at the mouth of the 
Cayster, was injudiciously reconstructed in the 
time of Attains (Jb. p. 641), and the consequent 
increase of alluvial matter caused serious hin- 
drances, especially in St. Paul's own time (Tac. 
Ann. xvi. 23). The Apostle's life alone furnishes 
illustrations of its mercantile relations with 
Achaia on the W., Macedonia on the N., and 
Syria on the E. At the close of his second 
missionary circuit, he sailed across from Corinth 
to Ephesus (Acts xviii. 19) when on his way 
to Syria {ih. 21, 22) : and there is some reason 
for believing that he once made the same 
f-hort voyage over the Aegean in the opposite 
direction at a later period [Corinthians, First 
Epistle to]. On the third missionary circuit, 
besides the notice of the journey from Ephesus 
to Macedonia (six. 21 ; xx. 1), we have the 
coast voyage on the return to Syria given in 
detail (xx. xxi.), and the geographical relations 
of this city with the islands and neighbouring 
parts of the coast minutely indicated (xx. 15-17). 
To these passages we must add 1 Tim. i. 3, 
2 Tim. iv. 12, 20 ; though it is difficult to say 
<onfidently whether the journeys implied there 
were by land or by water. See likewise Acts 
;:ix. 27 ; xx. 1. 

As to the relations of Ephesus to the inland 
regions of the continent, these also are promi- 
nently brought before us in the Apostle's travels. 
The " upper coasts " (ja avoorepiKa fJ-eprj, Acts 
xix. 1) through which he passed, when about to 
take up his residence in the city, were the 
Phrygian table-lands of the interior ; and it 
was probably in the same district that on a 
previous occasion (Acts xvi. 6) he formed the 
unsuccessful project of preaching the Gospel in 
the district of Asia. Two great roads at least, 
in the Roman times, led eastward from Ephesus ; 
one through the passes of Tmolus to Sardis 
(Rev. iii. 1) and thence to Galatia and the N.E., 
the other round the extremity of Pactyas to 
Magnesia, and so up the valley of the Maeander 
to Laodicea and Colossae, and thence to the 
east as far as the Euphrates, with cross-roads 
running south to Iconium, Tarsus, and the Syrian 
Antioch (Prof. Ramsay, /. c. p. 49). There was 
a.Magnesian gate on the E. side of Ephesus 
(Wood's Ephesus, p. 79). There were also roads 
leading northwards to Smyrna and southwards 
to Miletus. By the latter of these it is probable 
that the Ephesian elders travelled, when sum- 
moned to meet Paul at the latter city (Acts xx. 


17, 18). Part of the pavement of the Sardian 
road has been noticed by travellers under the 
dill's of Mount Gallesus. All these roads, and 
others, are exhibited on the map in Leake's 
Asia Minor. See also the Index Map in Prof. 
Ramsay, /. c. 

2. Temple and worship of Diana. — Conspicuous 
among the buildings of Ephesus was the great 
temple of Diana or Artemis, the tutelary divinity 
of the city. The earlier temple, which had 
been begun by Chersiphron before the Persian 
war, and afterwards enlarged, or even rebuilt, 
by Paeonius in the 5th century (Vitruv. vii. 
praef. 16 ; iii. 2, § 7), constituted an epoch in 
the history of Greek art ; since it was here first 
that the graceful Ionic order was perfected 
(Vitruv. iv. 1, 7). This temple was burnt down 
by Herostratus, B.C. 356, in the night when 
Alexander the Great was born (Strabo, xiv. 1); 
and another structure, raised by the enthusiastic 
co-operation of all the inhabitants of "Asia," 
took its place {Greek Inscriptions in the British 
Museum, iii., 1890, Nos. 518, 519, ed. Hicks). 
This building was raised on immense substruc- 
tions, in consequence of the swampy nature 
of the ground (Pliny, xxxvi. § 95). The 
architect was Dinocrates, a Macedonian, and 
among the sculptors employed in its decoration 
was Scopas. Its dimensions as given by Pliny, 
I. c, were very great. In length it was 
425 feet, and in breadth 220. The columns 
were 127 in number, and each of them was 
60 feet high. The magnificence of this sanctuary 
was a proverb throughout the civilised world 
('O T7JS 'ApTifxiSos vahs iv '^(f)4crcj> fxovos icrrl 
QeSiv oIkos, Philo Byz. Sped. Mund. 7). All 
these circumstances give increased force to the 
architectural allegory in the great Epistle which 
St. Paul wrote in this place (1 Cor. iii. 9-17), 
to the passages where imagery of this kind is 
used in the Epistles addressed to Ephesus (Eph. 
ii. 19-22; 1 Tim. iii. 15, vi. 19; 2 Tim. 
ii. 19, 20), and to the words spoken to the 
Ephesian elders at Miletus (Acts xx. 32). 

The site of the famous temple remained long 
unknown. In 1824 Colonel Leake appears to 
have been the first to make any sensible sug- 
gestion as to the place where it should be 
sought. In 1863, Mr. J. T. Wood excavated the 
Odeum on the S. side of Mount Prion. In the 
Odeum he discovered several inscriptions con- 
taining mention of Publius Vedius Antoninus, 
7pa/i,aaT6i)S of the city. One of these is a copy 
of a letter from Antoninus Pius to the magis- 
trates and council of Ephesus (between 140 and 
144 A.D.), dealing with a dispute between Ephe- 
sus and Smyrna on matters of titular prece- 
dence (Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum, 
iii., 1890, No. 489, p. 154, ed. Hicks). In 
1866-8, Mr. Wood explored the Great Theatre (A) 
on the western slope of Prion. Among the in- 
scriptions here discovered was a series of decrees, 
chiefly relating to more than thirty gold and 
silver images (aTreiKovifffiaTo), being figures of 
Artemis with two stags, and a variety of emble- 
matical objects, weighing from three to seven 
pounds each, dedicated to Artemis and ordered 
to be placed in her temple by a wealthy Roman, 
C. Vibius Salutaris. On May 25, the birthday of 
the goddess, these images were to be carried from 
the temple past the Magnesian Gate to the 
theatre, and thence to the Coressian Gate, before 




being taken back to the temple. The date of 
the decrees, which are now in the British Mu- 
seum (ih. iii. No. 481, pp. 83, 135, 140, 145), is 
not much later than A.D. 104. They are tlius 
nearly coutem])oraneous with Pliny's corre- 
spondence with Trajan (about 112 A.D.), and 
may be regarded as marking a reaction against 
Christianity, which shows no sign of abatement 
until j)erhaps half a century later (a.d 161).' 
The theatre in which these inscriptions were 


--239 '4;/' 
Plan of the Temple of Diana at Ephesus. (From Wood.) 

found is undoubtedly the same as that mentioned 
in the Acts as the scene of the uproar caused by 

» This is the date of an important inscriptiou wbich 
may fairly be interpreted "as an involuntary confession 
of the subsequent decline of the Artemis-worship under 
the growing influence of the new faith " (ib. Xo. 482, 
p. 145). The speech of Demetrius in Acts xix. 2T-28 
finds a parallel in part of this document, B (1)-. [e5]ofe>' 
Tij? irp(orrj9 KoX ixi{yC(TTr)^ jU7)Tp]o7r6Aeu)S tt/s Ao"ias koi. 
5t9 veoiK[^6pov Toiv 2e/3a]crTaJi' Kal <f)i\oa'€^d<TTOv E(^e[<rtwi' 
jToAewc TJj ^ojvAjj Kal tiZ S^/iO)- Trepl &v dcrriy[r]rai. — A]o^e'- 
pios *A/u.oti'os <^iAo(re^a(rTO!, 6 ypaiJ-ixlarev'S ToO S]riiJ.ov 
ewei^rjiljicrav 6e ot <TT[p]aTT]yol 1^5 TrdAews <|)iAo<r6'^acrTOi.' 
[en-eifiij 17 7r]pO£(TTa)cra t))S TrdAews rifiiov 6A<; ApTe[/nts ov 
u6vov'\ er ttJ eauT^5 naTpiSt artjiiaTat, 171' a[AAwi' airaciiii' 
wdAeioi'] ev&o^oTfpav Sia t^s tSi'as Seidrr)T[os TreTroiij/cef, 
d]AAa KoX napa. ['EAAtjctiV re K]ai [j3]ap3ap[o]ts, <Ji[o-Te 
iroAA]axou avelaOai avT^9 U[pa re Kai Tip.ds]' ic.T.A. (i&. 
pp. 144, 294). 

the manufacturers of silver shrines for the 
Temple of Artemis (Wood's Discoveries at 
h'phcsus, pj). 73—4). Its diamc^ter was 495 feet, 
and it has been estimated tliat it was caj)able 
of seating 24,500 ])ers(>ns. .Some of the columns 
in St. Soi)hia at Constautino])l(,', said to have 
been taken from the temple at Ephesus, possibly 
came from this theatre. 

Mr. Wood next ascertained the position of the 
Magnesian Gate to the S.E. of Prion.'' In 1869 
he came upon a niMssive wall, proved 
to have belonged to the ]irecincts of the 
temple by an inscription stating that 
they had been rebuilt by Augustus 
(^Inscr. in Brit. Museum, iii. No. 522; 
B.C. 6). This wall was built to 
restrict the limits of the sacred 
precinct, which had approached too 
near the city, and had thus unduly 
facilitated the escajje of criminals who 
claimed the privilege of sanctuary 
within the precinct (Strabo, p. 641, 
and Tacitus, Ann. iii. 61). Further, 
in 1870, he lighted on a marble 
pavement, 19 feet below the alluvial 
soil, with drums of columns, 6 feet 
Iiigh, one base being still attached to 
its plinth. The site (jf the temple 
was thus reached, and its style was 
at once seen to have been similar 
to that of the temple of Athene 
Polias at Priene, and of Apollo at 
Branchidae. The largest and best 
preserved of the drums was found 
in 1871, and is now in the British 
Museum. From the figures carved 
on it, one of which represents Hermes, 
it may fairly be presumed that it 
was one of the 36 columnae caelatae 
recorded by Pliny, xxxvi. 95. In the 
subsequent course of the excavations, 
Mr. Wood discovered the remains of 
three distinct temples, the earliest of 
them being that built 500 B.C., for 
which the solid foundations described 
by Pliny and Vitruvius were laid. 
Between 5 and 6 feet below the 
pavement, and under the foundations 
of the walls of the cella, he found the 
layer of charcoal, 3 inches thick, 
described by Pliny (Wood, I. c. p. 259 ; 
Vaux, Greek Cities of Asia 3Iinor, 
p. 45). The dimensions of the temple 
were ascertained to be 163 feet 9^ inches by 
342 feet 65 inches, with eight columns in front 
and two ranks of columns all round the cella. 
This agrees with the description in Vitruvius. 
The columns of the peristyle were 100 in number 
(Wood, I. c. pp. 264-5). He also found in 
massive pieces beneath the site of the cella a 
number of archaic fragments of sculpture and 

•> Mr. Wood placed the Coressian gate on the N.E. of 
the city near the Stadium, and was thus led to suppose 
that the hill on the E. was Coressus, and the range on 
the S., Prion. As regards the names of the two hills, 
the converse is the view now generally accepted ; while 
the Coressian gate may be identified with a gate leading 
towards the sea and situated near the western extremity 
of the range of Coressus (see Map, and Weber's mono- 
graph in Mouo-etoi' KoX BijSAto^rjKt? t^s EiiayyeAiK^S 
SxoA^s, 1884, pp. 4-11 ; cp. note by Mr. Hicks on Gk. 
Inscr. in British Museum, iii. p. 140). 



architecture which have been identified as i 
remains of the cornice of the archaic temple 
(A. S. JJurray, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 
s. 1-10, 1SS9J. One or more canals, formed 
by diverting the v/aters of the Cayster, and its 
tributaries, afforJed a water-way to the temple, 
which thus became accessible from the sea 
(^Gk. Inscr. in British Museum, iii. p. 179). An 
inscription belongmg to a.d. 160-1, and partly 
quoted in note *• on p. 967, states that " the 
Ephesian goddess, whose worship had hitherto 
been universally recognised, was now being set 
at nought (art/iarai) in her own native city " 
(ih. p. 145). The Goths are credited with the 
partial destruction of the last of the several 
successive temples, a.d. 262; and some twenty 
years later its total destruction was accom- 
plished by the early Christians. 

The chief points connected with the uproar at 
EphesQs (Acts xix. 23-41) are mentioned in the 


article Diana; but the following details must 
be added. In consequence of this devotion the 
city of Ephesus was called veaiKopos (v. 35), 
" temple-keeper "(K.V.)or " warden" of Artemis. 
This was a recognised title applied in such cases, 
not only to individuals, but to communities. In 
the instance of Ephesus, the term is frequently 
found both on coins (^Transactions of the Numis- 
matic Society, 1841) and on inscriptions (see 
below). Its neocorate was, in fact, as the 
" town-clerk " (6 said, proverbial 
(Guhl's Ephesiaca, pp. 114, 115). Another con- 
sequence of the celebrity of the worship of 
Artemis at Ephesus was, that a large manu- 
factory grew up there of small silver shrines 
(vaoi, V. 24), which strangers purchased and 
devotees carried with them on journeys or set 
up in their houses. [See Diana, p. 782.] Of the 
manufacturers engaged in this business, perhaps 
Alexander the "coppersmith" (o x^-^'^^^h 

'i emple of Diana at Ephesus restored. ( From Wood's Modern Discoveries on the site of Ancient Ephesus.) 
In the background the highest point is the Acropolis on Coressus (1250 ft.), with part of the city-walls runnin? alon^j tho 
riilge ; and, below it, towards the left, the slopes of Lepre (about 500 ft.). To the extreme left of the city-wall across the plain 
is the Magnesian Gate. To the right of Lepre and the Acropolis is the summit of Prion (about 500 ft.). To the extreme right 
is a hill (260 ft.), crowned with the " Prison of St. Paul." The precincts of the temple are approached by two routes:— (1) to 
the left, leaving the wall near the tomb of Androclus : and (2) to the right, leaving it near the Stadium (see Map). 

2 Tim. iv. 14) was one. The case of Demetrius 
the " silversmith " (apyvpoTroths in the Acts) is 
explicit. He was alarmed for his trade, when 
he saw the Gospel, under the preaching of St. 
Paul, gaining ground upon idolatry and super- 
stition ; and he spread a panic among the 
craftsmen of various grades, the Texv^rai 
(v. 24) or designers, and the ipydrai (v. 25) or 
common workmen, if this is the distinction 
between them. Lastly, as an illustration of the 
cry " Great is Diana of the Ephesians," we have 
an inscription in C. I. G. 2963, describing her 
statue outside Ephesus as "the great goddess 

3. TJie Asiarchs. — Public games were con- 
nected with the worship of Artemis at Ephesus. 
They were held in the month of 'ApTefiKTiicv, 
partly corresponding to our March and April." 

See Hicks in Gk. Inscr. in British Museum, ill. 
p. 79. 

The uproar mentioned in the Acts possibly took 
place at this season. St. Paul was certainly 
at Ephesus about that time of the year (1 Cor. 
xvi. 8) ; and Demetrius might well be pecu- 
liarly sensitive, if he found his trade failing at 
the time of greatest concourse. However this 
may be, the Asiarchs QAaidpxai, E. V. " chief 
officers of Asia ") were present (Acts xix. 31). 
These were wealthy persons appointed as officers, 
after the manner of the aediles at Rome, to 
preside over the games which were held in 
honour of the Caesars in different parts of the 
jjrovince of Asia, just as other provinces had 
their Galatarchs, Lyciarchs, &c. Various cities 
would require the presence of these officers in 
turn. In the account of Polvcarp's martyrdom 
at Smyrna (chap. 12, — Hofele, Pat. Apost. 
p. 286) an important part is played by the 
.\siarch Philip (Lightfoot's Ignatius, p. 967). 
It is a remarkable proof of the influence which 
St. Paul had gained at Ephesus, that the Asiarchs 




took his side in the disturbance. See Dr. 
Wordsworth's note ou Acts xix. 31 ; Couybeare 
and Hovvson, chap, xvi., ii. ]>. "JG, ed. 1865 ; 
Hicks in (Ik. Inscr. in British Jihiseum, iii. p. 87 ; 
and especially Lightfoot's Ljnatius, ii. p. 987 sq. 


4. St mill and practice of rruujic. — Not uncon- 
nected with the preceding subject was the re- 
markable prevalence of magical arts at Ephesus. 
This also comes conspicuously into view in St. 
Luke's narrative. The peculiar character of 
St. Paul's miracles (Suva/xeis ov ras rvxoixras, 
V. 11) would seem to have been intended as 
antagonistic to the prevalent superstition. In 
illustration of the magical books which were 
publicly burnt {v. 19) under the influence of 
St. Paul's preaching, it is enough here to refer 
to the 'E(/)eVia ypdy-nara (mentioned in Plu- 
tarch's Symposium, vii. 5, 4; Athenaeus, p. 548; 
Clem. Alex. Str. i. 73 ; and elsewhere), 
which were regarded as a charm when 
pronounced, and when written down were 
carried about as amulets. The faith in 
these mystic syllables continued, more 
or less, till the 6th century. See Cony- 
beare and Howson, chap, xiv., ii. p. 16; 
Falkener's Ephesus, chap. vi. ; and the 
Life of Alexander of Tralles in the Diet. 
of Biog. There is a terracotta tablet with 
'E(^€cna ypafifxara in the museum at 
Syracuse. [Diana, p. 781.] 

5. Provincial and municipal government. — It 
is well known that Asia was a proconsular pro- 
vince ; and in harmony with this fact we find 
avdinraroi (" proconsuls," R. V. ; " deputies," 
A. V.) specially mentioned (v. 38). Nor is it 
necessary to inquire here whether the plural 
in this passage is generic, or whether the 
governors of other provinces were present in 
Ephesus at the time. Again we learn from 
Pliny (.V. H. v. § 120) that Ephesus was an 
assize-town (^forum or conventus) ; and in the 
sacred narrative (v. 38) we find the court-days 
alluded to as actually being held (ay6paioi 
&yovTai, R. V. " the courts are open '") during 
the uproar ; though perhaps it is not absolutely 
necessary to give the expression this exact 
reference as to time (see Wordsworth). Ephe- 
sus itself was a " free city," and had its own 
assemblies and its own magistrates. The /Soi^Atj 
is mentioned by Josephus (Ant. xiv. 10, § 25 ; 
xvi. 6, §§ 4, 7); and St. Luke, in the nar- 
rative before us, speaks of the drifxas (vv. 30, 
33 ; A. V. " the people ") and of its custom- 
arv assemblies (rfj fvv6/xcfi iKKKrjcrla,, v. 39 ; 
R.'V. "the regular assembly")- That the tu- 
multuary meeting which was gathered on the 
occasion in question should take place in the 
theatre (vv. 29, 31) was nothing extraordinary. 
It was at a meeting in the theatre at Caesarea 
that Agrippa I. received his death-stroke (Acts 
xii. 23), and in Greek cities this was often the 
pkce for large assemblies (Tac. Hist. ii. 80 ; 
Val. Max. ii. 2). We even find conspicuous 
mention made of one of the most important 
municipal officers of Ephesus, the " Town- 
Clerk " (ypafj./j.arevs'), or keeper of the records, 
whom we know from other sources to have been 
a person of great influence and responsibility. 

It is remarkable how all these political and 
religious characteristics of Ephesus, which 
appear in the sacred narrative, are illustrated 

by inscriptions and coins. An apxe'tou or state- 
paper office is mentioned on an inscription in 
ChishuU's Travels in Turkey, p. 20. The ypa/x- 
Harevs frequently apj)ears; so also the 'Aalapxai 
and avOvnaToi. Sometimes these words are 
combined in the same inscription: see for in- 
stance Boeckh, Corp. Jnscr. 2999, 2994. The 
following is worth quoting at length, .is con- 
taining also the words 5^;uos and vewKopos : — 
'H <pi\o(7ffia(xros 'Efpecrlcov &ov\r] Kal 6 vew- 
K6pos Sfi/xos KaQiipwaav iirl ai/dvTraTov TIfSov- 
Kalov UpdiXKfivov \p7]<ptffan(vov Ti0. KA. 'IraAi- 
Kov Tov ypafi/xdrews rov S-fifxuv, 2966 (about 
127 A.D.). See also 2968, 2977, 2972. Among 
the inscriptions discovered by Mr. Wood we 
have some early in the 2nd century of our era, 
including phrases such as f/ veoK6pos 'Ecpecriwv 
ir6\ts, and d yeoKSpos drj/xos.^ (For further 
illustrations, see article by E. L. Hicks in the 

Coin of Ephesus, exhibiting the TemiJe cf Diaua. 

Expositor, June 1890, No. 6.) The coins of 
Ephesus are full of allusions to the worship 
of Artemis in various aspects. The word i/ew- 
K6pos is of frequent occurrence. That which is 
given above has also the word avQuT^aros : it 
exhibits an image of the temple, and, bearing 
as it does the name and head of Nero, it 
must have been struck about the time of St. 
Paul's stay at Ephesus. 

In the inscriptions of Ephesus we find fre- 
quent mention of a board of j/eoiroiol who had 
charge of the fabric of the temple of Artemis 
(Hicks, Gk. Inscr. in British Museum, iii. 
p. 80 V). In the inscription recording the bequest 
by Salutaris (ih. No. 481) two of the vioiroiol 
are directed to accompany the procession of 
images from the pronaos of the temple, and to 
see that they were brought back safely (»6. 
p. 81a). By the side of the civic ^ouA?) and 
Stj^os, there was founded in the time of Lysi- 
machus, about 300 B.C. (Strabo, p. 640), an im- 
portant body called the yepovaia, which was 
probably engaged, from the very first, with 
matters of religion (Hicks, ib. pp. 71-78, 105, 
where it is conjectured that the yepovala of the 
Roman time was a continuation of the yepovala 
of Lysimachus). 

Each of these three bodies had a, 
and it was the ypafifj.aT€vs rod Sirj/xov that, in 
Roman times, was the most prominent of the 
three. "As the real vigour of the e/c/cATjo-ia 
declined in the atmosphere of imperial rule, 
while at the same time the forms of the free 
republic were retained, it was more and more 
left to the ypaajxanvs to arrange the business 
of the public assembly." The importance of 
this official is proved by the extant inscriptions 
of Ephesus. " It is therefore one example the 
more of St. Luke's accuracy in speaking of 

d Gk. Inscr. in British Museum, iii. p. 164. 




titles, when in Acts six. 35 sq. he describes the 
ypafxfjLarevs as possessed of great influence with 
the assembly and keenly sensible of his own 
responsibility" (ib. p. 82a). 

We should enter on doubtful ground if we 
were to speculate on the Gnostic and other 
errors which grew up at Ephesus in the later 
apostolic age, and which are foretold in the 

address at Miletus, and indicated in the Epistle 
to the Ephcsians, and more distinctly in the 
Epistles to Timothy. It is more to our purpose 
if we briefly put down the actual facts recorded 
in the N. T. as connected with the rise and 
early progress of Christianity in this city. 

That Jews were established there in consider- 
able numbers is known from Josephus (II. c), 

A. Theatre. 

B. Forum. 

C. Agora. 

Map of 

D. Great Gymnasium. 

E. Double Church. 

F. "Tomb of St. Luke." 

(After G. Weber.) 
G. Small Gymnasium. 
H, Tomb of Androclus. 
J. Church of the Seven Sleepers. 


"Prison of St. Paul.' 

and might be inferred from its mercantile 
eminence ; but it is also evident from Acts ii. 9, 
vi. 9. In harmony with the character of Ephe- 
sus as a place of concourse and commerce, it 
is here, and here only, that we find disciples of 
John the Baptist explicitly mentioned after the 
Ascension of Christ (Acts xviii. 25 ; xix. 3). 
The case of Apollos (xviii. 24) is an exemplifica- 
tion further of the intercourse between this 

place and Alexandria. The first seeds of Chris- 
tian truth were possibly sown at Ephesus im- 
mediately after the Great Pentecost (Acts ii.). 
Whatever previous plans St. Paul may have 
entertained (xvi. 6), his first visit was on his 
return from the second missionary circuit (xviii. 
19-21); and his stay on that occasion was very 
short : nor is there any proof that he found any 
Christians at Ephesus ; but he left there Aquila 


and Piiscilla (v. 19), who both then and at a 
later periiid ("2 Tim. iv. 19) were of signal 
service. In St. Paul's own stay of more than 
two years (xix. 8, 10; xx. 31), which formed the 
most important jiassage of his third circuit, and 
during which he laboured, first in the synagogue 
(xi;;. 8), and then in the scliool of Tyraunus 
(v. 9), and also in ]irivate houses (xx. 20), and 
during which he wrote the First Epistle to the 
Corintliians, we have the period of the cliief 
evangelization of this shore of the Aegean. The 
direct narrative in Acts xix. receives but little 
elucidation from the Epistle to the Ephesiaus, 
which was written after several years from 
Rome ; but it is supplemented in some important 
particulars (especially as regards the Apostle's 
personal habits of self-denial, xx. 34-) by the 
address at Miletus. This address shows that the 
church at Ephesus was thoroughly organised 
under its presbyters. At a later period Timothy 
was set over them, as we learn from the two 
epistles addressed to him. Among St. Paul's 
other companions, two, Trophimus and Tychicus, 
were natives of Asia (xx. 4), and the latter pro- 
bably (2 Tim. iv. 12), the former certainly 
(Acts xxi. 29), natives of Ephesus. In the same 
connexion we ought to mention Onesiphorus 
(2 Tim. i. 16-18) and his household (iv. 19). 
On the other hand must be noticed certain 
specified Ephesian antagonists of the Apostle, 
the sons of Sceva and his party (Acts xix. 14), 
Hymenaeus and Alexander (liTim. i. 20 ; 2 Tim. 
iv. 14), and Phygelus and Hermogenes (2 Tim. 
i. 15). 

Tlie site of ancient Ephesus has been visited 
and examined by many travellers during the last 
200 years ; and descriptions, more or less co- 
pious, have been given by Pococke, Tournefort, 
Spon and Wheler, Chandler, Poujoulat, Prokesch, 
Beaujour, Schubert, Arundell, Fellows, and 
Hamilton. The fullest accounts are, among the 
older travellers, in Chandler, and, among the 
more recent, in Hamilton. Some views are 
given in the second volume of the Ionian An- 
tiquities, published by the Dilettanti Society. 
Leake, in his Asia Minor, has a discussion on the 
dimensions and style of the Temple. Falkener 
published in 1862 an elaborate work on Ephesus, 
with numerous sketches taken on the spot during 
a fortnight's visit seventeen years before. Finally, 
in 1877, appeared Mr. Wood's important volume 
entitled Discoveries at Ephesus, including the Site 
and Remains of the great Temple of Diana; a 
popular account of Modern Discoveries on the 
Site of Ancient Ephesus by the same author was 
published by the Religious Tract Society in 
1890. The ruins are of vast extent, both on 
the hills and on the plain : the map on the 
opposite page, drawn under the superintendence 
of Sir Charles Wilson, explains most of the 
topographical details. 

To the works above referred to must be added, 
Gronov. Antiq. Graec. vii. J'^ST^Ol ; Perry, De 
rebus Ephesiorum (Gott. 18^7), a slight sketch; 
Guhl, Ephesiaca (Berl. 1843), a very elaborate 
work ; Hemsen's Paulus (Gott. 1830), which 
contains a good chapter on Ephesus ; Biscoe On 
the Actsipxi. 1829), pp. 274-285; an article by 
Ampere in the Rev. des Deux Mondes for Jan. 
1842 ; Mr. Akerman's paper on the Coins of 
Ephesus in the Trans, of the Numismatic Soc. 
1841 ; Head's History of the Coinage of Ephesus 



(ending with the Christian era), 188u ; E. 
Curtius, in ISeitrdge zur Gcschichte nnd Topo- 
graphic Kkinasiens, Abh. der Akadeniie der 
Wiss. (Diimmler, 1872), and in Alterthum unl 
Gcgemvart (1874), ed. 2, 1886, ii. 98-128; and 
Newton's mEssags on Art and Archaeology, 
pp. 210-245; also Zimmermann, Ephesos itn 
ersten Christlichen Jithrhundert, 1874; Menadier, 
Qua condiciono Ephesii usi sirit inde ah Asia in 
forinam provinciae redacta, 1880 ; lip. Lightfoot's 
Essay on the Discoveries at Ephesus as illustra- 
tive of the narrative in the Acts, reprinted at 
the end of his collected Essays on Supernatural 
Religion ; and Greek Inscriptions in British 
Museum, iii. 1890, with Prolegomena to the in- 
scriptions of Ephesus by E. L. Ilicks, pp. 07-87, 
and list of recent authorities on p. 68. G. Weber 
has published a useful study of Ephesus, with 
a good map of the city and surroundings (see 
Movaelov Ka\ BtfiKiodriKri rrjs 'EiiayyeKiKris 
SxoA^j, Smyrna, 1880-4, TreploSosiv. pp. 1-44). 
[J. S. H.] [J. E. S.] 

EPH'LAL ("P^QX; B. 'A(pafxn\, B*. -yu7j5, 
A. '0(p\dS ; Ophlal), a descendant of .Tudah, of the 
family of Hezron and of Jerahmeel (1 Ch. ii. 37). 

EPHOD (TiDS), a sacred vestment origin- 
ally appropriate to the high-priest (Ezra sxviii. 
4), but afterwards worn by ordinary priests 
(1 Sam. xxii. 18), and deemed characteristic of 
the office (1 Sam. ii. 28, xiv. 3 ; Hos. iii. 4). 
For a description and illustration of the robe 
itself, see High-priest. A kind of ephod was 
worn by Samuel (1 Sam. ii. 18), and bv 
David, when he brought the Ark to Jerusalem 
(2 Sam. vi. 14 ; 1 Ch. xv. 27) ; it difJered from 
the priestly ephod in material, being made of 
ordinary linen (bad), whereas the other was of 
fine linen (shesh. See Dress 1) ; it is notice- 
able that the LXX. does not give iTrcofus or 
*E<f)oi/5 in the passages last quoted, but terms of 
more general import, ctoXt) ti,a\\os, <no\v 
fivcrffiur]. Attached to the ephod of the high- 
priest was the breast-plate with the Urim and 
Thummim : this was the ephod kut' i^oxw? 
which Abiathar carried off (1 Sam. xxiii. 6) 
from the Tabernacle at Nob (1 Sam. xxi. 9), and 
which David consulted (1 Sam. xxiii. 9, xxx. 7). 
The importance of the ephod as the receptacle 
of the breast-plate led to its adoption in the 
idolatrous forms of worship instituted in the 
time of the Judges (Judg. viii. 27, xvii. 5, xviii. 
14 sq.). The amount of gold used by Gideon in 
making his ephod (Judg. viii. 26) has led 
Gesenius (Thesaur. p. 135), Bertheau and others, 
following the Peshitto Version, to give the word 
the meaning of an idol-image, as though that 
and not the priest was clothed with the ephod : 
but there is no evidence that the idol was so in- 
vested, nor is the opinion supported by modern 
critics (see Keil, Riehm, Kleinert, and Budde 
[1890]). The ephod itself would require a con- 
siderable amount of gold (Ex. sxviii. 6 sq., 
xxxix. 2 sq.), and, with the jewels necessary, 
may well have required the large sum stated to 
have been used by Gideon. The meaning and 
consequences of his act are considered under 
Gideon, [W. L. B.] [F.] 

E'PHOD (nbK; B. :Sov<pl, AF. Ov<pl5; 
Ephod), Hanniel the son of Ephod, as head of 



the tribe of Manasseh, was one of the men 
appointed to assist Joshua and Eleazai- in the 
apportionment of the land of Canaan (Num. 
xsxiv. 23). 

EPHKAIM, Heb. EPH-KA'IM (Dn?^^; 

'E(t>pal/x ; Joseph. 'E^paifj.r]s ; Ephmmi), the 
second son of Joseph by his wife Asenath. He 
was born during the seven years of plenteous- 
ness, and an allusion to this is possibly latent 
in the name, though it may also allude to 
Joseph's increasing family: "The name of the 
second he called Ephraim (i.e. double fruitful- 
ness), for God hath caused me to be fruitful 
CJ^ISn, hiphrani) in the land of my affliction" 
(GeV. sli. 52 ; xlvi. 20).» 

The first indication we have of that ascend- 
encv over his elder brother Manasseh, which at 
a later period the tribe of Ephraim so unmis- 
takably possessed, is in the blessing of the chil- 
dren by Jacob, Gen. xlviii. (see Delitzsch [1887] 
and Dillmaun* in loco). Like his own father, 
on an occasion not dissimilar, Jacob's eyes were 
dim so that he could not see (xlviii. 10 ; cp. 
xxvii. 1). The intention of Joseph was evidently 
that the right hand of Jacob should convey its 
ampler blessing to the head of Manasseh, his 
first-born, and he had so arranged the young 
men. But the result was otherwise ordained. 
Jacob had been himself a younger brother, and 
his words show plainly that he had not for- 
gotten this, and that his sympathies were still 
with the younger of his two grandchildren. 
He recalls the time when he was flying with 
the birthright from the vengeance of Esau ; the 
day when, still a wanderer, God Almighty had 
appeared to him at " Luz in the land of 
Canaan," and blessed him in words which fore- 
shadowed the name of" Ephraim ; the still 
later day when the name of Ephrath ° became 
bound up with the sorest trial of his life 
(xlviii. 7; xxxv. 16). And thus, notwithstand- 
ing the pre-arrangement and the remonstrance 
of Joseph, for the second time in that family, 
the younger brother was made greater than the 
elder — Ephraim was set before Manasseh (xlviii. 
19, 20). 

Ephraim would appear at that time to have 
been about 21 years old. He was born before 
the beginning of the seven years of famine, 

» Josephus {Ant. ii. 6, $ 1) gives the derivation of 
the name somewlmt differently — " restorer, because 
he was restored to the freedom of his forefathers ;" 
aiTO&i&ovs ■ • • 6ta to an-oSoSjji'ai K.r.X. 

*> " I will make thee fruitful," 7]"120 (Gen. xlviii. 4) ; 

"Be thou fruitful," HID (xxxv. 11); both from the 

same root as the name Ephraim. 

« There seems to have been some connexion between 
Ephrath, or Bethlehem, and Ephraim, the clue to which 
is now lost (Ewald, Gesch. i. 493, note). The expression 
" Ephrathite " is generally applied to a native of 
Ephrath, i.e. Bethlehem ; but there are some instances 
of its meaning an Ephraimite. These are 1 Sam. i. 1 (see 
Driver in loco), 1 K. xi. 26 ; in both of which the Heb. 
word is accurately transferred to A. V., but is rendered 
Ephraimite In R. V. But in Judg. xii. 5, where the 
Hebrew word is the same, and with the definite article 
C^n'lDNn), it is incorrectly rendered " an Ephraimite." 
In the other occurrences of the word " Ephraimite " in 
w. 4, 5, 6 of the same chapter, and in Josh. xvi. 10, 
the Hebrew is "Ephraim." 


towards the latter part of which Jacob had 
come to Egypt, 17 years before his death (Gen. 
xlvii. 28). Before Joseph's death Ephraim's 
family had reached the third generation (Gen. 1, 
23), and it must have been about this time that 
the affray mentioned in 1 Ch. vii. 21 occurred, 
when some of the sons were killed on a plun- 
dering expedition along the sea-coast to rob the 
cattle of the men of Gath, and when Ephraim 
named a son Beriah, to perpetuate the memoiy 
of the disaster which had fallen on his house. 
[Beriah.] Obscure as is the interpretation of 
this fragment, it enables us to catch our last 
glimpse of the Patriarch, mourning inconsolable 
in the midst of the circle of his brethren, and 
at last commemorating his loss in the name of 
the new child, who, unknown to him, was to be 
the progenitor of the most illustrious of all his 
descendants — Jehoshua, or Joshua, the son of 
Nun (1 Ch. A'ii. 27; see Ewald, i. 491). To 
this early period too must probably be referred 
the circumstance alluded to in Ps. Ixxviii. 9, 
when the " children of Ephraim, carrying slack 
bows,* turned back in the day of battle." Cer- 
tainly no instance of such behaviour is recorded 
in the later history. 

The numbers of the tribe do not at once 
fulfil the pi'omise of the blessing of Jacob. At 
the census in the wilderness of Sinai (Num. i. 
32, 33 ; ii. 19) its numbers were 40,500, placing 
it at the head of the children of Rachel — ■ 
Manasseh's number being 32,200 and Benjamin's 
35,400. But forty years later, on the eve of 
the conquest (Num. xxvi. 37), without any 
apparent cause, while Manasseh had advanced 
to 52,700 and Benjamin to 45,600, Ephraim had 
decreased to 32,500, the only smaller number 
being that of Simeon, 22,200. At this period 
the families of both the brother tribes are 
enumerated, and Manasseh has precedence over 
Ephraim in order of mention. During the 
march through the wilderness the position of 
the sons of Joseph and Benjamin was on the 
west side of the Tabernacle (Num. ii. 18-24), 
and the prince of Ephraim was Elishama the 
son of Ammihud (Num. i. 10). 

It is at the time of the sending of the spies 
that we are first introduced to the great hero to 
whom the tribe owed much of its subsequent 
greatness. The representative of Ephraim on 
this occasion was " Oshea the son of Nun," whose 
name was at the termination of the affair changed 
by Moses to the more distinguished form in 
which it is fam.iliar to us. As among the 
founders of the nation Abram had acquired the 
name of Abraham, and Jacob of Israel, so Oshea, 
"help," became Jehoshua or Joshua, "the help 
of Jehovah " (Ewald, ii. 306). 

Under this great leader, and in spite of the 
smallness of its numbers, the tribe must have 
taken a high position in the nation, to judge 
from the tone which the Ephraimites assumed 
on occasions shortly subsequent to the conquest. 
These will be referred to in their turn. 

According to the present arrangement of the 
records of the Book of Joshua — the " Domesday 
book of Palestine " — the two great tribes of 
Judah and Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) first 
took their inheritance ; and after them, the seven 
other tribes entered on theirs (Josh, xv., xvi., 

"J This is the rendering of Ewald. 


xvii., xviii. 5). The 'ooundaries of the portion 
of Ephraim are given in xvi. 1-10. They iiichule 
the territory that was afterwards allotted to 
Dan; but the passage (cp. Dillinanii" in loco) is 
evidently in some disorder, and in our ignorance 
of the force of many of the almost technical 
terms with which these descriptions abound, it 
is unfortunately impossible to arrive at more 
than an ajiproximatiou to the case. The south 
boundary was coincident for part of its length 
with the north boundary of Benjamin. It 
j)robably left the Jordan at the mouth of W. 
Nueiamch, and, ])assing N. of Jericho to ' Ain 
Duk, went up through the hill-country to 
Bethel, Beittn, and Luz. It then went down 
by the border of the Archites, 'Ain Arlk ; 
Ataroth, Kh. Ddrieh, on the S. side of the 
Lower Beth-horon, Beit' IJrel-tahta ; and Gezer, 
Tell Jezar, to the Mediterranean. This agrees 
with the enumeration in 1 Ch. vii. 28, in 
which Bethel is given as the eastern, and 
Gezer as the western, limit. The general direc- 



tion of this line is N.E. by E. The common 
border of Ephraim and llanasseh is defined 
in Josh. xvi. G-8 ; and partially in xvii. 7-10. 
From Asher ham Michmethah, E. of Shechem, 
and probably in the jdain of JIukhna, it ran, 
on the one hand, southward to En-taj)i)uah, 
I'dsi'if, and the«ce along the course of the river 
Kanah, \V. Kumth, to the sea : and, on the other, 
eastward to Taauath-Shiloh, T'ana; Janoah, 
Yanun; Ataroth; Naarah, el-'Aujch, to Jericho 
and Jordan. The boundary between Ephraim 
and Dan, on the west, is not define<i ; but its 
approximate position can be ascertained from the 
notice of certain towns belonging to Dan, and of 
others in Mount Ephraim. It appears to have 
run along the crests of the spurs above the low 
hills of the Shephelah, or " low-land." Josephus 
{Ant. V. 1, § 22) makes the territory of Ephraim 
extend from the Jordan to Gezer, and from 
Bethel northwards to the " Great Plain," by 
which he perhaps means the plain of Jifukhna, 
and not Esdraelon, which was the limit of 

^M M m mA M i ^ ', 

Manasseh. It is very possible that at first there 
was no definite subdivision of the territory 
assigned to the two brother-tribes. Such is 
certainly the inference to be drawn from the 
very old fragment preserved in Josh. xvii. 14-18, 
in which the two are represented as complaining 
that only one portion had been allotted to them. 
The territory allotted to the " house of Joseph " 
may be roughly estimated at 55 miles from E. 
to W. by 70 from N. to S., a portion about equal 
in extent to the counties of Norfolk and Suil'olk 
combined. But though similar in size, nothing 
can be more different in its nature from those 
level counties than this broken and hilly tract. 
Central Palestine consists of an elevated district 
which rises from the flat ranges of the wilder- 
noes on the south of Judah, and terminates on 
the north with the slopes which descend into 
the great plain of Esdraelon. On the west a 
flat strip separates it from the sea, and on the 
east another flat strip forms the valley of the 
Jordan. Of this district the northern half was 
occupied by the great tribe we are now con- 

sidering. This was the Har-Ephraim, the 
" Mount Ephraim," a district which seems to 
extend as far south as Ramah and Bethel 
(1 Sam. i. 1, vii. 17 ; 2 Ch. xiii. 4, 19, compared 
with XV. 8), places but a few miles north of 
Jerusalem, and within the limits of Benjamin. 
In structure it is limestone — rounded hills 
separated by valleys of denudation, but much 
less regular and monotonous than the part more 
to the south, about and below Jerusalem ; with 
" wide plains in the heart of the mountains, 
streams of running water, and continuous tracts 
of vegetation " (Stanley, p. 229). All travellers 
bear testimony to the ■' general growing rich- 
ness " and beauty of the country in going north- 
wards from Jerusalem, the " innumerable foun- 
tains " and streamlets, the villages more thickly 
scattered than anywhere in the south, the 
continuous cornfields and orchards, the moist, 
vapoury atmosphere (Martineau, pp. 516, 521 ; 
Van de Velde, i. 386-8 ; Stanley, pp. 234-5). 
These are the " precious things of the earth, and 
the fulness thereof," which are invoked on the 



"ten thousands of Ephraim " and the " thousands 
of Manasseh " in the blessing of Moses. These 
it is which, while Dan, Judah, and Benjamin are 
personified as lions and wolves, making their lair 
and tearing their prey among the barren rocks 
of the south, suggested to the Lawgiver, as they 
had done to the Patriarch before him, the patient 
" bullock " and the " bough by the spring, whose 
branches ran over the wall," as fitter images 
for Ephraim (Gen. xlix. 22; Deut. xxxiii. 17). 
And centuries after, when its great disaster had 
fallen on the kingdom of Israel, the same images 
recur to the prophets. The " flowers " are still 
there in the " olive valleys," " faded " though 
they be (Is. xxviii. 1). The vine is an empty 
unprofitable viue, whose very abundance is evil 
(Hos. x. 1); Ephraim is still the "bullock," 
now " unaccustomed to the yoke," but waiting 
a restoration to the " pleasant places " of his 
former "pasture" (Jer. xxxi. 18; Hos. ix. lo, 
iv. 16) — " the heifer that is taught and loveth 
to tread out the corn," the heifer with the 
"beautiful neck " (Hos. x. 11), or the " kine of 
Bashan on the mountain of Samaria " (Amos 
iv. 1). 

The wealth of their possession had not the 
same immediately degi\ading effect on this tribe 
that it had on some of its northern brethren. 
[AsHER.] Various causes may have helped to 
avei-t this evil. 1. The central situation of 
Ephraim, in the highway of all communications 
from one part of the country to another. From 
north to south, from Jordan to the Sea — from 
Galilee, or still more distant Damascus, to 
Philistia and Egypt — these roads all lay more 
or less through Ephraim, and the constant traffic 
along them must have always tended to keep 
the district from sinking into stagnation. 2. The 
position of Shechem, the original settlement of 
Jacob, with his well and his " parcel of ground," 
with the two sacred mountains of Ebal and 
Gerizim, the scene of the impressive and signifi- 
cant ceremonial of blessing and cursing ; and of 
Shiloh, from whence the division of the land was 
made, and where the Ark remained from the time 
of Joshua to that of Eli ; and further of the 
tomb and patrimony of Joshua, the great hero 
not only of Ephraim but of the nation — the fact 
that all these localities were deep in the heart 
of the tribe, must have made it always the 
resort of large numbers from all parts of the 
country — of larger numbers than any other 
place, until the establishment of Jerusalem by 
David. 3. But there was a spirit about the 
tribe itself which may have been both a cause 
and a consequence of these advantages of 
position. That spirit, though sometimes taking 
the form of noble remonstrance and repai-ation 
(2 Ch. xxviii. 9-15), usually manifests itself in 
jealous complaint at some enterprise undertaken 
or advantage gained in which they had not a 
chief share. To Gideon (Judg. viii. 1), to Jeph- 
thah (xii. 1), and to David (2 Sam. xix. 41-43), 
the cry is still the same in effect — almost the 
same in words — " Why did ye despise us that 
our advice should not have been first had ? " 
" Why hast thou served us thus that thou 
calledst us not ? " The unsettled state of the 
country in general, and of the interior of 
Ephraim in particular (Judg. ix.), and the 
continual incursions of foreigners, prevented the 
power of the tribe from manifesting itself in a 


more formidable manner than by these murmurs, 
during the time of the Judges and the first 
stage of the monarchy. Samuel, though a 
Levite, was a native of Kamah in Mount Ephraim, 
and Saul belonged to a tribe closely allied to the 
family of Joseph, so that during the priesthood 
of the former and the reign of the latter the 
supremacy of Ephraim may be said to have been 
practically maintained. Certainly in neither 
case had any advantage been gained by their 
great rival in the south. Again, the brilliant 
successes of David and his wide influence and 
religious zeal, kept matters smooth for another 
period, even in the face of the blow given to 
both Shechem and Shiloh by the concentration 
of the civil and ecclesiastical capitals at Jerusa- 
lem. When Saul fell on Mount Gilboa, Ephraim, 
in common with all the tribes except Jodah, 
acknowledged Ishbosheth as king (2 Sam. ii. 9). 
But after the murder of the latter, 20,800 
of the choice warriors of the tribe, "men of 
name throughout the house of their father," 
went as far as Hebron to make David 
king over Israel (1 Ch. xii. 30). Among the 
officers of his court we find more than one 
Ephraimite (1 Ch. xxvii. 10, 14), and the 
attachment of the tribe to his person seems to 
have been great (2 Sam. xix. 41-43). But this 
could not last much longer, and the reign of 
Solomon, splendid in appearance but oppressive 
to the people, developed both the circumstances 
of revolt, and the leader who was to turn them 
to account. Solomon saw through the crisis ; 
and if he could have succeeded in killing Je- 
roboam as he tried to do (1 K. xi. 40), the 
disruption might have been postponed for another 
century. As it was, the outbreak was deferred 
for a time, but the irritation was not allayed, 
and the insane folly of his son brought the 
mischief to a head. Rehoboam probably selected 
Shechem — the old capital of the country — 
for his coronation, in the hope that his presence 
and the ceremonial might make a favourable 
impression, but in this he foiled utterly, and the 
tumult which followed shows how complete was 
the breach — " To your tents, Israel ! now see 
to thine own house, David ! " Rehoboam was 
certainly not the last king of Judah whose 
chariot went as far north as Shechem, but he 
was the last who visited it as a part of his own 
dominion, and he was the last who, having come 
so far, returned unmolested to his own capital. 
Jehoshaphat escaped, in a manner little short of 
mii-aculous, from the risks of the battle of 
Ramoth-Gilead, and it was the fate of two of his 
successors, Ahaziah and Josiah — differing in 
everything else, and agreeing only in this — that 
they were both carried dead in their chariots from 
the plain of Esdraelon to Jerusalem. 

Henceforward in two senses the history of 
Ephraim is the history of the kingdom of Israel, 
since not only did the tribe become a kingdom, 
but the kingdom embraced little besides the 
tribe. This is not surprising, and quite sus- 
ceptible of explanation. North of Ephraim the 
country appears never to have been really 'taken 
possession of by the Israelites. Whether fi'om 
want of energy on their part, or great stubborn- 
ness of resistance on that of the Canaanites, 
certain it is that of the list of towns from which 
the original inhabitants were not expelled, the 
I great majority belong to the northern tribes, 


Manasseh, Asher, Issachar, and Naphtali. And 
in addition to this original defect there is much 
in the physical formation and circumstances of 
the upper portion of Palestine to explain why 
those tribes never took any active part ia the 
kingdom. They were exposed to the inroads 
and seductions of their surrounding heathen 
neighbours — on one side the luxurious Phoeni- 
cians, on tlie other the plundering Bedouins of 
Midian ; they were open to the attacks of Syria 
and Assyria frc>m the north, and Egypt from the 
south ; the great plain of Esdraelon, which com- 
municated more or less with all the northern 
tribes, was the natural outlet of the no less 
natural high roads of the maritime plain from 
Egypt, and the Jordan valley for the tribes of 
the East, and formed an admirable base of 
operations for an invading army. 

But on the other hand the position of Ephraim 
was altogether different. It was one of very 
great richness and great security. Her fertile 
plains and well-watered valleys could only be 
reached by a laborious ascent through steep and 
narrow ravines, all but impassable for an army. 
There is no record of any attack on the central 
kingdom, either from the Jordan valley or the 
maritime plain. On the north side, from the 
plain of Esdraelon, it was more accessible, and 
it was from this side that the final invasion 
appears to have been made. But even on that 
side the entrance was so difficult and so easily 
defensible — as we learn from the description in 
the Book of Judith (iv. 6, 7)— that, had the 
kingdom of Samaria been less weakened by 
internal dissensions, the attacks even of the 
great Shalmaneser might have been resisted, as 
at a later date were those of Holofernes. How 
that kingdom originated, how it progressed, and 
how it fell, will be elsewhere considered. [Is- 
rael, Kingdom of.] There are few things 
more mournful in the sacred story than the 
descent of this haughty and jealous tribe, from 
the culminating point at which it stood when it 
entered on the fairest portion of the Land of 
Promise — the chief sanctuary and the chief 
settlement of the nation within its limits, its 
leader the leader of the whole people — through 
the distrust which marked its intercourse with 
its fellows while it was a member of the con- 
federacy, and the tumult, dissension, and un- 
godliness which characterised its independent 
existence, down to the sudden captivity and 
total oblivion which closed its career. Judah 
had her times of revival and of recurring pros- 
perity, but here the course is imiformly down- 
ward — a sad picture of opportunities wasted 
and personal gifts abused. " When Israel was 
a child, then I loved him, and called my son out 
of Egypt. ... I taught Ephraim also to go, 
taking them by their arms ; but they knew not 
that I healed them. I drew them with cords of 
a man, with bands of love , . . but the Assyrian 
shall be their king, because they refused to 
return. . . . How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? 
how shall I deliver thee, Israel? how shall I 
make thee as Admah ? how shall I set thee as 
Zeboim ? " (Hos. si. 1-8.) [G.] [W.] 

EPH-RA'BI (Dn_QN ; 'E^pai/u. ; Ephraim) 
In " Baal-hazor which is * by ' Ephraim " was 
Absalom's sheep-farm, at which took place the 
murder of Amnon, one of the earliest precursors 



of the great revolt (2 Sam. xiii. 23). The 
Hebrew particle CV, rendered above "by " (R. V. 
" beside "), always seems to im])ly actual 
proximity, and therefore we should conclude 
that Ei)hraim was not the tribe of that name, 
but a town. Ewald conjectures that it is identical 
with Ei'HRAiN, Epiiron, and Oi'IIHaii of the 
0. T., and also with the Eimiraim which was 
for a time the residence of our Lord (Gesck. iii. 
219, note). But with regard to the first three 
names there is the difficulty that they are spelt 
with the guttural letter ain, which is very 
rarely exchanged for the alqJi, which commences 
the name befoi-e us. The only clue to its situa- 
tion is its proximity to Baal-hazor, which has 
been identified with Tell 'Asiir, 2^ miles N.W. 
of et-Taiijibeh, Ephraim. The LXX. make the 
following addition to verse 34 : — " And the 
watchman went and told the king, and said, I 
have seen men on the road of the Oronen (B. 
TTjs 'npoovriv, A."*' Twy vpeaivrj) by the side of 
the mountain." Ewald considers this to be a 
genuine addition, and to refer to Beth-fiof'on, 
N.W. of Jerusalem, off the Nablils road, but the 
indication is surely too slight for such an 
inference. Any force it may have is against 
the identity of this Ephraim with that in John 
xi. 54, which was probably in the direction N.E. 
of Jerusalem. [G.] [W.] 

EPH-RA'IM ('Ecppdiix; Ej^hrem; Cod. Amiat. 
Efrcm), a city ('E. Xeyo/j.evr)v iroXiv) " in the 
district near the wilderness " to which our 
Lord retired with His disciples when tlireatened 
with violence by the priests (John xi. 54). By 
the "wilderness" (epTjyuox) is probably meant 
the wild uncultivated hill-country N.E. of 
Jerusalem, lying between the central towns and 
the Jordan valley. In this case the conjecture 
of Dr. Robinson is very admissible that Ophrah 
and Ephraim are identical, and that their 
modern representation is et-Taiyibch, a village 
on a conspicuous conical hill, commanding a 
view " over the whole eastern slope, the valley 
of the Jordan and the Dead Sea " (Rob. i. 444). 
It is situated 4 miles N.E. of Bethel, and 14 
from Jerusalem ; a position agreeing tolerably 
with the indications of Jerome in the Ono- 
masticon (^Efraim, Efron), and is too con- 
spicuous to have escaped mention in the Bible. 
It is probably also the Ephraim mentioned by 
Josephus (i>. J. iv. 9, § 9) as having, with 
Bethel, been taken by Vespasian ; and the place 
which gave its name to the toparchy of Apha- 
rema (1 Mace. xi. 34). Guerin, Judee, iii. 
45-51, gives a good description of et-Taiyiheh, 
with a summary of the arguments in favour of 
its identification with Ephraim. [G.] [W.l 

■kvXt] 'E<ppai/j. ; porta Ephraim), one of the gates 
of the city of Jerusalem (2 K. xiv. 13 ; 2 Ch. 
XXV. 23 ; Neh. viii. l(i, xii. 39), doubtless, 
according to the Oriental practice, on the side 
looking towards the locality from which !•■ 
derived its name, and therefore at the north, 
perhaps at or near the position of the present 
" Damascus gate." [Jerusalem.] [G.] [W.] 

EPH-RA'IM, MOUNT, more correctly, as 
in R. v., " the hill country of Ephraim." In Jer. 
iv. 15, xxxi. 6, L 19, R. V. reads " the hills of 


Ephraim." The name by which the territory 
allotted to the children of Joseph (Josh. xvii. 
15) was apparently known. In its widest sense 
it included part of Benjamin (Judg. It. 5) ; and it 
was also known as the mountain of Israel (Josh. 
xi. 16, 21), and as the Mount of the Amalekites 
(Judg. xii. 15). It is frequently mentioned in 
the O. T. (Judg. iii. 27, vii. 24, xvii. 1, 8, xviii. 
2, 13, six. 1, 16, 18 ; 1 Sam. ix. 4, xiv. 22 ; 
2 Sam. XX. 21 ; 2 K. v. 22 ; 2 Ch. xv. 8, sax. 
4) : and within its limits were, Timnath-serah, 
or Timnath-heres, Joshua's inheritance, and the 
place of his burial (Josh. xix. 50, xxiv. 30 ; 
Judg. ii. 9); Gibeah of Phinehas (Josh, s-viv. 
33) ; Shechem (Josh. xx. 7, xxi. 21 ; 1 K. xii. 
25 ; 1 Ch. vi. 67) ; Shamir (Judg. x. 1) ; Rama- 
thaim-zophim (1 Sam. i. 1); and Mount Zema- 
raim (2 Ch. xiii. 4). It was one of the twelve 
districts into which Solomon divided the 
country for commissariat purposes (1 K. iv. 8) ; 
and was very fruitful and in places covered with 
forest. The general character of the hill- 
country allotted to Ephraim has already been 
described. [Epiiraiu.] The highest points are 
Mount Gerizim, 2848 feet; Mount Ebal, 
3076 feet; and Tell 'Asur, 3376 feet. The 
deeply-cut valleys that descend on the west, to 
the plain of Sharon, are fertile and cultivated, 
whilst those that descend on the east to the 
Jordan Valley are barren and waste. [W.] 

EPH-RA'IM, THE WOOD of (DnsN ii;;;; 

Spvfxhs 'E(ppai'fi ; saltus Uphraim), a wood, or 
rather, as in R. V., a forest (the word ya^ar 
implying dense growth'), in which the fatal 
battle was fought between the armies of David 
and of Absalom (2 Sam. xviii. 6), and the en- 
tanglement in which added greatly to the 
slaughter of the latter (v. 8). It would be very 
tempting to believe that the forest derived its 
name from the place near which Absalom's 
sheep- farm was situated (2 Sam. xiii. 23), and 
which would have been a natural spot for his 
head-quarters before the battle, especially 
associated as it was with the murder of Amnon. 
But the statements of xvii. 24, 26, and also the 
expression of xviii. 3, " that thou succour us out 
of the city," i.e. Mahanaim, not to speak of the 
statement of Josephus (Ant. vii. 10, § 1), that 
Absalom crossed the Jordan and camped not far 
from Mahanaim, in the country of Gilead, allow 
no escape from the conclusion that the locality 
was on the east side of Jordan, though it is 
impossible to account satisfactorily for the 
presence of the name of Ephraim (the Luc. Rec. 
reads here Maaifdv = D^OnO) on that side of 
the river. The suggestion is due to Grotius 
that the name was derived from the slaughter 
of Ephraim at the fords of Jordan by the 
Gileadites under Jephthah (Judg. xii. 1, 4, 5) ; 
and this is in accord with the statement of 
Josephus (Ant. vii. 10, § 2), that the battle took 
place in the " Great Plain," or Jordan Valley. 
But is it not at least equally probable that the 
forest derived its name from this very battle ? 
The great tribe of Ephraim, though not specially 
mentioned in the transactions of Absalom's 

* The low thorny brushwood or scrub which covers 
many rocky and barren spots in the uplands of the 
Bible is still called waar by Ihe feUahln (Geikie. JJoly 
Land and the Bible, i. 49). 


revolt, cannot fail to have taken the most 
conspicuous part in the affair, and the reverse 
was a more serious one than had overtaken the 
tribe for a very long time, and possibly com- 
bined with other circumstances to retard ma- 
terially their rising into an independent king- 
dom. Ephron, the strong city between Carnaim 
and Bethshean, is too far distant to admit of 
any connexion between it and the forest of 
Ephraim. [G.] [W.] 

EPH-RA'IMITE Cn'ISN; B. 'E<ppaeelTT)s, 
A. €/c rov 'E(ppaliJ. ; Ephrathaeus). Of the tribe 
of Ephraim (Judg. xii. 5), elsewhere called 
"Ephrathite." [W. A. W.] 

E'PHRAIN (jnsy, R. V. Ephron; Keri, 
J^"!?!^; 'Ecppccv; Ephron), a city of Israel, which 
with its dependent hamlets (niJ3 = " daugh- 
ters," A. V. " towns ") Abijah and the army of 
Judah captured from Jeroboam (2 Ch. xiii. 19). 
Jerome (Q. Heb.) on this passage says, Ephron 
ipse est Sichem. So fruitful was Ephrain that 
it was a proverb not to carry straw to Ephrain 
(Otho, Ldx. 172). It is mentioned with Bethel 
and Jeshaaah, ^Ain Stnia, 3J miles north of 
Beitin, and was apparently not far from them. 
It has been conjectured that this Ephrain or 
Ephron is identical with the Ephraim by which 
Absalom's sheep-farm of Baal-hazor was situ- 
ated ; with the city called Ephraim near the 
wilderness in which our Lord lived for some 
time (John xi. 54) ; and with Ophrah (niQU), 
a city of Benjamin, apparently not far from 
Bethel (Josh, xviii. 23 ; cp. Joseph. B. J. iv. 9, 
§ 9), and which has been located by Dr. Robin- 
son (i. 447), with some probability, at the 
modern village of et-Taiyiheh, But nothing 
more than conjecture can be arrived at on these 
points (see Ewald, Geschichte, iii. 219, 466, v. 
365; Stanley, p. 214). [Ephraim.] [G.] [W.] 

EPH-RATH (nnnSN, or JT1DN; 'E(^pa0a and 
'E<ppa.Q ; Ephratha, Jerome). 1. Second wife 
of Caleb the son of Hezron, mother of Hur, 
and grandmother of Caleb the spy, according to 
1 Ch. ii. 19, 50, and probably v. 24, and iv. 4. 

2. The ancient name of Bethlehem-Judah, as 
is manifest from Gen. xxsv. 16, 19, xlviii. 7, 
both which passages distinctly prove that it was 
called Ephrath or Ephratah in Jacob's time, and 
use the regular formula for adding the modern 

name, Dn?"n'5 N""?!, which is Bethlehem, cp. e.g. 
Gen. xxiii. 2, xxxv. 27 ; Josh. xv. 10. It cannot 
therefore have derived its name from Ephratah, 
the mother of Hur, as the author of Quaest. 
Hehr. in J'araleip. says, and as one might other- 
wise have supposed from the connexion of her 
descendants, Salma and Hur, with Bethlehem, 
which is somewhat obscurely intimated in 1 Ch. 
ii. 50, 51, iv. 4. It seems obvious therefore to 
infer that, on the contrary, Ephratah the mother 
of Hur was so called from the town of her birth, 
and that she probably was the owner of the 
town and district. In fact, that her name was 
really gentilitious. But if this be so, it would 
•indicate more communication between the 
Israelites in Egypt and the Canaanites than is 
commonly supposed. When, however, we 


recollect that the land of Goshen was the 
border country on the Palestine side ; tiiat the 
Israelites in Goshen were a tribe of sheep- and 
cattle-drovers (Gen. xlvii. 3) ; that there was 
an easy communication between Palestine and 
Egypt from the earliest times (Gen. .xii. 10, 
Avi. 1, .\.\i. 21, &c.) ; that there are indications 
of communications between the Israelites in 
Egypt and the Canaanites, caused by their trade 
as keepers of cattle (1 Ch. vii. 21), and that in 
the nature of things the owners or keepers of 
large herds and Hocks in Goshen would have 
dealings with the nomad tribes in Palestine, it 

^will perhaps seem not impossible that a son of 
Hezron may have married a woman having 
property in Ephratah. Another way of account- 
ing for the connexion between Ephratah's de- 
scendants and Bethlehem is to su})pose that the 
elder Caleb was not really the son of Hezron, but 
merely so reckoned as the head of a Ilezronite 
house. He may in this case have been one of 
an Edomitish or Horite tribe, an idea which is 
favoured by the name of his son Hur [Caleb], 
and have married an Ephrathite. Caleb the spy 
may have been their grandson. It is singular 
that "Salma the father of Bethlehem" should 
have married a Canaanitish woman. Could she 
have been of the kindred of Caleb in any way ? 
If she were, and if Salma obtained Bethlehem, 
a portion of Hur's inheritance, in consequence, 
this would account for both Hur and Salma 
being called "father of Bethlehem." Another 
possible explanation is, that Ephratah may have 
been the name given to some daughter of 
Benjamin to commemorate the circumstance of 
Rachel his mother having died close to Ephrath. 
This would receive some support from the son 
of Rachel's other son Joseph being called 
Ephraim, a word of identical etymology, as 
appears from the fact that TnSN means in- 
differently an Ephrathite, i.e. Betldernite (Ruth 
i. 1, 2), or an Ephrcmnite (1 Sam. i. 1). But it 
would not account for Ephratah's descendants 
being settled at Bethlehem. The author of the 
Quaest. Ilchr. in Paraleip. derives Ephrata from 
EpJiraim, " Ephrath, quia de Ephraim fuit." 
But this is not consistent with the appearance 
of the name in Genesis. It is perhaps impossible 

■ to come to any certainty on the subject. It 
must suffice therefore to note, that in Gen., 
and perhaps in Chron., it is called Ephrath or 
Ephrata; in Ruth, Bethlehem- Judah, but the 
inhabitants, Ephrathites ; in Micah (v. 2), Beth- 
lehem- Ephratah ; in Matt. ii. 6, Bethlehem in 
the land of Juda. Jerome, and after him 
Kalisch, observe that EphrataJi, fruitful, has the 
same meaning as Bethlehem, house of bread ; a 
view which is favoured by Stanley's description 
of the neighbouring corn-fields '{Sinai ^ Pales- 
tine, ]). 164). [Bethlehem.] 

3. Gesenius thinks that in Ps. exxxii. 6 
Ephratah means Ephraim (so R. V. marg.). 

[A. C. H.] 

EPH-RATHITE (^nnaX ; 'EcppaOaTos ; Eph- 
ratkaeus). 1. An inhabitant of Bethlehem 
(Ruth i. 2). 2. An Ephraimite (1 Sam. i. 1 ; 
Judg. xii. 4, &c.). [A..C. H.] 

EPH-RON(P"lDi; = i-ji!i<;mMs; 'Ecpptiv; Eph- 
ron\ the son of Zochar, a Hittite ; the owner of a 
field which lay facing Mamre or Hebron, and of 



the cave therein contained, which Aln-aham 
bought from him for 400 shekels of silver (Gen. 
x.xiii. 8-17,xxv.9,xlix. 29, 30, 1. 13). By Josephus 
{Ant. i. 14) the name is given as Ephraim; and 
the jiurchase-money 40 shediels. On the simi- 
larity of the negotiations to those of the present 
day in Syria and Palestine, see Thomson, 7.. 
and B. ii. 381-4. [G.] [\V.] 

EPII-RON ('E^paii/; Kphron'), a verv strong 
city (ttJAis- fj.fyd\ri oxvpa (T(p6Spa) on the east of 
Jordan between Carnaim (Asliteroth-Karnaim) 
and Bethshean, attacked and demolished by 
Judas Maccabaeus (1 Mace. v. 46-52; 2 Mace, 
xii. 27). From the description in the former of 
these two passages, it appears to have been 
situated in a defile or valley, and to have com- 
pletely occuj)ied the pass. (See Josephus, Aiit. 
xii. 8, § 5.) Its site has not yet been discovered. 

[G.] [W.] 

EPH-RON, MOUNT (inDy-in ; rh Spos 
'E(ppu>v ; 3fons Ephroii). The " cities of Mount 
Ephron " formed one of the landmarks on the 
northern boundary of the tribe of Judah (Josh. 
XV. 9), between the " water of Nephtoah " and 
Kirjath-jearim. If these latter are identified 
with 'Ain Lifta and Kiiryct cl-Enah, Mount 
Ephron is probably the rancre of hills on the 
west side of the 'Wady .Bf2i//((n«ma (traditional 
valley of the Terebinth), opposite Lifta, which 
stands on the eastern side. If, on the other 
hand, they are identified with Etam, 'Ain 'Atdn 
and Kh. 'Erma, Mount Ephron is probably the 
long ridge or spur down which the road runs 
from Solomon's Pools, near Bethlehem, to 'Ain 
Shems, Bethshemesh. In this case it may 
possibly be the same place as the Ephrathah or 
Ephraim of Ps. cxxxii. 6. [G.] [W.] 

EPICURE' ANS, THE (^EmKovpuoi), derived 
their name from Epicurus (342-271 B.C.), a 
philosopher of Attic descent, whose " Garden " 
at Athens rivalled in popularity the " Porch " 
and the " Academy." The doctrines of Epicurus 
found wide acceptance in Asia Minor {Lampsa- 
cus, Mitijlcne, Tarsus, Diog. L. x. 1, 11 sq.) and 
Alexandria (Uiog. L. /. c), and they gained a 
brilliant advocate at Rome in Lucretius (95- 
50 B.C.). The object of Epicurus was to find 
in philosophy a practical guide to happiness 
(ivepyeia . . . rhi/ €v5ai/j.ova ^iov irepiirotova-a, 
Sext. Emp. adv. Math. xi. 169). True pleasure 
and not absolute truth was the end at which he 
aimed ; experience and not reason the test on 
which he relied. He necessarily cast aside dia- 
lectics as a profitless science (Diog. L. x. 30, 31). 
and substituted in its place (as ri Ka.voviK6v, 
Diog. L. X. 19) an assertion of the right of the 
senses, in the widest acceptation of the term, to 
be considered as the criterion of truth (/cptr^pio 
rrjs aAriOeias elvai ras alffOvffeis Koi rets npo- 
\r]^eis [general notions] Kal 7a irdQri). He made 
the study of physics subservient to the uses of 
life, and especially to the removal of supersti- 
tious fears (Lucr. i. 146 sq.) ; and maintained 
that ethics are the proper study of man, as lead- 
ing him to that supreme and lasting pleasure 
which is the common object of all. 

It is obvious that a system thus framed would 
degenerate by a natural descent into mere mate- 
rialism ; and in this form Epicurism was the 
popular philosophy at the beginning of the 

?s R 




Christian era (cp. Diog. L. x. 5, 9). When St. 
Paul addressed '' Epicureans and Stoics " (Acts 
xvii. 18) at Athens, the philosophy of life was 
practically reduced to the teaching of those two 
antagonistic schools, which represented in their 
final separation the distinct and complementary 
elements which the Gospel reconciled. For it is 
unjust to regard Epicurism as a mere sensual 
opposition to religion. It was a necessary step 
in the development of thought, and prepared the 
way for the reception of Christianity, not only 
negatively but positively. It not only weakened 
the hold which polytheism retained on the mass 
of men by daring criticism, but it maintained 
with resolute energy the claims of the body to 
be considered a necessary part of man's nature 
co-ordinate with the soul, and affirmed the 
existence of individual freedom against the Stoic 
doctrines of pure spiritualism and absolute fate. 
Yet outwardly Epicurism appears further re- 
moved from Christianity than Stoicism, though 
essentially it is at least as near ; and in the 
address of St. Paul (Acts xvii. 22 sq.) the affirma- 
tion of the doctrines of creation (v. 24), provi- 
dence (y. 26), inspiration (v. 28), resurrection, 
and judgment (v. 31), appears to be directed 
against the cardinal errors Avhich it involved. 

The tendency which produced Greek Epicur- 
ism, when carried out to its fullest development, 
is peculiar to no age or country. Among the 
Jews it led to Sadduceeism [Sadducees], and 
Josephus appears to have drawn his picture of the 
sect with a distinct regard to the Greek prototype 
(Joseph. Ant. xviii. 1, § 4- ; dc B. J. ii. 8, § 14 ; 
cp. Ant. X. 11, § 7, da Ejnciireis'). In modern 
times the essay of Gassendi (^Syntagma Philoso- 
2oJiiae Epicuri, Hag. Com. 1659) was a significant 
symptom of the restoration of sensationalism. 

The chief original authority for the philosophy 
of Epicurus is Diogenes Laertius (lib. x.), who 
has preserved some of his letters and a list of 
his principal writings. The poem of Lucretius 
must be used with caution, and the notices in 
Cicero, Seneca, and Plutarch are undiscruisedly 
hostile. [B.'F. W.] 

EPIPH'ANES (1 Mace. i. 10 ; x. 1). [Anti- 
OCHUS Epiphanes.] 

EPI-PHI QEiTLcpi, 3 Mace. vi. 38), name of 
the eleventh iiionth of the Egyptian Vague year, 
and the Alexandrian or Egyptian Julian year : 

Copt. eriHTI; Arab, (_a>.>1- In ancient 

Egyptian it is called "the third month [of] the 
season of the waters." [Egypt.] The name 
Epiphi is derived from that of the goddess of the 
month, Apap-t (Lepsius, Chron. d. Aerj. i. 141). 
The supposed derivation of the Hebrew month- 
name Abib from Epiphi is discussed in other 
articles. [Chroijology ; Months.] [R. S. P.] 

EPISTLE (eVitTToAi,). The Epistles of the 
N. T. are described under the names of the 
Apostles by whom, or the Churches to whom, 
they were addressed. It is proposed in the 
present article to speak of the epistle or letter 
as a means of communication. The use of 
written letters implies, it need hardly be said, 
a considerable progress in the development of 
civilised life. There must be a recognised 
system of notation, phonetic or symbolic ; men 

must bo taught to write, and have writing 
materials at b.and. In the early nomadic stages 
of society accordingly, like those which mark 
the period of the Patriarchs of the 0. T., we 
find no traces of any but oral communications. 
Messengers are sent instructed what to say from 
Jacob to Esau (Gen. xxxii. 3), from Balak to 
Balaam (Num. xxii. 5, 7, 16), bringing back in 
like manner a verbal, not a written answer 
(Num. xxiv. 12). The negotiations between 
Jephthah and the king of the Ammonites (Judg. 
xi. 12, 13) are conducted in the same way. It 
is still the received practice in the time of Saul 
(1 Sam. xi. 7, 9). The reign of David, bringing 
the Israelites, as it did, into contact with the 
higher civilisation of the Phoenicians, witnessed 
a change in this respect. The first recorde 1 
letter (IDD, LXX. ^i^Klov: cp. the use of the 
same word in Herod, i. 123) in the history of 
the 0. T. was that which " David wrote to Joab, 
and sent by the hand of Uriah " (2 Sam. xi. 14) ; 
and this must obviously, like the letters (D'''1Dp, 
LXX. fii^\iov) that came into another history 
of crime (in this case also in traceable con- 
nexion with Phoenician influence, 1 K. xxi. 8, 9), 
have been " sealed with the king's seal," as at 
once the guarantee of their authority, and a 
safeguard against their being read by any but 
the persons to whom they were addressed. The 
material used for the impression of the seal was 
probably the "clay" of Job xxxviii. 14. The 
act of sending such a letter is, however, pre- 
eminently, if not exclusively, a kingly act, 
where authority and secrecy were necessary. 
Joab, e.g., answers the letter which David had 
sent him after the old plan, and receives a verbal 
message in return. The demand of Benhadad 
and Ahab's answer to it are conveyed in the 
same way (1 K. xx. 2, 5). Written communi- 
cations, however, become much more frequent 
in the later history. The king of Svria sends a 
letter (1SD) to the king of Israel (2''K. v. 5, 6). 
A " writing " (QflDp, LXX. eV ypacpfj) comes to 
Jehoram from Elijah the prophet (2 Ch. xxi. 12). 
Hezekiah oil one occasion makes use of a system 
of couriers like that afterwards so fully organ- 
ized under the Persian kings (2 Ch. xxx. 6, 10, 
m"l!IX, LXX. i-Ki(TTo\r) ; cp. Herod, viii. 98, and 
Esth. iii. 13, viii. 10, 14), and receives from 
Sennacherib the letter (DnSiD, LXX. Tafii0\[a) 
which he " spreads before the Lord " (2 K. xix. 
14). Jeremiah writes a letter ("IQD, ^ifiXos) to 
the exiles in Babylon (Jer. xxix. 1, 3, the pro- 
totype of the apocryphal Epistle of Jeremiah, 
placed as Baruch vi. in the A. V. ; on which see 
Barucii, the Book of). The Books of Ezra 
and Nehemiah contain or refer to many such 
documents (Ezra iv. 6 sq., v. 6, vii. 11 ; Neh. 
ii. 7, 9, vi. 5). The influence of Persian, and 
yet more, perhaps, that of Greek civilisation, 
led to the more frequent use of letters as a 
means of intercourse. Whatever doubts may be 
entertained as to the genuineness of the epistles 
themselves, their occurrence in 1 Mace. xi. 30, 
xii. 6, 20, XV. 1, 16 ; 2 Mace. xi. 16, .34, together 
with the allusions to them in 1 Mace. v. 10, 
ix. 60, X. 3, indicates that they were recognised 
as having mainly (yet not entirely : see 1 Mace, 
vii. 10, XV. 32) superseded the older plan of 
messages orall)' delivei'ed. The two stages of 
the history of the N. T. present in this respect a 




striking contrast. The list of the canoniciil 
Books shows how largely ei)istles were used in 
the expansion and organization of the Church. 
Those which have survived may be regarded as 
the representatives of many otiiers that are lost. 
The mention of " every epistle" and the warn- 
ing (if 2 Thcss. iii. 17 indicate tliat St. I'aul 
had already written more than the two Epistles 
to theThe.ssalonians — the only ones of that early 
date still preserved. 1 Cor. v. 9, but probably 
not Col. iv. 1(3 (cp. Lightfoot in loco), alludes to 
a lost epistle, as does 3 John 9. We are pcrhajis 
''too much in the habit of forgetting that quite 
as noticeable is the absence of all mention of 
written letters from the Gospel history. With 
the exception of the spurious letter to Abgarus 
•of Edessa (Euseb. 11. E. i. 13), no epistles have 
been attributed to Jesus. The explanation of 
tills is to be found partly in the circumstances 
of one who, known as the " carpenter's son," 
was training as His disciples those who, like 
Himself, belonged to the class of labourers and 
peasants ; partly in the fact that it was by 
personal rather than by written teaching that 
the work of the prophetic office, which He re- 
produced and perfected, had to be accomplished. 
The Epistles of the X. T. in their outward form 
are such as might be expected from men who 
were brought into contact with Greek and 
Roman customs, themselves belonging to a 
different race, and so reproducing the imported 
style with only partial accuracy. They fall 
into two main groups : (1) the "Pauline " Ej)istles, 
including the Epistle to the Hebrews, and (2) the 
*' Catholic Epistles," viz. James, 1 and 2 Peter, 
1, 2, and 3 John, and Jude. The title given to 
this second group is not in strictness of speech 
applicable to all of those contained in it. 2 Peter 
^and Jude are indeed perfectly general in their 
address. James, 1 Peter, and 1 John are general 
in their application, and are not (like St. Paul's 
Epistles) addressed to the Church in a single 
■city or country. Hence the term was applied 
to them also ; and afterwards, though less 
accurately, its range was extended so as to 
include 2 and 3 John as well (cp. Westcott, The 
Epistles of St. John, p. xxviii.). The Epistles in 
■each group begin (the Epistle to the Hebrews 
and 1 John excepted) with the names of the 
writer and those to whom the Epistle is addressed. 
Then follows the formula of salutation (analogous 
to the ۤ irpaTTeiv of Greek ; the S., S. D., or 
S. D. JI., salutem, salutem dicit, saluiem dicit 
muUam, of Latin correspondence), generally in 
some combination of the words X"P'^' e^^oy, 
€lpi\vt): occasionally, aj 'n Acts xv. 23, Jas. i. 1, 
with the closer equivalent x^'P*"' ('^P* -'^cts 
xxiii. 2*3). Then the letter itself commences, in 
the first person, the singular and plural being 
used, as in the letters of Cicero, indiscriminately 
(cp. 1 Cor. ii. ; 2 Cor. i. 8, 15 ; 1 Thess. iii. 1, 2 ; 
and passxm). Then when the substance of the 
letter has been completed, questions answered, 
truths enforced, come the individual messages, 
characteristic, in St. Paul's Epistles especially, 
of one who never allowed his personal aft'ections 
to be swallowed up in the greatness of his work. 
The conclusion in this case was probably modi- 
fied by the fact that the letters were dictated 
to an amanuensis. When he had done his 
woi'k, the Apostle took up the pen or reed, and 
added in his own large characters (Gal. vi. 11) 

the authenticating autograph, sometimes with 
special stress on the fact that this was his 
writing (1 Cor. xvi. 21 ; Gal. vi. 11 ; Col. iv. 
IS; 2 Thess. iii. 17), always with one of the 
closing formulae of salutation, " Grace be witii 
thee" — "tiie grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be 
with your spirit." In one instance, Rom. xvi. 
22, the amanuensis in his own name adds liis 
salutation. In the fppuade of Acts xv. 29, and 
(ppwffo of the received text in xxiii. 30, we have 
the equivalents of the va'ete, vale, which formed 
the customary conclusion of Roman letters, it 
need hardly be said that the fact that St. Paul's 
E))istles were dictated in this way accounts for 
many of their most striking peculiarities, — the 
frequent digressions, the long parentheses, the 
vehemence and energy as of a man who is 
speaking strongly as his feelings prompt him 
rather than wi-iting calmly. For the autho- 
rities on which the text of the two groups of 
Epistles rest, see Ni:w Tkstament. 

An allusion in 2 Cor. iii. 1 brings before us 
another class of letters which must have been 
in frequent use in the early ages of the Christian 
Church, the eTrtcrroAal (rvaraTiKai, by which 
travellers or teachers were commended by one 
Church to the good offices of others. Other 
persons had come to the Church of Corinth 
relying on these. St. Paul appeals to his con- 
verts as the eVicrToA?; Xpiffrov (2 Cor. iii. 3), 
written " not with ink, but with the S]drit of 
the living God." Another instance of this kind 
of letter is fotind in Acts xviii. 27 ; and cp. the 
mention of Zenas and Apollos in Titus iii. 13. 
On the later history of eVicrToAal avarariKai, see 
Suicer. Thcs. ii. 1194, and Diet, of Christ. Anfiq., 
art. " Commendatory Letters." 

For other particulars as to the material and 
implements used for epistles, see Writing. 

[E. H. P.] [E. C. S. G.] 

EPl (ly = xcatchful ; "Hp ; Her). 1, First- 
born of Judah. His mother was Bath-Shuah 
(daughter of Shuah), a Canaanite. His wife was 
Taniar, the mother, after his death, of Pharez 
and Zarah, by Judah. Er " was wicked in the 
sight of the Lord ; and the Lord slew him." It 
does not appear what the nature of his sin was ; 
but, from his Canaanitish birth on the mother's 
side, it was probably connected with the abomi- 
nable idolatries of Canaan (Gen. sxxviii. 3-7 ; 
Num. xxvi. 19). 

2. Descendant of Shelah the son of Judah 
(1 Ch. iv. 21). 

3. With a final yod, Eri, perhaps designating 
a family, son of Gad (Gen. xlvi. 16 ; LXX. 'A7]5iy). 

4. Son of Jose, and father of Elmodam, in our 
Lord's genealogy (Luke iii. 28), about con- 
temporary with Uzziah king of Judah. 

[A. C. H.] 

E'RAN (py, but Sam. and Syr. Y]]^, Edan ; 
'*E5eV ; Hcraii), son of Shuthelah, eldest son of 
Ephraim (Num. xxvi. 36). The name does not 
occur in the genealogies of Ephraim in 1 Ch. vii. 
20-29, though a name, Ezer (ITN), is found 
which may possibly be a corruption of it. Erau 
was the head of the family of 

E'RANITES, THE (^nun ; Sam. ^inm; 
'ESei't ; Heranitae), Num. xxvi. 36. 

3 R 2 



ERAS'TUS ("Epao-Tos ; Erastus). 1. One of 
the iittenilants or deacons of St. Paul at Epl\esus, 
who with Timothy was sent forward iuto Mace- 
donia while the Apostle himself remained in Asia 
(Acts six. 22). He is probably the same as 
Erastus who is again mentioned in the salutations 
to Timothy (2 Tim. iv. 20), though not, as Jleyer 
maintains, the same as Erastus the chamberlain 
of Corinth (Rom. xvi. 23). 

2. Erastus the chamberlain, or rather the 
public treasurer {oiKOv6fxos, arcarius) of Corinth, 
who was one of the early converts to Christianity 
(Rom. xvi. 23). According to the traditions of 
the Greek Church (Mcnol. Graecum, i. p. 179), he 
was first oeconomus to the Church at Jerusalem, 
and afterwards Bishop of Paneas. He is probably 
not the same as Erastus who was with St. Paul 
at Ephesus, for in this case we should be com- 
pelled to assume that he is mentioned in the 
Epistle to the Romans by the title of au ofhce 
which he had once held and afterwards re- 
signed. [W. A. W.] 

E'EECH C^IX ; 'Ope'x ; Arach) is the second 
tity of the list of four given in Gen. x. 10 as the 
beginning of Nimrod's kingdom in the land of 
Shiuar ; the others being Babel, Accad, and 
Calneh. This important city, supposed at fii'st 
to be Edessa or Calirrhoe {Urfali) in the N.W. of 
Jlesopotamia (so St. Ephrem, Jerome, and the 
Targumists), is now known to be the site called 
liv the Arabs Warka, which lies halfway between 
Hilla and Korna on the left bank of the Eu- 
phrates, having on its eastern side the Kile 
canal. This town was called Uruk (or Arkii) by 
the Babylonians and Assyrians, whence the Heb. 
Erech and the Arab. Warka. The original 
Akkadian name was Unn, Unng,'^ or Unuga, 
which is translated in the Bilingual lists by 
iMu, "seat," "dwelling." Other native (Ak- 
kadian) names for the city were Illag (or lUab); 
Namerim ; Tir-ana, " the heavenly grove ; " Ara- 
iinina (or Uru-imina) and Da-imina, " district 
seven " (or " the seven districts "), Gipar-imina, 
" enclosure seven " (or " the seven enclosures ") ; 
Ki-nd-ana, " the heavenly resting-place," &c., 
&c. As may be supposed from this, the Baby- 
lonians thought a great deal of this city, which, 
in ancient days, must have been a much more 
delightful place than the present scene of 
desolation which the ruins present would lead 
one to suppose. That this was the case is also 
indicated by the ruins themselves, which show 
remains of large and elegant buildings with the 
usual recessed or fluted walls, in some cases 
decorated with patterns formed with the circular 
ends of cones imbedded in mortar, and coloured 
various hues. At the time when the Babylonian 
emjiire was at the height of its power, it is 
probable that the country around the city was 
well drained, and properly fertilised by the 
numerous canals. The dwellings of the people 
seem, at one time, to have extended some three 
miles beyond the walls of the cityj which was 
itself nearly six miles in circumference. 

» It is from this form that, by change of n into r, the 
Bab.-Assyr. form Uruk comes. The Greek form of the 
name of the city is 'Opxoi; ; and the inhabitants are 
mentioned in Ezra iv. 9 under the name of Archevites 
(*1p, N''1D"IX ; M!D"IX)- Compare the Assyr. ArMa, 
fem. Arkiiaitu, " Erechite." 


Erech seems to have been used as a necropolis, 
large numbers of glazed earthenware coffins and 
other receptacles, used for the burial of the dead, 
having been found there. These coffins are 
mostly of the Parthian period, though the city 
had probably been used as a burial-place long 
before then. 

That it was a very ancient city is proved by 
the Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions. It 
seems to have been the capital of the semi- 
mythical hero-king Gilgames (Gilgamos), in the 
wonderful legend concerning whom it is con- 
stantly mentioned under the name of Uruk or 
Uruk supuri, "Erech of the enclosure"* (see 
above). From time to time it was attacked by 
enemies, and devastated, as the following extract 
from a hymn of au tmknown and probably pre- 
historic period will show : — 

" How long, roy lady, shall the strong enemy hold 

thj' sanctuary .'' 
In thy primeval city, Erech, famine exisleth ; 
In E-ulbar, the house of thine oracle, blood like 

water fioweth ; 
He hath set fire in all thy lands, and poured it out 

liUe date-fruit. 
My lady, greatly am I bound up with misfortune. 
My lady, thou hast hemmed me in, and entreated me- 

The mighty enemy hath smitten me down like & 

single reed. 
I take not counsel, myself I am not wise. 
Like the fields, day and night I mourn. 
I, thy servant, praj' to thee — 
Let thy heart take re^t ; let thy mood be softened." 

During the historical period many kings 
reigned in Erech, and some of them — such as 
Dungi, Ur-Bau, and Gudea, about 2500 B.C. ; 
Sin-gasid, at a little later date ; and Merodach- 
baladan I., about 1325 B.C. — have left records of 
their having done so on the many inscribed and 
stamped bricks which are found in the ruins.. 
In the year 2280 B.C., Kudur-Nanhundi, king of 
Elam, invaded this part of Babylonia, captured 
Erech, and carried away the image of the goddess- 
Nani, which was restored to its place 1(335 
years later by Assur-bani-apli, king of Assyria. 
Tablets of the reigns of Nabopolassar, Nebuchad- 
nezzar, Nabonidus, Cyrus, Darius, and some of 
the Seleucidae have also been found on the site. 

This city contained two great temples, the 
abodes of the patron divinities of the place. One 
was called E-ulbar (" the house of the oracle : " 
see the hymn above), and was dedicated to- 
the goddess Istar (Venus as evening star) ; the 
other E-ana (" the house of heaven "), dedicated, 
to NanS. (the goddess whose image was carried 
off by the Elamite king), and now represented, 
by the Buwarvja mound. It is argued by Prof. 
Fried. Delitzsch that in former times the river 
Euphrates must have flowed much nearer to tha 
city than at present, because, in the legend^ of 
Gilgames, it is related that Gilgames and Ea- 
bani, after they had killed, in Erech, the bull 
sent by the goddess Istar, washed their hands ia 
the stream. See Loftus, Travels, &c. ; Oppert, 
Expedition en Me'sopotamie, vol. i. ; Smith, 
Chaldean Genesis, p. 194; Delitzsch, Wo lag 
das Paradies ? and Records of the Past, vol. i., 
N.S., pp. 78-85. [T. G. P.] 

* Supuru (or Subuni) means "ring" (round the 
moon), "halo," and "fold," "sheep-fold." 




E'RI (ny ; 'AtjSIj in Gen., B. 'ASSff, AF. -5« 
in Num. [y. 25] ; 7Avi, 7/(7-), son of Gad (Gen. 
slvi. l(j ; Num. .\xvi. H3, LXX. u. 25). 

E'RITES, THE (nUH ; 6 'A5fl or -5i ; //m- 
ii(c'). A branch of the tribe of Gad, descended 
from Eri (Num. sxvi. 16). 

ESAIAS [3 syll.] (Westcott and Hort, 
'Hffalas; Isaias ; Cod. Aniiat. Esaias), Matt. iii. 
3, iv. U, viii. 17, .\ii. 17, xiii. 14, .\v. 7 ; Mark 
vii. 6 ; Luke iii. 4, iv. 17 ; John i. 23. xii. 38, ;59, 
41 ; Acts viii. 28, 30, xxviii. 25 ; Kum. i.\. 27, 
29, X. 16, 20, XV. 12. [ISAiAii.] 

E'SAR-HAD-DON (pH'^DX; 'AcropSa,^; 
LXX. 2axep5ovJs ; Ptol. 'AcrapiSavov ; Assyr. 
Aisur-dha-iddiiui, Aiiur-dhu-iddina, " Asshur has 
given a brother " ; Asar-haddon), the name of one 
of the greatest and also the mildest of the kings of 
Assyria. He was the son of Sennacherib (2 K. 
xix. 37), and grandson of Sargon of Assyria, sur- 
named"the later" [Sargon], who succeeded Shal- 
maneser IV. Esarhaddon was not the eldest 
son of Sennacherib ; the unfortunate Assur-nadin- 
sum, who was made king of Babylon by his 
father, having been the firstborn. Judging 
from the meaning of his name, " Asshur has 
^iven a brother," he was possibly the second 
son of Sennacherib. The others were Assur- 
munik (or Assur-mulik) [Adrammelech] and 
Sharezer (= Sarra-usur ?). 

Esarhaddon ascended the throne of Assyria on 
the 18th day of Adar (Feb.-March), in the year 
<380 B.C., after, as is supposed, he had defeated 
the army of his brothers in the land of Hani- 
rabbe, near the Upper Euphrates, and his brothers 
had taken refuge in Armenia. Esarhaddon at once 
turned his attention to Babylonia, where Nabu- 
zer-napisti-lisir, son of Merodach-baladan, had 
taken possession of the city of Ur. On the 
Assyrian army marching against him, he fled to 
Elam, where, however, the king of the country, 
Ummanaldas, put him to death. Na'id-Marduk, 
brother of Nabu-zer-napisti-lisir, threw himself 
on the mercy of J^sarhaddon, who restored him 
to the dominions of his brother on the sea-coast 
(called mat Tdinti'"). Esarhaddon now restored 
those portions of Babylon which had been de- 
stroyed by Sennacherib, his father, and returned 
the images of the gods which had been carried 
away, thus conciliating the people. He also 
■defeated and ]nit to death the chief of the 
■(.Chaldean tribe of Dakkuri, Samas-ibni, who had 
taken possession of the fields of the people of 
Babylon and Borsippa. Having restored the 
land to its rightful owners, he placed Nabii- 
sallim on the throne as king of the tribe of 

Affairs in Babylonia being thus satisfactorily 
settled, Esarhaddon, in the fourth year of his 
reign, captured the cities Sidon and Bazza, and 
executed Abdi-JIilkutti, king of Sidon, together 
with Sanduarri, king of Kundu and Sisu. He 
also built a new town near Sidon, peopling it 
with the captives from the old city, and placing 
it under the control of an Assyrian governor. 
This was apparently an attempt to divert the 
trade of Sidon to the new settlement, but the 
.eommerce lost at the destruction of Sidon went 
to the sister-city, Tyre. At this time the whole 
«f Palestine and the surrounding district made 

submission to Esarhaddon, who gives us a list of 
twelve kings of tlie mainland (including Baal of 
Tyre, Manassch of .ludah, and the kings of Edom, 
JIuab, (jazM, Askelon, Ekron, &c.) and ten kings 
of the island of Cyprus, all of whom sent pre- 
sents, and were directed by Esarhaddon to 
supply him with building materials for liis new 
palace at Nineveh. 

In his sixth year, Esarhaddon began to turn 
his attention to Egypt, and seems to have made 
some slight conquests there. 0])erations were 
continued in his seventh year, when tliere was a 
battle on the 5th day of Adar ; but it was not a 
vigorous campaign, as a part of the Assvrian 
army was engaged in Hupuskia, against the 
Cimmerians, who were now beginning to make 
inroads. Checked in the south, the Cimmerians 
turned to the west and overran ]iart of Asia 
Minor. Cilicia and Du'ua, in the neighbourhood 
of Tubal, were also invaded, and thirty-one cities 
taken ; and Barnaki, " a powerful enemy dwell- 
ing in Til-Assuri " (Tel-Assar — cp. Is. xxxvii. 
12), was overrun by the Assyrian army. The 
Medesa, the Mannaa (Jlinni or Armenians), and 
other tribes on the north and east of Assyria, 
were next attacked, the result being that three 
Median chiefs journeyed in person to Nineveh 
and made submission to Esarhaddon. 

Esarhaddon's next move was in the direction 
of Arabia, whither, after having returned to the 
king, Haza-ilu or Hazael, the images of the gods 
which Sennacherib had carried away, with his 
own name written upon them (a com.mon custom 
with the Assyrian kings), Esarhaddon conducted 
an expedition to subdue the country. He tra- 
velled 900 miles, and reached two districts, 
called HazQ and Biizu (Hazo and Buz), where he 
subdued seven kings. An eighth, Lale, king of 
Yadi', who had fled, afterwards made submission 
at Nineveh, when Esarhaddon returned to him 
the images of his gods, inscribed with " the 
power of Assur," and conferred upon him the 
laud of Biizu or Buz. After the death of Haza- 
ilu, king of Arabia, Esarhaddon placed his son, 
Ya'-ilu, on the throne. He was unpopular with 
the tribes, however, and Esarhaddon had to send 
an army to quell the insurrection which took 
place. The Assyrians were successful, and 
Wabu, a pretender, was captured and taken to 

In his eighth year Esarhaddon invaded and 
plundered the land of the Rurisaa, tlie spoils of 
which were taken to Erech in Babylonia. In 
this year Esarhaddon lost his queen, who died on 
the 5th day of Adar (Feb.-March). 

In Nisan (March-April) of the tenth year of 
his reign, Esarhaddon began the conquest of 
Egvpt. Battles were fought there on the 3rd, 
16th, and 18th of Tammuz (June-July), result- 
ing in the capture of IMemphis on the 22nil. 
Tirhakali, who was then king of Egypt, fled ; 
but his sons and nephews were captured, and the 
city spoiled. Esarhaddon now divided Egypt into 
twentv provinces, placing the majority of them 
under Egyptian princes, who submitted to his 
rule. Tliose not under native government — and 
these were probably the more important posts — 
he garrisoned with Assyrian troops under As- 
syrian governors. A complete list of these pro- 
vinces, with the names of their governors, has 
come down to us. 

In the eleventh year several of the great 



meu of Assviia were, for some reason unknown, 
jxeouted bv Esarhaddon. 

Esarhaddon's last expedition was again against 
Egypt, but he fell ill on the road, and died on 
the 10th of jMarcheswan, in the twelfth year of 
hisveign, according to the Babylonian Chronicle, 
and in the thirteenth, according to the Babylonian 
Canon (G67 or 66S li.C.)- 

Besides setting on foot the campaigns men- 
tioned in his inscriptions, Esarhaddon carried 
away captive jManasseh, king of Judah, who was 
seized at Jerusalem by his captains on a charge 
of rebellion, and taken to Babylon (2 Ch. xxxiii. 
11), where Esarhaddon held his court. The 
Jewish king was, however, afterwards pardoned 
and restored to his kingdom. As has already 
been mentioned above, Mauasseh is given in his 
inscriptions as a tributary of Esarhaddon. 

Esarhaddon rebuilt the walls of Babylon and 
the temple of Bel in that ci"y, as well as many 
temples in Assyria and Akkad. He also built a 
palace at Nineveh, on an old site which he en- 
larged, and for which twenty-two kings of Hit, 
the seacoast, and the middle of the sea (Cyprus), 
furnished the materials. It was adorned with 
winged bulls and colossi, and decorated with 
rare and valuable stones. The doors were made 
of sweetly-smelling wood overlaid with silver 
i.ud bronze. The south-west palace at Nimroud 
IS the best-preserved of his constructions. This 
building, which was excavated by Sir A. H. 
Layard, is remarkable for the peculiarity of its 
l)lan as well as tor the scale on which it is con- 
structed, and the Rev. G. Rawliuson says that 
it corres]ionds in its general design almost exactly 
with the i)alace of Solomon (1 K. vii. 1-12), but 
is of larger dimensions, the great hall being 
220 feet long by 100 broad (Layard's Nin. <J- 
Bab., p. 634), and the porch or antechamber 
160 feet by 60. It had the us-ual adornments of 
winged bulls, colo.ssi, and sculptured slabs, but 
it has sullered so severely from fire, that the 
stones and alabaster slabs, &c., were all split 
and calcined. This is all the more to be re- 
gretted, as, from what has been said above, there 
is reason to believe that Hittite, Phoenician, 
and Cypriote artificers took part in the work. 
Portions of very fine winged bulls from Esar- 
haddon's palace at Nineveh are now in the 
British Museum. 

Esarhaddon was probably one of the most 
energetic of a very energetic race of kings, and 
carried his conquests farther than any of his 
predecessors, leaving his kingdom, at his un- 
expected death, in a ver}- prosperous condition. 
Although many acts of severity mark his reign, 
he must nevertheless be regarded as one of the 
most clement rulers of his time in the East — as 
■witness his treatment of Manasseh, Na'id- 
Marduk, Haza-ilu of Arabia, and others. On 
the whole, his was a wise and common-sense 
reign (as things went at that time in the East), 
and must have had the eft'ect of reconciling the 
diverse elements under his sway. At his death, 
the kingdom was divided between his two sons, 
Assurbanipal (see Asnapper) becoming king of 
Assyria and its dependencies, and Samas-sum- 
Tikin (Saosduchinos) king of Babylon under him. 
Both princes had probably not yet reached man- 
hood when this took place. Esarhnddon's third 
son, Assur-mukin-pnlia, was raised to the priest- 
hood, with the title of tirigall". probably at 


Nineveh; and his fourth and youngest," Assur- 
ftil-same-irsiti-bullit-su, became urigallu, " be- 
fore the god Sin " in Harrau. 

See G. Smith's Histor;/ of Assyrui, and T. G. 
Piuches's " Babylonian Chronicle " in the Journ. 
Eoy. Asiat. Soc, vol. xis., part 4. [T. G. P.] 

ESAU, the eldest son of Isaac, and twin- 
brother of Jacob. The singular appearance of 
the child at his birth originated the name : " And 
the first came out red ("ilDnS, indicative of the 
colour of the skin), all over like an hairy gar- 
ment, and they called his name Esau " (^t^'I?, i.e. 
" hairy," " rough," Gen. XXV. 25; see Delitzsch. 
[1887]). This was not the only remarkable 
circumstance connected with the birth of the 
infant. Esau was the first-born ; but as he was 
issuing into life Jacob's hand grasped his heel. 
The after enmity of two brothers, and the in- 
creasing strife of two great nations, were thus 
foreshadowed (xxv. 23, 26. Cp. Dillmann,* 
p. 310 sq.). Esau's robust frame and " rough " 
aspect were the types of a wild and daring nature- 
(cp. the Phoenician legends about Oijcrooos in 
Dillmann,* p. 7). The peculiarities of his- 
character soon began to develop themselves. 
Scorning the peaceful and commonplace occupa- 
tions of the shepherd, he revelled in the excite- 
ment of the chase, and in the martial exercises- 
of the Canaanites (xxv. 27). He was, in foot,, 
a thorough Bedav:ij, a " son of the desert," who- 
delighted to roam free as the wind of heaven, 
and who was impatient of the restraints of 
civilised or settled life. His old father, by a. 
cajn'ice of affection not uncommon, loved his- 
wilful, vagrant boy ; and his keen relish for 
savoury food being gratified by Esau's venison, 
he liked him all the better for his skill in hunt- 
ing (xxv. 28). An event occurred which ex- 
hibited the reckless character of Esau on the one- 
hand, and the selfish, grasping nature of his- 
brother on the other. The former returned from 
the field, exhausted by the exercise of the chase, 
and faint with hunger. Seeing some pottage of 
lentiles which Jacob had prepared, he asked for 
it. Jacob only consented to give the food on- 
Esau's swearing to him that he would in returrk 
give up his birthright. There is something- 
revolting in the whole transaction. Jacob takes 
advantage of his brother's distress to vob him of 
that which was dear as life itself to an Eastern 
patriarch. The birthright not only gave him 
the headship of the tribe, both sacerdotal and' 
temporal, and the possession of the great bulk 
of the family property, but it carried with it the- 
covenant blessing (xxvii. 28, 29, 3G ; Heb. xii. 16, 
17). Then again whilst Esau, under the pressure 
of temporary suf.t/ring, despises his birthright 
by selling it for a mess of pottage (Gen. xxv. 34), 
he afterwards attenijits to secure that whichi 
he had deliberately sold (xxvii. 4, 34, 38; Heb.. 
xii. 17). 

It is evident that the whole transaction was 
public, for it resulted in a new name being given 
to Esau. He said to Jacob (cp. R. V.), " Feed me 
with that same red (DhXH) . . . ; therefore was 
his name called Edom " (DITX, Gen. x.xv. 30).. 
It is worthy of note, however, that this name is 
seldom applied to Esau himself, though almost 
universally given to the country he settled in, 
and to hisposterity. [Edom ; Edomites.] The 




name "children of Esau " is in a few cases ap- 
I)lie(J to the Kdoiuites (Dout. ii. 4; Jer. xlix. « ; 
Obail. V. 18) ; but it is rather a iioetical e.\()rossion. 

Ksau inarriod at the age of lorty, and contrary 
to tlie wish of liis parents. His wives were botli 
Canaanites; and they "were bitterness of spirit 
unto Isaac and to Kebekah " (Gen. .\xvi. 34, 35)." 

The next ei)isode in the history of Esau and 
Jacob is still more painful tliau the former, as 
it brings out fully those bitter family rivalries 
and divisions which were all but universal in 
ancient times, and which are still a disgrace to 
/Eastern society. Isaac, conceiving himself near 
death, wished to bless Esau before he died ; 
but Jacob, co-operating with the craft of his 
mother, is again successful, and secures ir- 
revocably the covenant blessing. Esau vows 
vengeance, liut foaring his aged father's patri- 
archal authority, he secretly congratulates him- 
self: "The days of mourning for my father are 
at hand; then will I slay my brother Jacob" 
(Gen. xxvii.41). Thus he imagined that by one 
bloody deed he would regain all that had been 
taken from him by artifice. But he knew not a 
mother's watchful care. Kot a sinister glance 
of his eyes, not a hasty expression of his tongue, 
escaped Kebekah. She felt that the life of her 
darling son, whose gentle nature and domestic 
habits had won her heart's atl'ections, was now 
in imminent peril ; and she advised him to flee 
for a time to her relations in Mesopotamia. The 
sins of both mother and child were visited upon 
them by a long and painful separation, and all 
the attendant anxieties and dangers. By a 
characteristic piece of domestic policy Eebekah 
succeeded both in exciting Isaac's anger against 
Esau, and obtaining his consent to Jacob's de- 
parture — " and Kebekah said to Isaac, I am 
weary of my life because of the daughters of 
Heth ; if Jacob take a wife such as these, what 
good shall my life do me ? " Her object was 
attained at once. The blessing was renewed to 
Jacob, and he received his father's commands to 
go to Padau-aram (Gen. xxvii. 4G ; xxviii. 1-5). 

When Esau heard that his father had com- 
manded Jacob to take a wife of the daughters 
of his kinsman Laban, he also resolved to try 
whether by a new alliance he could propitiate 
his parents. He accordingly married his cousin 
^lahalath, the daughter of Ishmael (xxviii. 8, 9). 
This marriage appears to have brought him into 
connexion witli the Ishmaelitish tribes beyond 
the valley of Arabah. He soon afterwards 
established himself in Mount Seir, still retain- 
ing, however, some interest in his father's pro- 
perty in Southern Palestine. It is probable that 
his own habits, and the idolatrous practices of 
his wives and rising family, continued to excite 
and even increase the anger of his parents ; «nd 
that he, consequently, considered it more prudent 
to remove his household to a distance. He was 
residing in Mount Seir when Jacob returned 
from Padan-aram, and had then become sn rich 
and powerful that the impressions of his brother's 
early oflences seem to have been almost com- 

» The opinion tliat this mesalliance was the original 
tradition round which tlie other Biblical events con- 
nected with Esau were made to centre is too hypothetical 
and unsupported to secure acceptance Kot less imagi- 
native is the opinion that Esau and Edom are but names 
of gods transferred to men who have human biographies 
accorded to them.— [F.] 

pletely effaced. Ilis reception of Jacob was 
cordial and honest ; though doubts and fears still 
lurked in the mind of the latter, and betrayed 
him into somotliing of his old dui)licify ; for 
while he jiromiscs to go to Seir, he carei'ully 
declines his brother's escort, and, immediately 
after his departure, turns westward across the 
Jordan (Gen. xxxii. 7, 8, 11 ; xxxiii. 4, 12, 17). 

It dues not appear that the brothers again 
met until the death of their father, about twenty 
years afterwartis. Mutual interests and mutuji/ 
fear seem to have constrained them to act 
honestly, and even generously, towai'ds each 
otiier at this solenm interview. They united in 
laying Isaac's body in the cave of Machpelah. 
Then "Esau took all his cattle, and all his sub- 
stance, which he had got in the land of Canaan" 
— such, doubtless, as his father with Jacob's 
consent had assigned to him — " and went into 
the country from the face of his brother Jacob" 
(xxxv. 29 ; xxxvi. 6). He now saw clearly that 
the covenant blessing was Jacob's ; that God had 
inalienably allotted the land of Canaan to Jacob's 
posterity ; and that it would be folly to strive 
against the Divine will. He knew also that as 
Canaan was given to Jacob, IMount Seir was 
given to himself (cp. xxvii. 39, xxxii. 3 ; and 
Dent. ii. 5) ; and he was, therefore, desirous with 
his increased wealth and jiower to enter into full 
possession of his country, and drive out its old 
inhabitants (Dent. ii. 12). Another circumstance 
may have influenced him in leaving Canaan. He 
'• lived by his sword " (Gen. xxvii. 40) ; and he 
felt that the rocky fastnesses of Edom would be 
a safer and more suitable abode for such as by 
their habits provoked the hostilities of neigh- 
bouring tribes, than the open plains of Southern 

There is a difficulty eonnected with the names 
of Esau's wives, which is discussed under Aholi- 
BAiiAii and Basiiematii. Of his subsequent his- 
tory nothing is known ; for that of his descend- 
ants, see Edom and Edomites. [J. L. P.] 

E'SAU CUa-ai ; Sel), 1 Esd. v. 29. [Ziba.] 

ESA'Y ('Htroioy ; Isaia, Isaias), Ecclus. xlviii. 
20, 22 ; 2 Esd. ii. 18. [ISAIAH.J 

ESCHATOLOGY. Eschatology, or the 
Doctrine of the Last Things, is the name which 
of late has become common for doctrine con- 
cerning both the future state of the individual 
and the consummation of the present dispensa- 
tion, or end of the world, with its accompanying 
events; and a complete view cannot be obtained 
of the way in which either of these reached its 
iinal form, apart from a consideration of the 
other. The present article will necessarily be 
confined to a review of Biblical Eschatology. 
An attempt will be made to trace the progress 
of thought and Revelation on the Last Things in 
the Old and Kew Test.aments, though this also 
can be done only in bare outline, while other 
articles will be referred to for information on 
particular points. (1) It will be convenient to 
speak first of belief in the future of the indi- 
vidual. As regards actual knowledge and clear 
ideas on this subject, the Israelites, during the 
greater part of that period to which the Old 
Testament refers and belongs, are not in advance 
of other nations. Indeed, their very superiority 
consists in part in the severe restraint under 



which their thoughts are kept in this region, 
where they have no sure liglit to guide them. 
They have' no mythology in regard to it, and 
crive but little the reins to imagination. The 
bareness of their conceptions necessarily makes 
their words few, and may explain how it has 
been possible to doubt whether they believed in 
any continued existence of the soul after death 
at all. 

Such passages as Job xxxiv. 14, 15, and Eccles. 
xii. 7, with which also Pss. civ. 29 and cxlvi. 4 
may be compared, might possibly, taken by 
themselves, be supposed to imply a pantheistic 
conception : the spirit in man, which animates 
his frame, seems to be regarded as an effluence 
from an original Divine Source, with which it is 
to be reunited at death. But the strong sense 
of man's personality and relationship of re- 
sponsibility and love to a personal God which 
distinguishes the Old Testamsnt, negatives this 

Expressions like those in Pss. xxxix. 13, cxv. 
17, cxlvi. 4; Is. xxxviii. 18, 19, depict the loss 
of all the interests and hopes and joys, the 
warmth and light, of this present scene. They 
do not necessarily exclude the notion of con- 
tinued existence of the soul in another world. 
Indeed such an expression as " goinj down into 
silence " (Ps. cxv. 17) seems to imply it. 
Among such slight indications of belief in a 
continuance of existence may be reckoned the 
phrase "gathered unto his people " or "to his 
fathers," which clearly, from some passages in 
which it is used, cannot mean " buried in the 
family burying-place." See, for example. Gen. 
xxv. 8 (of Abraham, far away from his ancestral 
home), xlix. 33 (where it is used not of Jacob's 
burial, but of his death); Num. xx. 24 (of 
Aaron's death on Mount Hor) ; Judg. ii. 10 (of 
the passing away of a whole generation). As 
showing a similar view of death, compare 
David's language, 2 Sam. i. 23. A still clearer 
proof of belief in existence after death is the 
practice of necromancy (Deut. xviii. 11 ; Is. viii. 
19 ; 1 Sam. xxviii. 9 sq.). Is. xiv. 9 sq. and 
Ezek. xxxii. 31 give fuller pictures of the 
realms of the dead. In all this, howevei' — and 
the same holds of the language of the Old 
Testament genei'ally, with but few exceptions — 
the state after death is contemplated as one of 
gloom, sadness, enervation ; while no clear 
distinction is made between the condition of the 
righteous and the wicked, and no doctrine of 
retribution is associated with it. Compare 
especially the Book of Job, chaps, vii. and xiv. 
To the same eil'ect is the name by which the 
dead are in some places described, the Rephaim, 
translated by the Revisers " the Shades," which 
gives well the general sense of the word, though 
not agreeing strictly with its derivation. (On 
Rephaim, see art. Giants, § 3. On Sheol, the 
common name fur the Under-world, see Hell, 
and note also the name AbailJon, " destruction.") 

These mournful forebodings were the utter- 
ance of human misgiving and doubt, nat'iral 
even for the riy,hteous when so little clear 
knowledge of the future life had as yet been 
vouchsafed. They are preserved in Holy Scrip- 
ture, because it is a faithful record of human 
experience, apart from which it would be im- 
possible to understand the actual historv of the 
progress of Revi;lation. The prospect of giouuiy 


death made the sorrows and injustices of life 
harder to bear. The triumph of faith was as 
yet most commonly seen in the confidence that, 
in spite of all appearances to the contrary, God's 
righteousness would be vindicated even in this 
life. The broad lesson of the Providential 
ordering of this world had to be mastered 
before men were allowed to dwell on recom- 
pense in a life to come. Even such words as 
those of Balaam (Num. xxiii. 10), which seem 
to us so naturally to speak of the hope of future 
bliss, must, on the ground of the prevailing 
tenor and usage of Old Testament language, 
be understood to refer to the long life and 
peaceful end which were regarded as the fitting 
and appointed reward of godliness. 

But now and again, especially while viewing 
the incompleteness of the manifestation of 
Divine justice here, the soul is permitted to 
attain to a confidence that even in and through 
death it must be well with it, if it is reposing 
in trust upon God (see Pss. xvi. 10, 11 ; xvii. 
14, 15 ; xlix. 14, 15 ; Ixxiii. 24-26). Some inter- 
preters hold that no hope of immortality is 
expressed even in these passages. But in Ps. 
xlix. it seems clear that the reference must be 
to the joy of the righteous after death, from the 
fact that the contrast drawn is between their 
lot and the lot of the ungodly who are pros- 
perous even to the end of life. Such is also the 
most natural sense, and, supported by Ps. xlix., 
we may say is almost certainly the sense, of 
Ps. xvii. In Pss. xvi. and Ixxiii. again no inter- 
pretation which does not see in the language 
the expression of the hope of eternal communion 
with God seems adequate. But it is particularly 
to be noted that this confident hope of living 
enjoyment of God hereafter springs from the 
intense realisation of communion with God here. 
These psalmists are sure that Death cannot have 
power to triumph over such a fellowship. "The 
communion instituted by Revelation between 
the living God and man imparts to human 
personality an eternal importance " (Oehler). 
Compare our Lord's argument with the Saddu- 
cees, especially as recorded by St. Luke (xx. 37, 
38). Another well-known passage (Job six. 
25 sq.) seems to hold out hope of satisfaction 
after death for the righteous, while moving 
more than those last considered in the plane of 
Old Testament ideas. The exact rendering of 
this passage does not favour the view that it 
refers to a resurrection. And even if the render- 
ing of the A. V. were right, the words would, 
in the absence of all other intimations of belief 
in a resurrection in the Book, have to be under- 
stood of a vindication of the sufferer even in 
this life. But the thought seems rather to be 
that over his dust God would stand as his vindi- 
cator, and that even in Sheol he would be 
permitted to derive comfort from the proof 
given of his innocence and of God's favour. 

The further development, however, of tiie 
doctrine of immortality was not after the 
manner of ordinary Theism. It did not consist 
in attributing fuller life to the spirit aj^art 
from the body, hut in the growing expectation 
of a resurrection. In the case both of Is. xxvi. 
19 and Ezek. xxxvii. 1-14, it is difficult to 
decide whether a literal resurrection of the 
dead, or a figurative representation of national 
revival, is to be understoo 1. There is most to 



bo said for the formef view in Is. xxvi. 10, I 
where, as a. much earlier passage, we shoulii 
least expect it. But at all events, ia Dan. .xii. 
2, a resurrection whicli, though not universal, 
should comprise both godly and ungodly, is 
plainly foretold. Cp. also v. 13. The doctrine 
of the resurrection of the righteous is still more 
clearly insisted on in 2 Mace. vii. 9, 11, 14, 23, 
29 ; xii. 43, 44. The oppressions to which the 
faithful among the Jews were subjected under 
Antiochus Epiphanes were ))eculiarly suited to 
bring such a hope into jironiinence. It formed, 
as we know, a delinite article of the creed of the 
Pharisees, and is fully recognised in the Jewish 
Apocalvptic literature. The work of Christ 
with respect to this doctrine was (1) to refine 
and spiritualise it (Matt. xxii. 23-30, and 
]iarallels: cp. also St. Paul's teaching concern- 
ing the ''spiritual body," 1 Cor. xv. 35-end); 
("2) to place it upon a sure foundation through 
His revealing word and His own resurrection as 
the " (irst-fruits " (1 Cor. xv. 20), the " Hrst- 
born from the dead" (Col. i. 18; Rev. i. 5). 

2. But there is another hope more clearly 
apprehended and largely dwelt upon in the Old 
'I'estament than that of personal immortality ; 
it is that of the Redemption of Zion, the com- 
plete jieace, righteousness, and happiness of 
Israel under their promised God-given King. 
The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, 
when at length it arose, linked the hopes of the 
individual to those of the nation. The righteous 
would rise again in order to share in that 
triumph of the Divine love and righteousness 
in which, notwithstanding all seeming evidence 
to the contrary, they had believed. The faith in 
this glorious future for the nation had its foun- 
dation in the knowledge of God's covenant with 
Israel, to which He must prove faithful, and the 
sense in every age that the ideal of their condi- 
tion as the People of God had not as yet been 
attained, either as regards their inward state or 
their surroundings. It rose ever clearer and 
fuller in and through every period of adversity. 

This is not the place in which to discuss the 
justness of the language of the Seventh of the 
Thirty-nine Articles of the English Church. 
But the passing remark may be permitted, that 
whatever may be thought of its fitness when we 
are reviewing the uncertain hold upon the hope 
of bliss hereafter for the individual in the Old 
Testament, yet at least when we turn to the 
hope for Israel, as God's people, we see the in- 
adequacy of the theory that "the Old Fathers 
did look only for transitory promises." Though 
the future bliss is no doubt conceived under 
earthly forms and as taking place upon this 
earth, yet the whole drift of Old Testament 
hope sets towards a fitial and complete establish- 
ment of the Kingdom of God. 

The germ of the later Jewish and the Chris- 
tian conceptions of the Last Things is to be 
found in the imagery of the Prophets of the Old 
Testament concerning the Redemption of Zion. 
Jehovah's final judgment on the enemies of 
Israel passed into the loftier conception of the 
Day of Universal Judgment, and the picture of 
a restored Jerusalem furnished the image of tlie 
heavenly, eternal city. From the same imagery 
the doctrine of a Millennium, preceded and closed 
by specially fierce onslaughts of the enemies of 
God, was also drawn. While, again, the valley 

near Jerusalem where the enemies were to be 
slaughtered gave the name of the j>lace of 
torment in another world (see the arts. Hell 

and (JEIIKNNA). 

Foremost among the conceptions prepared 
under the Old Testament which in Christian 
faith were to be associated with the future 
coming of Christ as the Judge and heavenlv 
King, we have the exjtrcssion "day of the Lord " 
(i.e. of Jehovah), for a time of Divine judgment. 
We find it used of times of Divine visitation 
generally (Amos v. 18; Is. ii. 12, xiii. 6, 9; 
Lam. ii. 22 ; Ezek. xiii. 5) ; but it had also 
a special a])plication to a final judgment ujiou 
the enemies of Zion, and of the ungodly in the 
midst of her, closely connected with her re- 
demption (Is. xxxiv. 8 ; Obad. v. 15 ; Joel iii. 14; 
Mai. iv. 5). The idea of such a "day" does 
not seem to have been originally taken from a 
judge holding court, but from a terrible tri- 
umphant conqueror executing vengeance in a 
day of battle and slaughter (cp. Is. xiii. 4. 
Zeph. i. 8, 16 ; Ezek. xiii. 5, xxx. 3, 4 ; and Joel ii. 
may also be compared). Touches are also added 
to the descrij)tions, drawn from the terrors of 
nature (Is. xiii. 10; Zeph. 1. 15). The Lord's 
judgments were sometimes literally executed 
through the sword of human warriors. But 
in the visions of that last great judgment the 
vengeance upon the heathen and the sinners in 
Zion seems to be the work of powers of Nature, 
or powers supernatural. In Joel iii. 12, an ad- 
dition is made to the conception which was of 
the greatest moment in the histoi'y of the 
doctrine of judgment. The image of a great 
slaughter is still employed in that passage, but 
Jehovah is represented as sitting to judge while 
it is taking place. The valley in the mind of 
the Prophet here, when he speaks of " the vallev 
of decision," is most probably that same valley 
of Hinnom where were seen in the vision of 
Isaiah Ixvi. the carcases of those who had been 
slain in the great Divine visitation, and which 
furnished the name Gehenna to after-times. This 
term came eventually to be loosely used of the 
place of punishment to which the wicked go at 
death, as well as of that connected with the 
Messianic judgment; but originally it belonged 
to the latter only. 

After the destruction of the enemies of Zion, 
and of the rebellious sinners among her own 
people, there would follow a time of overflowing 
j)rosperity and peace. All nations would ac- 
knowledge the God of Israel and pay reverence 
to His people. Nature herself would be rendered 
newly propitious to man. All that is harsh and 
cruel in her would be altered, and the fruitful- 
ness of the earth would be multiplied many- 
fold. So great would the change be that it 
might be described as a renewal of heaven and 
earth (Hos. ii. 18-23 ; Is. ii. 2-4, xi., Ixv. 17, &c.). 
Similar descriptions, based upon these in the 
Prophets, are found in the Jewish Sibylline 
fragments, the pre-Christian portions of the Book 
of Enoch, and the Psalms of Solomon, the figures 
being sometimes grotesquelv exaggerated (Sib. 
Or. iii. 702-794; Enoch v.' 6-9, x. 16— xi. 2; 
Pss. of Sol. xvii. 23 sq.). We have not here, it is 
to be observed, the doctrine of the IMillennium in 
its definite and ultimate form : for no indica- 
tion is given of a limit to this period of bliss, 
and of another world to follow it. The first 



trace of such a conception which we meet with 
is in Enoch xci. 12-17. It comes out with far 
greater distinctness in 4 Esdras vii. 26-31, and 
in the Apocalypse of Baruch (Ixxiii.-lxxxir. 2), 
writings which most probably belong to the last 
thirty years or so of the 1st century a.d. It 
may be noted in passing that the duration of 
this Messianic time according to 4 Esdras is 
400 yeai's, and that very various lengths are 
assigned to it in Rabbinic writings. Into 
Jerusalem or around it all the faithful were to 
be gathered, and the difliculties attending such 
an arrangement are quaiutly dealt with. (For 
Rabbinic doctrine on the subject, see Gfrorei-, 
Jahvkundcrt des Ilcils, pt. ii. c. 10.) 

For the conception of the Universal Judgmer^t 
as well as for that of a Jlillennium, properly co 
called, we have to go beyond the Old Testament. 
The doctrine, indeed, of man's personal responsi- 
bility to God pervades the Old Testament ; but 
we do not find there the representation of one 
great future assize to which shall be brought 
iallen spirits and all men living and dead. For 
the earliest instances of this we must pass to 
the portions of the Book of Enoch which are 
generally admitted to be pre-Christian and to 
belong to the last century or century and a half 
before Christ (see chs. xvi. 1 ; xxii. 4, &c.). It 
is unnecessary to give particular references 
to later books, — 4 Esdras, the Apocalypse of 
Baruch, the Book of Jubilees. Isaiah xxiv. 
21, 22, has been thought by some to refer to 
a future judgment on spiritual beings and on 
departed kings. But at any rate a universal 
judgment is not there described. 

There are difierences in the representations of 
the things of the end in different portions of the 
New Testament. Language resembling that of 
the Jewish Apocalypses is chiefly to be found in 
the Synoptic Gospels, the Apocalypse of St. John, 
the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, and the 
Epistles to the Thessalonians. Deeper and more 
comprehensive teaching, mure divested of such 
imagery, is set before us in the remaining 
writings of St. Paul and St. John. But besides 
this broad distinction there are differences of 
imagery even in the former group, corresponding 
in a measure to varieties in Jewish ideas. It 
will be most convenient to follow the order of 
events in the Apocalypse and to compare other 
descriptions by the way. The succession of 
calamities in the gradually unfolding visions 
of the Apocalypse may be compared with the 
briefer and more general description of the 
signs of the end in our Lord's Apocalyptic dis- 
course in Matt. xxiv. (Mark xiii. ; Luke xxi.). 
Then after the fall of the city mystically called 
Babylon, He Whose Name is " The Word of God " 
is seen going forth to war followed by the 
armies of heaven ; and the enemies of God 
assemble to make war with Him and are over- 
thrown (Rev. xix. 11-21). Then follows a 
reign of the Saints ( xx. 1-7) for a thousand 
years. This passage does not enter into details, 
and it is not clear that what is ordinarily meant 
by the Millennium is intended. Such a belief, 
known as Chiliasm or Milleuarianism, was, 
indeed, very prevalent in the Christian Church 
of the 2nd century, and they so interpreted 
this passage of the Apocalypse. But their 
ideas on the subject were evidentlv chiefly 
drawn from Jewish sources (Justin M. l>ia!. 


cum Tryph., 51, 80, 81 ; Irenaeus, v. 33-36). 
If all ages of the Church and schools of inter- 
preters be taken into account, it has been more 
commonly held that this portion of the imagery 
of the Ajiocalypse has been tiulfilled in the 
victory, partial as it is, which Christ and His 
Church have already won. Elsewhere in the 
New Testament there is no clear indication of a 
finite period before the Judgment, like that of 
the reign of the Messiah in the later Jewish 
writings. In the Synoptic Gospels figures of 
earthly felicity are drawn from the Old Testa- 
ment and from current Jewish language to 
describe the triumph of the kingdom of God, 
such as that of the great banquet (Matt. viii. 
11, &c.), and of abundant possessions, including 
the reign of the Apostles with Christ (Matt, 
six. 28, 29, &c.). But if the language be con- 
sidered as a whole, it will be seen that it agrees 
rather with those earlier and simpler ideas 
described above, according to which the Mes- 
sianic times and the world to come were not 
distinguished from one another. According to 

1 Thess. iv. 16, 17, the resurrection of those 
that "sleep in Jesus " is to be a first incident of 
His appearing, so that they will share in all its 
joy and glory. Thus far this passage accords 
with Rev. xx. 7 ; but no room seems to be left 
for a reign on earth. 

To return to the Apocalypse. After the 
thousand years a renewed activity is permitted 
to spiritual wickedness ; and the powers of this 
world, under the names of Gog and !Magog 
(cp. Ezek. xxxviii., xxxix.), are .igain gathered 
together. The result is that they are destroyed, 
and the Devil, who deceived them, cast into the 
lake of fire. According to the older type of 
prophetic imagery, the judgment upon the 
ungodly was, as we have seen, conceived not as 
a formal process of judgment, but as a great 
slaughter. This view seems to be followed in 

2 Thess. i. 7-10; but it is to be supernaturally 
inflicted by the Christ Himself. In the more 
fully developed ideas of the things of the end, 
room was found for this ancient representation 
of the judgment by placing an overthrow of 
enemies (or even two, one at the beginning and 
one at the close of the Messianic times) before 
the final, universal forensic judgment upon 
quick and dead. This more developed conce]i- 
tion is presented to us in the Apocalypse. 

We are thus brought to the Last Judgment, 
and here we meet with the most significant point 
of contrast between Christian and Jewish teach- 
ing. It is that in the New Testament the Christ 
appears as the Judge in the Universal Judgment 
(Matt. XXV. 31 sq. ; 2 Cor. v. 10, and other allu- 
sions in St. Paul's Epistles ; James v. 7-9 ; 
1 John ii. 28, with iv. 17 ; and perhaps also 
1 Pet. iv. 5). This point does not appear quite 
so clearly in the Apocalypse ; it may, how- 
ever, be inferred. The dead stand " before the 
Throne" (right reading, xx. 12), and this Throne 
is that "of God and of the Lamb" (xxii. 1). 
Compare also xxi. 27 with xx. 12; and see 
ii. 23 and xxii. 12. 

Just before the Judgment the Deyil is cast 
into the lake of fire (xx. 10) to which the Beast 
and the False Prophet have also been consigned 
(xix. 20). Death and Hades, after they have given 
up their dead, are also cast there (xx. 13, 14). 
The binding of Satan during the thousand years 


and his final consignment to tlie lake of fire 
shduld In; ccimjiarcd with tho story in the Book 
of Enoch and other Jewish AjKicalyiises of the 
imi)risonment, from the time of their fall, of the 
angels who fell by lust ju^t before the Flood, 
and their removal at the Judgment Day to a 
i-tili worse place of torture (Enoch x. 4-6, 12, 
l.i; j\j)oc. of Baruch Ivi. 10-l;J ; Book of Jubi- 
lees, ch. v.). But Satan and his angels are not 
ilentical with the latter, though tliere must 
evidently be some connexion between the ideas 
about them both. 

Wicked men are cast into the same lake of 
fire (xx. 15, xxi. 8 ; cp. the other comparatively 
speaking full description of the Judgment in 
Matt. XXV. 31-46). In the Book of Enoch, on 
the other hand, the place of punishment to 
which the wicked augelsare to be sent is distinct 
from, tliough similar to, that for wicked men. 
Other jiassages suggesting conscious suffering, 
Avitiiout end, or of which no end is indicated, 
are Jlatt. v. 30, xiii. 49, 50, .xviii. 8, 9 (JMark ix. 
43, 45, 47, 48), xii. 32 (Mark iii. 29). More 
vague is the image of the " outer darkness," 
outside the lighted banqueting-hall, where the 
Feast is held, which represents the Joy of the 
triumphant kingdom of God (Matt. viii. 12, 
xxii. 13, xxiv. 51, xxv. 30 ; Luke xiii. 28). On 
the other hand, we have language which recalls 
rather the image of the destruction of God's 
enemies, and suggests annihilation. This is true 
especially of 2 Thess. i. 7-10 ; but with this 
view the following passages seem also best to 
agree : Matt. iii. 12 ; 1 Pet. iv. 17, 18 ; 2 Pet. 
iii. 7 ; Jude 14, 15. Cp. also Heb. x. 27. Of 
the four following it is difficult to say under 
which of the preceding heads they should be 
classed : Matt. x. 28, xvi. 25 ; Luke xiii. 5, 
XX. IS. On the other hand, Luke xii. 47, 48, 
59, speaks of punishment limited in duration as 
well as in severity ; for an unending hell, however 
modified, could not be described as " few stripes." 
Even the "many stripes " are scarcely consistent 
M'ith such a thought. An end seems also sug- 
gested in Matt. v. 25, 26, stern as the purpose 
of the passage is. Again, the very saying of our 
Lord, which speaks of a sin that hath " never 
forgiveness, either in this world or in the world to 
come," suggests that there are others which have 
(Matt. xii. 32 ; Mark iii. 28, 29). Again, the 
phrase "to every man according to his deeds," 
and similar expressions, regarding the Judgment 
(Matt. xvi. 27; 2 Cor. v. 10; Rev. xx. 12), 
seem to imply a greater variety of award than 
einiply the division into two great classes of 
the saved and the damned. Moreover, these 
passages all plainly refer not to the intermediate 
state, but to the Judgment Day. Cp. also 1 Cor. 
iii. 13, 15. The doctrine of Purgatory, when 
presented in a spiritual form, seems to commend 
itself to the reason, but it must be allowed that 
it has no basis in Holy Scripture. 

All this language has its correspondences with 
Jewisli descriptions of future judgment and 
punishment. Yet there is in the New Testament 
a greater simplicity and dignity; details are 
less dwelt upon; the moral and spiritual lessons 
count for much more, while a curious imagina- 
tion is less gratified. In that other group of 
New Testament writings to which reference has 
been made, glimpses are afforded into deeper 
underlying truths. All judgment has been 



committed to the Son of JIan (John v. 22-27). 
When He was on earth, the judgment of men of 
;ill classes, and of the Evil One himself, was pro- 
ceeding, and it is proceeding still (Jidin xii. 31 ; 
xvi. 8, 11). The word "eternal " is applied to a 
state of life and death on earth, where we should 
rather use the word " spirituaL" In no mere 
metaphorical sense there is a resurrection now, 
as well as hereafter (John iii. 36, v. 24, xi. 25, 
xvii. 3 ; 1 John iii. 14, v. 12, 13 ; Kom. vi. 1 sq.). 
But this does not destroy the sense of the need 
of future resurrection and judgment (John v. 
25, 29 ; 1 John iii. 2 sq. ; Kom. viii. 16 sq.). Here 
and there also a more sublime close seems to be- 
indicated than that of the Judgment Day itself, 
a time when at last every rational will shall be 
brought into obedience to Christ, and complete 
harmony and hajipiness shall be established 
through every realm of being (1 Cor. xv. 23- 
27 ; Col. i. 20 ; Ei)hes. i. 20 ; Acts iii. 21 ; Kom. 
xi. 32; Philip, ii. 10, 11). It is too much over- 
liioked liow much of the most distinctive tcacli- 
ing of the Christian Kevelation is contained iu 
its eschatology; in other words, in tlie new view 
which it gives of God's ultimate purposes wiil> 
regard to mankind and His kingdom. For in- 
stance, the real gist of St. Paul's great argument 
in the E|)istle to the Romans is to be found not 
less in chs. viii.-xi. than in chs. ii.-vii. 

We have attempted thus far to bring out 
clearly the facts in regard to the language of 
Holy Scripture on future judgment and ])unish- 
ment. Any adequate consideration of the con- 
clusions to be drawn in view of the modern con- 
troversies on the subject would be impossible 
here. We must confine ourselves to one or two 
remarks: (a) The descriptions are figurative, 
and the figures are not matter of Revelation. 
They are neitlier derived, except in germ, from 
the Old Testament, nor newly given by Christ, 
but are taken from, prevailing Jewish language, 
for the purpose of enforcing certain great truths. 
There are, moreover, variations in the imagery 
employed which show that the precise form of 
the representations is of small account. It is, 
for example, impossible to fit together the pic- 
ture of the servants beaten with few or many 
stripes with that of the two classes of the 
righteous and the wicked in the parable of the 
sheep and the goats. 

(Jj) We have as little right to explain away 
the passages which speak of the final restitution 
of all things as we have to destroy the force of 
those which describe the doom of the wicked. 
It may be that no thoroughly satisfactory way 
of reconciling them will present itself. If so, 
the apparently conflicting teaching should bring 
home to us our own ignorance and the weakness 
of our thought. 

3. The subject of the Intermediate State is 
treated — at least as regards the righteous — in 
the article on Paradise. It must suffice here 
to note its connexion with the topics which 
have been discussed in the present article. It 
would seem probable that the effort to combine 
the ideas respecting the Under-world to which 
the soul would go at death, spoken of in 1, when 
brought into comparison with those concerning 
the great consummation referred to in 2, must 
have helped to render definite the conception of 
an intermediate state. The holy dead must, it 
was felt, share in the future glory of Zion, and 



a term was thus set to their pi-esent state of 
•existence. The imagery on this subject also 
underwent a development after the close of the 
Old Testament Canon, as appears from the same 
Apocalyptic and Rabbinic literature to which 
reference has already been made. The most dis- 
tinct use of such imagery in the New Testament 
is in the picture of separate abodes for the 
righteous and wicked in Hades in the parable of 
Lazarus and Dives in Hades (Luke xvi. 22 sq.). 

It is always to be remembered that we can 
know nothing concerning either the future of the 
•individual soul or the end of the world, except 
in figurative language. But the figures which 
we have noticed, albeit not first promulgated in 
Holy Scripture, have received its sanction ; and, 
taken in general outline, they shadow forth 
truth to which our own minds and hearts give 
i\ response. In spite of the part taken by the 
body in all our thinking and acting, ineradic- 
able instincts of the human heart and conscience 
protest against the materialism which supposes 
that there is no continued existence of the 
human personality after death. At the same 
time we see that an organism, such as that of 
the resurrection-body, is necessary to the spirit 
for the fulness of life ; while all that we have 
learnt and are learning concerning the manifold 
ties that bind us together reconciles us to the 
thought that the individual must wait for 
perfect consummation and bliss in the final 

Jewish Eschatology and its relation to Chris- 
tian Faith is discussed, from various standpoints, 
in many modern German works which deal 
with the subject of Messianic doctrine. On the 
doctrine of Future Life in the Old Testament, 
Oehler's Theology of the Old Testament may 
be consulted with advantage. Information 
respecting Jewish doctrine later than the Old 
Testament, and the critical questions connected 
with the Jewish documents of the last one or 
two centuries B.C., and the 1st century A.D., 
)nay be obtained in The Jewish Messiah, by 
J. Drummond, or both on these points and their 
relation to Christian doctrine in The Jewish and 
Christian Messiah, by V. H. Stanton. A good 
succinct account of Jewish, belief in regard to 
the things of the end will be found in Schiirer, 
The Jewish People in the time of Jesus Christ, 
Div. ii. vol. ii. § 29, pp. 154-187, Eng. trans. 
F. Weber's Altsynagogale Paldstinische Theologie, 
pp. 322-382, is also to be mentioned as spe- 
cially useful for the Rabbinic doctrine on the 
.subject. [V. H. S.] 

ESCHEW (.lob i. 1, 8, ii. 3 ; 1 Pet. iii. 11) = 
to flee fi-om or shun. The word occurs in the 
collect for the Third Sunday after Easter, and is 
retained by the R. V. in the above 0. T. passages, 
but replaced by " turn away " in 1 Pet. [F.] 

ESDRAE'LON ('E<r5p7j\alj', B. 'Eo-Spo^Awj/, 
Judith iii. 9 ; B. 'E(TpT)\wv, A. 'EcrepriX'^'', Judith 
iv. 6 ; 'ZaSpriKwfj., BN. -\wy, Judith vii. 3 ; 'Eir- 
SprtKaif^, a. -K(i>v, B. "E.(TpT]fx, A. 'EaSp'fi/j., Judith 
i. 8 ; Esdrelon). This name is merely the Greek 
form of the Hebrew word Jezreel. It occurs 
in this exact shape only twice in the A. V. 
(Judith iii. 9, iv. 6). In Judith vii. 3, it is 
EsDRAELOJl (i/siiraefon, ed. 1611); and in i. 8, 
EsDRELOM {Esdrelon, ed. 1611), with the 


addition of " the great plain." The name is 
derived from the old royal city of Jezreel, 
which occupied a commanding site at the 
eastern extremity of the plain. 

The "great plain of Esdraelon " is called in 
the 0. T. tlie "valley of Megiddo " (2 Ch. 
XXXV. 22), the "valley of Megeddon " (Zcch. 
xii. 11), and "Jezreel" only in 2 Sam. ii. 9; 
in the Apocrypha, " the plain of Megiddo " 
(1 Esd. i. 29) and "the great plain" (1 Mace, 
xii. 49) ; by Josephus, " the great plain," rh 
TTiUov n4ya (Ant. xii. 8, § 5 ; £. J. iii. 3, § 1, 
&c.) ; and by Eusebius and Jerome, " the plain of 
Legio," TreSi'o;' ttjs Aiyeuvos, Campus Leijionis, 
from the Roman town Legio on its S. side. It 
separates the hills of Samaria on the S. from 
those of Galilee on the N. ; and is not only the 
largest and most fertile plain in Palestine, but 
one of the most remarkable features of the 
country. "A glance at its situation will show 
that to a certain extent, though not in an equal 
degree, it formed the same kind of separation 
between the mass of Central Palestine and the 
tribes of the extreme north, as the valley of the 
Jordan effected between that same mass and the 
trans-Jordanic tribes on the east " (Stanley, 
S. 4' P- P- 337). At its eastern extremity stood 
Jezreel, Zerin, the royal residence of the kings 
of Israel, whence the broad, open " valley of 
Jezreel " (Josh. xvii. 16 ; Judg. vi. 33 ; Hos. i. 
5) slopes gradually down to the Jordan valley ; 
and at its western end was Jokneam of Carmel, 
Tell Keimun. Its length from Zcnn to Tell 
Kcimun is 15 miles, and its greatest breadth 
from Jenln to Junjdr is 14 miles. On the N.E. 
the plain extends 3J miles further, to the foot 
of Mount Tabor ; and on the S.E. it stretches, 
eastward from Jenin, for 31 miles between 
Jlount Gilboa and the hills to the S. On the N. 
the mountains of Galilee rise boldly from the 
plain, and the " Mount of the Precipitation " 
(1285 ft.), below Nazareth, is conspicuous; 
whilst on the S. low olive-clad hills slope gently 
upwards to the heights of Mount Ephraim. Oa 
the N.E. are the ridge of /. Duhy (1690 ft.) and 
the isolated hill of Tabor (1843 ft.), and on the 
N.W. the Kishon runs out through a narrow 
gorge, between Carmel and the Galilean hills, to 
the plain of Acre and the sea. 

The wide undulating plain, now called ^ferj 
ibn 'Amir, is dotted with grey tells, and seamed 
in every direction with small watercourses, 
which convey the drainage of the surrounding 
hills to the Kishon. The fall is slight ; the 
water 2)arting near Jenin is only 260 ft. above 
the sea, and during winter the central portion of 
the plain becomes an impassable morass. The 
Kishon at the same time becomes a deep, turbid 
stream, and after heavy rain it rolls down in 
flood as it did on the day when it swept away 
the host of Sisera (Judg. v. 21). In summer 
the rich, crumbling volcanic soil cracks, and 
numerous fissures make riding off the beaten 
tracks difficult. Wherever it is tilled the plain 
yields abundant crops of wheat, cotton, tobacco, 
sesame, and millet, and everywhere flowers and 
rank weeds attest the fertility of the soil. To 
this richness there are allusions in Hos. ii. 
21, 22 ; Gen. xlix. 14, 15; 1 Ch. xii. 40; and 
in the modern name of the district, Beldd 
Hdritheh, the " country of the ploughed land." 
The plain is now fully cultivated, but thirty yeai'S 


ago it was the favourite resort of the Bedawin, 
who, like tlit; iioinad Midianites and Anialekitcs, 
— thoso '• children of the east " who were '"as 
locusts for multitude," whose "camels were 
without number as sand by the seaside," — 
devoured its rich pasture. Trees are rare 
except round villages ; but where there is an 
abundance of water, as at Jcn'in, they grow 
with great luxuriance. The whole plain is 
watered by the numerous springs on the N.E. 
and W. Between 217/ Keimun and I'cll Ahu 
Kiuicis there are from fifty to sixty springs, all 
fresh and good, and some of them feeding 
running streams. The three most remarkaijle 
groups are those of Lcjjiin, W. ed-DuJieh, and 
Kirch, from which even in the dry season con- 
siderable streams run down. No important 
town was ever situated in the plain itself, but 
on its borders were places of high historic and 
sacred interest. Such were Jokneam of Carmel, 
commanding roads through the gorge of the 
Kishou to Accho, and over the ridge to the 
plain of Sharon ; Megiddo, at the northern end 
of the easiest pass through the hills that 
separate Esdraelon from the Maritime Plain ; 
Taanach ; En-gannim, the Ginaia of Josephus 
(5. J. iii. 3, § 4), which marked the boundary of 
Samaria; Jezreel, the royal city, commanding 
the great road down the Valley of Jezreel to 
Bethshean and the country east of Jordan ; 
Shunem, Nain, and Endor, on the slopes of 
/. Duhn ; Daberath ; Chesulloth, the Xaloth of 
Josephus (Z). /. iii. 3, § 1) ; Gaba " of the Horse- 
men " {B. J. iii. 3. § 1) ; and Harosheth of the 

The principal roads which cross the plain 
are : (1) the main road from Ndhlus to Jenin 
and Nazareth ; (2) the great trade route from 
'Akka and Haifa to Zcrin, Beisdn, and the 
Jffaurdn, and to Tiberias and Damascus ; (3) the 
main road from Lydda to Bdka, and across 
the ridge of Carmel to Jokneam (^Tell Keimun), 
Haifa, and 'Akka ; (4) the road which runs 
from the Maritime Plain up the broad W. 'Arah, 
and, crossing the ridge at 'Ain Ibrali'na, descends 
to Megiddo {Lejjuii), whence it branches otF to 
Nazareth, and Zcrin, — this line is one of the 
easiest across the country, and must always 
have been of great importance ; (5) the road 
from Jenin, that passes along the plain of 
'Arrdbeh, N. of Dothan, and descends by W. cl- 
Ghamik to the Plain of Sharon : this, which is 
also an easy road, is probably the one that was 
followed by the Midianite and Amalekite mer- 
chants who carried Joseph down with them to 
Egypt. Over these roads the caravans of 
merchants and the armies of contending nations 
must always have passed on their way from E. to 
W., or from N. to S. ; and the fact that the great 
plain was such a common thoroughfare must 
have made it in peaceful times the most avail- 
able and eligible possession of Palestine. " It 
was the frontier of Zebulun — ' Rejoice, 
Zebulun, in thy goings out.' But it was the 
special portion of Issachar ; and in its condition, 
thus exposed to the good and evil fate of the 
beaten highway of Palestine, we read the 
fortunes of the tribe which, for the sake of this 
possession, consented to sink into the half- 
nomadic state of the Bedouins who wandered 
over it, — into the condition of tributaries to the 
Canaanite tribes, whose iron chariots drove 



victoriously through it. ' Rejoice, O Issachar, 
in thy tents . . . they shall suck of the abun- 
dance of the seas [from Acre], and of the 
[glassy] treasures hid in the sands [of the 
torrent Belus] . . . Issachar is a strong ass, 
couching down between two 'troughs': and 
he saw that rest was good, and the land that it 
was pleasant; and bowed his shoulder to bear, 
and became a servant to tribute.' " (Stanley, 
S. (f- J'. ]). 348 ) 

The plain was the scene of two of the greatest 
victories, and of two of the saddest defeats, in 

I'luiu ui K^draelu 

the history of the Jews. On the banks of the 
Kishon, in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo, 
tlie Lord delivered Sisera and his host into the 
hands of Barak (Judg. iv. v.) ; and, in the Valley 
of Jezreel, Gideon broke the " rod of the 
oppressor " (Judg. vii.). On the " high places '' 
of Gilboa, Saul and Jonathan perished miserably 
(1 Sam. xxxi. ; 2 Sam. i. 17-27); and in the 
Valley of Megiddo, Josiah was sore wounded by 
an arrow when attempting to stop the passage 
of Necho's army northwards from the ^laritime 
Plain (2 Ch. xxxv. 20-27). To these battles 
the plain pi-obably owes its celebrity as the- 



battle-field of the world, " the place which is 
Called in the Hebrew tongue, Armageddon ; " 
that is, " the city or mountain of Jlegiddo." 
It was across one portion of the plain, towards 
Jcnin, that Ahaziah fled from Jehu, and it was 
to Megiddo that he was brought to die when 
sore wounded at the ascent of Gur (2 K. ix. 
27). Here too, spreading themselves out from 
Bethulia to Cyanion, Tall Kcimun, Holofernes 
and his soldiers were encamped during the siege 
of the former ))lace (Judith vii. 3). At a later 
period during the Jewish war the plaih was the 
scene of frequent skirmishes, and at the foot of 
Mount Tabor the Jews were sharply defeated by 
Placidus (i?. J. iv. 1, § 8). Here Crusaders and 
Saracens met in conflict, and in 1799, at Faleli, 
the Turks were conquered, by Bonaparte and 
Kleber, at the battle of Mount Tabor. A 
graphic sketch of Esdraelon is given in Stanley's 
S. ^ P. pp. 335 sq. See also PEF. Mem. ii. ."36, 
39,50; Robinson, ii. 315-30, iii. 139 sq. ; Con- 
dor, Tent Work, i. Ill sq. ; Hbk. for S. ^ P. 
pp. 351 sq. [W.] 

ES'DEAS ("Eo-Spas ; Esdras), 1 Esd. viii. 1, 
3, 7, 8, 9, 19, 23, 25, 91, 92, 96 ; ix. 1, 7, 16, 
39, 40, 42, 45, 46, 49 ; 2 Esd. i. 1 ; ii. 10, 33, 
42 ; vi. 10 ; vii. 2, 25; viii. 2, 19; xiv. 1, 38. 


This is the first in order of the apocryphal 
books in the English Bible, which follows 
Luther and the German Bibles in sejiarating the 
apocryphal from the Canonical Books, instead 
of binding them up together according to his- 
torical order (Walton's Prolejom. de vers. Graec. 
§ 9). The classification of the four books which 
have been named after Ezra is particularly 
complicated. In the Vatican (B) edition of the 
LXX., our 1st Esd. is called " Esdras A." or 
the first Book of Esdras, in relation to the 
canonical Book of Ezra which follows it and is 
called " Esdras B." {i.e. our Ezra and Nehemiah) 
or the second Esdras, the reason for this order 
being probably due to the fact that the events 
related in it precede in point of time, at least 
partly, those related in the other two (see 
Lupton, p. 5, n. 3). But in the Vulgate, 1st 
Esd. means the canonical Book of Ezra, and 
2nd Esd. means Nchemiah, according to the 
primitive Hebrew arrangement, mentioned by 
Jerome, in which Ezra and Nehemiah made up 
two parts of the one Book of Ezra ; and 3rd 
and 4th Esd. — placed after the N. T. — are what 
we now call 1 and 2 Esdras. These last, with 
the Prayer of Manasses, are the only apocry- 
phal books admitted co nomine into the Romish 
Bibles, the other apocrypha being declared 
canonical by the Council of Trent (1546). The 
reason of the exclusion of 3rd Esdi-as from the 
Canon seems to be either that the Tridentine 
fathers in 154G were content to follow the 
estimate passed upon the book by Jerome (§ II. 
below), or that they were not aware, or did not 
remember, that it then existed in Greek. For, 
though it is not in the Complutensian edition 
(1515), nor in the Biblia Regia, yet it is found 
in the Aldine edition (1518), in the Strasburg 
edition (1526), and in the Basle edition (1545. 
See Lu])ton, p. 4). Vatablus (about 1540) had, 
it would seem, never seen a Greek copy, and, in 


tiie preface to the apocryphal books, speaks of 
it as only existing in some MSS. and printed 
Latin Bibles." For reasons now unknown, it 
was excluded from the Canon, though it has 
certainly quite as good a title to be admitted 
as Tobit, Judith, &c. It has indeed been stated 
(Bp. Marsh, Comp. View, ap. Soames, Hist, of 
Mcf. ii. 608) that the Council of Trent in 
excluding the two books of Esdras followed 
Augustine's Canon. But this is not so. Au- 
gustine (jle Ductr. Christ, lib. ii. 13) distinctly 
mentions among the libri Canonici, Esdrae duo;" 
and that one of these was our 1st Esdras is 
manifest from the quotation from it given below 
from Be Civit. Dei. Hence it is also sure that 
it was included among those pronounced as 
Canonical by the 3rd Council of Carthage (a.d. 
397), whei'e the same title is given, Esdrae 
lihri duo. In all the earlier editions of the 
English Bible the books of Esdras are numbered 
as in the Vulgate. In the 6th Article of the 
Church of England (first introduced in 1571) 
the first and second books denote Ezra and Ne- 
hemiah, and the 3rd and 4th, among the Apo- 
crypha, are our present 1st and 2nd. In the list 
of revisers or translators of the Bishops' Bible, 
sent by Archbishop Parker to Sir William Cecil, 
with the portion revised by each, Ezra, Nehe- 
miah, Esther, and the apocryphal books of 
Esdras seem to be all comprised under the one 
title of Esdras. Barlow, bishop of Chichester, 
was the translator, as also of the books of 
Judith, Tobias, and Sapientia {Corrcsp. of Archhp. 
Parker, p. 335, Parker Soc. See Westcott, Hist. 
of the Engl. Bible, p. 115). The Geneva Bible 
first adopted the classification used in our present 
Bibles, in which Ezra and Nehemiah give 
their names to the two Canonical Books, and the 
two apocryphal become 1 and 2 Esdras ; where 
the Greek form of the name indicates that these 
books do not exist in Hebi'ow or Chaldee. 

II. Reception of the hook. — As regards the 
antiquity of this book and the rank assigned to 
it in tlie early Church, it may suffice to mention 
thai Josei)iius quotes largely from it, and fol- 
lows its authority, even in contradiction to the 
canonical Ezra and Nehemiah, by wJiich he has 
been led into hopeless historical blunders and 
anachronisms. It is quoted also by Clemens 
Alexandrinus(/S'('rom. i.); and the famous sentence 
" Veritas manet, et invalescit in aeternum, ot 
vivit et obtinet in saocula saeculorum" (iv. 38) 
is cited by Cyprian as from Esdras, and prefaced 
by ut scriptum est (Epist. Ixxiv.). Augustine also 
refers to the same passage (de Civit. Dei, xviii. 
36), and suggests that it may be prophetical of 
Christ, Who is the truth. He includes under the 
name of Esdras our 1 Esd. and the canonical 
Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. 1 Esd. is also 
cited by Athanasius and other fathers (see Pohl- 

> "Oratio llanassae, necnon libri duo qui sub libri 
tertii et quarti Esdrae nomine circumferuntur, hoc 
in loco, extra scilicet seriem canonicorum librorum, 
quos sancta Tridentina synodus suscepit, et pro ca- 
nonicis suscipiendos decrevit, sepositi sunt, ne prorsus 
interircnt, quippe qui a nonnullis Sanctis Patribus 
interdum citantur, et in aliquibus Bibliis Latinis, tarn 
manuscriptis quam impvcssis, reperiuntur." 

•> Jerome, in his preface to his Latin Version of 
Ezra and Nehemiah, sa3-s, " Unds a nobis liber editus 
est," &c. ; though he implies that they were sometimes 
called 1 and 2 Esdras. 


ntann in Tiib. Thcohg. Quartahchr. p. 203 sq., 
1859) ; aud p('i-lia])S there is no sentence tliat 
has been more widely divulged than that of 
iv. 41, " Magna est Veritas et jiraevalet." It is 
rightly included by us among the Apocrypha, 
not only on the ground of its historical in- 
accuracy, and contradiction of the true Ezra, 
but also on the external evidence of the early 
vJhurch. That it was never known to exist in 
Hebrew, and formed no part of the Hebrew 
Canon, is admitted by all (see Bissell, § 4). 
Jerome, in his preface to Ezra and Neh., speaks 
contemptuously of the dreams {somnia) of the 
'3rd and 4th Esdras, and says that they are to be 
utterly rejected. In his I'rolojus Gakntus he 
clearly defines the number of Books in the Canon, 
sxii., corresponding to the xxii. letters of the 
Hebrew alphabet, and says that all others are 
apocryphal. This of course excludes 1 Esdras. 
Melito, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Gregory 
Nazianzen, Hilary of Poitiers, Cyril of Jerusalem, 
the Council of Laodicea, and many other fathers, 
expressly follow the same Canon, counting as 
apocryphal whatever is not comprehended in it. 
HI. Contents. — As regards the contents of the 
book, the first chapter is a transcript of the 
last two chapters of 2 Ch., for the most part 
verbatim, and only in one or two parts slightly 
abridged and paraphrased, and showing some 
corruptions of the text, the iise of a different 
Greek Version, and some various readings. 
Chapters iii., iv., and v., to the end of v. 6, are 
the original portions of the book, containing 
the legend of the three young Jews at the 
court of Darius ; and the rest is a transcript 
more or less exact of the Book of Ezra, with 
the chapters transposed and quite otherwise 
arranged, and of a portion of Nehemiah (cp. 
Lupton, Schiirer, and Zockler). The central 
subject of the book, now very commonly ac- 
cepted, is that originated by the heading of the 
Old Latin Version, " De restitutione Templi : " 
but other and collateral designs are apparent 
on the part of the compiler, such as his wish 
to stimulate his countrymen to a more zealous 
observance of the Law, and win the favour of a 
Ptolemaic or other heathen power ; or his 
desire to introduce and give Scriptural sanction 
to the legend about Zerubbabel, which may or 
may not have an historical base, and may have 
existed as a separate work ; or to explain the 
great obscurities of the Book of Ezra, and to 
present the narrative, as the author understood 
it, in historical order. In this latter point, how- 
ever, he has signally failed. For, not to advert 
to innumerable other contradictions, the intro- 
ducing the opposition of the heathen, as offered 
to Zerubbabel after he had been sent to Jeru- 
salem in such triumph by Darius, and the 
describing that opposition as lasting " until the 
reign of Darius " (v. 73), and as put down by 
an appeal to the decree of Cyrus, is such a pal- 
pable inconsistency, as is alone quite sufficient 
to discredit the authority of the book. It even 
induces the suspicion that it is a farrago made 
up of scraps by several different hands. At all 
events, attempts to reconcile the different por- 
tions with each other, or with Scripture, is lost 
labour (see Lupton, § iii.). The compiler him- 
self is unknown. 

V. Time and place. — As regards the time when 
and place where the compilation was made, the 


oriijinal portion (iii. 1-v. 6) — original, that is, 
in the sense that there is nothing to answer to 
it in the Canonical Books — does not afford much 
clue. It may have come from a current Persian 
court anecdote or frcjin a Jewish tradition. The 
conjecture (Fritzsche and lieuss) that not Zerub- 
babel but las son Joachim is the hero of this 
episode, and the deduction of date from this 
cliange, is unsatisfactory, and does not remove 
other difficulties (see Lupton and Zockler). 
The writer was conversant with Hebrew, 
though he did not write the book in that 
language. He was well acquainted with the 
Books of Esther and Daniel (I Esd. iii. 1, 2sq.), 
and other Books of Scripture (ib. vv. 20, 21, b'J, 
41, &c., and v. 4.5 compared with Ps. cxxxvii. 
7) ; but that he did not live under the Persian 
kings, and was not contemporary with the 
events narrated, appears by the undiscrimi- 
nating way in which he uses promiscuously the 
phrase Mcdes aiul Persians, or Persians and 
MedcSy according as he happened to be imitating 
the language of Daniel or of the Book of Esther. 
The allusion in iv. 23 to " sailing upon the sea 
and upon the rivers," for the purpose of " rob- 
bing and stealing," seems to indicate residence 
in Egypt, and acquaintance with the lawlessness 
of Greek pirates there acquired. The phrase- 
ology of V. 73 (of disputed meaning) savours 
also strongly of Greek rather than Hebrew. If, 
however, as seems very probable, the legend of 
Zerubbabel appeared first as a separate piece, 
and w'as afterwards incorporated into the narra- 
tive made up from the Book of Ezra, this Greek 
sentence from ch. v. would not prove anything 
as to the language in which the original legend 
was written. The expressions in iv. 40, " She 
is the strength, kingdom, power, and majesty of 
all ages," is very like the doxology found in 
some copies of the Lord's Prayer, and retained 
by us, " thine is the kingdom, and the power 
and the glory for ever •, " but Lightfoot says 
that the Jews in the Temple-service, instead of 
saying Amen, used this antiphon, " Blessed be 
the Name of the Glory of His Kingdom for ever 
and ever " (vi. 427). So that the resemblance 
may be accounted for by their being both taken 
from a common source. Indications, though 
faint ones, seem to place the origin of the work 
in the 1st, or at the latter end of the 2nd, 
century B.C. Ewald finds traces of the story of 
chs. iii. iv. in the earliest of the Sibylline books 
(B.C. 181-143), and affirms that the "history" 
of Aristeas (on the LXX. ; 1st century) must 
have been known to the compiler. Lupton 
argues that the building of a temple, or re- 
storation and adaptation of an Egyptian temple, 
for Jewish worship, such as is connected with 
Onias in the time of Ptolemy Philometor, 
suggested the production of 1 Esdras, and 
furnishes other reasons for agreeing with Herz- 
feld in assigning the work to a period preceding 
the Maccabaean wars. The point cannot be said 
to be conclusively settled. 

For a further account of the history of the 
times embraced in this book, see Ezra ; 2 Es- 
DKAS; Joseph. Antiq. Jud. xi. ; Hervey's Gene- 
alo'j!/ of our Lord Jesus Christ, ch. xi. ; Bp. Cosin 
on the Canon of Scr, • Fulke's Defence of Transl. 
of Bible, p. 18 sq., Parker Soc. ; Kitto, Bibl. 
Ci/clop., "Esdras." The works of Fritzsche 
{Handb. z. d, Apokryphcn, i. 11 sq.), Bissell 


{Lange^s Comm. on the Apocrypha), Lujiton 
(Spea/ier's Comm. on the Apociypha), ami 
ZiJpklcr (' Die Apokryphen ' in Strack u. Zock- 
ler's K(jf. Komm.) will supply the reader with 
references to modern works. [A. C. H.] [F.] 


the English Version of the Apocrypha, and so 
called by the author (2 Esd. i. 1), is more com- 
monly known, according to the reckoning of 
the Latin Version, as the fourth Book of Ezra 
[see above, 1 EsDRAS] ; but the arrangement in 
the Latin MSS. is nut uniform (see that of the 
Codex Sangermanensis quoted in Lupton, § i.), 
and in the Arabic and Aethiopic Versions the 
book is called the first of Ezra. The original 
title, 'ATroKaA.ui^is''Eo-5pa (or irpo<f)7)T6ia''E(rSpa), 
"the Eevelation of Ezra," which is preserved 
in some old catalogues of the canonical and 
apocryphal books (Xicephorus, ap. Fabric. Cod. 
Fseud. V. T., ii. 170 ; Montfancon, Biblioth. 
Coislin. p. 19-i), is far more appropriate, and it 
were to be wished that it could have been 
restored, had it been possible to do so without 
confusion with a later and inferior work, bear- 
ing this title, and published by Tischendorf in 
1866 (cp. Lupton, § i.) 

L Languaije and Versions. — The original lan- 
guage of the book was Greek (cp. V^an der 
Vlis, Disputatio critica de Ezrae libra Apo- 
crypha, &c., pp. lO-l-t, 1839), but for a long 
time it was known only by an Old Latin 
Version, which is preserved in some JISS. of 
the Vulgate. This Version (3rd cent., Fritzsche) 
was nsed by Ambrose (see the parallels in 
Lupton, § ii.), and, like the other parts of 
the Vetus Latina, is probably older than the 
time of Tertullian. The Arabic text was dis- 
covered by Mr. Gregory about the middle of the 
17th century in two Bodleian MSS., and an 
English Version made from this by Simon 
Ockley was inserted by Whiston in the last 
volume of his Primitive Christianity (London, 
1711). Fabricius added the various readings of 
the Arabic text to his edition of the Latin in 
1723 (^Cod. Pseud. V. T., ii. 174 sq.). The 
Aethiopic text was published in 1820 by 
[Archbp.] Laurence with English and Latin 
translations, likewise from a Bodleian MS. 
which had remained wholly disregarded, though 
quoted by Ludolf in his Dictionary (*' Primi 
Esrae libri, versio Aethiopica. . .Latine Anglice- 
que reddita ; " Oxon. 1820). The emendations 
made by Van der Vlis (p. 77), the readings from 
other MSS. collected by Dillmann (printed at 
the end of Ewald's edition of the Arabic text), 
and those subsequently made by Praetorius, are 
necessary for the study of a text of great value. 
The Latin translation has been reprinted by 
Gfrorer, with the various readings of the Latin 
and Arabic {Praef. Pseud., Stuttg. 1840, p. 66 
sq.) ; and the Bodleian Arabic text has been 
published by Ewald (1863), who dates it a.d. 
1354, and another version of it, also of the 
14th cent., by Gildemeister (1877). The Ar- 
menian Version, published in 1666, and trans- 
lated in Hilgenfeld's Messias Judaeorum, diverges 
yery widely from the rest. 

Of the five existing Versions, four (the 
Syriac, Arabic, Aethiopic, and Latin) are thought 
to have been made from a Greek text ; the Arme- 
nian Version was not. This is certainly the case 


with regard to the Latin, the oldest and most 
important of all, which bears everywhere traces 
of Greek idiom (Liicke, ]'crsiich einer vallst. 
Einleitung, i. 144), and the Aethiopic (Van der 
Vlis, p. 75 sq.), but is less certain with regard 
to the two versions of the Arabic (Fritzsche 
thinks the first text of the Arabic to be taken 
from the Syriac). A clear witness to the Greek 
text is Clement of Alexandria, who expressly 
quotes the book as the work of " the prophet 
Ezra " (^Strom. iii. 16 ; cp. Ambrose, da bono 
mortis, ch. xii.). A question, however, has been 
raised whether the Greek text was not itself a 
translation from the Hebrew (Bretschneider in 
Henke's Mus. iii. 478 sq. ; ap. Liicke, /. c.) ; but 
the arguments from language by which the 
hypothesis of a Hebrew (Aramaic) original is 
supported, are wholly unsatisfactory ; and in 
default of direct evidence to the contrary, it 
must be supposed that the book was composed 
in Greek. This conclusion is further strength- 
ened by its internal character, which points to 
Egypt as the place of its composition. 

The Latin text, for many years that of the 
Codex Sangermanensis (a.d. 822), compared with 
that of the Codex Turinensis (13th cent.) and 
of the Codex Dresdensis (15th cent.), can now 
be improved by a Complutensian MS. of the 
8th cent, discovered by Prof. Palmer in 1826, 
and by the Amiens MS. of the 9th cent, dis- 
covered by Mr. Beusley in 1874 (cp. Lupton, 
§ iii.). Followed by the English Version, it 
contains two important interpolations (chs. i. ii. ; 
XV. xvi.) which are not found in the four 
Oriental Versions, and are separated from the 
genuine Apocalypse in the best Latin MSS. 
Both of these passages are evidently of Chris- 
tian origin: they contain traces of the use of 
the Christian Scriptures (e.g. i. 30, 33, 37 ; 
ii. 13, 26, 45 sq. ; xv. 8, 35 ; xvi. 54), and still 
more they are pervaded by an anti-Jewish spirit. 
Thus, in the opening chapter, Ezra is commanded 
to reprove the people of Israel for their con- 
tinual rebellions (i. 1-23), in consequence of 
which God threatens to cast them off (i. 24-34) 
and to " give their houses to a people that shall 
come." But in spite of their desertion, God 
offers once more to receive them (ii. 1-32). The 
offer is rejected (ii. 33), and the heathen are 
called. Then Ezra sees " the Son of God "■ 
standing in the midst of a great multitude 
"wearing crowns and bearing palms in their 
hands," in token of their victorious confession 
of the truth. The last two chapters (xv., xvi.) 
are different in character. They contain a stern 
prophecy of the woes which shall come upoa 
Egypt, Babylon, Asia, and Syria, and upon the 
whole earth, with an exhortation to the chosen 
to guard their faith in the midst of all the 
trials with which they shall be visited (? the 
Decian persecution. Cp- Liicke, p. 186, &c.). 
Another smaller interpolation occurs in the 
Latin Version in vii. 28, where filius mens Jesus 
answers to " My Messiah " in the Aethiopic, and 
to " My Sou Messiah " in the Arabic (cp. Liicke, 
p. 170 n. &c. ; Speaker's Comm. in loco). The 
passage in the Oriental Versions after vii. 35, 
now also restored to the Latin, was probably 
omitted from dogmatic causes. The chapter 
contains a strange description of the inter- 
mediate state of souls, and ends with a peremp- 
tory denial of the efficacy of human interces- 


aion after death. Vigilantius appealed to the 
.passage in support of his views, and called down 
upon liimself by this the severe reproof of 
Jerome {Lib. c. Vijiil. c. 7). This circumstance, 
combined with the Jewish comi)lexion of the 
narrative, may have led to its rejection in later 
times (cp. Liicke, p. 155 sq.). 

II. Cuntcnts. — The original Apocalypse (iii.- 
xiv.) consists of a scries of angelic revelations 
and visions in which Ezra, musing in the out- 
skirts of Babylon, is instructed in some of the 
great mysteries of the moral world, and assured 
''of the final triumph of the righteous. The 
first revelation (iii.-v. 15, accoi-ding to the 
E. Y.) is given by the Angel Uriel to Ezra, 
in " the tliirtieth year after tlie ruin of the 
city" (i.e. some ninety years too early!), in 
answer to his complaints (ch. iii.) that Israel 
was neglected by God while the heathen were 
lords over them ; and the chief subject is the 
unsearchablencss of God's purposes, and the 
signs of the last age. The second revelation 
(v. 20-vi. 34-) carries out this teaching yet 
further, and lays open the gradual progress 
of the plan of Providence, and the nearness 
of the visitation before which evil must attain 
its most terrible climax. The third revela- 
tion (vi. 35-ix. 25) answers the objections 
which arise from the apparent narrowness of 
the limits within which the hope of blessedness 
is confined, and describes the coming of Messiah 
and the last scene of Judgment. After this 
follow three visions. The first vision (is. 26- 
X. 59) is of a woman (Sion) in deep sorrow, 
lamenting the death, upon his bridal day, of her 
■only son (the city built by Solomon), who had 
been born to her after she had had no child for 
thirty years. But while Ezra looked, her face 
■" upon a sudden shined exceedingly," and " the 
Avoman appeared no more, but there was a city 
builded." The second vision (chs. si., xii.), in a 
dream, is of an eagle (Rome) which "came up 
from the sea " and " spread her wings over all 
the earth." As Ezra looked, the eagle suffered 
strange transformations, so that at one time 
"three heads and six little wings" remained; 
and at last only one head was left, when sud- 
denly a lion (Messiah) came forth, and with the 
voice of a man rebuked the eagle, and it was 
burnt up. The third vision (ch. xiii.), in a 
dream, is of a man (Messiah) " flying with the 
clouds of heaven," against whom the nations of 
the earth are gathered, till He destroys tliem 
with the blast of His mouth, and gathers 
together the lost tribes of Israel and offers Sion, 
" prepared and builded," to His people. The 
last chapter (xiv.) recounts an appearance to 
Ezra of the Lord Who showed Himself to Moses 
in the bush, at Whose command he receives 
again the Law which had been burnt, and with 
the help of scribes writes down ninety-four 
books (the twenty-four canonical Books of the 
O. T. and seventy books of secret mysteries), 
and thus the people are prepared for their last 
trial, guided by the recovered Law." 

» For other arrangements of the revelations and 
visions (e.g. sevenfold) see Schiirer, Zuckler, and Lupton, 
$iv., who also gives a fuller analysis of the contents. 
The arbitrary views of Iselin, who considers the work a 
fiction, composed by a Syrian Christian against Mahora- 
medanism, and of Eabisch, who finds in ch. xiv. not 


HI. Date. — The date of the book (chs. iii.- 
xiv.) is much disputed (see the three main con- 
clusions ill Schiirer-), though the limits withiu 
which opinions vary are narrower than in the 
case of the book of Enoch. Liicke ( Versuch eincr 
vollst. Einl.- i. 2(19) places it in the time of 
Caesar; Van der V'lis, shortly after the death of 
Caesar. Laurence (/. c.) brings it (h)wn somewhat 
lower, to 28-25 B.C., and Hilgenf'cld (.lud. Apok. 
p. 221 ; Me.^sias Juducorum, p. Ixi.) agrees with 
this conclusion, though he arrives at it by very 
different reasoning. On the other hand, Gfrorer 
(Jahrh. d. lleils, i. ()9 sq.) assigns the book to the 
time of Domitian (a.D. 81-96), and in this he is 
followed by most authorities, VVic.seler, Reuss, 
Fritzsche, Dillmann, Schiirer,- &c. The inter- 
pretation of the details of the vision of the 
eagle furnishes the chief data for determining 
the time of its composition (cp. Fabricius, Cod. 
Pseud, ii. p. 189 sq. ; and Liicke, j). 187, n. &c., 
for a summary of the earlier opinions on the 
composition of tlie book). 

The chief characteristics of the " three- 
headed eagle," which refer apparently to his- 
toric details," are "twelve feathered wings" 
(duodecim alae pennaruin), "eight counter- 
feathers " ( contrariae pennae ), and " three 
heads ; " but though the writer expressly inter- 
prets these of kings (xii. 14, 20) and " king- 
doms " (xii. 23), he is, perhaps intentionally, so 
obscure in his allusions, that the interpretation 
only increases the difficulties of the vision 
itself. One point only may be considered cer- 
tain, — the eagle can typify no other empire than 
Rome. Notwithstanding the identification of 
the eagle with the fourth empire of Daniel (c]i. 
Barn. Ep. 4- ; Daniel, Book of), it is impossible 
to suppose that it re])resents the Greek king- 
dom (flilgenfeld ; cp. Volkmar, Die vierte Buch 
Esra, p. 36 sq., Ziirich, 1858). The power of 
the Ptolemies could scarcely have been de- 
scribed in language which may be rightly 
applied to Rome (xi. 2, 6, 40) ; and the succes- 
sion of kings quoted by Hilgeufeld to represent 
"the twelve wings" preserves only a faint 
resemblance to the imagery of the vision. 
Seeking then the interpretation of the vision in 
the history of Rome, the second wing (i.e. king), 
which rules twice as long as the other (xi. 17), 
is found in Augustus, who reigned some fifty-six 
years. The " three heads " are taken to repre- 
sent the three Flavii (Vespasian, Titus, and 
Domitian), and " the twelve " to be the nine 
Caesars (Jul. Caesar to Vitellius) and the three 
pretenders Piso, Vindex, and Nymphidius 
(Gfrorer). Volkmar's interpretation — by which 
the twelve wings represent six Caesars (Caesar 
to Nero) ; the eight " counter-feathers," four 
usurping emperors, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and 
Nerva ; and the three heads the three Flavii — 
oilers many striking coincidences with the text, 
but is directly opposed to the form of interpre- 
tation given by Ezra (xii. 14, 18), and for other 

less than five minor Apocalypses worked np in the 
time of Hadrian (a.d. 120), may be seen in Zockler, 
p. 447.— [F.] 

•> The description of the duration of the world as 
"divided into twelve (ten Aeth.) parts, of which ten 
parts are gone already, and half of a tenth part" 
(xiv. 11), is so uncertain in its reckoning, that no 
argument (e.g. that of Hilgenfeld) can be based upon it. 

3 S 


reasons is extremely improbable. Van iler Vlis 
and LiJcke- regard the twelve kings as only gene- 
rally symbolic of the Roman power; and while 
tlioy identify the three heads with the Trium- 
virs, seek no explanation of the other details. 
The clearer light now thrown upon Jewisli 
thought and history during the critical jieriod 
100 B.c.-lOO A.D. makes Gfrorer's hypothesis, 
with modifications, the most probable (see 

The book — apocalyptic in cast and markedly 
distinct from the historically framed books 
which also bear the name of Ezra — is a 
genuine product of Jewish tlionght. Weisse 
(Ecangclicnfraje, p. 222) alone dissents on this 
point from the unanimous judgment of recent 
scholars (Hilgenfeld, p. 190, «S:c.) ; and the con- 
trast between the tone and style of the Chris- 
tian interpolations and the remainder of the book 
is in itself sulHcient to prove the fact. This 
apocalypse was written in Alexandria more 
probably than in Palestine; the opening and 
closing chapters certainly were ; while their 
author is now considered to have been a Chris- 
tian. The date of chs. xv., xvi. is placed between 
2*30-270 A.D. ; that of chs. i., ii. is not fixed so 

IV. Character. — In tone and character the 
apocalypse of Ezra offers a striking contrast to 
that of Enoch [Book of Exocii]. Triumphant 
anticipations are overshadowed by gloomy fore- 
bodings over the destiny of the world. Tfie idea 
of victory is lost in that of revenge. Future 
blessedness is reserved only for " a very few " 
(vii. 70 ; viii. 1, 3, 52-55 ; ix. 1-13). The great 
question is "not how the ungodly shall be 
punished, but how the righteous shall be saved, 
for whom the world is created " (ix. 13). The 
" woes of Messiah " are described with a terrible 
minuteness, which approaches the despairing 
traditions of the Talmud (v., xiv. 10 sq., ix. 
3 sq.); and after a reign of 400 years (vii. 28-35 ; 
the clause is wanting in Aeth. v. 29), "Christ," 
it is said, " My Son, shall die (Arab, omits), and 
all men that have breath; and the world shall 
be turned into the old silence seven days, like as 
in the first beginning, and no man shall remain " 
(vii. 29). Then shall follow the resurrection 
and tlie judgment, "the end of this time and 
the beginning of immortality ' (vii. 43). In 
other points the doctrine of the book offers 
curious approximations to that of St. Paul, as 
the imagery does to that of the Apocalypse 
(e.g. 2 Esd. xiii. 43 sq. ; v. 4).= The relation 
of •' the first Adam " to his sinful posterity, and 
the operation of the Law (iii. 20 sq., vii. 48, ix. 
36) ; the transitoriness of the world (iv. 26) ; 
the eternal counsels of God (vi. sq.) ; His 
Providence (vii. 11) and long-suffering (vii. 64); 
His sanctification of His people " from the 
beginning" (ix. 8) and their peculiar and lasting 
privileges (vi. 59), are plainly stated ; and on 
the other hand the efficacy of good works (viii. 
33) in conjunction ^v^th faith (ix. 7) is no less 
clearly affirmed. 

One tradition which the book contains ob- 
tained a wide reception in early times, and 
served as a pendant to the legend of the origin 

« A complete list of parallel passages between 2 Esd. 
and the N, T. may be seen in Lee, 'AiroAein-d/neva, 
pp. 112-25, lf52. 


of the I.XX. Ezra, it is said, in answer to his 
prayer that he might be inspired to write agaiu 
all the Law which was burnt, received a com- 
mand to take with him tablets and five men, 
and retire for forty days. In this retirement a 
cup was given him to drink, and furthwith his 
understanding was quickened and his memory 
strengthened ; and for forty days and forty 
nights he dictated to his scribes, who wrote 
ninety-four books (Latin, 204), of which twenty- 
four were delivered to the jieople in place of the 
books which were lost (xiv. 20-48). This- 
strange story was repeated in various forms by 
Irenaeus (cidc. Ilacr. iii. 21, 2), Tertullian (do 
cult, fooin. i. 3, "omne instrumentum Judaicae 
literaturae per Esdi'am constat restauratum "), 
Clement of Alexandria {Strom, i. 22, p. 410, P. ;. 
cp. p. 392), Jerome {adv. Ilelv. 7, cp. Pseudo- 
Augustine, do Jlirab. S. Scr. ii. 32), and many 
others ; and probably owed its origin to the- 
tradition which regarded Ezra as the representa- 
tive of the men of "the Great Synagogue," to- 
whom the final revision of the Canonical Books- 
was universally assigned in early times. 

V. Eeccption. — Though the book was assigned 
to the " prophet " Ezra by Clement of Alexan- 
dria {Strom, iii. 16) and quoted with respect 
by Irenaeus (/. c.) and Ambrose, who adopts or 
paraphrases many passages in it (Lupton, § ii.), 
it did not maintain its ecclesiastical position ia 
the Church.'' Jei'ome speaks of it with con- 
tempt {adv. Vigilant. See quotation in Speaker's 
Coinm. on vii. 102 *), and it is rarely found in 
3ISS. of the Latin Bible. Archbishop Laurenccv 
examined 180 MSS., and the book was contained 
only in thirteen, and in these it was arranged 
very differently. It is found, however, in the 
printed copies of the Vulgate older than the 
Council of Trent, by which it was excluded from 
tlie Canon ; and quotations from it still occur 
in the Roman services (Basnage, ap. Fabr. Cvd. 
Pseud, ii. 191. The words of ii. 3+, 35 are 
embodied in the "Missa pro defunctis " of the 
Sarum use). On the other hand, though this 
book is included among those which are "read 
for examples of life" by the English Church, 
no use of it is now made in public worship, 
though formerly ii. 3G, 37 was used as an Introit 
for Whitsun Tuesday. Luther and the Reformed 
Church rejected the book entirely ; but it was 
held in high estimation by numerous mystics 
(Fabric. I. c. p. 178 sq.), for whom its contents 
naturally had great attractions. 

VI. Literature. — The literature of the subject 
is very large. Some works have been already 
noted. Schiirer {Gcsch. d. Jiid. Volhes im 
Zeitalter Jcsu Christi,^ p. 661) and Zockler 
(' Die Apokryphen d. A. T.'s nebst einem Anhang 
iiber die Pseudepigraphen,' p. 448 in Strack 
u. Zockler's Kgf. Komm. in d. heil. Schriftcii 
A. u. iV. T.'s) give a full list. The English 
reader will find help from Bissell, "The Ajjo- 
crypha," Appendix i. (Lange's Comm. on the 
Ilohj Scriptures) ; Eddrup, Introduction to 1 
and 2 Esdras in S.P.C.K. Comm. on the Apo- 
crypha ; Churton's The Uncanonical and Apo- 
cryphal Scriptures ; and above all from Lupton in 

a The references and allusions once found in Clement 
of Rome, Barnabas, Hermas, Tertullian, and Cyprian 
are now generally given up (cp. Lupton, J ii.). 


the Speaficr's Comm. on 2 Esdras. The essay of 
Van der Vlis is the most important contribution 
to the stiulv of the text, of which a critical 
edition is still needed, though the Latin materials 
for its construction are abnndant. [B. F. W.] [F.] 



ES'EBON, THEY OF (tovs 'Ea-ffiovlras, 
A. TOVS 'Effefiwu; Hescbon), Judith v. 15. 

' ES'EBRIAS ("EffepelSias ; ScdcbMs), 1 Esd. 

Viii. 54. [SlIEREBIAlI.] 

E'SEK (pl^'V = strife ; 'ASiKia; Caiumnia), a 
well ("1N3) containing a springof water ; which 
the herdiimen of Isaac dug in the valley of 
Gerar, and which received its name of Esek, 
or "strife," because the herdsmen of Gerar 
" strove " (Ipt^rnn) with him for the possession 
of it" (Gen. xxv'i. 20). Josephus (A7it. i. 18, 
§ 2) gives the name as "EffKov. [G.] [W.] 

ESH-BAAL (^yati'i^l = Baars man [C'« 
as in Phoenician = t^'^N] ; Eshaal), the fourth 
son of Saul, according to the genealogy of 1 Ch. 
viii. 33 (B. 'Aaa^aK, A. 'U^aaX) and ix. 39 
(B. 'lejSaaA, N. ^Icr^aaK, A. BaaA). Ho is 
doubtless the same person as Ish-boshetii, since 
it was the practice to change the obnoxious 
name of Baal into Bosheth, as in the case of 
Jerubbesheth for Jcrub-baal, and (in this very 
genealogy) of Merib-baal for Mephibosheth : 
cp. also Hos. ix. 10, where Bosheth (A, V. 
and R. V. marg. " shame ") appears to be used 
as a synonym for Baal. Which of the two 
names is the earlier it is not possible to decide. 

[G.] [W.] 

ESH'BAN (JSt^iS! ; 'ha^iv [Gen.], B. 'Acre- 
^wv, A. 'Effi^dv [1 Ch.] ; Esehaii), a Horite ; 
one of the four sons of Dishan (so the Hebrew 
in Gen. ; but A. V. has Dishon), the son of Seir 
the Horite (Gen. xxxvi. 26 ; 1 Ch. i. 41). No 
trace of the name appears to have been dis- 
covered among the modern tribes of Idumaea. 

[G.] [W.] 

ESH'COL (^3t:\S ; 'Eo-xtiSA ; Joseph. 'Eo-- 
XwA'i^s ; Eschol), brother of JIamre the Amorite, 
and of Aner ; and one of Abraham's companions 
in his pursuit of the four kings who had carried 
off" Lot (Gen. siv. 13, 24). According to 
Josephus (Ant. i. 10, § 2) he was the foremost 
of the three brothers, but the Bible narrative 
leaves this quite uncertain (cp. v. 13 with v. 24). 
Their residence was at Hebron (xiii. 18), and 
possibly the name of Eshcol remained attached 
to one of the fruitful valleys in that district till 
the arrival of the Israelites, who then inter- 
preted the appellation as significant of the 
gigan>ic " cluster" (in Heb. Eshcol) which they 
obtained there. [G.] [W.] 

" The word rendered "strive" Oi"|) in the former 

part of V. 20 and in vv. 21 and 22 is not tbe same as that 
from which EseJc derived its name, and lias therefore 
been translated by R. V. by a different English word, 
"contended." Such points, though small, are anything 
but unimportant in connexion with these ancient and 
peculiar records. 




BROOK, OP ('?^^t^•^il-^^3, or h'2m -, <\>ipay^ 

^6rpvos: Tui-icns botri ; Nchelescol,'id est torrcns 
botri ; Vallis botri), a wady in the neighbourhood 
of Hebron, explored by the spies who were sent 
by Moses from Kadcsh-barnea. From the terms 
of two of the notices of this transaction (Num. 
xxxii. 9 ; Deut. i. 24), and from the .speech of 
Caleb (Josh. xiv. 7-12), it might be gathered that 
Eshcol was the furthest jioint to which the spies 
jjenetrated. But this would be to contradict 
the express statement of Num. xiii. 21, that thev 
went as far as Rchob. From this fruitful valley 
they brouglit back a huge cluster of grapes ; 
an incident wliich, according to the narrative, 
obtained for the place its appellation of the 
" valley of the cluster" (Num. xiii. 23, 24). It 
is true that in Hebrew Eshcol signifies a cluster 
or bunch, but the name had existed in this 
neighbourhood centuries before, when Abraham 
lived there with the chiefs Aner, Eshcol, and 
Mamre, not Hebrews but Amorites ; and this 
was possibly the Hebrew way of appropriating 
the ancient name derived from that hero into 
the language of the conquerors, consistently 
with the paronomastic turns so much in favour 
at that time, and with a practice of which traces 
appear elsewhere. 

In the Onomasticon of Eusebius the (pdpay^ 
p6Tpvos is placed, with some hesitation, at 
Gophna, 15 miles north of Jerusalem, on the 
Neapolis road (OS.- p. 288, 92). By Jerome 
it is given as north of Hebron, on the road to 
Bethsur (Epitaph. Paitlac). The Jewish traveller 
Ha-Parchi speaks of it as north of the mountain 
on which the (ancient) city of Hebron stood 
(Benjamin of Tudela, Asher, il. 437). A short 
distance N.W. of Hebron is a fine spring called 
'Ain Keshkalch, which in ordinary conversation 
is pronounced 'Ain Ashkali. It is mentioned 
under the name 'Ain Eskali by Van de Velde 
(ii. 64), De Saulcy (To;/, en Terre Sainte, i. 155), 
Sepp (Jerus. u. d. heil. Land, i. 593), and 
identified with Eshcol. On the other hand, 
Dr. Rosen (ZD3IG., 1858, pp. 481-2), Guerin 
(Judee, iii. 215), and Conder (PEF. Mem. iii. 
306) give the form Keshkaleh, which may repre- 
sent Eshcol, though the corruption would be 
unusual. The Jews of Hebron identify it with 
W. Tuffiih, up which runs the road from Hebron 
to Tufft'ih and Beit Jibrin. The vineyards in 
this valley are very fine, and produce the 
largest and best grapes in the country, espe- 
cially a large seedless grape which is much 
sought after (Robinson, Fhys. Geog. of II. Land, 
p. 110 ; Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 393). 
Geikie (Holy Land and the Bible, i. 318) places 
Eshcol near Beersheba, but there are many 
objections to this. [G.] [W.] 

ESH'EAN, R. V. ESH'AN (jri^N ; B. :S.o^Li, 
A. (?) "Effdv ; Esaan), one of the cities of Judah, 
in the mountainous district, and in the same 
group with Arab, er-Eabtyeh, and Dumah, cd- 
Bwneh (Josh. xv. 52). It is possibly es-Stmia, 
2i m. E. of Domeh (PEF. Mem. iii. 313, 378). 

[G.] [W.] 

E'SHEK (pm = oppression; B. "AcrrjA, A. 
'Eo-eAe'/c; Esec), a Benjamite, one of the late 
descendants of Saul ; the founder of a large and 

3 5 2 



noted family of archers, lit. " treaders of the j 
bow" (1 Cli. viii. 39). The name is omitted in 
the parallel list of 1 Ch. i.\-. [G.] 

ESHKALO'NITES, THE (accurately " the 
Eshkelonite," ''3i'?|X"^'^> •" the singular num- 
ber; T(5 'Ao-KoA.ojj'fTj; ; Ascalonitas), Josh. .xiii. 

3. [ASHKELON.] [G.] 

ESHTA'OL (VlXriy'^ and ^NFltl'x, (?) = 
request, Gei.\ B. 'AtrraoiX and 'haa, A. 'Eff6a6\; 
Esthaol, EstaoJ, Asthaol), a town in the low 
country — the Shcfchih — of Jmlah. It is the first 
of the first group of cities in that district (Josh. 
XV. 33) enumerated with Zoreah (Heb. Zareah), in 
company with which it is commonly mentioned. 
Zorah (R. V.) and Eshtaol were two of the towns 
allotted to the tribe of Dan out of Judah (Josh, 
six. 41). Between them, and behind Kirjath- 
jearim, was situated Mahaneh-Dan, the camp or 
stronghold which formed the head-quarters of 
that little community during their constant 
encounters with the Philistines. Here, among 
the old warriors of the tribe, Samson spent his 
boyhood, and experienced the first impulses of 
the Spirit of Jehovah ; and hither after his last 
exploit his body was brought, up the long slopes 
of the western hills, to its last rest in the bury- 
ing-place of Manoah his father (Judg. xiii. 25; 
xvi. 31 ; xviii. 2, 8, 11, 12). [Dan.] In the 
genealogical records of 1 Chron. the relationship 
between Eshtaol, Zareah, and Kirjath-jearim is 
still maintained. [Eshtaulites.] 

In the Onomasticon of Eusebius and Jerome it 
is mentioned as Esthaol (^'Eff9ah\) of Dan, 10 
miles N. of Eleutheropolis on the road to Nico- 
polis {OS.^ p. 261, 87; p. 153, 32). It is now 
the small village of Eshu'a, 13 English miles 
N. of Beit Jibrin, Eleutheropolis, and not far 
from Sur'ah, Zorah, which is also placed by 
the Onomasticon 10 miles N. of Eleutheropolis 
{PEF. Mem. iii. 25). Guerin {.Tud^e, ii. 12) 
also identifies the village, which he calls Achou'a, 
wuth Eshtaol. He connects a Wely Sheikh 
Gherib with the tomb of Samson (ii. 382, but 
see FEF. Mem. iii. 164). A description of 
the locality is given by Geikie (^Holy Land and 
the Bible, ii. 147). [G.] [W.] 

ESHTAULITES, THE C^Xrii^Xn, accur. 
" the Eshtaulite," in sing, number ; B. vloi 'Etr- 
daafx, A. ol 'EaOaw\a7oi ; Esthaolitae), with the 
Zareathites, were among the families of Kirjath- 
jearim ^(1 Ch. ii. 53). [Eshtaol.] [G.] 

ESHTEMO'A, and in shorter form, without 
the final guttural, ESHTEMOH' (i^innp'N 
and norit^'N ; the latter occurs in Josh. xv. 
only : in Josh, xv., B. corruptly 'EcrKaifidi', 
A. 'E(r0€jU£i ; in Josh, xxi., B. corruptly Ttfxa, 
A. 'EadefjL'Ji ; in 1 Sam., B. 'EaOe^e, A. 'Ecr- 
defid: Istemo, Estemo, Esthamo, Esthemo'), a 
town of Judah, in the mountains ; one of the 
group containing Debir (Josh. xv. 50). With 
its " suburbs " Eshtemoa was allotted to the 
priests (xxi. 14; 1 Ch. vi. 57). It was one of 
the places frequented by David and his followers 
during the long period of their wanderings ; and 
to his friends there he sent presents of the spoil 
of the Amalekites (1 Sam. xxx. 28, cp. v. 31). 
The place was known in the time of Eusebius 
and Jerome, who describe it as a Kd/xr] ixeyicrTr) 


in Daroma (OS.- p. 254, 70, 'E(r0e^a). There is 
little doubt that it was discovered by Dr. Robin- 
son at cs-Semil'a, a village 7 miles south of 
Hebron, on the great road from el-Milh, and in 
the neighbourhood of other villages still bearing 
the names of its companions in the list of Josh. 
XV. ; Anab, Socoh, Jattir, &c. The village is 
full of ancient remains ; there are some interest- 
ing tombs, and boundary stones which appear 
to mark the ancient limits of the city (see 
Robinson, i. 494, ii. 204-5 ; Schwarz, p. lOo ; 
FEF. Man. iii. 403, 412; Guerin, Judfy, iii. 

In the lists — half genealogical, half topo- 
gra})hical — of the descendants of Judah in 1 Ch., 
Eshtemoa occurs as derived from Ishbah, " the 
father of Eshtemoa" (1 Ch. iv. 17); Gedor, 
Socoh, and Zanoah, all towns in the same locality, 
being named in the following verse. Eshtemoa 
ajipears to have been founded by the descendants 
of the Egyptian wife of a certain Mered, the 
three other towns by those of his Jewish wife. 
See the explanations of Bertheau {Chronik, ad 
loc). [G.] [W.] 

ESHTEMO'A (B. 'Ecrdaiixiiv, A. 'I6(r0€/it5r; ; 
Esthamo), in 1 Ch. iv. 19, appears to be the 
name of an actual person, "Eshtemoa the Maa- 
chathite." [JIaachathite.] 

ESH'TON (|in';\S* ; 'AcraaQdv ; Esthon), a 
name which occurs in the genealogies of Judah 
(1 Ch. iv. 11, 12). Mehir was "the father of 
Eshton," and amongst the names of his four 
children are two — Beth-rapha and Ir-nahash — 
which have the appearance of being names, not 
of persons, but of places. [G.] [W.] 

ES'LI (Rec. T. 'Eo-Af, B. 'Eo-Aei, probably = 
•iriv^'N, Azaliaii; EsU, Cod. Amiat. ffesli), son 
of Nagge or Naggai, and father of Naum, in the 
genealogy of Christ (Luke iii. 25). See Hervey, 
Genealogies, &c., p. 136. [G.] 

ESO'RA (Aio-cijpa ; Yulg. omits: thePeshitto 
Syriac reads Bethc/ioni), a place fortified by the 
Jews on the apjrroach of the Assyrian army 
under Holofernes (Judith iv. 4). The name may 
be the representative of the Hebrew word Hazor, 
or Zorah (Simonis, Onom. N. T. p. 19), but no 
identification has yet been arrived at. The 
Syriac reading suggests Beth-horon, which is 
not impossible (see Speahcr's Comm.). [G.] 

ESPOUSAL. [Marriage.] 

ES'KIL ('Eo-piA, A. 'eCp'iX; Yulg. omits), 
1 Esd. ix. 34. [AzAREEL, or Sharai.] [G.] 

ES'EOM (Rec. T. 'Ecpdip. ; in Luke, Lachm. 
with B, "Ecrpciv ; Esrom), Matt. i. 3 ; Luke 
iii. 33. [Hezron.] [G.] 

ESSE'NES. 1. In describing the different 
sects which existed among the Jews in his own 
time, Josephus dwells at great length and with 
especial emphasis on the faith and practice of 
the Esscnes, the third in his category ; the 
Pharisees and the Sadducees being the other two. 
They appear in his description to combine the 
ascetic virtues of the Pythagoreans and Stoics 
with a spiritual knowledge of the Divine Law. 
An analogous sect, marked, however, by charac- 


teristic difierences, used, at one time, to be 
found in tlie Egyptian Therapeutae ; and from 
the detailed notices of Josephus {D. J. ii. 8 ; 
Ant. siii. 5, § 9, xv. 10, § 4 sq., xviii. 1, 
§ 2 sq. [see § 12]) and Philo (^Quod omn. prob. 
lilicr. § 12 sq. [see p. 028, note ''] ; Fraipa. 
np. Euseb. Pracp. Ev. do vita conteinplatiua), 
and the casual remarks of Pliny (//. N. v. 17), 
later writers have frequently discussed the 
relation which these Jewish mystics occupied 
towards the popular religion of the time, and 
more particularly towards the doctrines of 
Christianity. For it is a most remarkable fact 
that the existence of such sects appears to be 
unrecognised both in the Apostolic writings .and 
in early Hebrew literature. 

2. TherxaLvae Essc7ic {'EcriTTjfol, Joseph.; Esseni, 
Plin.) or Essaccm ('Etrcroroi, Philo; Jos. B. J. i. 
3, 5, &c.) is itself full of dilHculty. Various 
derivations have been proposed for it, and all 
are more or less open to objection (see the list in 
Lightfoot,- p. 349 sq.). The derivation preferred 
by Schiirer and Ginsburg is that from XDH = 
" the pious ones " ; Lightfoot would give the 
preference to □'•NE^TI = "the silent ones." 

3. The obscurity of the Essenes as a distinct 
body arises from the fact that they represented 
originally a tendency rather than an organisa- 
tion. The communities which were formed out 
of them were a result of their practice, and not 
a necessary part of it. As a sect they were 
distinguished by an aspiration after ideal purity 
rather than by any special code of doctrines ; 
and, like the Chasidim of earlier times [Assi- 
DEANs], they were confounded in the popular 
estimation with the great body of the zealous 
observers of the Law (Pharisees). The growth 
of Essenism was a natural result of the religious 
feeling which was called out by the circumstances 
of the Greek dominion; and it is easy to trace 
the pi-ocess by which it was matured. From 
the Maccabaean age there was a continuous 
effort among the stricter Jews to attain an 
absolute standard of holiness. Each class of 
devotees was looked upon as pi-actically impure 
by their successors, who carried the laws of 
purity still further ; and the Essenes stand at 
the extreme limit of the mystic asceticism which 
was thus gradually reduced to shape. The 
associations of the " Scribes and Pharisees " 
(D^T3n, '■'■the companions, the icise") gave place 
to others bound by a more rigid rule ; and the 
rule of the Essenes was made gradually stricter. 
Judas, the earliest Essene who is mentioned (c. 
110 B.C.), appears living in ordinary society (Jos. 
a. J. i. 3, § .5). Menahem, according to tradition 
a colleague of Hillel, was a friend of Herod, and 
secured for his sect the favour of the king 
(Jos. Ant. XV. 10, § 5). But by a natural 
impulse the Essenes withdrew from the dangers 
and distractions of business. From the cities 
they retired to the wilderness to realize the 
conceptions of religion which they formed, while 
they remained on the whole true to their ancient 
faith. To the Pharisees they stood nearly in 
the same relation as that in which the Pharisees 
themselves stood with regard to the mass of the 
people. The differences lay mainly in rigour of 
practice, and not in articles of belief. While the 
Pharisees and Sadducees represented political- 
religious parties, the Essenes came to resemble 
a monastic order (Schiirer.^ p. 468). 



4. The traces of the existence of Essenes in 
common society are not wanting nor confined to 
individual cases. Not only was a gate at 
Jerusalem named from them (Jos. D. J. v. 4, § 2, 
'Eaffrivwi/ -nvK-ri), but a later tradition mentions 
the existence of a congregation there which 
devoted " one-third of the day to study, one- 
third to prayer, and one-third to labour" 
(Frankel, Zeitschrift, 18-i(J, ]). 458). Those, 
again, whom Josephus speaks of (A J. ii. 8, § 13) 
as allowing marriage may be supposed to have 
belonged to such bodies as had not yet with 
drawn from intercourse with their fellow-men. 
But the practices of the extreme section — which 
included non-marriage, absence from the Temple, 
&c. — were afterwards regarded as characteristic 
of the wliole class, and the isolated communities 
of Essenes furnished the type which is preserved 
in the popular descriptions. These were regu- 
lated by strict rules (see them at length in 
Ginsburg), analogous to those of the monastic 
institutions of a later date. The candidate for 
admission first passed through a year's noviciate, 
in which he received, as symbolic gifts, an axe, 
an apron, and a white robe, and gave proof of 
his temperance by observing the ascetic rules of 
the order (rriv avr^v Siairai/). At the close of 
this probation, his character (t^ ^dos) was sub- 
mitted to a fresh trial of two years, and mean- 
while he shared in the lustral rites of the 
initiated, but not in their meals. The full 
membership was imparted at the end of this 
second period, when the novice bound himself 
"by awful oaths" — though oaths were abso- 
lutely forbidden at all other times — to observe 
piety, justice, obedience, honesty, and secrecy, 
" preserving alike the books of their sect, and 
the names of the Angels " (Joseph. B. J. ii. 8, § 7). 

5. The order itself was regulated by an internal 
jurisdiction. Excommunication, unless revoked 
after due repentance, would be equivalent to a 
slow death, since an Essene could not take food 
prepared by strangers for fear of pollution. All 
things were held in common, without distinction 
of property or house ; and special provision was 
made for the relief of the jioor. Self-denial, 
temperance, and labour — especially agriculture 
— were the marks of the outward life of the 
Essenes ; purity and divine communion the ob- 
jects of their aspiration. Slavery, war, and 
commerce were alike forbidden (Philo, Qtwd om. 
prob. I. § 12, p. 877 M.) ; and, according to Philo, 
their conduct generally was directed by three 
rules, " the love of God, the love of virtue, and 
the love of man " (Philo, /. c). 

6. In doctrine they did not differ essentially 
from strict Pharisees. Moses was honoured by 
them next to God (Joseph. B. J. ii. 8, 9). They 
observed the Sabbath with singular strictness ; 
and though they were unable to offer sacrifices 
at Jerusalem, chiefly from regard to purity 
(StacpopSTTiri ayveiHv), but partly also from 
their conception of sacrifices as of inferior value 
(Lightfoot, pp. 371-3 ; Ginsburg, p. 205), they 
sent gifts thither (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2, § 5). At 
the same time, like most ascetics, they turned 
their attention specially to the mysteries of the 
spiritual world, and looked upon the body as a 
mere prison of the soul, though this, it would 
seem, is not to be understood as denying the 
resurrection of the body (see Ginsburg, p. 207). 
They studied and practised with signal success, 



according to Josephtis, the art of prophecy (see 
the instances in Joseph. B. J. ii. 8 : cp. Ant. xv. 
10, § 5 ; i?. /. i- 3) § 5), though Lightfoot con- 
siders them prophets in the sense only of 
fortune-tellers or soothsayers (p. 418) ; and 
familiar intercourse with nature gave them an 
unusual knowledge of physical truths. They 
asserted with peculiar boldness the absolute 
power and foreknowledge of God (Joseph. Ant. 
xiii. 5, § 9 ; xviii. 1, § 5), and disparaged the 
various forms of mental philosophy as useless or 
beyond the range of man (Philo, I. c. p. 877). 

7. The number of the Essenes is roughly esti- 
mated by Philo at 4,000 (Philo, I. c. ; followed 
by Josephus, Ant. xviii. 2, § 5 : cp. B. J. ii. 8 ; 
Schiirer," p. 470, n. 12). Their best-known 
settlements were on the N.W. shore of the Dead 
Sea (Philo ; Plin. II. cc), but others lived in scat- 
tered communities throughout Palestine, and in 
other cities besides Jerusalem (Jos. B. J. ii. 8, § 4. 
Cp. [HippoL] Philos. ix. 20 | Schiirer,^ p. 471). 

8. In the Talmudic writings there is, as has 
been already said, no direct mention of the 
Essenes, but their existence is recognised by the 
notice of peculiar points of practice and teaching. 
Under the titles of "the pious," "the weakly" 
{i.e. with study), " the retiring," their maxims 
are quoted with respect, and many of the traits 
preserved in Josephus find parallels in the 
notices of the Talmud (Z. Frankel, Zcitschrift, 
Dec. 1846, p. 451 sq. ; Monatsschrift, 1853, 
p. 37 sq.). The four stages of purity which are 
distinguished by the doctors (Ckagigah, 18 a, ap. 
Frankel, op. cit. p. 451) correspond in a sin- 
gular manner with the four classes into which 
the Essenes are said to have been divided 
(Joseph. B. J. ii. 8, § 10) ; and the periods of 
probation observed in the two cases olf'er similar 

9. But the best among the Jews felt the peril 
of Essenism as a system, and combined to dis- 
courage it. They shrank with an instinctive 
dread from the danger of connecting asceticism 
with spiritual power, and cherished the great 
truth which lay in the saying "Doctrine is not 
in heaven." The miraculous energy which was 
attributed to mystics was regarded by them 
as rather a matter of suspicion than of respect ; 
and theosophic speculations were condemned 
with emphatic distinctness (Frankel, Monats- 
schrift, 1853, pp. 62 sq., 68, 71). 

10. The character of Essenism limited its 
spread. Out of Palestine, Levitical purity was 
impossible, for the very land was impure ; and 
thus there is no trace of the sect in Babylonia. 
The case was different in Egypt, where Judaism 
assumed a new .shape from its intimate con- 
nexion with Greece. Here the original form in 
which it was moulded was represented not by 
direct copies, but by analogous forms; and the 
tendency which gave birth to the Essenes has 
been sometimes thought to have found a fresh 
develojiment in the pure speculation of the 
Therapeutae. These (according to Philo) were 
Alexandrine mystics who abjured the practical 

» This 5 8 is left unaltered. Ginsburg (p. 204) sup- 
ports Frankel's views. Lightfoot 2 (p. 356 sq.) is 
tlioroughly opposed to them. Tlie difference between 
these two scholars is extremely interesting, and mainly 
arises from regarding the matter from a different point 
of view. Schiirer 2 Cp. 470, n. 11) agrees with Lightfoot. 


labours which rightly belonged to the Essenes, 
and gave themselves up to the study of the 
inner meaning of the Scriptures. The "whole 
day, from sunrise to sunset, was spent in mental 
iliscipline." Bodily wants were often forgotten 
in the absorbing pursuit of wisdom, and "meat 
and drink " were at all times held to be un- 
worthy of the light (Philo, De vit. contempl., § 4). 
But Philo's treatise is now (see Schiirer,- p. 863) 
generally considered unauthentic. The Thera- 
peutae were probably only Christian monks. 

11. From the nature of the case Essenism in 
its extreme form could exercise very little in- 
fluence on Christianity.* In all its practical 
bearings it was diametrically opposed to the 
Apostolic teaching. The dangers which it 
involved were far more clear to the eye of the 
Christian than they were to the Jewish doctors. 
The only real similarity between Essenism and 
Christianity lay in the common element of true 
Judaism. Nationally, the Essenes occupy the 
same position as that to which John the Baptist 
was personally called. They mark the close of 
the old, the longing for the new, but in this 
case without the promise. In place of the 
message of the coming " kingdom " they could 
proclaim only individual purity and isolation. 
At a later time traces of Essenism appear in the 
Clementines (cp. Lightfoot," p. 372), and the 
strange account which Epiphanius gives of the 
Osseni QOcra-rjvol) appears to point to some 
combination of Essene and pseudo-Christian 
doctrines {Ilacr. xix.). After the Jewish war 
the Jlssenes disappear from history. The 
character of Judaism was changed, and ascetic 
Pharisaism became almost impossible. 

12. The original sources for the history of 
the Essenes have been already noticed. Of 
modern essays, the most original and important 
are those of Frankel in his Zcitschrift, 1846, 
pp. 441-461, and Monatsschrift, 1853, p. 30 sq. ; 
cp. the wider view of Jost, Gesch. d. Judcnth. 
i. 207 sq. See also Hilgenfeld {Die Ketzenje- 
schichte d. Urchristcnthums, p. 84 sq.) ; Gfrorei' 
(Philo, ii. 299 sq.); Dahne {Jud.-Alex. Reli].- 
Philos. i. 467 sq.); Ewald {Gesch. d. Volk. tsr. 
iv. 420 sq.) ; Lightfoot (Epp. to the Colossians 
and Philemon,- p. 349 sq.) ; Ginsburg (" Essenes " 
in Diet, of Christian Bio(jrap)hj) ; Schiirer {Gesch, 
d. Jiid. Volkes im Zeitalter Jesit Christ!,- ii. 
p. 467 sq.); Morrison {The Jews under Poman 
Pule, ch. xiv.). The rejection by Ohle {Die 
Essener, in Jahrh. f. Prot. Theol. xiv. [1888]; 
Die Pseudophilon-Esslicr u.s.ic, in Beitrdge z. 
Kirchengcschichte [1888]) of the statements of 
Josephus as spurious is not accepted by the best 
modern critics. Lucius {Der Essenismus in 
scinem Ve7-h(iltniss z. Judenthum [1881]) is less 
radical and peremptory. [B. F. W.] [F.] 

ESTHER ("IFIpX = the planet Venus ; 'Eff- 
6vp), the Persian name of H.\dassah, daughter 
of Abihail the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a 
Benjamite [MORDECAi], and cousin of Mordecai. 
The explanation of her old name Hadassah, by 
the addition of her new name, by which she was 
better known, with the formula "IFIDN N^H' 

* On this point again Lightfoot 2 (p. 397 sq.) is 
radically opposed to Ginsburg (p. 201 sq.), whose 
ruling idea is that "Jesus. . .belonged to (the Essene) 
portion of His religious brethren." 




" that is, Esther " (Esth. ii. 7), is exactly analo- 
gous to the usinl adilitiou of tlie modern names 
of towns to explain the use of the old obsolete 
ones (Gen. xxxv. I'l, 27; Josh. xv. 10, &c.). 
Esther was a beautiful Jewish maiden, whose 
ancestor Kish had been amon^^ the cajitives led 
away from Jeru.salem (part of which was in the 
tribe of Benjamin) by Nebuchadnezzar when 
Jehoiacliiu was talcen cai)tive. She was an 
orphan without father or motlier, and had been 
brought up by her cousin Jlordecai, wlio had an 
office in the household of Ahasuerus king of 
Persia, and dwelt at " Shushan the palace." 
When Vashti was dismissed from being queen, 
•and all the fairest virgins of the kingdom had 
'been collected at Shuslian for the king to make 
■choice of a successor to her from among them, 
the choice fell upon Esther, and she was 
■crowned queen in the room of A^ashti with 
much pomp and rejoicing. The king was not 
.aware, however, of her race and parentage ; and 
so, with tlie careless ])rofusion of a sensual 
-despot, on the representation of Haman the 
Agagite, his prime minister, that the Jews 
scattered through his em])ire were a pernicious 
race, he gave him full ])ower and authoritv to 
kill them all, young and old, women and chil- 
dren, and take jiossession of all their property. 
The means taken by Esther to avert this great 
calamity from her people and her kindred, at 
the risk of her own life, and to turn upon 
Haman the destruction he had plotted against 
the Jews, and the success of her scheme, by 
Avhich she changed their mourning, fasting, 
weeping, and wailing, into light and gladness 
and joy and honour, and became for ever 
■especially honoured amongst her countrymen, 
are fully related in the Book of Esther. The 
feast of Purim, i.e. of Lots (?), was appointed by 
Esther and I\Iordecai to be kept on the 14th and 
loth of the month Adar (February and March) 
in commemoration of this great deliverance. 
[Pl'Rim.] The decree of Esther to this eflect is 
the last thing recorded of her (ix. 32). The 
continuous celebration of this feast by the Jews 
to the present da_v is thought to be a strong 
evidence of the historical truth of the Book. 
[Esther, Book of.] 

The questions which arise in attempting to 
give Esther her place in profone history are — 

I. Who is Ahasuerus ? This question is 
answered under AiiASL'Eiirs, and the reasons 
there given lead to the conclusion that he was 
Xerxes the son of Darius Hystaspis (cp. Sayce, 
Intro:!, to Ezra, . . . Esther, p. 96 sq.). 

n. The second inquiry is. Who then was 
Esther? Artissona, Atossa, and others are in- 
deed excluded by the above decision ; but are 
we to conclude with Scaliger, that because 
Ahasuerus is Xerxes, therefore Esther is Ames- 
tris? Surely not. None of the historical par- 
ticulars related by Herodotus concerning Amcs- 
tris make it possible to i ientify her with 
Esther. Amestris was the daughter of Otanes 
■(Onophas in Ctesias), one of Xerxes* generals, 
and brother to his father Darius (Herod, vii. 61, 
82). Esther's fiither and mother had been Jews. 
Amestris was wife to Xerxes before the Greek 
expedition (Herod, vii. 61), and her sons accom- 
panied Xerxes to Greece (Herod, vii. oQ). and 
had all three come to man's estate at the death 
of Xerxes in the 20th year of his reign, Darius, 

the eldest, had married immediately after the 
return from Greece. Esther did not enter the 
king's palace till his 7th year, just the time of 
])arius's marriage. These objections are con- 
clusive, without adding the diflerence of cha- 
racter of the two queens. The truth is that 
history is wholly silent both about \'ashti and 
Esther. Herodotus only happens to mention 
one of Xerxes' wives; Scri]ituro only mentions 
two, if indeed either of them were wives at all. 
liut since we know that it was the custom of 
the Persian kings before Xerxes to have several 
wives, besides their concubines; thatC!yrus had 
several (Herod, iii. 3); that Cambyses'had four 
whose names are mentioned, and others besides 
(iii. 31, 32, 68); that Smerdis had several (ib. 
08, 69) ; and that Darius had six wives, whose 
names are mentioned (ib. passim), it is most 
improbable that Xerxes should have been con- 
tent with one wife. Another strong objection 
to the idea of Esther being his one legitimate 
wife, and ]ierha]is to her being strictly his wife 
at all, is that the Persian kings .^elected their 
vives not from the harem, but, if not foreign 
]n-incesses, from the noblest Persian families, 
either their own nearest relatives, or from one 
of the seven great Persian houses. It seems 
therefore natural lo conclude that Esther, a 
captive and one of the harem, was not of tho 
highest rank of wives, but that a special honour, 
with the name of queen, may have been given 
to her, as to Vashti before her, as the favourite 
concubine or inferior wife, whose offspring, how- 
ever, if she had any, would not have succeeded 
to the Persian throne. This view, which seems 
to be strictly in accordance with what we know 
of the manners of the Persian court, removes all 
difficulty in reconciling the history of Esther 
with the scanty accounts left us by profane 
authors of the reign of Xerxes. 

It only remains to remark on the character 
of Esther as given in the Bible. She appears 
there as a woman of deep piety, foith, courage, 
]iatriotism, and caution, combined with resolu- 
tion ; a dutiful daughter to her adoptive father, 
docile and obedient to his counsels, and anxious 
to share the king's favour with him for the 
good of the Jewish people. That she was a 
virtuous woman, and, as far as her situation 
made it possible, a good wife to the king, her 
continued influence over him for so long a time 
warrants us to infer. And there must have 
been a singular grace and charm in her aspect 
and manners, since she " obtained favour in the 
sight of all that looked upon her" (ii. 15). 
That she was raised up as an instrument in the 
hands of God to avert the destruction of the 
Jewish people, and to afford them iirotection. 
and forward their wealth and peace in their 
captivity, is also manifest from the Scripture 
account. But to impute to her the sentiments 
l)ut into her mouth by the ajwcryphal author 
of ch. xiv., or to accuse her of cruelty because 
of the death of Haman and his sons, and the 
second day's slaughter of the Jews' enemies at 
Shushan, is utterly to ignore the manners and 
feelings of her age and nation, and to judge her 
by the standard of Christian morality in our 
own age and country instead. In tact the sim- 
plicity and truth to nature of the Scriptural 
narrative afford a striking contrast, both with 
the forced and florid am2">lifications of the ape- 



cryphal additions (see e.g. Speaker's Comm. on 
the Apocrvpha, i. 402), and with the sentiments 
of SDine later commentators. It may be con- 
venient to add that the third year of Xerxes was 
li.C. 4-83, his seventh 479, and his twelfth 474 
(Clinton, F.H.), and that the simultaneous battles 
of Plataea and Mycale, which frightened Xerxes 
from Sardis (Diod. Sic. xi. § 36) to Susa, hap- 
pened, according to Prideaux and Clinton, in 
September of his seventh year. For a fuller dis- 
cussion of the identity of Esther, and ditlerent 
views of the subject, see Prideaux's Cunnexion, 
i. '236, 243, 297 sqq., and Petav. de doctr. Temp. 
xii. 27, 28, who maivC Esther wife of Artaxerxes 
]>ongimanus, following Joseph. Ant. xi. 6, as he 
followed the LXX. and the apocryphal Esther ; 
J. Scaliger {de emend. Temp. vi. 591 ; Animtdv. 
Euseb. 100) makes Ahasuerus, Xerxes ; Ut-sher 
{Annal. Vet. Test.) maljes him Darius Hystas- 
pis ; Loftus, Chaldaen, &c. Eusebius (^Canon. 
Chron. 338, ed. Mediol.) rejects the hypothesis 
of Artaxerxes Longimauus, on the score of the 
silence of the books of Ezra and Xehemiah, and 
adopts that of Artaxerxes Muemon, following 
the Jews, who make Darius Codomauus to be 
the same as Darius Hystaspis, and the son of 
Artaxerxes by Esther ! It is observable that 
all Petavius's and Prideaux's arguments against 
Scaliger's view apply solely to the now obsolete 
opinion that Esther is Amestris. [A. C. H.] 

ESTHER, BOOK OF. 1. Title and 
authorship. The Book is one of the latest of 
the Canonical Books of Scripture, having been 
written late in the reign of Xerxes, or early in 
that of his son Artaxerxes Longimanus. The 
author is not known, but some think that he 
may possibly have been JNIordecai himself The 
minute details given of the great banquet, of 
the names of the chamberlains and eunuchs and 
Haman's wife and sons, and of the customs and 
regulations of the palace, betoken that the 
author lived at Shushan, and probably at court, 
while his no less intimate acquaintance with the 
most private aflfairs both of Esther and ]\Iordecai 
are thought to suit the hypothesis of the latter 
being himself the writer. It is also not in 
itself improbable that as Daniel, Ezra, and 
Nehemiah, who held high offices under the 
Persian kings, wrote an account of the affairs 
of their nation, in which they took a leading 
part, so Mordecai should have also recorded 
the transactions of the Book of Esther. The 
termination of the Book with the mention of 
Mordecai's elevation and government agrees 
■with this view, which has the sanction of Ibn 
Ezra, most of the Jews, Vatablus, Carpzovius, 
and others, though not accepted by modern com- 
mentators. The Book is included by Josephus 
(c. Apion. i. 8) in the twenty-two Books of the 
Oanon, and probably as the last of those Sjkoiojs 
Beta TreirtffTevfjLeva. Those who ascribe it to 
Ezra, or to the men of the great Synagogue 
(Baba Bathra, f. 14), may have merely meant 
that Ezra edited and added it to the Canon of 
Scripture, which he probably did, bringing it, 
and perhaps the Book of Daniel, with him from 
Babylon to Jerusalem. 

2. Date and place. — The earliest reference to 
the Book is iu 2 Mace. xv. 36, but the apo- 
cryphal additions of the LXX. and Josephus 
carry the evidence for it further back than the 


date of that work (c. 2nd cent. B.C.). The 
closing words of the LXX. Version (see § 3, &) 
do not advance the mattei-. The language 
(see §3, a), but above all the evident familiarity 
of the writer with I'ersia, go to show that 
the author lived in Persia, if after the reign of 
Xerxes ; and the end of the reign of Artaxerxes 
Longimanus (is.c. 425) is accepted by many com- 
mentators as the date of composition (Eichhorn, 
Keil, Rawliuson, Sayce, &c.). It must, however, 
be admitted that the same premisses lead others 
(Ewald, Stiihelin, Bertheau, and Orelli) to prefer 
a later Persian period or the beginning of the 
Greek period (c. B.C. 332), while another class 
of critics refuse to the Book any historical 
value, and carry it down to much more modem 
times (see Oettli, § 6). 

3. Text. — The Book of Esther appears in a 
form in the LXX.,* and in the translations from 
that Version, different from that in which it 
is found in the Hebrew Bible. In speaking of 
it we shall first speak of (a) the Canonical 
Book found in Hebrew, and next ('.*) of the 
Greek Book with its apocryphal additions, 
(a) The Canonical Esther then is placed among 
the hagiographa or D''Il-"in3 by the Jews, 
and in that first portion of them which they 

call the five volumes, nV?3p. It is sometimes 
emphatically called Meijillah, without other dis- 
tinction, and was held in such high repute by 
the Jews that it is a saying of Maimonides that 
in the days of Messiah the prophetic and hagio- 
graphical Books will pass away, except the 
Book of Esther, which will remain with the 
Pentateuch. This Book is read through by the 
Jews in their synagogues at the feast of Purim,. 
when it was once the custom — since abandoned 
at least by British Jews — at the mention of 
Haman's name to hiss, and stamp, and clench 
the fist, and cry, " Let his name be blotted 
out ; may the name of the wicked rot." It 
is said also that the names of Haman's ten 
sons are read in one breath, to signify that 
they all expired at the same instant of time. 
Even in writing the names of Haman's sons- 
in the 7th, 8th, and 9th verses of Esth. ix., 
the Jewish scribes have contrived to express- 
their abhorrence of the race of Haman. For 
these ten names are written in three perpeo- 
dicular columns of 3, 3, 4, as if they were 
hanging upon three parallel cords, three upon 
each cord, one above another, to repi'esent the 
hanging of Haman's sons (Stehelin's Rabbin. 
Literal, ii. 349 ; Speaker's Commentary on the 
Apocrvpha, "The rest of Esther," 'pp. 362, 
col. 2, n. 1, 402 (d)). The Targum of Esth. 
ix., in Walton's Polyglott,'' inserts a very minute 
account of the exact position occupied by Haman 
and his sons on the gallows, the height from 
the ground, and the interval between each ; 
according to which they all hung in one line, 
Haman at the top, and his ten sons at intervals 
of half a cubit under him. It is added that 
Zeresh and Haman's seventy surviving sons fled, 
and begged their bread from door to door, in 

» The term LXX. is used here to indicate the whole 
Greek volume as we now have it. 

b There are two Targums to Esther, both of late date. 
See Wolf's Bibl. Sebr. Pars 11, 1171-81 ; Speaher'a 
Comm. on the Apocrypha, 1. 363. 


evident allusion to Ps. fix. 9, 10. It has often 
been remariieil as a peculiarity of this I5ook that 
tlie name of God does not once occur in it. Some 
of the ancient .Jewish teaciiers were somewhat 
staijgered at this, but others accounted for it 
by sayin<^ that it was a transcript, under Divine 
insjiiration, from the Chronicles of the Medes 
ami Persians ; and that, being meant to be read 
by heathen, the sacred Name was wisely omitted. 
Baxter {Saint's Jicst, iv. ch. iii.) speaks of tlie 
Jewish practice of casting to the ground the liook 
of Esther, because the Name of God was not in 
it ; but Wolf (i). //. ii. 00) denies this, and 
says that if any such custom prevailed among 
tile Oriental Jews, to whom it is ascribed by 
Sandys, it must have been rather to express 
their hatred of Haman. This peculiarity of 
tlie Book must not be pressed too far. Certain 
it is that this Book was always reckoned in the 
Jewish Canon, and is named or implied in 
almost every enumeration of the Books com- 
posing it, from Josephus downwards. Jerome 
mentions it by name in the Prolog. Gal., in 
his Ei)istle to Paulinus, and in the preface 
to Esther ; as does Augustine, do Civit. Dei 
and dc Doctr. Christ., and Origen, as cited 
by Eusebius (Hist. Eccks. vi. 25), and many 
others. Some modern commentators, both Eng- 
lish and German, have objected to the contents 
of the Book as improbable and not strictly 
historical ; but if it be true, as Diodorus 
Siculus relates, that Xerxes put the Jledians 
foremost at Thermopylae on purpose that they 
might be all killed, because he thought they 
were not thoroughly reconciled to the loss of their 
national supremacy, it is surely not incredible 
that he should have given permission to Haman 
to destroy a few thousand strange people like 
the Jews, who were represented to be injurious 
to his empire, and disobedient to his laws. Nor 
again, when we remember what Herodotus 
relates of Xerxes in respect to promises made at 
banquets, can we deem it incredible that he 
should perform his promise to Esther to reverse 
the decree in the only way that seemed prac- 
ticable. It is likely too that the secret friends 
and adherents of Haman would be the persons 
to attack the Jews, which would be a reason 
why Ahasuerus would rather rejoice at their 
destruction.'^ In so many respects the writer 
shows such accurate acquaintance with Persian 
manners, and is so true to history and chrono- 
logy, as to afford the strongest internal evidences 
to the truth of the Book. The casual way in 
which the author of 2 Mace. xv. 36 alludes to 
the feast of Purim, under the name of " Mardo- 
chaeus's day," as kept by the Jews in the time of 
Nicanor (u.c. 161), is another strong testimony 
in its favour; and indeed justifies the expression 
of Dr. Lee (quoted in Whiston's Josephus, xi. 
ch. vi.), that " the truth of this history is de- 
monstrated by the feast of Purim, kept up from 
that time to this verv dav." ^ 



' The arguments of those who deny strict historical 
.accuracy to the Book are summarized in Oettli, } 5, 
" Gcschichtlichkeit." See Driver, iOT". p. 452 sq. Cp. 
on the other side, Sayce, p. 98 sq. — [F.] 

^ Dr. W. Lee also has some remarks on the proof of 
the historical character of the Book derived from the 
feast of Purim, as well as on other points (Inspir. of 
JT. S. 430 sq."). See also Sayce, p. 101 ; Oettli, p. 233. 
The etymological derivation from the Persian and the 

The style of writing is remarkably chaste 
.and simple. Xerxes, Haman, Mordecai, and 
Estiier are personages full of life anU mdr- 
viduality ; and the narrative of the struggle 
in Esther's mind between fear and tiie desire to 
save lier people, and of the final resolve made in 
the strength of that help, which was to be 
sought in prayer and fasting, is very touching 
and beautiful, and without any exaggeration. 
It does not in the least savour of romance. The 
Hebrew is very like that of Ezra and parts of 
the Chronicles Qd. like that of Ecclesiastes) ; 
generally pure, but mixed with words of Persian 
origin (Sayce, p. 93), and of Dhaldaic allinity, 
which do not occur in older Hebrew. 

In short it is just what one would expect 
to find in a work of the age to which the Book 
of Esther pretends to belong. The student 
has indeed only to compare the Hebrew Esther 
with the Greek Esther now to be noticed in 
order to see the difference between what may 
be called genuine history and what is certainly 

(6) As regards the LXX. Version of the Book 
(of which there are two texts, called by Dr. 
Fritzsche, A and B), it consists of the Canonical 
Esther with various interpolations prefixed, 
interspersed," and added at the close. Read in 
Greek, it makes a complete and continuous 
history, except that here and there, as e.g. in 
the repetition of Mordecai's pedigree, the patch- 
work betrays itself. The chief additions are: — 
A preface containing Mordecai's pedigree, his 
dream, and his appointment to sit in the king's 
gate, in the second year of Artaxerxes. In the 
third chapter, a pretended copy of Artaxerxes's 
decree for the destruction of the Jews is added, 
written in thorough Greek style ; a prayer of 
Mordecai is inserted in the fourth chapter ; fol- 
lowed by a prayer of Esther, in which she excuses 
herself for being wife to the uncircumcised king, 
and denies having eaten anything or drunk wine 
at the table of Haman ; an amplification of 
V. 1-3 ; a pretended copy of Artaxerxes's letter 
for reversing the previous decree (also of mani- 
festly Greek origin in ch. viii.), in which Haman 
is called a Macedonian, and is accused of having 
plotted to transfer the empire from the Persians 
to the INIacedonians, a palpable proof of this 
portion having been composed after the over- 
throw of the Persian empire by the Greeks ; 
and lastly an addition to the tenth chapter, in 
which Mordecai shows how his dream was ful- 
filled in the events that had happened, gives 
glory to God, and prescribes the observation of 
the feast of the 14th and 15th Adar. The whole 
book is closed with the following entry : — " In 
the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemaeus and 

iJentification of Purim with a Persian festival which the 
later Jews metamorphosed into that connected with the 
Book of Esther has been, in various forms, advocated by 
Hitzig, Zunz, Lagarde, Reuss (see Oettli, p. 233). The 
result is not philologically successful (see Halevy, 
BEJ. XV. 289, as against Lagarde's Purim), neither is it 
historically defensible. — [F.] 

e The Targum to Esther contains other copious 
embellishments and amplifications. On the whole 
subject of the apocryphal " Additions to," see 
Speaker's Comm. on " The rest of Esther." Jacob, ' Das 
Buch Esther bei den LXX.' in ZATW. x. 290, considers 
the LXX. Version to have been made in Egypt about 
B.C. 30. 


Cleopatra, Dositheus, -^-no said he was a priest 
and Levite, and Ptflemy his son, brought this 
epistle of Phuriir^ which they said was the 
same, and that Lysimachus, the son of Ptolemy, 
that was in Jerusalem, had interpreted it." 
This entry was apparently intended to give 
authority to this Greek Version of Esther, by 
pretending that it was a certified translation 
fiom the Hebrew original. Ptolemy Philometor, 
who is here meant,'' began to reign B.C. 181. 
Though, however, the interpolations of the 
Greek copy are thus manifest, they make a con- 
sistent and intelligible story. But the apocry- 
phal additions as they are inserted in some 
editions of the Latin Yu'lgate, and in the 
English Bible, are incomprehensible ; the history 
of which is this : — When Jerome ti-auslated the 
Book of Esther, he first gave the Version of the 
Hebrew only as being alone authentic. He 
then added at the end a Version in Latin of 
those several passages which he found in the 
LXX., and which were not in the Hebrew, 
stating where each passage came in, and marking 
them all with an obelus. The first passage so 
given is that which forms the continuation of 
chapter x. (which of course immediately pre- 
cedes it), ending with the above entry about 
Dositheus. Having annexed this conclusion, 
he then gives the Froocmium, which he says 
forms the beginning of the Greek Vulgate, be- 
ginning with what is now v. 2 of ch. xi. ; and 
so proceeds with the other passages. But in 
subsequent editions all Jerome's explanatory 
matter has been swept away, and the disjointed 
portions have been printed as chapters xi., xii., 
xiii., xiv., XV., xvi., as if they formed a narrative 
in continuance of the Canonical Book. The 
extreme absurdity of this arrangement is no- 
where more apparent than in chapter xi., where 
the verse (1) which closes the whole Book in 
the Greek copies, and in St. Jerome's Latin 
translation, is actually made immediately to 
precede that (u. 2) which is the very first 
verse of the Prooemium. As regards the place 
assigned to Esther in the LXX., in the Vatican 
edition, and most others, it comes between 
Judith and Job. Its place before Job is a 
remnant of the Hebrew order, Esther there 
closing the historical, and Job beginning the 
metrical Megilloth. Tobit and'Judith have been 
placed between it and Nehemiah, doubtless for 
chronological reasons. But in the very ancient 
Codex published by Tischendorf, and called C. 
Friderico-Augxistanus (now X), Esther immedi- 
ately follows Nehemiah (included under Esdras 
B), and precedes Tobit. This Codex, which con- 
tains the apocryphal additions to Esther, was 
copied from one written by the martyr Pamphilus 
with his own hand, as far as to the end of Esther, 
iind is ascribed by the editor to the 4th century. 
As regards the motive which led to these 
additions, one seems evidently to have been to 
supply what was thought an omission in the 

' He is the same as is frequently mentioned in 
1 Mace; e.g. x. 57, xl. 12; cp. Joseph. A. J. xlii. 
4, 5 1, 5, and Clinton, F. IT. iii. 393. This identifica- 
tiou with Philometor, if not positively certain, cannot be 
said to be seriously refuted by Jacob, p. 274 sq. Dosi- 
theus seems to be aGrcek vcrsinu of Mattathiab ; Ptolemy 
was also a common name for Jews at that time. See 
Speaka^s Comm. ou the Apocrypha, i. 364-6. 


Hebrew Book, by introducing copious mention 
of the name of God. It is further evident from 
the other apocryphal books, and additions to 
canonical Scripture, which appear in the LXX., 
such as Bel and the Dragon, Susanna, the Song 
of the Three Children, &c., that the Alexandrian 
Jews loved to dwell iipon the events of the 
Babylonish Captivity, and especially upon the 
Divine interj)Ositions in their behalf, probably 
as being the latest manifestations of God's 
special care for Israel. Traditional stories 
would be likely to be current among them, and 
these would be sure sooner or later to be com- 
mitted to writing, with additions according to 
the fancy of the writers. The most popular 
among them, or those which had most of an 
historical basis, or which were written by men 
of most weight, or whose origin was lost in the 
most remote antiquit)^, or which most gratified 
the national feelings, would acquire something 
of sacred authority (especially in the absence of 
real inspiration dictating fresh Scriptures), and 
get admitted into the volume of Scripture, less 
rigidly fenced by the Hellenistic than by the 
Hebrew Jews. No subject would be more 
likely to engage the thoughts and exercise the 
pens of such writers, than the deliverance of the 
Jews from utter destruction by the intervention 
of Esther and ]\Iordecai, and the overthrow of 
their enemies in their stead. Those who made 
the additions to the Hebrew narrative according 
to the religious taste and feeling of their own 
times, probably acted in the same spirit as 
others have often done, who have added florid 
architectural ornaments to temples which were 
too plain for their own corrupted taste. The 
account which Josephus follows seems to have 
contained yet further particulars, as e.g. the 
name of the Eunuch's servant, a Jew, who 
betrayed the conspiracy to Mordecai ; other 
passages from the Persian Chronicles read to 
Ahasuerus, besides that relating to Mordecai, 
and amplifications of the king's speech to Haman, 
&c. It is of this LXX. Version that Athanasius 
(Fest. Epist. 39, Oxf. transl.) spoke when he 
ascribed the Book of Esther to the non-canonical 
books ; and this also is perhaps the reason why 
in some of the lists of the canonical Books 
Esther is not named, as e.g. in those of Melito 
of Sardis and Gregory Nazianzen, unless iu these 
it is included under some other book, as Ruth, 
or Esdras s (see Whitaker, Disput. on II. Set:, 
pp. 57, 58 [Park. Soc] ; Cosins on the Canon 
of Scr. pp. 49, 50 [ditto]). Origen, singu- 
larly enough, takes a different line in his Ep. 
to Africanus (Oper. i. 14). He defends the 
canonicity of these Greek additions, though 
he admits they are not in the Hebrew. His 
sole argument, unworthy of a great scholar, 
is the use of the LXX. in the Churches, 
an argument which embraces equally all the 
apocryphal books. Africanus, in his Ep. to 
Origen, had made the being in the Hebrew 
essential to canonicity, as Jerome did later. 
The Council of Trent (1546) pronounced the 
whole Book of Esther to be canonical (see 
the R. C. commentators in Kaulen, Einleit. in 
die heil. Schriftcn A. T. § 270 sq.), and 

e " This Book of Esther, or sixth of Esdras, as it is 
placed iu some of the most ancient copies of the 
Vulgate." (Lee's Dissert, on 2nd Esdras, p. 23.) 


V<ataljlus sa\-s tliat prior to that decision it was 
doubtful whether or no Esther was to be included 
in the Canon, some authors allirming and some 
denying it. He afterwards qualilies the state- 
ment by saying that at all events the last seven 
chapters were doubtful. Sixtus Senensis, in 
spite of the decision of the Council, spealis of 
these additions, after the example of Jerome, as 
"lacinias hinc inde quorumdam Scriptorum 
temeritate inscrtas," and thinks that they ;\re 
chiefly derived from Josophus, but this last 
opinion is without jirobability. The manner 
-and the order in which .Jose]ilius cites tlieni 
{Ant. xi. G) show that they had already in liis 
days obtained currency among the Hellenistic 
Jews as portions of the Book of Esther ; as we 
know from the way in which he cites other 
apocryphal books that they were current like- 
wise ; with others which are now lost. For it 
was probably from such that Josephus derived 
his stories about Jloses, about Sanballat, and 
the temple on Mount Gerizim, and the meeting 
of the high-priest and Alexander the Great. 
But these, not having happened to be bound up 
with the LXX., jierished. However, the mar- 
vellous purity with which the Hebrew Canon 
has been jircserved, under the ]>rovidence of God, 
is brought out into very strong light, by the 
contrast of the Greek volume. Nor is it un- 
interesting to observe how the relaxation of the 
peculiarity of their national character, by the 
Alexandrian Jews, implied in the adoption of the 
Greek language and Greek names, seems to have 
been accompanied with a less jealous, and conse- 
quently a less trustworthy guardianship of their 
great national treasure, " the oracles of God." 

See further. Bishop Cosins, on the Canon of 
JL S.; Wolfs Bibl. Ilcbr. 11, S8, and passim; 
Hotting. Thesaur. p. 494; Walton, Prolog, ix. 
§ 13; Whitaker, IHsput. of Script, oh. viii. ; 
l>r. 0. F. Fritzsche, Zusiitze zmn BucJic Esther ; 
Baumgarteu, de Fide Lib. Esther, &c. IMore 
modern German literature on the Book of Esther 
is enumerated by Oettli in Strack u. Zockler's 
Kqf. Komm. z. d. heil. Schriften A. u. N. Ties. 
"Einl. z. Esther," § 7. Cp. Driver, LOT. 
p. 449 sq. [A. C. H.] [F.] 

E'TAM (Dn'-y; klrdv; Etam). 1. A village 
("IVn) of the tribe of Simeon, specified only in 
the list in 1 Ch. iv. 32 (cp. Josh. xi.x. 7); but 
that it is intentionally introduced appears from 
the fact that the number of places is summed as 
five, though in the parallel list as four. The 
cities of Simeon appear all to have been in the 
extreme south of the countrj'' (see Joseph. Ant. 
V. 1, § 22). Conder {PEF. Mem. iii. 261) proposes 
to identify it with Kh. 'Aitiln, between 8 and 9 
miles S. of Beit Jibr'vi, Eleutheropolis. 

2. B. Alrav, A. Ahdfi (in Josh. xv. 59 a). 
A place in Judah, fortified and garrisoned by 
Rehoboam (2 Ch. xi. 6, B. 'Andv, B"". Alrd/x, 
A. Ahavl). From its position in this list we 
may conclude that it was near Bethlehem and 
Tekoah ; and in accordance with this is the 
mention of the name among the ten cities which 
the LXX. (ed. Swete) inserts in the text of 
Josh. XV. 59 a, " Thecoa and Ephratha which is 
Bethlehem, and Phagor and Aitan (Ethan)." 
Reasons are shown below for believing it pos- 
sible that this may have been the scene of 
Samson's residence, the clill" Etam being one of 



the numerous bold eminences which abound in 
this part of the country ; and the spring of En- 
hak-kore one of those abundant fountains which 
have procured for Etam its chief fame. For 
here, according to the statements of Josephus 
(Ant. viii. 7, § 3) and the Talmudists, were 
the sources of the water from which Solomon's 
gardens and pleasure-grounds were fed, ami 
Bethlehem and the Temple supjilied (see Light- 
foot on John v.). The name is retained in that 
of 'Ain 'Atdii, a fine spring, close to "Solomon's 
Pools," near Urlds, the waters of which were 
formerly conveyed to the Temple by an aque- 
duct (see Dillmann- on Josh. I. c). 

3. B. Alrdu, A. Alrd/x. A name occurring in 
the lists of Judah's descendants (1 Ch. iv. 3), 
but probably referring to the jilace named 
above (2), Bethlehem being mentioned in the 
following verse. [G.] 

E'TAM, THE EOCK (DD''J? vho ; t, ivirpa 
'HTctyU, for A. see below ; Joseph. Ahdv ; Petra, 
and silex, Etam), a cliff or lofty rock (such 
seems to be the special force of Sela') into 
a cleft or chasm (fl'-rp ; A. V. " top," R. V. 
" cleft ") of which Samson retired after his 
slaughter of the Philistines, in revenge for their 
burning the Timnite woman who was to have 
been his wife (Judg. xv. 8, 11"). The general 
tenor of the narrative seems to indicate that 
this natural stronghold (jrfTpa 5' icrrly hxvpd, 
Jos. Ant. V. 8, § 8) was in Judah, and that the 
Philistines had advanced into the heart of the 
territory of that tribe (to. 9, 10) in their search 
for Samson. At Lehi in Judah they were de- 
feated, and the victory was so comjilete that it 
raised Samson to be Judge, and secured peace 
for 20 years (i\ 20). It is evident that the 
place Lehi, in which was the spring En-hak-kore 
(r. 19), was above, or at a higher altitude than 
the country of the Philistines {v. 9) and the 
rock Etam {vv. 11, 13). There is no further 
indication of position (the names have vanished), 
but it may be inferred that " the rock " was not 
far from a town of the same name. 

The identifications that have been proposed 
are: — (1) A cliff, or " crag," in the extremely 
uneven and broken givjund in the Wady (x^^- 
jxappos : see note ") Urtds, below 'Ain 'Atdn 
[Etam, 2]. Here is a fitting scene for the adven- 
ture of Samson. It was sufficiently distant from 
Timnah to have seemed a safe refuge from the 
wrath of the Philistines, while on the other hand 
it was not too far for them to advance in search 
of him ; and it may be remarked that one of the 
easiest and most direct routes from Philistia to 
the heart of Judah, now marked by a Roman 
road, was that which passes 'Ain Shems, and 
goes up by Beit 'Atub and el-Kliudr to " Solo- 
mon's Pools," Bethlehem, and Jerusalem. This 
road was frequently followed at a later date by 
the Philistines, who, even in the reign of David, 
had a garrison at Bethlehem near its head. 
This position is apparently at variance with 
the statement, in v. 8, that Samson went doivn 

a There is some uncertainty about the text of this 
passage, the Alex. MS. of the LXX. inserting in v. 8 
the words Trapot t<2 xei/<p, "by tie torrent," before 
the mention of the rock. EuseWus {OS.- P- 26-1, 83- 
8-1) has tV TO) cnrrjXai'w 'Hrctja Trapa tw ;^ei;Aopp<j>. In 
V. 11 the reading agrees with the Hebrew. 



to the rock Etani after the slaughter of the 
Philistines ; but it is possible that an allusion 
to the ascent which preceded the descent has 
been omitted. In 1 Ch. xiii. 6 David is said to 
have gone up to Kirjath-jearim (from Hebron) 
to bring up from theuce the Ark of God (to 
Jerusalem), no mention being made of the 
previous descent. The view that the clift' Etam, 
Eamath Lehi, and En-hak-kore must be looked 
for in the abundant springs and numerous 
eminences in the district round 'Ain 'Atctn and 
Urtds, is supported by Stanley, Led. on Jeirish 
Ch. i. 371; Guerin, Jude'e, iii. 118; Schenkel, 
Bih. Lex.; Winer, liWB.; Bertheau^ ; Birch, 
FEFQy. Stat. 1881, p. 323. (2) Kajor Conder 
(PEF. Jlem. iii. 22, 23, and Tait Work, i. 275- 
77) has proposed Beit 'Atub, "a small village, 
standing on a remarkable knoll of rock which 
rises some 60 ft. to 100 ft. above the sur- 
rounding hilly ridge." "A remarkable cavern," 
which might have been used as a hidiug-]ilace 
by bamson, runs beneath the houses. This 
place is in Judah, on the direct road to Beth- 
lehem, mentioned above, and not far from 
Samson's home. But there is nothing at Beit 
'Atub to which the term Sela, " clilf," used in 
connexion with such places as Fetra and the 
gorge at Michmash, could be applied ; and 
there is also the ditficulty that the Philistines, 
in advancing to the higher ground of Lehi, 
would have left " the rock " behind them, 
and would consequently have been between 
Samson and the men of Judah. Major Conder's 
identification has been accepted by Tristram, 
Bib. Places, p. 48; and Geikie, H. Land and 
the Bible, ii. 142. (3) Van de Velde (ii. 141) 
would identify the rock Etam with the Etam of 
1 Ch. iv. 32 near Ain Rimmon, Kh. Unim er- 
Eumdmln, and Lehi with Lekhjch, a short distance 
N. of Beersheba, but these ]ilaces are too far to 
the south, and must have been within the ter- 
ritory of Simeon, while it is clear from the 
narrative that the scene of Samson's exploit 
was in Judah. This view has the support 
of Riehm, HWB. (s. v.); Keil, Coram, zu 
Hichter, xv. 8, p. 316 ; Boettger, Lex. Joseph. 
s. V. Aita. [G.] [W.] 

E'THAM. [Exodus, the.] 

E'THAN (|n''K = strong ; Taiddf [1 K.], 
AlOdp [Ps. BX-] ; Ethan). The name of several 
persons. 1. Ethan the Ezrahite, one of the 
four sons of Mahol, whose wisdom was excelled 
by Solomon (1 K. iv. 31 ; LXX. v. 27). His 
name is in the title of Ps. Ixxxix. There is 
little doubt that this is the same person who in 
1 Ch. ii. 6 (B. Atedfi, A. -av) is mentioned — 
with the same brothers as before — as a son of 
Zerah, the son of Judah. [Darda; Ezrahite.] 
But being a son of Judah, he must have been a 
different person from 

2. B. AlOd/x, A. -oc. Son of Kishi or Kushaiah, 
a Merarite Levite, head of that family in the 
time of King David (1 Ch. vi. 44, Heb. v. 29), 
and spoken of as a " singer." With Heman and 
Asaph, the heads of the two other families of 
Lcvites, Ethan was appointed to sound with 
cymbals (xv. 17, 19). From the fact that in 
other passages of these Books the three names 
are given as Asaph, Heman, and Jedutiiun, 
it has been conjectured that the two names 


both belonged to the one man, or are identical; 
but there is no direct evidence of this, nor is 
there anything to show that Ethan the singer 
was the same person as Ethan the Ezrahite, 
whose name stands at the head of Ps. Ixxxix., 
though it is a curious coincidence that there 
should be two persons named Heman and Ethan 
so closely connected in two diflerent tribes and 
walks of life. 

3. B. Aiedv, A. Ovpl. A Gcrshonite Levite, 
one of the ancestors of Asaph the singer (1 Ch. 
vi. 42, Heb. v. 27). In the reversed genealogy 
of the Gershonites (v. 21 of this chap.) Joah 
stands in the place of Ethan as the son of 
Zimmah. (]G.] 

ETHANIM. [Months.] 

ETHBA'AL ("pranS; 'E0j8aaA; Joseph. 
'Ido^aAos; Ethbaal), king of Sidon and father 
of Jezebel, wife of Ahab (1 K. xvi. 31). Josephus 
(^Ant. viii. 13, § 1) represents him as king of the 
Tyrians as well as of the Sidonians. We may 
thus identify him with Eithobalus (Ei0£i)3aA.os), 
noticed by Menauder (Joseph, c. AiJion. i. 18), a 
priest of Astarte, who, after having assassinated 
Pheles, usurped the throne of Tyre for 32 
years. As 50 years elapsed between the deaths 
of Hiram and Pheles, the date of Ethbaal's reign 
may be given as about B.C. 940-908. The varia- 
tion in the name is easily explained ; Ethbaal =• 

idth Baal ; Ithobalus ("prainX) = Baal with 
him, wliich is preferable in point of sense to the 
other. The position which Ethbaal held explains, 
to a certain extent, the idolatrous zeal which 
Jezebel displayed. [\V. L. B.] [A. H. S.] 

E'THER ("in;^; Ether, Atker), one of the 
cities of Judah in the low countr}', the Shefclah 
(Josh. XV. 42 ; B. "WaK, A. 'Adep), allotted to 
Simeon (xix. 7 ; B. 'ledep, A. Bedep). In the 
parallel list of the towns of Simeon in 1 Ch. 
iv. 32, Tochen is substituted for Ether. In his 
Onomasticon Eusebius mentions it (^OS.^ p. 261, 
78-79) as being in his time a considerable place 
(Kio/xf) ix^ylcTTTj), called Jethira ('leSeipa), near 
Malatha in the interior of the district of Daroma. 
But he evidently confounds it with Jattir, now 
Kh. 'Attir, to the S.W. of cs-Seinu'a, Eshtemoa. 
Conder (PEF. Mem. iii. 261, 279) and Miihlaa 
(in Riehm's HWB.) identify it with Kh. el- 
'Atr, a short distance N.W. of Beit Jibrln, but 
this seems too far N. for a town belonging 
to Simeon. The identification of the place is 
still uncertain. It was probably situated nearer 
Beersheba. [G.] [VV.] 

ETHIO'PIA (tr-IS; Aldiovia', Aethiopia). 
The country which the Greeks and Romans 
described as "Aethiopia" and the Hebrews as 
"Cush"lay to the south of Egypt, and em- 
braced, in its most extended sense, the modern 
Kubia, Sennaar, Kordofan, and Northern Abys- 
sinia, and in its more definite sense the kingdom 
of Meroe, from the junction of the Blue and 
White branches of the Nile to the border of 
Egypt. The only direction in which a clear 
boundary can be fixed is in the north, where 
Syene marked the division between Ethiopia 
and Egypt (Ezek. xxix. 10): in other directions 
the boimdaries can be only generally described 
as the Red Sea on the east, the Libyan desert on 


the west, and the Abyssinian highlands on tlie 
south. The name " Ethic)])ia " is probably an 
adaptation of the native Egyptian name '' Et- 
haush," which bears a tolerably close resem- 
blance to the gentile form "Aethiops;" the 
Gre^'ics themselves regarded it as expressive of 
a dark complexion (I'rom atdai, " to burn," and 
&\l/, " a countenance "). The Hebrew and As- 
syrian Cush was borrowed from the Egyptian 
Kesh, which designated the district of which 
Napata, the modern Gebel Barlval, was after- 
wards the capital. The Hebrews do not appear 
^to have had much practical acquaintance with 
Ethioi)ia itself, though the Ethiopians were well 
known to them through their intercourse with 
Egypt. They were, however, perfectly aware 
of its position (Ezek. xxix. 10) ; and they de- 
scribe it as a well-watered country " beyond " 
the waters of Cush (Is. xviii. 1 ; Zeph. iii. 10), 
being traversed by the two branches of the 
Nile, and by the Astaboras or Tacazzc. The 
Nile descends with a rapid stream in this part 
of its course, forming a series of cataracts : 
its branches are referred to in the words of Is. 
xviii. 2, "whose land the rivers divide." The 
papyrus boats (" vessels of bulrushes," Is. xviii. 
2), which were peculiarly adajited to the navi- 
gation of the Upper Nile, admitting of being 
carried on men's backs when necessary, were 
regarded as a characteristic feature of the 
country. The Hebrews carried on commercial 
intercourse with Ethiopia, its " merchandise " 
(Is. xlv. 14) consisting of ebony, ivory, frank- 
incense, and gold (Herod, iii. 97, 114), and 
precious stones (Job xxviii. 19 ; Joseph. Ant. 
viii. 6, § 5). The country is for the most part 
mountainous, the ranges gradually increasing 
in altitude towards the south, until they attain 
an elevation of about 8000 feet in Ahijssinia. 

The inhabitants of Ethiopia were a Hamitic 
race (Gen. x. 6), and are described in the Bible as 
a dark-complexioned (Jer. xiii. 23) and stalwart 
race (Is. xlv. 14, " men of stature ; " xviii. 2, for 
" scattered," substitute " tall," K. V.). Their 
stature is noticed by Herodotus (iii. 20, 114), 
as well as their handsomeness. Not improbablj' 
the latter quality is intended by the term in 
Is. xviii. 2, which is rendered "peeled" (A. V.) 
or "smooth" (R. V.), but which rather means 
"fine-looking." Their appearance led to their 
being selected as attendants in ro3'al households 
(Jer. xxxviii. 7). The Ethiopians are on one occa- 
sion coupled with the Arabians, as occupying the 
opposite shores of the Red Sea (2 Ch. xxi. 16) ; 
but elsewhere they are connected with African 
nations, particularly Egypt (Ps. Ixviii. 31 ; Is. 
XX. 3, 4, xliii. 3, xlv. 14), Phut (Jer. xlvi. 9), 
Lub and Lud (Ezek. xsx. 5), and the Sukkiims 
(2 Ch. xii. 3). They were divided into various 
tribes, of which the Sabaeans were the most 
powerful. [Seba; Sukkiim.] 

The history of Ethiopia is closely interwoven 
with that of Egypt. The two countries were 
not unfrequently united under the rule of the 
same sovereign. Pepi I. of the 6th dynasty 
overran that part of Cush or Ethiopia — the To- 
Kens of the Egyptian monuments — which lay 
between the First and Second Cataracts, but its 
complete conquest was reserved for the kings 
of the 12th dynasty. Amen-em-hat I. subdued 
the Wawai, who extended from the First Cataract 
to Korosko; his son Usirtesen I. subjugated the | 


negro tribes who spread southward to Wadi 
Helfa, and Usirtesen 111. fixed the frontier of 
Egypt at Semneli, where he built a fortress on 
either side of the river. Nubia was at this 
time well-watered and fertile, the present First 
Cataract not having as yet been formed, and the 
break in the navigation of the Nile being ap- 
jiarently at Silsileh. The negro tribes extended 
much further north than subsequently ; the 
area occui)ied by the Nubians being compara- 
tively limited. During the jieriod of the 
Hyksos, Ethiopia was lost to Egypt, but Ahmes, 
the founder of the 18th dj-nasty, who had mar- 
ried a Nubian queen, set about the work of 
reconquering it. His successor, Amenophis I., 
completed the work : Ethiopia became an 
Egyptian province as far south as .Scnnaar ; 
colonies of fellaliin were planted in dillerent 
jiarts of it, and the eldest son of the Egyptian 
monarch took from henceforth the title of "the 
]U'ince of Cush." In the time of Ramses II., the 
tsesostris of the Greeks (of the 19th dynasty), the 
great temple of Abu-Simbel was excavated in the 
rock ; and though from time to time expeditions 
were required against the restless tribes of the 
Soudan, the country remained in the possession 
of Egypt until after the fall of the 20th dynasty, 
when one of the high-priests of Amun of 
Thebes established an imlependeut kingdom at 
Napata. For some centuries this kingdom 
remained in all respects Egyptian, language, 
names, and customs being alike those of Egypt ; 
and it was only gradually that the foreign culture 
was replaced by one of native growth. More 
than once the kings of Napata overran Egypt, 
and finally under Sabako, the So of 2 K. xvii. 4, 
they made themselves masters of the whole 
country and founded the 25th dynasty. Ta- 
harka or Tirhakah (2 K. xix. 9) was driven 
back into Ethiopia by the Assyrian forces of 
Esar-haddon, B.C. 672; and though he made more 
than one attempt to recover Egypt during the 
Assyrian occupation of it, his eiibrts were un- 
successful. After the reign of his successor. Nut 
Mi-Amun, Ethiopia was divided into two 
kingdoms — that of To-Kens, with its capital at 
Kipkip ; and that of Napata, which at one time 
included Berua or Meroe, and the country of 
Alo, which extended from the White and I51ue 
Nile to the jilain of Sennaar. Ethiopia now 
disappears from history, and is hardly heard of 
again until the campaign of Cambyses ; but the 
Persian rule did not take any root there, nor 
did the influence of the Ptolemies generally 
extend beyond Northern Ethiopia. Shortly 
before our Saviour's birth, a native dynasty of 
females, holding the official title of Candace 
(Pliu. vi. 35), held sway in Ethiopia, and even 
resisted the advance of the Roman arms. One 
of these is the queen noticed in Acts viii. 27. 
[Candace.] [a. H. S.] 

ETHIOPIAN 0Ci'-13; Alelo^\>^, Aethiops). 
Properly " Cushite " (Jer, xiii. 23) ; used of 
Zerah (2 Ch. xiv. 9 [8]), and Ebedmelech (Jer. 
xxxviii. 7, 10, 12 ; xxxis. 16). [W. A. W.] 

ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH. Acts viii. 26 sq. 
gives the history of the baptism by Philip the 
Evangelist of the Ethiopian chamberlain of 
Candace. He had gone as a proselyte to Jeru- 
salem to attend the great Feast ; he had he;nd 


probably while at Jerusalem of the Death, 
Resurrection, and Asceusiou of Jesus Christ, of 
the claims put forth in His Name, and of those 
who were known as His followers. When Philip 
overtook him he was reading the Messianic 
passacje. Is. liii., and possibly debating with 
himself how far the Prophet's words might be 
said to have found their fulfilment in Christ. 
The explanation was given which induced him 
to embrace the Gospel. Eusebius does not 
hesitate to attribute to this Ethiopian — whom 
he calls Indich — the first preaching of the 
Gospel to his own people, and the founding of 
Christianity among them (see Diet, of Christ. 
Biog., s. V. " Ethiopian Church "). [F.] 

ETHIOPIAN WOMAN (n''t?'3 ; MOlo- 
irla-ffa ; Aethiojjissa). Zipporah, the wife of 
Moses, is so described in Num. xii. 1. She is 
elsewhere said to have been the daughter of 
a Midianite, and in consequence of this Ewald 
and others have supposed that the allusion is to 
another wife whom Moses married after the 
death of Zipporah. [W. A. W.] 

ETHIOPIANS (t^••1^, is. sx. 4 ; Jer. xlvi. 9, 
"•i^'-IS ; Aie'iowes; Aethioina, Aethiopes). Properly 
"Cush" or "Ethiopia" in two passages (Is. xx. 4; 
Jer. xlvi. 9). Elsewhere " Cushites," or in- 
habitants of Ethiopia (2 Ch. .\ii. 3, xiv. 12 [11], 
13 [121, xvi. 8, xxi. 16 ; Dan. .xi. 43 ; Amos 
i.x. 7 ; Zeph. ii. 12 : Acts viii. 27). [Ethiopia.] 

[W. A. W.] 

ETH'MA (B. 'Oofia, A. Noo/tc{; Nohei), 
1 Esd. ix. 35 (see Speaker's Comm. in loco). It 
occupies the place of Nebo in the parallel list of 
Ezra X. 43. 

ETH'NAN (]\nii, (?) = gift; B. 26w:i;', A. 
'EveaSi ; Ethnan), a descendant of Judah ; one 
of the sons of Helah the wife of Ashur, "the 
father of Tekoa " (1 Ch. iv. 7). 

ETHNAKCH (2 Cor. xi. 32). [Governor, 
No. 11.] 

ETH'NI C^r\i^ ;(?) = munificent ; 'ABavei; 
Athanai), a Gershonite Levite, one of the fore- 
fathers of Asaph the singer (1 Ch. vi. 41 ; Heb. 
V. 26). 

EUBU'LUS (Ev/3ou\os), a Christian at 
Eome mentioned by St. Paul (2 Tim. iv. 21). 

EUER'GETES (Evepyirns, a benefactor; 
Pfolemaeus Euergetes), a common surname and 
title of honour (cp. Plato, Gorg. p. 506 C, and 
Stallbaum m loco) in Greek states, conferred at 
Athens by a public vote (Dem. p. 475), and so 
notorious as to pass into a proverb (Luke xxii. 5). 
The title was borne by two of the Ptolemies : 
Ptol. III., Euergetes I., B.C. 247-222, and Ptol. 
VII., Euergetesll., B.C. 146-117. The Euergetes 
mentioned in the prologue to Ecclesiasticus has 
been identified with each of these, according 
to the different views taken of the history of 
the book. [Ecclesiasticus; Jesus son of 
SiRACH.] [B. F. W.] 

EU'MENES II. (Ebixfvqs), king of Pergamus, 
succeeded his father Attains I., B.C. 197, from 
whom he inherited the favour and alliance of 
the Romans. In the war with Antiochus the 


Great he rendered the most important services' 
to the growing republic ; and at the battle of 
Magnesia (B.C. 190) commanded his contingent 
in person (Just. xs.\i. 8, 5 ; App, Sgi: 34). 
After peace was made (B.C. 189) he repaired 
to Rome to claim the reward of his loyalty ; 
and the Senate conferred on him the provinces 
of Mysia, Lydia, Ionia (with some exceptions), 
Phrygia, Lycaonia, and the Thracian Chersonese 
(App. Sgr."44:; Polyb. xxii. 7 ; Liv. xxxviii. 56). 
His influence at Rome continued uninterrupted 
till the war with Perseus, with whom he is said 
to have entertained treasonable correspondence 
(Liv. xxiv. 24, 25) ; and after the defeat of 
Perseus (b.c. 167) he was looked upon with 
suspicion, which he vainly endeavoured to re- 
move. The exact date of his death is not men- 
tioned, but it must have taken place in B.C. 159. 
The large accession of territory which was 
granted to Eumenes from the former dominions 
of Antiochus is mentioned 1 Mace. viii. 8, but 
the present reading of the Greek and Latin texts 
offers insuperable difficulties. " The Romans 
gave him," it is said, " the countrg of India and 
Media, and Lydia and parts of his (Antiochus') 
fairest countries (a-Trci Tciv koKK. X'^p'^" avrov)." 
Various conjectures have been proposed to re- 
move these obvious errors ; but though it may 
be reasonably allowed that Mysia may have 
stood originally for Media QUO for ^HD, 
Michaelis), it is not equally easy to explain the 
origin of x^P"'" "^h^ 'lvSiKi]v. It is barely 
possible tliat 'IvSiKijv may have been substituted 
for 'Icori/cJ/f after MTjSi'ai' was already established 
in the text. Other explanations are given by 
Grimm {Exeg. Haiidlj.) and Wernsdorf (De fide 
Lihr. 3Iacc. p. 50 sq.), but they have little 
plausibility (see Speaker's Comm., Bissell, and 
Zockler, in loco). [B. F. W.] [F.] 

EUNA'TAN (B. 'Evaarav, A. 'EXvaedv ; En- 
nagam), 1 Esd. viii. 44, possibly a misprint for 
Ennatan, the reading of the Genevan Version. 
and of the Bishops' Bible (see D. B. Amer. ed.). 
[Elxatiian.] "" [F.] 

EUNI'CE {EvviKrt ; Eunice), mother of 
Timothy (2 Tim. i. 5), a woman of unfeigned 
faith, and, as we learn from Acts xvi. 1, a Jewess 
and a Christian (ttio-tt)). That her husband was 
a Greek is probably mentioned to explain 
why Timothy had not been circumcised (see 
Timothy). The influence of the tradition of 
her widowhood appears in the addition of XVP"-^ 
(widow) in one cursive MS. [E. R. B.] 

EUNUCH (D'''nD; elvoZxos, BXaZias; spado; 
variously rendered in the A. V. " eunuch,'' 
" officer," and " chamberlain," apparently as 
though the word intended a class of attendants 
who were not always mutilated).* The original 

Hebrew word (root Arab. {.J^j***, impotens esse 
ad vcnerem, Gesen. s. u.) clearly implies the 
incapacity which mutilation involves, and per- 
haps includes all the classes mentioned in Matt, 
xix. 12, not signifying, as the Greek wvovxos, 
an office merely. The law, Deut. xxiii. 1 (cp. 
Lev. xxii. 24), is repugnant to thus treating any 
Israelite ; and Samuel, when describing the 
arbitrary power of the future king (1 Sam. viii. 

» So Whiston, Joseph. Ant. x. 10, $ 2, note. 




15, marg.), mentions " his eunuchs," but does 
not say that he would make "their sons" such. 
This, if we compare 2 K. xx. 18, Is. xxxix. 7, 
possibly implies that these persons would be 
foreigners; cp. Jer. xxxviii. 7. It was a bar- 
bai-ous custom of the Kast thus to treat captives 
(Herod, iii. 49, vi. 32), not only of tender age 
(when a non-devolopnient of beard and feminine 
mould of limbs and modulation of voice ensued), 
but, it should seem, when past puberty, which 
there occurs at an early age. Physiological 
considerations lead to the sujjposition that in 
iho latter case a remnant of animal feeling is 
left; which may explain Ecclus. xx. 4, xxx. 20 
(cp. Juv. vi. 366, and IMart. vi. G7 ; Philnstr. 
ApoU. Tijan. i. 37 ; Ter. Eun. iv. 3, 24), where 
a sexual function, though fruitless, is implied. 
Busbequius {Ep. iii. 122, Ox. 1660) seems to 
ascribe the absence or presence of this to the 
total or jiartial character of the mutilation ; 
but modern surgery would rather assign the 
earlier or later i)eriod of the operation as the 
real explanation. It is total among modern 
Turks (Touruefort, ii. 8, 9, 10, ed. Par. 1717, 

Heads of Eunuchs. (XimroTiJ.) 

talU(^s a flcur de ventre) ; a precaution arising 
from mixed ignorance and jealousy. The 
"ofHcer" Potiphar (Gen. xxxvii. 36; xxxix. 1, 
marg. eunuch, and LXX. a'Tra.Soi'TL, evuouxos) 
was an Egyptian, was married, and was the 
" captain of the guard " ; and in the Assyrian 
monuments an eunuch often appears, sometimes 
armed and in a warlike capacity, or as a scribe, 
noting the number of heads and amount of .spoil, 
as receiving the prisoners, and even as otBciatiug 
in religious ceremonies (Layard, Nineveh, ii. 
324—6, 334). A bloated beardless face and 
double chin is there their conventional type. 
Chardiu ( Voyages en Perse, ii. 283, ed. Amsterd. 
1711) speaks of eunuchs having a harem of 
their own. If Potiphar had become such by 
operation for disease, by accident, or even by 
malice, such a marriage seems, therefore, ac- 
cording to Eastern notions, supposable" (see 

^ The Jewish tradition is that Joseph was made a 
eunuch on bis first introduction to Egypt ; and yet 
the accusation of Potijihar's wife, his marriage and 
the birth of his children, are related subsequently 
without any explanation. See Targum Pseudojon. 

Grotius on Deut. xxiii. 1 ; cp. Burckhardt, 
2/v<L'. in Arab. i. 290). Nor is it wholly repug- 
nant to that barbarous social standard to thiuK 
that the prosj)ect of rank, honour, and royal 
couiidence might even induce jiarents to thuu 
treat their children at a later age, if they 
showed an aptness for such preferment. The 
characteristics as regards beard, voice, &c., 
might then perhaps be modified, or might gra- 
dually follow. The Poti-pherah of Gen. xli. 50, 
whose daughter Joseph married, was " priest of 
On,"' and no doubt a dill'erent ])erson. 

The origination of the jiractice is ascribed to 
Semiramis (Amm. Marcell. xiv. 6), and is no 
doubt as early, or nearly so, as Eastern despotism 
itself. Their incapacity, as in the case of mutes, 
is the ground of reliance upon them (Clarke'a 
Travels, part ii. § 1, 13; Busbeq. Ep. i. p. 33). 
liy reason of the mysterious distance at which 
the sovereign sought to keep his subjects (Herod, 
i. 99; cp. Esth. iv. 11), and of the malignant 
jealousy fostered by the debased relation of the 
sexes, such wretches, detached from social 
interests and hopes of issue (especially when, as 
commonly, and as 
amongst the Jews, 
foreigners), the natu - 
ral slaves of either 
sex (Esth. iv. 5), and 
having no prospect 
in rebellion save the 
change of masters, 
were the fittest props 
of a government rest- 
ing on a servile re- 
lation, the most com- 
plete vpyava efxipvxa- 
of its despotism or 
its lust, the surest 
(but see Esth. ii. 21) 
guardians (Xenoph. 
t'ljrop. vii. 5, § 60 
sq. ; Herod, viii. 105) 
of the monarch's per- 
son, and the sole con- 
fidential witnesses of 
his unguarded or 
undignified moments. Hence they have in all 
ages Irequently risen to high offices of trust. 
Thus the " chief "*= of the cup-bearers and of 
the cooks of Pharaoh were eunuchs, as being 
near his person, though their inferior agents 
need not have been so (Gen. xi. 1, 7, LXX.). 
The complete assimilation of the kingdom of 
Israel, and latterly'' of Judah, to the neigh- 
bouring models of despotism, is traceable in the 
I'ank and prominence of eunuchs (2 K. viii. 6, 

on Gen. xxxix. 1, xli. 50, and the details given in 
xxxix. 13. 

' 'Wilkinson {Anc. Egypt, ii. ei'* denies the use of 
eunuchs in Egypt. Herodotus, indeed (ii. 92), confirms 
his statement as regards Egyptian monogamy; but if 
this as a rule applied to the kings, they seemed at any 
rate to have allowed themselves concubines (i'&. 1^1). 
From the general beardless character of Egyptian heads 
it is not easy to pronounce whether any eunuchs appear 
ra the sculptures or not. 

a 1 Cb. x.wiii. 1 (LXX.) is remarkable as ascribing 
eunuchs to the period of David, nor can it be doubted 
that Solomon's polygamy made them a nccessarj- conse- 
quence ; but in this state they do not seem to have 
played an important part at this period. 



is. 32, xxiii. 11, xxv. 19; Is. Ivi. 3, 4; Jer. 
xxix. 2, xxxiv. 19, xxxviii. 7, xli, 16, lii. 25). 
They mostly appear in one of two relations, 
cither military as " set over the men of war," 
greater trustworthiness possibly counterbalanc- 
ing inferior courage and military vigour, or 
associated, as we mostly recognise them, with 
women and children. It is possible but uncertain 
that Daniel and his companions were thus treated, 
in fulfilmeut of 2 K. xx. 17, 18 ; Is. xxxix. 7 ; cp. 
Dan. i. 3, 7. The court of Herod of course had 
its eunuchs (Joseph. Ant. xvi. 8, § 1 ; xv. 7, § 4), 
as had also that of Queen Candace (Acts viii. 
27). We find the Assyrian Rab-Saris, or chief 
eunuch (2 K. xviii. 17), employed together with 
other high officials as ambassador. Similarly, 
in the details of the travels of an embassy sent 
by the Duke of Holstein (p. 136), we find an 
eunuch mentioned as sent on occasion of a state- 
marriage to negotiate, and of another (p. 273) 
who was the Mchcter, or chamberlain of Shah 
Abbas, who was always near his person, and had 
his ear (cp. Chardin, iii. 37), and of another, 
orii^inally a Georgian prisoner, who officiated as 
supreme judge. Fryer {Travels in India and 
Persia, 1698) and Chardin (ii. 283) describe 
them as being the base and ready tools of 
licentiousness, as tyrannical in humour, and 
pertinacious in the authority which they exer- 
cise ; Clarke (Travels in Europe, &c., part ii. § 1, 
p. 22), as eluded and ridiculed by those whom 
it is their office to guard. A great number of 
them accompany the Shah and his ladies when 
hunting, and no one is allowed, on pain of 
death, to come within two leagues of the field, 
unless the king sends an eunuch for him. So 
eunuchs ran before the closed arabahs of the 
sultanas when abroad, crying out to all to keep 
at a distance. This illustrates Esth. i. 10, 12, 
15, 16 ; ii. 3, 8, 14. The moral tendency of this 
sad condition is well known to be the repression 
of courage, gentleness, shame, and remorse, the 
development of malice, and often of melancholy, 
and a disposition to suicide. The favourable 
description of them in Xenophon (?. c.) is over- 
charged, or at least is not confirmed by modern 
observation. They are not more liable to 
disease than others, unless of such as often 
follows the foul vices of which they are the 
tools. Michaelis (ii. 180) regards them as the 
proper consequences of the gross polygamy of 
the East, although his further remark that they 
tend to balance the sexual disparity which such 
monopoly of womea causes is less just, since the 
countries despoiled of their women for the one 
purpose are not commonly those which furnish 
male children for the other. 

In the three classes mentioned in Matt. xix. 
12 the first is to be ranked with other examples 
of defective organization ; the last, if taken 
literally, as it is said to have been personally 
exemplified in Origen (Euseb. Uccl. Hist. vi. 8), 
is an instance of human ways and means of 
ascetic devotion being valued by the Jews above 
revealed precept (see Schottgen, Hor. Heh. 1. 
159). But a figurative sense of exivovxos (cp. 
1 Cor. vii. 32, 34) is also possible. 

The operation itself, especially in infancy, is 
not more dangerous than an ordinary amputa- 
tion. Chardin (ii. 285) indeed says that only one 
in four survives; and Clot Bey, chief physician 
of the Pasha, states that two-thirds die ; but 


Burckhardt affirms {Niih. p. 329) that the opera- 
tion is only fatal in about two out of a hundred 

In the A. V. of Esther the word "chamber- 
lain " (marg. eunuch) is the constant render- 
ing of D^'ID ; and as the word also occurs in 
Acts xii. 20 and Rom. xvi. 23, where the original 
expressions are very ditferent, some caution is 
required. In Acts xii. 20 rbj' eirl tov koitHvos 
Tov fiaffiKews may mean a " chamberlain " 
merely. Such were persons of public infiuence, 
as we learn from a Greek inscription, preserved 
in Walpole's Turkey (ii. 559), in honour of P. 
Aelius Alcibiades, "chamberlain of the em- 
peror " (iirl KoiTwvos 26/3.), the epithets in 
which exactly suggest the kind of patronage 
expressed. In Rom. xvi. 23 the word eTriTpoiros 
is the one commonly rendered " steward " (e.g. 
Matt. XX. 8 ; Luke viii. 3), and means the one 
to whom the care of the city was committed. 
See Salden, Oiia Theol. dc Eunuchis ; Keim, 
HWB. s. n. ' Verschnittene.' [H. H.] 


EUO'DIA, E. Y. (EiioSta ; textus 7-eceptus, 
wrongly Evio5(a; Evhodia, Amiat.), a Christian 
woman of Philippi, named with Syntyche (Phil, 
iv. 2). St. Paul beseeches the two to be of one 
mind in the Lord. They are described (v. 3) as 
having laboured with Paul in the Gospel, an 
important testimony to the work of women in 
the primitive Church. The A. V. erroneously 
takes EtioSlav as a man's name from a nom. 
EvoSias (see Lightfoot's note in loco). [E. E. B.] 

EUPHRA'TES (JTlS ; Eixppdrris ; Eu- 
phrates) is a word of Accadian or prc-Semitic 
origin. The eaidy inhabitants of Chaldaea called 
the river the Pura-nunu, " the great water," or 
Pura, " the water," simply. From this, the later 
Semitic population formed Puratu by attaching 
the Semitic suffix of the feminine to the Acca- 
dian word. The Greek Euphrates is a popular 
modification of the Persian Ufratu, where the 
first syllable represents the adventitious vowel 
produced by the omission of the first vowel of 
the original name, and the consequent coalescence 
of two initial consonants. In the Babylonian 
inscriptions, the Euphrates is often called " the 
river of Sippara." It was also termed "Sakhan," 
for which the Semitic equivalent seems to have 
been Gikhinnu or Gihon. It is most frequently 
denoted in the Bible by the terra 111311, han- 

T T - 

nahar, i.e. " the river, ' the river of Asia, in 
grand contrast to the short-lived torrents of 
Palestine (see a list of the occurrences of this 
term in Stanley, S. and P., App. § 34). 

The Euphrates is the largest, the longest, and 
by far the most important of the rivers of 
Western Asia. It rises from two chief sources 
in the Armenian mountains, one of them at 
Domli, 25 miles N.E. of Erzeroum, and little 
more than a degree from the Black Sea ; the 
other on the northern slope of the mountain 
range called Ala-Tagh, near the village of 
Diyadin, and not far from Mount Ararat. The 
former, or Northern Euphrates, has the name 
Frdt from the first, but is known also as the 
Kara-Su (Black River) ; the latter, or Southern 
Euphrates, is not called the Frdt but the Murad 




Chai, )'et it is ia reality the main river. Both 
branches riow at first towards the west or south- 
west, passing tiirough tlie wildest mountain- 
districts of Armenia ; they meet at Kchban- 
Mddcn, nearly in long. I3'J° K. from Greenwich, 
having run respectively 400 ami 270 miles. 
Here the stream formed by their combined 
waters is 120 yards wide, rapid, and very deep ; 
it now flows nearly southward, but in a tortuous 
course, forcing a way through the ranges of 
Taurus and anti-Taurus, an 1 still seeming as if 

it woulil empty itself into the Mediterranean; 
but prevented from so doing by the longitudinal 
ranges of .\manus and Lebanon, which here run 
parallel to the Syrian coast, and at no gi'eat 
distance from it, the; river at last desists from 
its endeavour, and in alxiut lat. 3G° turns to- 
wards tiie south-east, and proceeds in this 
direction for above 1,000 miles to its embouchure 
in the Persian Gulf. The last part of its course, 
from Hit downwards, is througli a low, flat, and 
alluvia! plain, over which it has a tendency to 

«%"^^t^^ K 

-<; ^ "^ ^ <- '^Lake Van 

^,PERSI AJ:{^ 
G lf0F 

The Euphrfttes. 

spread and stagnate ; above Hit, and from thence 
to Sumcisat (Samosata), the country along its 
banks is for the most part open but hilly ; north 
of Suine'isat, the stream runs in a narrow 
valley among high mountains, and is interrupted 
by numerous rapids. The entire course is cal- 
culated at 1780 miles, nearlv 650 more than 
that of the Tigris, and only 200 short of that of 
the Indus ; and of this distance more than two- 
thirds (1200 miles) is navigable for boats, and 
even, as the expedition of Col. Chesney proved, 
for small steamers. The width of the river is 


greatest at the distance of 700 or 800 miles 
from its mouth — that is to say, from its junction 
with the Khahour to tiie village of Werai. It 
there averages 400 yards, while lower down, 
from Werdi to Lamlun, it continually decreases, 
until at the last-named place its width is not 
more than 120 yards, its depth having at the 
same time diminished from an average of 18 
to one of 12 feet. The causes of this singular 
phenomenon are the entire lack of tributaries 
below the Khahour, and the employment of the 
water in irrigation. The river has also in this 

3 T 




part of its course the teudency already noted, to 
run off and waste itself in vast marshes, which 
every year more and more cover the alluvial 
tract west and south of the stream. From this 
cause its lower course is continually varying, and 
it is doubted whether at present, except in the 
season of the inundation, any portion of the 
Euphrates water is poured into the Shat-el-Arah. 

The annual inundation of the Euphrates is 
caused by the melting of the snows in the 
Armenian highlands. It occurs in the month 
of May. The rise of the Tigris is earlier, since 
it drains the southern flank of the great Armenian 
chain. The Tigris scarcely ever overflows [HiD- 
dekel], but the Euphrates inundates large 
tracts on both sides of its course from Hit 
downwards. The great hydraulic works ascribed 
to Nebuchadnezzar (Abyden. Fr. 8) had for 
their object to control the inimdation by tui'n- 
ing the waters through sluices into canals 
prepared for them, and distributing them in 
channels over a wide extent of countiy. 

Tlie Euphrates has at all times been of some 
importance as furnishing a line of traflic between 
the East and the West. Herodotus speaks of 
persons, probably merchants, using it regularly 
on their passage from the Mediterranean to 
Babylon (Herod, i. 185). He also describes the 
boats which were in use upon the stream (i. 194-) 
— and mentions that their principal freight was 
wine, which was furnished by Armenia. Boats 
such as he describes, of wicker-work and coated 
with bitumen, or sometimes covered with skins, 
still abound on the river. Alexander appears to 
have brought to Babylon by the Euphrates route 
vessels of some considerable size, which he had 
had made in Cyprus and Phoenicia. They were 
so constructed that they could be taken to pieces, 
and were thus carried piecemeal to Thapsacus, 
where they were put together and launched 
(Aristobul. ap. Strab. xvi. 1, § 11). The dis- 
advantage of the route was the difficulty of 
conveying return cargoes against the current. 
According to Herodotus, the boats which de- 
scended the river were broken to pieces and sold 
at Babylon, and the owners returned on foot 
to Armenia, taking with them only the skins 
(i. 194). Aristobulus however related (ap. 
Strab. xvi. 3, § 3) that the Gerrhaeans ascended 
the river in their rafts not only to Babylon, but 
to Thapsacus, whence they carried their wares 
on foot in all directions. The spices and other 
products of Arabia formed their principal mer- 
chandise. On the whole there are sufficient 
grounds for believing that throughout the Baby- 
lonian and Persian periods this route was made 
use of by the merchants of vai'ious nations, and 
that by it the east and west continually inter- 
changed their most important products (see 
Layaril's Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 536-37). 

The Euphrates is first mentioned iu Scripture 
as one of the four rivers of Eden (Gen. ii. 14). 
Its celebrity is there sufficiently indicated by 
the absence of any explanatory phrase, such as 
accompanies the names of the other streams. 
We next hear of it in the covenant made with 
Abraham (Gen. xv. 18), where the whole country 
from " the great river, the river Euphrates," to 
the river of Egypt, is promised to the chosen 
race. In Deuteronomy and Joshua we find that 
this promise was borne in mind at the time of 
the settlement in Canaan (Deut. i. 7, si. 24 ; 

Josh. i. 4) ; and from an important passage in 
the First Book of Chronicles it appears that the 
tribe of Reuben did actually ext.nd itself to the 
Euphrates in the times anterior to Saul (1 Ch. 
V. 9). Here they came in contact with the 
Hagarites, who appear upon the middle Eu- 
phrates in the Assyrian inscriptions of the later 
empire. It is David, however, who seems for the 
first time to have entei'ed on the full enjoyment 
of the promise, by the victories which he gained 
over Hadadezer, king of Zobah, and his allies, 
the Syrians of Damascus (2 Sam. viii. 3-8; 
1 Ch. xviii. 3). The object of his expedition was 
" to recover his border," and " to stablish his 
dominion by the river Euphrates ; " and in this 
object he appears to have been altogether suc- 
cessful ; insomuch that Solomon, his son, who 
was not a man of war, but only inherited his 
fixther's dominions, is said to have '' reigned over 
all kingdoms from the river (i.e. the Euphrates) 
unto the land of the Philistines and unto the 
border of Egypt " (1 K. iv. 21 ; cp. 2 Ch. ix. 
26). Thus during the reigns of David and 
Solomon the dominion of Israel actually attained 
to the full extent both ways of the original 
promise, the Euphrates forming the boundary 
of their empire to the north-east, and the river 
of Egypt (torrens Aei/ypti) to tlie south-west. 
This wide-spread dominion was lost before the 
disruption of the empire under Rehoboam ; and 
no more is heard in Scripture of the Euphrates 
until the expedition of Necho against the Baby- 
lonians iu the reign of Josiah. The " great 
river " had meanwhile served for some time as 
a boundary between Assyria and the country of 
the Hittites [see Assyria], but had been re- 
peatedly crossed by the armies of the Ninevite 
kings, who gradually established their sway over 
the countries upon its right bank. The crossing 
of the rivei" was always difficult ; and at the 
point where certain natural facilities fixed the 
ordinary passage, the strong fort of Carchemish 
had been built, probably iu very earlv times, to 
command the position. [Oarchkmisk.] Hence, 
when Necho determined to attempt the perma- 
nent conquest of Syria, his march was directed 
upon "Carchemish by Euphrates" (2 Ch. xxxv. 
20), which he captured and held, thus extending 
the dominion of Egypt to the Euphrates, and 
renewing the old glories of the Ramesside king.s. 
His triumph, however, was short-lived. Three 
years afterwards the Babylonians^who had 
inherited the Assyrian dominion in these parts 
— made an expedition under Nebuchadnezzar 
against Necho, defeated his army, '" which was 
by the river Euphrates in Carchemish " (Jer. 
xlvi. 2), and recovered all Syria and Palestine. 
Then " the king of Egypt came no more out of 
his land, for the king of Babylon had taken 
from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates 
all that pertained to the king of Egypt " (2 K. 
xxiv. 7). 

These are the chief events which Scripture 
distinctly connects with the " great river." 
It is probably included among the " rivers of 
Babylon," by the side of which the Jewish 
captives "remembered Zion " and "wept" 
(Ps. cxxxvii. 1); and no doubt is glanced at in 
the threats of Jeremiah against the Chaldaean 
" waters " and " springs," upon which there is 
to be a " drought," that shall " dry them up " 
(Jer. 1. 38; li. 26). The fulfilment of these 




prophecies has been noticed umlor the head of 
OiiALDAEA. The river stiil brings down as 
much water as of old, but the precious element 
is wasted bv the neglect of man; the various 
watercourses along which it was in former 
times conve3-ed are dry ; the same channel had 
shrunk ; and the water stagnates in unwhole- 
some marshes. 

In ancient times the Euphrates fell into the 
sea without first joining the Tigris, as is now 
the case. When Senuaclierib ]nirsued the sub- 
jvcts of i\Ierodach-15aladan to the mouth of the 
Kulaeus, he had, after sailing out of the Eu- 
])h rates, quite a long voyage by sea. According 
to Pliny (X. 11. vi. 31), the city of Charax, 
the present Jlohammerah, which was Iniilt by 
Alexander the Great, was originally 10 stades 
<listant from the sea ; in the age of Juba II. 
50 miles, and in his own time 120 miles. Loftus 
(Chaldaea and Sitsiana, p. 282) states that the 
delta at the mouths of the Euphrates and Tigris 
has increased since the beginning of the Christian 
ora, at the rate of a mile in about seventy years. 
The ancient city of Eridu, now Abu-Shahrein, 
when first founded stood ujion the coast. Be- 
tween the actual mouth of the Euphrates and 
the sea, however, lay e.xtensive " salt-marshes," 
called Marratim in Babylonian, the Merathaim 
of Jer. 1. 21. It was in these marshes that 
Bit-Yagina, the ancestral capital of Merodach- 
Baladan, was situated, and it was here that 
we first hear of his subjects, the Kalda or 

See, for a general account of the Euphrates, Sir 
<j. Chesney's Euphrates Expedition, vol. i. ; and 
for the lower course of the stream, cp. Loftus's 
Chaldaea and Susiana. See also Eawlinson's 
Herodotus, vol. i. Essay ix., and Layard's Nineveh 
and Babylon, chs. xxi. and xxii. [A. H. S.] 

EU-POLEMUS (Eu5ro'\eyuo$), the "son of 
John, the son of Accos " (^Akkws ; cp. Neh. iii. 
4, 21, &c.), one of the envoys sent to Rome by 
Judas Maccabaeus, c. B.C. 161 (1 Mace. viii. 17 ; 
2 Mace. iv. 11 ; Joseph. Ant. xii. 10, § 6). He 
has been identified with the historian of the 
same name (Enseb. Pracp. Ev. ix. 17 sq.); but it 
is by no means clear that the historian was of 
Jewish descent (Joseph, c. Ap. i. 23 ; yet cp. 
Hieron. dc Vir. Illustr. p. 38). [B. F. W.] 

EUKO-CLYDON; R. V. Eur-aquilo (Eipo- 
kXvSuv ; NA. EvpaKvXwy ; Euro-aquilo), the 
name given (Acts xxvii. 14) to the gale of 
wind which off' the south coast of Crete seized 
the ship in which St. Paul was ultimately 
wrecked on the coast of Malta. The circum- 
stances of this gale are described with much 
particularity; and they admit of abundant 
illustration from the experience of modern sea- 
men in the Levant. In the first place it came 
down from the island (kot' auTTJs), and there- 
fore must have blown, more or less, from the 
northward, since the ship was sailing along the 
south coast, not far from Mount Ida, and on the 
way from Fair Havens toward Piioenice. 
So Captain Spratt, R.N., after leaving Fair 
Havens with a light southerly wind, fell in 
with " a strong northerly breeze, blowing direct 
from Mount Ida" (Smith, T'oy. and Shipwreck 
of St. Paul, 1856, pp. 97, 245)." Next, the wind 
is described as being like a tvphoou or whirlwind 

(rvtpwviKSs, A. y. and R. V. "tempestuous"); 
and the same authority speaks of such gales 
in the Levant as being generally "accompanied 
by terrilic gusts and squalls from high 
mountains " (Conybeare and Howson, Life and 
Epistles of St. Paul, 1856, ii. 401). It is 
also observable that the change of wind in 
the voyage before us (xxvii. 13, 14) is exactly 
what might have been expected ; for Captain 
J. Stewart, R.N., observes, in his remarks on 
the Archipelago, that "it is always safe to 
anchor under the lee of an island with a 
northerly wind, as it dies away gradually, 
but it would be extremely dangerous with 
southerly winds, as they almost invariably shift 
to a violent northerly wind " (Purdy's Sailing 
Director!/, pt. ii. p. 61). The long duration of 
the gale (" the fourteenth night," v. 27), the 
over-clouded state of the sky ('• neitlier sun nor 
stars a))pcaring," v. 20), and even the heavy rain 
which concluded the storm {rhy veT6v, xxviii. 2), 
could easily be matched with parallel instances 
in modern times (see Voij. and Shipwrecli, p. 144 ; 
Life and Epp. ii. 412). We ha^-e seen that the 
wind was more or less northerly. The context 
gives us full materials for determining its direc- 
tion with great exactitude. The vessel Avas 
driven from the coast of Crete to Clauda 
(xxvii. 16), and apprehension was felt that she 
would be driven into the African Syrtis {v. 17). 
Combining these two circumstances with the 
fact that she was less than half-way from Fair 
Havens to Phoenice when the storm began 
(y. 14), we come to the conclusion that it came 
from the N.E. or E.N.E. This is quite in har- 
mony with the natural sense of EvpaKvKwv 
{Euro-aquilo, Vulg.), which is found in some of 
the best MSS., and has been adopted in R. Y. ; 
but we are disposed to adhere to the Received 
Text, more especially as it is the more difficult 
reading, and the phrase used by St. Luke (o 
KaAovfxevos EvpoK\vSa>i') seems to point to some 
peculiar word in use among the* sailors. Dean 
Alford thinks that the true name of the wind 
was evpaKvXooy, but that the Greek sailors, not 
understanding the Latin termination, corrupted 
the word into evpoic\v5wv, and that so St. Luke 
wrote it. [Winds.] [J. S. H.] [W.] 

EU'TYCHUS (EijTvxos ; Eutychus ; Acts xx. 
9-11). Sitting in the window of the upper room 
where St. Paul was preaching, he was overcome 
by sleep and fell to the ground. He was taken 
up dead. But after St. Paul had embraced him 
(I'ike Elisha, 2 K. iv. 34) he said (R. V.), " Make 
ye no ado; for his life is in him." St. Paul then 
returned to the upper room, and the story closes 
with the words, "they brought the lad alive." 
St. Paul's words, " his life is in him," appear to 
imply that he had not really expired. But 
if we accept literally the distinct statement that 
he was taken up dead, we must suppose that 
St. Paul means " his life is now in him," as a 
consequence of what had been done, without 
implying that it had continued to be in him 
throughout. It is difficult to interpret the 
apparent contradiction without unduly straining 
one of the two phrases. It is clear, however, 
that the author intends to relate a notable 
miracle, either of healing or of raising from the 
dead, otherwise the whole story would be with- 
out point. [E. R. B.] 

3 T 2 




EVANGELIST {evayyeXicrrris ; evanrje- 
llsta: Acts xxi. 8; Eph. iv. 11 ; 2 Tim. iv. 5). 
The constitution of the apostolic Church in- 
cluded a body of men known as Evangelists. 
The absence of any detailed account of the 
organization and practical working of the Church 
in the 1st century leaves us in some uncertainty 
as to their functions and position. The meaning 
of the name, " the publishers of glad tidings," 
seems common to the work of the Christinn 
ministry generally, yet in Ephes. iv. 11 the 
€ua77€At(rTal appear on the one hand after the 
airdcrroAoi and irp6<priTai, and on the other 
before the irolfj-eves and SiSdcTKaAoi. Assuming 
that the Apostles here, whether limited to the 
twelve or not, are those who were looked upon 
as the special delegates and representatives of 
Christ, and therefore higher than all others in 
their authority, and that the Prophets were 
men speaking under the immediate impulse of 
the Spirit words that were mighty in their 
effects on men's hearts and consciences, it would 
follow that the Evangelists had a function 
subordinate to theirs ; yet more conspicuous 
and so far higher than that of the pastors who 
watched over a Church that had been founded, 
and of the teachers who carried on the work of 
systematic instruction. This passage would 
accordingly lead us to think of them as standing 
between the two other groups — sent forth as 
missionary preachers of the Gospel by the first, 
and as such preparing the way for the labours 
of the second. The same inference would seem 
to follow from the occurrence of the word as 
applied to Philip in Acts xxi. 8. He had been 
one of those who had gone everywhere, evayyfKi- 
(o/xevoi rhv \6yof (Acts viii. 4), now in one 
city, now in another (viii. 40) ; but he has not 
the power and authority of an Apostle (see the 
whole narrative in ch. viii.), he does not speak 
as a prophet himself, though the gift of prophecy 
belongs to his four daughters (xxi. 9), and exer- 
cises apparently no pastoral superintendence over 
any portion of the flock. The omission of Evange- 
lists in the text of 1 Cor. xii. may be explained 
on the hypothesis that the nature of St. Paul's 
argument led him there to speak of the settled 
organization of a given local church, which 
of course presupposed the work of the missionary 
preacher as already accomplished, while the 
train of thought in Ephes. iv. 11 brought before 
his mind all who were in any way instrumental 
in building up the Church imiversal. It follows 
from what has been said that the calling of the 
Evangelist is expressed by the word K-r\p{i(T<r(Lv 
rather than StScicrKeir, or irapaKaXuv : it is the 
proclamation of the glad tidings to those who 
have not known them, rather than the instruc- 
tion and pastoral care of those who have believed 
and have been baptized. And this is also what 
we gather from 2 Tim. iv. 2-5. Timothy is to 
" preach the word ; " in doing this he is to " do 
the work of an evangelist." It follows also 
that the name denotes a ivork rather than an 
order. And hence there are no references to 
the existence of an order bearing this title in 
any later writers. The word evayyeMaTrjs does 
not occur in the Apostolic Fathers, nor even in 
the AtSaxh "^^^ SdSeKa airo(Tr6\oi)v, which 
recognises a distinction between two kinds of 
ministers, missionari/ (JittoctoXqi koI Trpo<prjrai) 
and stationary (^iiricTKOiroi koI dtaKOVoi). The 

Evangelist might or might not be a Bishop- 
elder or a deacon. The Apostles, so far as they 
evangelized (Acts viii. 25, xiv. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 17), 
might claim the title, though there were manv 
Evangelists who were not Apostles. "Omnis 
apostolus evangeJista, non omnis evangelists 
apostolus" (Pelagius). The "brother whose 
praise was in the Gospel " (2 Cor. viii. 18) may 
be looked upon as one of St. Paul's companions 
in this work, and known probably by the same 
name. In this as in other points connected 
with the organization of the Church in the 
apostolic age, but little information is to be 
gained from later writers. The name was no' 
longer explained by the jiresence of those to 
whom it had been specially applied, and came- 
to be variously interpreted. Theodoret (on 
Ephes. iv. 11) describes the Evangelists — as they 
have been described above — as travelling mis- 
sionaries, who -n-fpiovres eK-fipurrov : Chrysos- 
tom, as men who preached the Gospel fj.i) 
TrepiovTes iravraxov. The two expressions, 
when taken together, give us the idea of the 
office very fairly. They were distinguished from 
the Apostles, to whom they acted as subordi- 
nates : " missionary assistants of the Apostles " 
(Meyer). The account given by Eusebius- 
(H. E. ii. 37), though somewhat rhetorical and 
vague, gives prominence to the idea of itinerant 
missionary preaching. Men " do the work of 
Evangelists, leaving their homes to proclaim 
Christ, and deliver the written Gospels to those 
who were ignorant of the faith." The last 
clause of this description indicates a change iit 
the work which before long atl'ected the meaning 
of the name. If the Gospel was a written book, 
and the office of the Evangelist Avas to read or 
distribute it, then the writers were /car' e^oxvy 
THE Evangelists. It is thus accordingly thii 
Eusebius {l. c.) speaks of them, though the old 
meaning of the word (as in J£. E. v. 10, where 
he applies it to Pantaeuus) is not forgotten by 
him. Soon this meaning so overshadowed the 
old that Oecumenius (Estius on Ephes. iv. 11) has 
no other notion of the Evangelists than as those 
who have written a Gospel (cp. Harless on Ephes. 
iv. 11). Augustine, though commonly using- 
the word in this sense, at times remembers its- 
earlier signification (Serm. xciv. and cclxvi.). 
Ambrosiauus (Estius L c.) identifies them with 
deacons. In later liturgical language the word 
was applied to the reader of the Gospel for the 
day (cp. Neander, Pfianz. u. Lett., iii. 5 ; Hooker, 
E. P. V. ch. Ixxviii. ; Meyer on Acts xxi. 8 : and 
for the symbolic representations of the Evan- 
gelists in the Church, see Dictionary of Christian 
Antiquities, s. v. "Evangelists"). 

[E. H. P.] [E. C. S. G.] 

EVE (H-in, i.e. Chamah, LXX. in Gen. iii. 20, 
Zoori, elsewhere E5o; Heva), the name given in 
Scripture to the first woman. It is simply ;» 
feminine form of the adjective "TI, living, alive, 
which more commonly makes ilTi ; or it may be 
regarded as a variation of the noun n*n, which 
means life. The account of Eve's creation is 
found in Gen. ii. 21, 22. Upon the failure of 
a companion suitable for Adam among the 
creatures which were brought to him to be 
named, the Lord God caused a deep sleep to 
fall upon him, and took one of his ribs from 



liira, ivhich he fashioned into a woman, and 
Ijrought her to the man. Various exphinations 
of this narrative have been otfered. Perhaps 
that which we are chieH)- intended to learn 
from it is the foundation upon which the union 
between man and wife is built, viz. identity of 
nature and oneness of origin. 

Through the subtlety of the serpent, Eve 
was beguiled into a violation of the one com- 
mandment which had been imposed upon her 
and Adam. She took of the fruit of the for- 
bidden tree and gave it her husband (cp. 2 Cor. 
x-i. 3 ; 1 Tim. ii. 13, 14). [Adam.] The different 
aspects under which Eve regarded her mission 
as a mother are seen in the names of her sons. 
At the birth of the first she said, "I have gotten 
A man from the Lord," or perhaps, " I have 
gotten a man, even the Lord," mistaking him 
for the Redeemer. When the second was born, 
finding her hopes frustrated, she named him 
Abel, or vanity. When his brother had slain 
him, and she again bare a son, she called his 
■name Seth, and the joy of a mother seemed to 
■outweigh the sense of the vanity of life: " For 
<jod," said she, " hath appointed me another 
•seed instead of Abel, for Cain slew him." The 
Scripture account of Eve closes with the birth 
of Seth. [S. L.] 

EVI (MN ; Evi ; Evi, Ilcvacus), one of the five 
kings or princes of Midian, slain by the Israelites 
dn the war after the matter of Baal-peor, apd 
Avhose lands were afterwards allotted to Reuben 
<Num. xxxi. 8 ; Josh. xiii. 21). [Midian.] 

[E. S. P.] 

EVIDENCE, The term used by the A. V. 
to describe the document of purchase which 
Jeremiah (xxxii. 10 sq.) signed and sealed upon 
buying a field at a time when, humanly speak- 
ing, such purchase seemed an act of folly. He 
relied on God's promise {y. 15). The R. V. 
renders '' deed." [F.] 

EVIL-MERO'DACHC^nnp h''\^/, B. Eil-e*- 
aXfiapuSeK [2 K.], K. OuAai/xapaSax; Abyden. 
'AyuiA.juapou5o/cos ; Beros. EvdX/xapdSovxos ', Evil- 
merodach; Ba.h. Amel-Marduk {_ = Awel-Marduk, 
-Maruduk'], " Man of Merodach ") was, according 
to Berosus, Abydenus, &c.,the son and successor of 
Nebuchadnezzar, and came to the throne of Baby- 
lonia about 562 B.C. The Second Book of Kings 
i(xxv. 27) and the Book of Jeremiah (Hi. 31) re- 
late that in the accession year, or first year of 
his reign, this king had compassion upon Je- 
hoiachin, king of Judah (whom Nebuchadnezzar 
had cast into prison thirty-seven years before), 
Teleiised him from his confinement, " spake kindly 
to him," honoured him above all the vassal-kings 
at Babylon, and gave him a portion of his table 
for the rest of his life. As Evil-Merodach 
■only reigned for two years (Abydenus, Fr. 9; 
Berosus, Fr. 14), or two years and a few months, 
according to the tablets dated in his reign, this 
must have been done by means of a deed drawn 
«p in legal form, such as the words of the pas- 
sages of Scripture imply, and as was usual in 
Babylonia at the time, though it is not impos- 
sible that Jehoiachin died before his roval 
master. Evil-Merodach was killed in a rebellion 
3od by his sister's husband, a Babylonian noble 
named Neriglissar [Nergal-sharezer], who 

then seized the Babylonian crown. Accordinof 
to Berosus, Evil-Merodach rendered himself 
odious by his debaucheries and other extrava- 
gances, and it is to this that his untimely end 
was really due. He was a good-natured, though 
unwarlike and unwise ruler. [T. G. P.] 

EVIL SPIRIT. [Demon.] 


The wonderful profusion of flowering shrubs is 
to Tristram '• ths gran<i characteristic of the 
excellency of Carmel." [Carmel.] [F.] 

EXCELLENT, as applied by A. V. to 
Theophilus (Luke i. 3) and to Felix (Acts xxiii. 
26) in the phrase "most excellent " (6 KpancrTos), 
is usually considered a title or office (cp. "your 
Excellency "). The R. V. preserves the same 
English word for the same Greek word when 
speaking of Felix (Acts xxiv. 3) and Festus 
(Acts xxvi. 25), where the A. V. uses "noble." 

EXCOMMUNICATION C^<popi(Tix6s ; Ex- 
comimaiicatio). Excommunication is a power 
founded upon a right inherent in all religious 
societies, and is analogous to the powers of 
capital punishment, banishment, and exclusion 
from membership, which are exercised by poli- 
tical and municipal bodies. If Christianitv is 
merely a philosophical idea thrown into the 
world to do battle with other theories, and to 
be valued according as it maintains its ground 
or not in the confiict of opinions, excommuni- 
cation, ecclesiastical punishments, and peni- 
tential discipline are unreasonable. If a society 
has been instituted ior maintaining anv body of 
doctrine, and any code of morals, they are 
necessary to the txisttnce cl that societv. That 
the Christian Church is an organised polity, 
a spiritual " Kingdom of God " on earth, is the 
declaration of the Bible [Church]; and that 
the Jewish Church was at once a spiritual and a 
temporal organization is clear, 

I. Jciish Excommunication. — The Jewish 
system of excommunication was threefold. For 
a first offence a delinquent was subjected to the 
penalty of '1^3 (^Niddui). Maimonides (quoted 
by Lightfoot, Horae Hchraicae, on 1 Cor. v. 5), 
Morinus {de Poenitentia, iv. 27), and Buxtorf 
(^Lexicon, s. v. ^■'n^) enumerate the twenty-four 
offences for which it was inflicted. They are 
various, and range in heinousness from the 
offence of keeping a fierce dog to that of taking 
God's name in ■vain. Elsewhere {Bab. Moed 
Katon, fol. 16, 1) the causes of its infliction are 
reduced to two, termed money and epicurism, by 
which is meant debt and wanton insolence. The 
offender was first cited to appear in court, and if 
he refused to appear or to make amends, his 
sentence was pronounced — " Let M, or N, be 
under excommunication." The excommunicated 
person was prohibited the use of the bath, or of 
the razor, (ir of the convivial table ; and all 
who had to do v/ith him were commanded to 
keep him at four cubits' distance. He was 
allowed to go to the Temple, but not to make 
the circuit in the ordinary manner. The term 
of this punishment was thirty days ; and it was 
extended to a second, and to a third thirty days 
when necessarv. If at the end of that time the 


offender was still contumacious, he was subjected 
to the second excommunication, termed D^n 
(cherem), a word meaning something devoted to 
God (Lev. xxvii. 21, 28; Ex. xxii. 20; Num. 
xviii. 14). Severer penalties were now attached. 
The offender was not allowed to teach or to be 
tau<fht in company with others, to hire or to bo 
hired, nor to perform any cuinniercial transac- 
tions beyond purchasing the necessaries of life. 
The sentence was delivered by a court of ten, 
and was accompanied by a solemn malediction, 
for which authority was supposed to be found in 
the "Curse ye Meroz " of Judg. v. 23. Lastly 
followed KnjS'i' (^Shamnidtlui;, which was an 
entire cutting off from the congregation. It has 
been supposed by some that these two latter 
forms of excommunication were undistinguish- 
able from each other." 

The punishment of excommunication is not 
appointed by the Law of Moses. It is founded 
on the natural right of self-protection which all 
societies enjoy. The case of Korah, Dathan, 
and Abiram (Num. xvi.), the curse denounced 
on Meroz (Judg. v. 23), the commission and 
proclamation of Ezra (vii. 26, x. 8), and the 
reformation of Nehemiah (xiii. 2.5), are appealed 
to by the Talmudists as precedents by which 
their proceedings are regulated. In respect to 
the principle involved, the " cutting off from 
the people " commanded for certain sins (Ex. 
XXX. 33, 38, xxxi. 14; Lev. xvii. 4), and the 
exclusion from the camp denounced on the 
leprous (Lev. xiii. 46 ; Num. xii. 14), are more 

In the New Testament, Jewish excommunica- 
tion is brought prominently before us in the 
case of the man that was born blind and restored 
to sight (John ix.). " The Jews had agreed al- 
ready that if any man did confess that Jesus was 
Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. 
Therefore said his parents, He is of age, ask 
him" (vv. 22, 23). "And they cast him out. 
Jesus heard that they had cast him out " (vv. 34, 
35). The expressions hei'e used, airoffwdyooyos 
yevriTai — i^f^aXov avrhv e^w, appear to refer 
to the first form of excommunication or Niddui. 
Our Lord warns His disciples that they will 
have to suffer excommunication at the hands of 
their countrymen (John xvi. 2) ; and the fear 
of it is described as sufficient to prevent persons 
in a respectable position from acknowledging 
their belief in Christ (John xii. 42). In Luke 
vi. 22, it has been thought that our Lord re- 
ferred specifically to the three forms of Jewish 
excommunication — " Blessed are ye when men 
shall hate you, and when they shall separate 
you from their company [ac^opi(Ta>(nv], and shall 
reproach you [oveiSicr&xrt;'], and cast out your 
name as evil [iK^a.\oi<Tiv], for the Son of Man's 
.sake." The three words vei-y accurately express 
the simple separation, the additional maledic- 
tion, and the final exclusion of niddui, cherem, 
and shamrndthd. This verse makes it probable 
that the three stages were already formally dis- 
iinguished from each other, though, no doubt, 
the words appropriate to each are occasionally 
used inexactly. 

» A Blightly different view of the three forms of ex- 
communication will be found on p. 128, col. 1. Cp. also 
Hamburger, B.E. s.v. " Bann."— [F.] 


II. Christian Excommunication. — Excommuni- 
cation, as exercised by the Christian Church, is 
founded not merely on the natural right pos- 
sessed by all societies, not merely on the example 
of the Jewish Church and nation. It was insti- 
tuted by our Lord (Matt, xviii. 15, 18), and it 
was practised by and commanded by St. Paul 
(1 Tim. i. 20; 1 Cor. v. 11 ; Tit. iii. 10). 

Its Institution. — ^The passage in St. Matthew 
has led to much controversy, into which we do 
not enter. It runs as follows : — " If thy brothei" 
shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his 
fault between thee and him alone ; if he shall 
hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if 
he will not hear thee, then take with thee cue 
or two more, that in the mouth of two or three 
witnesses every word may be established. And 
if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the 
Church ; but if he neglect to hear the Church, 
let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a 
publican. Verily I say unto you. Whatsoever 
ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, 
and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be 
loosed in heaven." Our Lord here recognises 
and appoints a way in which a member of His 
Church is to become to his brethren as a heathen 
man and a publican — i.e. be reduced to a state 
analogous to that of the Jew suffering the 
penalty of the third form of excommunication. 
It is to follow on his contempt of the censure of 
the Church passed on him for a trespass which 
he has committed. The final excision is to be 
preceded, as in the case of the Jew, by two 

Apostolic Example. — In the Epistles we find 
St. Paul frequently claiming the right to 
exercise discipline over his converts (cp. 
2 Cor. i. 23 ; xiii. 10). In two cases we find 
him exercising this authority to the extent of 
cutting off' offenders from the Church. One of 
these is the case of the incestuous Corinthian : 
" Ye are puffed up, and have not rather 
mourned, tiiat he that hath done this deed 
might be taken away from among you. For I 
verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, 
have judged already, as though I were present, 
concerning him that hath so done this deed, in 
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are 
gathered together, and my spirit, with the power 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one 
unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that 
the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord 
Jesus " (1 Cor. v. 2-5). The other case is that 
of Hymenaeus and Alexander : " Holding faith, 
and a good conscience ; which some having put 
away concerning f;iith have made shipwreck : of 
whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander ; whom I 
have delivered nnto Satan, that they may learn 
not to blaspheme " (1 Tim. i. 19, 20). It seems 
certain that these persons were excommunicated, 
the first for immorality, the others for heresy. 
What is the full meaning of the expression, 
"deliver unto Satan," is doubtful. All agree 
that excommunication is contained in it, but 
whether it implies any further punishment, 
inflicted by the extraordinary powers committed 
specially to the Apostles, has been questioned. 
The strongest argument for the phrase meaning 
no more than excommunication may be drawn 
from a comparison of Col. i. 13. Addressing 
himself to the "saints and faithful brethren in 
Christ which are at Colosse," St. Paul exhorts 



them to " give thauks unto the Father Which 
liatli made us meet to be partakers of the in- 
heritance of the saints in light : Who hath 
delivered us from the power of darkness, and 
hath trauslatod us into the kingdom of His dear 
Son: in Whom we have redemption through His 
blood, even the forgiveness of sins." The con- 
ception of the Apostle here is of men lying in 
the realm of darkness, and transported from 
thence into tiie kingdom of the Son of God, 
which is the inheritance of the f-aints in light, 
by admission into the Church. What he means 
\)y the power of darkness is abundantly clear 
from many other passages iu his writings, of 
which it will be sullicieut to quote Ephes. vi. 12 : 
" Put on the whole armour of God, that ye 
may be able to stand against the wiles of the 
devil ; for we wrestle not against flesh and 
blood, but against principalities, against powers, 
against the rulers of the darkness of this world, 
against spiritual wickedness in high places." 
Introduction into the Church is therefore, in 
St. Paul's mind, a translation from the kingdom 
and power of Satan to the kingdom and govern- 
ment of Christ. This being so, he could hardly 
more naturally describe the effect of excluding a 
man from the Church than by the words, 
" deliver him unto Satan," the idea being, that 
the man ceasing to be a subject of Christ's king- 
dom of light, was at once transported back to 
the kingdom of darkness, and delivered therefore 
into the power of its ruler, Satan. This inter- 
pretation is strongly confirmed by the terms in 
which St. Paul describes the commission which 
he i-eceived from the Lord Jesus Christ, when he 
was sent to the Gentiles: " To open their eyes, 
and to turn tlicm from darkness to light, and 
from the power of Satan unto God, that they 
may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance 
among them which are sanctified by faith that 
is in Me " (Acts xxvi. 18). Here again the act 
of being placed in Christ's kingdom, the Church, 
is pronounced to be a translation from darkness 
to light, from the power of Satan unto God. 
Conversely, to be cast out of the Church would 
be to be removed from light to darkness, to be 
withdrawn from God's government, and deli- 
vered into the power of Satan (so Balsamon and 
Zonaras, in Basil. Can. 7 ; Estius, in 1 Cor. v. ; 
Beveridge, in Can. Apost. x.). If, however, the 
expression means more than excommunication, 
it would imply the additional exercise of a 
special apostolical power, similar to that exerted 
on Ananias and Sapphira (Acts v. 1), Simon 
Magus (viii. 20), and Elymas (xiii. 10 : so 
Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustine, Hammond, 
Grotius, and the elder Lightfoot). 

Apostolic Precept. — In addition to the claim 
to exercise discipline, and its actual exercise in 
the form of excommunication, by the Apostles, 
we find apostolic precept directing that disci- 
pline should be exercised by the rulers of the 
Church, and that in some cases excommunica- 
tion should be resorted to : " If any man obey 
not our word by this epistle, note that man, and 
have no company M-ith him, that he may be 
ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy, but 
admonish him as a brothei-," writes St. Paul to 
the Thessalonians (2 Thess. iii. 14). To the 
Romans : " Mark them which cause divisions 
and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye 
have heard, and avoid them "' (Kom. xvi. 17). 

To the Galatians : " I would they were even cut 
off that trouble you " (Gal. v. 12). To Timothy : 
"If anv man teach otherwise,. . . from such 
withdraw thyself" (1 Tim. vi. 3). To Titus 
he uses a still stronger expression : " A man 
that is an heretic, after the first and second 
admonition, reject " (Tit. iii. 10). St. John 
instructs the lady to whom he addresses his 
Second Epistle, not to receive into her house 
nor bid God speed to any wiio did not believe in 
Christ (2 John v. 10) ; and we read that in the 
case of Cerinthus he acted himself on the pre- 
cept that he had given (Euseb. //. E. iii. 28). 
In his Third Epistle he describes Diotrephes, 
apparently a Judaizing presbyter, " who loved 
to have the pre-eminence," as "'casting out of 
the Church," i.e. refusing Church communion to 
the stranger brethren who were travelling about 
preaching to the Gentiles (.a John v. 10). In- 
the addresses to the Seven Churches, the angels 
or rulers of the Church of Pergamos and of 
Tliyatira are rebuked for " suffering " the Nico- 
laitans and Balaamites " to teach and to seduce 
my servants to commit fornication, and to eat 
things sacrificed unto idols " (Rev. ii. 20). 
There are two passages still more important to 
our subject. In the Epistle to the Galatians, 
St. Paul denounces, " Though we, or an Angel 
from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you 
than that which we have preached unto you, 
let him be accursed (wdde/xa tcrrw). As I said 
before, so say I now again, If any man preach 
any other gospel unto you than that ye have 
received, let him be accursed " (avadifxa fffrai. 
Gal. i. 8, 9). And in the First Epistle to the 
Corinthians : '• If any man love not the Lord 
Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maran-atha " 
(1 Cor. xvi. 22). It has been supposed that 
these two expressions, " let him be Anathema," 
" let him be Anathema Maran-atha," refer 
respectively to the two later stages of Jewish 
excommunication — the chcrcm and the sham- 
iiidthd. This requires consideration. 

The words avade/xa and a.yddr]fj.a have evi- 
dently the same derivation, and originally they 
bore the same meaning. They express a per- 
son or thing set apart, laid up, or devoted. 
But whereas a thing may be set apart by v/ay 
of honour or for destruction, the words, like 
the Latin sacer and the English " devoted," 
came to have opposite senses — rb dirTjAAoTpiw- 
ixivov Qfov, and -rh a(pa)pt(rfj.4vov 0€^. The 
LXX. and several ecclesiastical writers use the 
two words almost indiscriminately, but in 
general the form avaQ-nixa is applied to the 
votive offering (see 2 Mace. ix. 16 ; Luke xxi. 5; 
and Chrys. Horn. xvi. in Ep. ad Bom.), and the 
form avddefjLa to that which is devoted to evil 
(see Deut. vii. 26 ; Josh. vi. 17, vii. 13). Thus 
St. Paul declares that he could wish himself an 
avdOifia from Christ, if he could thereby save 
the Jews (Rom. ix. 3). His meaning is that he 
would be willing to be set apart as a vile thing, 
to be cast aside and destroyed, if only it could 
bring about the salvation of his brethren. 
Hence we see the force of avddffxa earw in 
Gal. i. 8. "Have nothing to do with him," 
would be the Apostle's injunction, " but let 
him be set apart as an evil thing, for God to 
deal with him as he thinks fit." Hammond (in 
loc.) paraphrases it as follows : — " You are to 
disclaim and renounce all communion with him, 


to look on him as on an excommunicateil person, 
under the second degree of excommunication, 
that none is to have anj' commerce with in 
sacred things." Hence it is that avadefxa ttrreo 
came to be the common expression employed by 
Councils at the termination of each canon which 
they enacted, meaning that whoever was dis- 
obedient to the canon was to be separated from 
the communion of the Church and its privi- 
leges, and from the favour of God, until he 
rei)euted (see Bingham, Ant. xvi. 2, 16). 

The expression 'Avofle/uo /napavadd, as it stands 
by itself without explanation in 1 Cor. xvi. 22, 
is so peculiar, that it has tempted a number of 
ingenious expositions. Parkhurst hesitatingly 
derives it from PiriS ^in'O, " Cursed be thou." 
But this derivation is not tenable. Buxtorf, 
Morinus, Hammond, Bingham, and others iden- 
tify it with the Jewish shainmdthd. They do 
so by translating sJuunmdthd, "The Lord 
comes." But shammdthd cannot be made to 
me.m "The Lord comes " (see Lightfoot in loco). 
Several fanciful derivations of it are given by 
Rabbinical writers, as "'There is death," "There 
is desolation " ; but there is no menticm by them 
of such a signification as "The Lord comes." 
Lightfoot derives it from r\)S^, and it probably 
means a thing excluded or shut out. Maran- 
atha, however peculiar its use in the text may 
seem to us, is an Aramaic expression, signi- 
fying " Our Lord is come " (Chrysostom, Jerome, 
Estius, Lightfoot), or " Our Lord cometh." If 
we take the former meaning, wc may regard it 
as giving the reason why the offender was to be 
anathematized ; if the latter, it would either 
imjily that the separation was to be in per- 
petuity, " donee Dominus redeat " (Augustine), 
or, more properly, it would be a form of solemn 
appeal to the day on which the judgment should 
be ratified by the Lord (cp. Jude, v. 14). In 
any case, it is a strengthened form of the simple 
avadiixa tdTu. And thus it may be regarded as 
holding towards it a similar relation to that 
which existed between the shammdthd and the 
cherem, but not on any supposed ground of ety- 
mological identity between the two words 
shammdthd and maran-atha. Perhaps we ought 
to interpunctuate more strongly between 
auddeixa and ixapava6d, and read tj'to) avddena- 
fjLapavadd, i.e. " Let him be anathema. The 
Lord will come " (cp. R. V. " let him be 
anathema. Maranatha" — explained as meaning 
"our Lord cometh"). The anathema and the 
cherem answer very exactly to each other (see 
Lev. xxvii. 28 ; Num. xxi. '6 ; Is. xliii. 28). 

Restoration to Communion. — Two cases of 
excommunication are related in Holy Scrip- 
ture ; and in one of them the restitution of the 
offender is specially recounted. The incestuous 
Corinthian had been excommunicated by the 
authority of St. Paul, who had issued his sen- 
tence from a distance without any consultation 
with the Corinthians. He had required them 
publicly to promulgate it and to act upon it. 
They had done so. The offender had been 
brought to repentance, and was overwhelmed 
Avith grief. Hereupon St. Paul, still absent as 
before, forbids the further infliction of the pun- 
ishment, pi'onounces the forgiveness of the 
penitent, and exhorts the Corinthians to receive 
him back to communion, and to confirm their 
love towards him. 


The Kidure of E.ccommunicatlon is made more 
evident by these acts of St. Paul than by any 
investigation of Jewish ju'actice or of the ety- 
mology of words. We thus find, (1) that it is 
a spiritual ])enalty, involving no temporal pun- 
ishment, except accidentally ; (2) that it con- 
sists in separation from the communion of the 
Church ; (3) that its object is the good of the 
sufferer (1 Cor. v. 5), and the protection of the 
sound members of the Church (2 Tim. iii. 17); 
(4) that its subjects are those wlio are guilty 
of heresy (1 Tim. i. 20), or gross immorality 
(1 Cor. V. 1) ; (5) that it is inflicted by the 
authority of the Church at large (Matt, xviii. 
18), wielded bv the highest ecclesiastical officer 
(1 Cor. V. 3 ; fit. iii. 10) ; (6) that this officer's 
sentence is promulgated by the congregation to 
which the oU'ender belongs (1 Cor. v. 4), in 
deference to his superior judgment and com- 
mand (2 Cor. ii. 9), ani in sjiite of any opposi- 
tion on the part of a minority (v. 6) ; (7) that 
the exclusion may be of indefinite duration, or 
for a period ; (8) that its duration may be 
abridged at the discretion and by the indul- 
gence of the person who has imposed the penalty 
(t;. 8) ; (9) that penitence is the condition on 
which restoration to communion is granted 
(v. 7); (10) that the sentence is to be publicly 
reversed as it was publicly promulgated (r. 10). 

Practice of Excommunication in the Post- 
Apostolic CIturch. — The first step was an ad- 
monition to the offender, repeated once, or eveu 
more than once, in accordance with St. Paul's 
precept (Tit. iii. 10. See Apostol. Constitittions, 
ii. 37-39 ; S. Ambr. De Offic. ii. 27 ; Prosper, 
De Vit. Contempl. ii. 7 ; Synesius, Ep. Iviii.). If 
this did not reclaim him, it was succeeded by 
the Lesser Excommunication (a.(popia-/j,6s), bv 
which he was excluded from the participation 
of the Eucharist, and was shut out from the 
(Jommunion-service, although admitted to what 
was called the Service of the Catechumens (see 
Theodoret, Ep. Ixxvii. ad Eulal.). Thirdlv 
followed the Greater Excommunication or Ana- 
tliema (jravTiX^s a<popiffix6s, avdOfixa), by which 
the offender was debarred, not only from the 
Eucharist, but from taking part in all religious 
acts in any assembly of the Church, and from 
the company of the faithful in the ordinarv 
concerns of life. In case of submission, offenders 
were received back to communion by going 
through the four stages of public penance, in 
which they were termed, (1) irpoffK\aiovT(S, 
fientes, or weepers ; (2) aKpou^evoi, audientes, 
or hearers ; (3) vwoiritrTovTes, substrati, or 
kneelers ; ( 4) crwiffTiines, consistentcs, or co- 
standers; after which they were restored to 
communion by absolution, accompanied by im- 
position of hands. To trace out this branch of 
the subject more minutely would carry us 
beyond our legitimate spher.e. Reference may be 
made to Suicer's Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus, s, vv. 
TrpoffKXavcrts, aKpSacris, wJirTtocris, avtrraffis. 

References. — Tertullian, De Poenitentia, Op. 
i. 139, Lutet. 1G34; S. Arnhvos^, De Poenitentia, 
Paris, 1686 ; Morinus, De Poenitentia, Antv. 
1682 ; Hammond, Power of the Keys, Works, i. 
406, Lond. 1684; Taylor, Ductor Duhitantium, 
iii. 4, 2, Lond. 1852; Selden, De jure NaturaH 
et Gentium juxta Disciplinam Jlebraeoi'um, Lips. 
1695 ; Lightfoot, Horae Hebraicne, On 1 Cor. 
V. 5, Works, ii. 746, Lond. 1634; Bingham, 


I Antiquities of the Christian Church, Books xvi. 
xviii., J.ond. 1875 ; Van Kspen, Jus Ucclcsiiis- 
ticiun, \en. 1789; Marshall, J'cnitentiil IJisci- 

' plinc of the Primitive Church, Oxf. 1844 ; 
Thorndike, The Chunh's J'owcr of L'xcominuni- 
(Xttion, as found in b'criptnn; Works, vi. 21 
(see also i. 55, ii. 157), Oxf. 1856; Waterland, 
^\o Cummunion tcith Jmpu<jncrs of Fundamentals, 
Works, iii. 45(3, Oxf. 184.'j ; August!, Denk- 
n-urdi<j/:citen aus dcr Christlichcn Archdologie, 
Leipz. 1S17 ; Hey, Lectures in Divinity, O/i. 
Art. XXXiri., Camb. 1822; Palmer, Treatise 
on the Church, ii. 224, Lond. 1S42; Harold 
lirowno, Jixpusition of the Articles, On Art. 
AXXIIf., Lond. 18G3. [F. ]\I.] 

EXECUTIONER (nStp) ; (rirfKovKiiTwp). 
The Hebrew tifihach describes in the first instance 
the general ollice of one of the body-gjuard of a 
monarch ; and, in the second ])!ace, the special 
oflice of an executioner as belonging to that 
guard (cp. Delitzsch, Genesis [1887], in loco). 
Tims l'oti|ihar was '" captain of the executioners" 
(Gen. XXX vii. 30 ; see margin), and had his 
(itficial residen'ce at the public gaol (Gen. xl. o). 
Nebuzaradan (2 K. xxv. 8 ; Jer. xxxix. 9) and 
Arioch (Dan. ii. 14) held the same olHce. That 
the "captain of the guard" himself occasionally 
performed the duty of an executioner appears 
ironi 1 K. ii. 25, 34. The post was one of high 
dignity, and something beyond the present jiosi- 
tion ot the zdbit of modern Kgypt (ep. Lar.j, i. 
103), with which Wilkinson (ii. 45 [1878]) com- 
]iaresit. It is still not unusual for otficei's of high 
rank to inriict corporal )iunishmpnt with their 
own hands (Wilkinson, ii. 43). The LXX. takes 
the word in its originil sense (cp. 1 Sam. ix. 23), 
iinil terms Potiphar chief-cook, apx'l^o/yeipos. 

The Greek aneKovAaTCDp (Mark vi. 27) is bor- 
rowed from the Latin speculator ; originally a 
military s])y or scout, but under the emperors 
transferred to the body-tjuard, from the vigilance 
wiiich their office demanded (Tac. Hist. li. 11; 
.Suet. ClauJ. 35). [W. L. B.] [F.] 

EXILE. [CAPTIVITY ; Dispersion.] 
EX'ODUS ("EloSos : called by the Jews, from 

its opening words, niOp' n?N1, or more briefly 
mop*, its usual name), the Second Book of the 

Pentateuch, carrying on the narrative of the 

history and antiquities of the Israelitish nation 

fsee Genesis] from the death of Joseph to the 

beginning of the second year after the Exodus 
from Egypt (xl. 1, 17). 

I. Contents. 
§ 1. (i.) Chs. i.-xii. Event-; leading to the 
•deliverance of the Israelites from Egvpt, viz. : 
a. The increase of Jacob's posterity in Egypt, 
and their oppression under a new king, -who paid 
no heed to the memory of Joseph (ch. i.); b. The 
birth and education of Moses, and his flight from 
Egypt into the land of Midian (ch. ii.) ; c. The 
call and commission of Moses to be the deliverer 
of his people (iii. 1-iv. 20), and preliminary 
negotiations with the Israelites and Pharaoh 
(iv. 27-vii. 7); d. The series of signs and 
wonders by means of which the deliverance from 
Egypt was at length effected, and the institution 
of the Passover (vii. 8-xii. 51). 



(ii.) Chs. xiii. 1-xix. 2. The journey of the 
Israelites from Kameses to Sinai : a. The march 
to the Red Sea, the passage through it, and 
Moses' song of triumph on the occasion (xii. 37- 
XV. 21); 6. The j(mniey from the lied Sea to 
Sinai, with jiarticiiiars of the bitter waters of 
Marah (xv. 23- G), the giving of (juails and 
manna, and the observance of the Sabbath 
(ch. xvi.), the miraculous sujijdv of water at 
Rephidim, and the conflict with Ainalek at the 
same time (ch. xvii.), the meeting with Jethro 
and the advice given by him to Closes (ch. xviii.). 

(iii.) Chs. xix. 3-xl. 38. Events during the 
first part of the sojourn at Sinai, viz. : a. The 
solemn establishment of the Theocracy (see 
xix. 5-8, xxiv. 3-8), on the basis (o) of the Ten 
Commandments (xx. 1-17) ; ()3) of a code of laws 
(xx. 23-xxiii. 33), regulating the social life and 
religious observances of the jieople (xix. 3- 
xxiv. 11); b. The giving of instructions to 
Idoses on Mount Sinai, for the construction of 
the Tabernacle, with the vessels and furniture 
belonging to it, for the consecration of Aaron 
and his sons as priests, the selection of Bezaieel 
and Oholiab to execute the skilled woi-k that 
was necessary, and the delivery to Moses of the 
two tables of the Law (xxiv. 12-xxxi. 18); 
c. The incident of the golden calf, Moses' inter- 
cession for the people, and the renewal of the 
covenant (xxxii.-xxxiv.); d. The construction of 
the Tabernacle, in its various parts, in accord- 
ance with the directions prescribed in chs. xxv.- 
xxxi., and its erection (xl. 17) on the first day 
of the second year of the Exodus (xxxv.-xl.) : 
the consecraticn of the priests in accordance 
with the injunctions laid down in ch. xxix. is 
not related till Lev. viii. ; some other omissions 
in xxxv.-xl., as compared with xxv.-xxxi., will 
be noticed in § 14. In the course of the 
history, it will be observed, different legislative 
enactments are intors[iersed (see, besides the 
jiassages that have been s]iecitied, chs. xii., xiii., 
and xxxi. 12-17): the relation of these to one 
another, and to the narratives with which they 
are connected, will ajipear subsequently. 

II. Structure and Axdhorship. 

§ 2. The Book of Exodus is a continuation of 
the narrative of Genesis, and presents the same 
structural peculiarities. The same two con- 
trasted narratives, the priestly (P) and the 
prophetical (JE), appear still side by side, each 
displaying the same phraseological criteria, and 
each marked by the same diflerences of repre- 
sentation and style. Referring to the article 
Genesis" for an account of the main charac- 
teristics of these sources, we proceed to analyse 
the narrative of Exodus upon the same prin- 
ci]des. The interest of P, it will be observed, 
lies chiefly in the ceremonial institutions of the 
theocracy, which are described by him at length 
(xxv.-xxxi., xxxv.-xl.): the parts contributed by 
him in Exodus, prior to ch. xxv., form an intro- 
ductory sketch of the main features of the 
history, constructed upon a similar scale and 
plan to that adopted in Genesis, and exi>laiued 
in the article on that Book. 

» And especially to ^ 12 on the analysis of JE. It is 
not tlie intention of tlie following Tables to represent 
this in every detail as final. 




(i.) Chs. i.-si. — Events Icadinj to the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt : — 
1' i. 1-7.J 13-14 . ii. 23b-25. 

lE i. 8-12. 15-22. ii. l-23a.2 

7-8. ie-20. iv. 1-16. 

iii. 1-6. 9-15. 21-22. 

J P 

< f,T 19-20a. 

llEiv. 17-18. 20b-21. 

VI. 2-vii. 13. 



22-31. V. 1-vi. 1. 


J vii. 23. 25. viii. 1-4 [H. vii. 26-29]. 


viii. 5-7 [H. 1-3]. 

vii. 14-18. 
17 (partly). 

8-15a [H. 4-lla]. 

15b-19 [H. llb-15]. 

IS viii. 20-32 [H. 16-28]. ix. 1-7. 

13-21. 23b-34. X. 1-7. 

ix. 22-23a. 24a. 35. X. 8-13a. 





To commanded. 

f From and the blood. 

J To land of Egypt. 

1 Here, i. 1-5 repeats tlie substance of Gen. xlvi. 8-27, as is sometimes done by P at tlie beginning of a new stage 
of tile narrative (cp. Gen. i. 27 sq. with v. 1 sq. ; v. 32 with vi. 10 ; xi. 27 with xi. 26 ; Num. iii. 2-4 with Ex. vi. 
23, Lev. X. 1 sq. 

- So Jtilicher [see } IC]. Dillmann gives vv. 15-23a to J, arguing chiefly from the name lleuel, for which in 
th. xviii. 2 (E) we have Jethro. But, as JUL remarks, the name Reuel may be here a later insertion : had it 
originally stood in the narrative, it would have appeared naturally in u. 16, rather than in v. IS. 

§ 3. The grounds of the preceding analysis 
are particularly evident in the account of the 
uecrotiations of Moses with Pharaoh, and in the 
narrative of the Plagues. Both are marked, 
namely, by a series of systematic differences, per- 
vading the narrative from beginning to end. 
Thus in the former, the section vi. 2-vii. 13, as 
seems clear, is not in reality the sequel of iii. 1- 
vi. 1, but is parallel to it. Chs. iii. 1-vi. 1 
(disregarding, for the present, iv. 17, 18, 20b-21) 
describe the call and commission of Moses, the 
appointment of Aaron to be his representative 
vjith the people (iii. 16; iv. 1, 16), and three 
signs given to him for the satisfaction of the 
people: Moses and Aaron have satisfied the 
people (iv. 31), but the application to Pharaoh 
has been unsuccessful, and something further is 
threatened. The continuation of vi. 1, however, 
is vii. 14 ; with vi. 2 there begins evidently 
another account of Moses' call, in which, unlike 
iv. 31, the people refuse to listen to the promises 
conveyed to them (vi. 9), and in which, Moses 
jjrotesting his inability to plead * with I'harauh 
(not, as before, with the people'), Aaron is 
appointed to be his spokesman v:ith him (vi. 11, 
12, 29, 30; vii. 1, 2). The case of Pharaoh's 
requiring a guarantee is provided for : Aarons 
rod is to be thrown down that it may become a 
reptile (P^JI, not t^'PIJ, a serpent, as iv. 4), 
vii. 8 f. Pharaoh's heart, however, is hardened, 
and the narrative at vii. 13 reaches just the 
same point as vi. 1. Thus vi. 2-8 is parallel to 
iii. 6-9, 14, 15 ; vi. 12b-30 to iv. 10; vii. 1 to 
iv. 16 ; vii. 4 f. to iii. 19 f., vi. 1. Corresponding 
to these material differences, others of expres- 
sion and style mark each narrative throughout. 

§ 4. The principal differences between the 
two narratives of the Plagues mav be arranged 

» If Pharaoh, as in the present narrative (ch. v), had 
already refused to hear Jloses, the different, it priori 
ground alleged in vi. 12 for bis hesitation (a ground, 
moreoTer, inconsistent with iv. 31) is difficult to under- 

as follows : each, it will be noticed, while 
differing from the other, exhibits several traits 
connecting it with the correspoiidinij narrative 
in chs. iii. -vii. 9. In one narrative (P) Aaron co- 
operates with Moses, and the command is Say 
unto Aaron .... (vii. 19, viii. o [Heb. 1], 16 
[Heb. 12]; so before, vii. 9: even ix. 8, where 
Moses acts, both are expressly addressed) : no 
demand is ever made of Pharaoh ; the sequel is 
told briefly, usually within the compass of one 
or two verses ; the success or failure of the 
Egyptian magicians is noted : the hardening of 
Pharaoh's heart is expressed by pfH (ivas strong, 
or 7nade strong, R. V. marg.), vii. 22, viii. 19 
(Heb. 15), ix. 12 (so vii. 13), and the concluding 
formula is And he hearkened not unto them as the 
Lord had spoken (vii. 22, viii. 15b [Htb. lib], 
19 [Heb. 15], ix. 12; so vii. 13). 

In the other narrative (JE), on the contrary, 

Moses alone, without Aaron, is commissioned to 

go to Pharaoh : he addresses Pharaoh himself 

(in agreement with iv. 10-16, where Aaron is 

appointed to be his spokesman irith the people): 

a formal demand is regularly made, Let my 

people go that they may serve me (vii. 16, viii. 1 

[Heb. vii. 26], ix. 1, 13 ; x. 3 ; so before, in the 

same narrative, iv. 23, v. 1) ; upon Pharaoh's 

refusing, the plague is announced, and takes 

effect without further human intervention (viii. 

24 [Heb. 20], is. 6), or at a signal given by 

Moses, not by Aaron (vii. 20, ix. 22 sq., x. 12 sq., 

22) ; the interview with Pharaoh is pi-olonged, 

and described in some detail : and the term used 

to' express the hardening of Pharaoh's heart i.s 

not ptn, but n^D, T'DDH, to he or to maek 

I heavy (vii. 14, viii. 15 [Heb. 11], 32 [Heb. 28], 

' ix. 7, 34, X. 1 ; see Pi. V. marg.). The style of 

i the narrative generally is more picturesque and 

j varied than that of P ; it is marked by recurring 

I phrases, which are, howe-ver, dilTerent from those 

of P, as Thus saith the Lord, said regularly to 

' Pharaoh; Behold, with the participle, in the 

announcement of the plague. Thou, thy people, 

and thy servants ; the expression God of the 


Hebrews (vii. 16, ix. 1. 13, x. 3, as before, iii. 18, 
V. 3), ami several others which the careful 
reader will note for himself. 

§ b. Kxaniiuing JE more particularly, we 
observe that the main narrative is J, with 
traces of K. 

The reasons for supposinR it to be not entirely homo- 
geneous may Ix' stated briefly thus, (i.) The versos 
iv. 17, 20b-2l stiuul in no relation to their context ; 
iv. 17 speaks of "t/ie signs" to be performed with the 
rod, whereas only one sign to be so performed has been 
described in vv. 1-9 : iv. 21 mentions similarly wonders 
to be done before Pharaoh, whereas vv. 1-9 speak only 
of credentials for the satisfaction of the people. The 
verses read, in fact, like fragments from another nar- 
rative, which once of course contained the explanations 



which are now missing, and to which either v. 18 or 
I), lu doubtless also belonged (for in the existing narra- 
tive hotli are not recpiircd, or, at least, v. 19 should 
jn-eccdev. is), (ii.) It is ubscrved that in sonic of the 
plagues the effect is not brought about immediately by 
God (as e.ff. ix. (i), but Moses, as here directed, uses his 
rod (vii, 17, 20b; ix. 23; x. 13). It is difficult now 
not to connect those passages with iv. 17, 20l)-21, and to 
suppose them to have been derived by the compiler 
from the same source. Many critics are of opinion that 
otlier traits in the narrative, especially some which 
when viewed carefully seem to bo redundant, are derived 
likewise from K. One or two examples (ix. 24a, 35 ; 
X. I4a) have been introduced into the Table; but the 
criteria are slight, and may not be decisive. It is 
wiser, therefore, to adopt this opinion, if at all, with 

§ 6. (ii.) Chs. xii.-xix. 2. — Departure of the Israelites from Egypt, and Journey to Sinai : — 

P xii. 1-20. 28^ 37a. 40-51 . xiii. 1-2 . 

J xiTr29-30.l ~ 

xii. 21-27. 

xii. 31-3G.2 





P xiv. 21a.* 

;21c,* 22-23. 


(XV. 19.) 

31-36. xvii. lat. 

xix. l-2a.$ 


xvii. ]b-2. 

s-16. xviii.' 

six. 2b. 

The words: " And Jloses stretched out his hand over the sea ; and the waters wore divided." 
f To over the sea. J To Rephidim. ^ To ivilderness. 

1 Cp. xi. 6, 8 (J). 

2 With V. 31b cp. iii. 12, x. 8, 11 ; with v. 32, x. 9, 24 (E). 

3 This section, as it stands, is generally considered to be the work of the compiler of JE, earlier material, 
however, being incorporated by him, e.g. vv. 6, 7, 12, 13. 

* The analysis of ch. xiv. is that of Noldeke, Dillmann (except in one or two clauses), and Kuenen, which appears 
to the writer to be more probable than that of Wellh., who assigns to E part of what is here attributed to P. The 
parts ascribed to P, it examined carefully, will be found to presuppose one another, and to be connected together by 
many similarities of expression, in some cases agreeing with those elsewhere belonging to P (e.g. pTn> to harden, 
of the heart). The parts assigned to J exhibit possible traces of the use of E (e.g. vv. 1, 10b [cp. Josh. xxiv. 7, E], 
16, " Lift up thy rod," 19a [cp. Gen. xxi. 17 ; xxxi. 11]) ; but the two sources, if both have been employed, are 
here so fused, that nothing more definite can be affirmed with confidence. 

s The Song is of course incorporated by the narrator from an earlier source, perhaps from a collection of national 
poems. Its general style is antique ; and in the main it is, no doubt. Mosaic : but it appears towards the end to 
have undergone some expansion or modification of form at a later age ; for v. 13 (" Thou hast guided them to Thy 
holy habitation") clearly describes a past event, and v. I7b points to some fixed abode of the ark, such as the 
temple at Shiloh (1 Sam. i. 9). Y. 19 appears to be a redactional addition, reverting, in terms borrowed from P 
(see xiv. 23, 26, 29), to the occasion of the .Song. 

6 In ch. xvi. vv. 4 and 5, on material even more than phraseological grounds, must have their source in a different 
current of narrative from v. 6 sq. ; for in vv. 6, 1 {evening and morning, in agreement with vv. 8, 12, fiesh at 
evening, and hread at morning) the communication made to the people differs in its terms from that stated in 
vv. 4, 5 (bread alone) to have been given to Moses ; and vv. 25-30 agree with vv. 4, 5. In the text of P, it is 
remarkable that the instructions to Moses to convey the promise of food to the people {vv. 11, 12) follow the 
account of the actual delivery of the message, vv. 6-8 : if it might be assumed that a transposition had taken place, 
and that the original order was vv. 1-3, 9-12, 6-8, 13, &c., the consecution of the narrative would be improved. 
Man in v. 15 is strange: in the sense of "What?" man is a secondary, contracted form, confined to particular 
Aramaic dialects (Noldeke, Syr. Gr. $ 68 ; AVright, Compar. Gramm. of the Semitic Languages, p. 125). 

7 An historically interesting chapter (see vv. 15 sq., 19 sq.), universally assicned to E. 

§ 7. In chs. xii. and xiii. the double treatment 
is discernible without difficulty. Notice in P, .xii. 
1-13" (Passover); 14-20 (Unleavened Cakes); 
28, 37a, 40-42, 51 (narrative); 43-50 (Pass- 
over — supplemental) ; xiii. 1 sq. (Firstborn)," 20 : 

i> In xii. 14 " this day " is the first day of Mazzoth 
(Unleavened Cakes), not the Passover : cp. Lev. xxiii. 6. 

<: In P this injunction is here isolated: the full expla- 
nation is first given in Num. iii. 12 sq. ; viii. 16-19. 

in JE, xii. 21-7 (Passover); 29-36, 37b, 38 
(narrative — continuation of xi. 4-8) ; 39 ; .xiii. 
3-10 (Unleavened Cakes); 11-16 (Firstborn). 
The connexion between the different parts of 
each narrative is observable, not merely in 
techHical details, but also in general style and 
tone. The Passover was followed by the Feast 
of Mazzoth ; but the two are in their origin 
distinct, and are treated accordingly, especially 
in JE. The Passover commemorates the sparing 




of the Isr.ielites (xii. 13, 27), the Feast of 
Mazzoth the iiiurniug of the Exodus (xiii. 3-10 ; 
so xii. 17, xxiii. 15), being brought into con- 
nexion with the circumstance that through the 
haste with which the Hebrews left Egypt they 
were obliged to bake for themselves unleavened 
cakes ou the morrow (xii. 34, 39) ; tlie dedica- 
tion of the Firstborn (xiii. 11-16) is made a 
memorial of the slaughter of the firstborn of 
the Egyptians (xii. 29 sq.). 

Ch. xii. 21-27 cannot be the original sequel to xi'. 1-13. 
The verses do not describe the execution of the com- 
mands enjoined, vv. 1-13: Moses does not repeat to the 
people, even in an abridged form, the injunctions that 
1)6 has receive d ; on the contrary, several important 
points (e.g. the character of the lamb, and the manner 
in which It was to be eatm) are omitted; a.ud fresh 
points (the hyssop, the b.isin, none to leave the house) 
iu-e meutionec/ respecting which the instructions just 
given to him are sili-nt. It seems clear that I'l'. 21-27 
are really part of a different account of the institution 
of the Passover, which " starids to xii. 3-13 in the same 
relation that the .iMaj^ot/i-ordinance in xiii. 3-10 stands 

§ S. (iii.) Chs. xix. 3-xl. — Israel at Sinai : — 
< P 

to that in xii. 14-20 " (Dillm. p. 100). Vis 25-27 
resemble strongly xiii. 3-16 (see vv. 5, 8, 10, 14 sq.), and 
are no doubt to be referred to the same source, i.e. 
either J (Dillm.), or the compiler of JE expanding 
materials derived from J (so Wellh., at least for xiii. 

If the different laws respecting these feasts 
be compared, the simplest will be seen to be 
those in Ex. xxiii. 15, 18 ; then come those of JE 
in chs. xii., xiii., and xxxiv. 18-20, 23-25 ; then 
Deut. xvi. ; lastly, the injunctions of P in Ex. xii. 
In chs. xii. and xiii. it may be noticed : (1) Pass- 
over and llazzoth are more clearly distinguished 
in JE than in P; (2) in JE greater stress is laid 
on their relation with the history and com- 
memorative import ; (3) the provisions in P 
are far more definite and strict than in JE 
(e.g. xii. 15b, 16, 18, 19b, and the whole of 
vi\ 43-49). It is remarked by Delitzsch that 
the greater specialization of the ordinances 
in P creates a strong presumption that they 
were codified later (Studien, vii. pp. 340, 342). 


xix. 2U-2o. 

XX. 22-xxiii. 33. 

E xix. 3-19.1 

XX. 1-21. 

xx;v. (1-2). 


xxiv. 15-13a.* 

XXV. l=-xxxi. ISa.f 

J xxiv. 3-8. 


(9-li). 12-14. X8b. 

sxxi. 18b. xxxii. 1-8. 


xxxiv. 29-3.5. xxxv.-xl. 


; xxxii. 9-14. 

xx.\iii. 12-xxxiv. 2S. 


15-29, 30-xxxiii. 6 (in the main), 7-11. 

* To cloud. 

f To testimony. 

1 So Wellh., DiUni. ; but admitting that vv. 3-8, the "classical expre.ssion in the 0. T. of the nature and scope of 
the theocratic cuveuaut," has been amplified by the compiler of JE, perhaps (Dillm.) with elements derived from 
.(. The sequence of the chapter is in many places imperfect, an indication that it has been formed by a combina- 
tion of different sources. Thus the natural sequel of v. 3, ivent up, would be not v. 7, came, but v. 14, went down ; 
a. 9b is superfluous after v. 8b (if, indeed, it be more thau a repetition of it, iutroductd by a clerical error); v. 13b 
is obscure, and not explained by anything which follows [the " trumpet" of vv. 16, 19 is not the " ram's-horn" of 
this verse]. In the latter part of the chapter, vv. 20-25 manifestly interrupt the connexion : v. 20 is a repetition of 
V. 18a (" descended "), and v. 21 of v. 12 ; v. 25, "and said [lOX^U ""'" them" (not, " and tuld them ") should 
be followed by the words reported, and is entirely disconnected with xx. 1 : on the other hand, xx. 1 is the natural 
continuation of xix. 19. Clearly, two parallel narratives of the theophany on Sinai have been combined together: 
though it is no longer possible to determine throughout the precise limits of each (see the attempt of Jtllicher, 
pp. 306 sq.). Ch. xix. 20-25 is generally assigned to J: Kuenen regards these verses, together with v. 13b, 
xxiv. 1-2, 9-11 (which .similarly interrupt the connexion in ch. xxiv.), as standing by themselves, and forming 
part of a third independent narrative of the occurrences at Sinai. 

- Chs. XXV. 1-xxxi. 18a contain P's account of the instructions given for the construction of the Tabernacle, &c., 
tie sequel following in chs. xxxv.-xl., which describe how these instructions were carried out. On some 
questions arising out of these sections of P, see below, }^ 13, 14. 

§9. In chs. xix. 2b-xxiv. (after separating 
xxiv. 15-18a, which belongs to P, and is the 
introduction to ch. xxv.) there are two narra- 
tives of the occurrences at Sinai, one attached 
to the Decalogue, the other to the " Book of 
the Covenant" (i.e. the laws xx. 22-xxiii. 33; 
see xxiv. 7). The Decalogue, with the narra- 
tives attached to it, is generally allowed to 
belong to E : the Book of the Covenant is con- 
sidered by Wellliaufen {C'omp. p. 90) to have 
formed part of J ; but Kuenen (§ 8. 12, 18), 
Dillmanu (p. 220), Jiilicher (p. 305), assign it 
to E, though it is doubtful whether the grounds 
alleged are decisive. The principal grounds for 
the separation in ch. xix. have been stated in 
§ 8, note >. In xx. 1, 19, 20, 21, notice God 
<not .lehovah), as in xix. 3, 17, 19. The sequel 
to the " Book of the Covenant " is evidently 
xxiv. 3-8. Ch. xxiv. 12-14, 18b, on the con- 

trary, form a natural continuation of xx. 18-21 : 
the "elders " in u. 14 cannot well be the seventy 
mentioned in v. 9 (among whom disputes are 
not likely to have arisen during Moses' absence), 
but the elders of the people generally, named as 
the people's representatives : Moses goes up into 
the mountain to receive, not merely the tables 
of stone, but also instruction of a more general 
kind ("the law and the commandment"), en- 
abling him to speak to the people instead of 
God, and in accordance with the request, xx. 19 
(cp. Deut. V. 27-31). The intermediate verses 
(xxiv. 1, 2, 9-11) are of uncertain origin. Pos- 
sibly they are to be regarded as introductory 
to V. 12 sq., and assigned to E; possibly they 
form, with xix. 13b, 20-25 (see § 8, note '), 
part of an independent narrative, of which only 
fragments have been preserved. 

§ 10. The Decalogue, it need hardly be said, 


is not the composition of E, but is merely in- 
corporated by him iu his narrative. It is 
ri'iieated, as is well known, in Deut. v. 6-21, 
where, though it is introilucetl formally (it. 5, 22) 
as a verbal quotation, it ))resents in fact con- 
siderable differences, especially iu the fourth, 
fifth, and tenth commandments, from the text 
of Kxodus. The variations are manifestly due 
to the author of Deuteronomy, whose style and 
characteristic thought they mostly exhibit.'' 
It is the opiniun, however, of many critics," 
based in part ui)on the fact of this varying text, 
that the primitive form of the Decalogue was 
not that in which it appears now even in 
Exodus ; but that originally it consisted merely 
of the Commandments themselves, all expressed 
with the same terseness exhibited still by the 
first, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth, and that 
the explanatory commeuts appended in the case 
of the others were only added subsequently 
(probably by the compiler of JE). These com- 
ments, in the case of Ex. xx. 10b, 12, bear a 
singular resemblance to the style of Deuter- 
onomy; so that, unless (as has been supposed) 
they can have been introduced here from 
Deuteronomy itself, they must be regarded as 
belonging to the class of passages in Exodus 
indicated in Deuteronomy, § 34, as being the 
source of some of the expressions which in their 
entirety give to Deuteronomy its peculiar and 
distinctive colouring (i6. § o6). The case of 
Ex. XX. 11, however (which is not found in 
Deuteronomy), is somewhat dift'erent. Not 
only does this verse form no model for the style 
of Deuteronomy, but it is alien in style to JE ; 
while on the other hand it resembles closely 
two passages of P, Ex. xxxi. 17b, Gen. ii. 2b : 
hence, as it is not ]ierhaps very probable that it 
would have been omitted wheu the Decalogue 
was incorporated in Deuteronomy, had it 
already formed part of it, the conjecture is not 
an unreasonable one that it was introduced 
into the text of E.\odus, after Deuteronomy 
was written, on the basis of the two passages of 
P just referred to. 

§ 11. The laws contained in the "Book of the 
Covenant " (xx. 22-xxiii. 33) comprise two ele- 
ments (xxiv. 3), the "words" (or commands) 
and the "judgments:" the latter, expressed 
all hvpotheticallv, occupy .xxi. 1-xxii. 17 (Heb. 
16), 25a (24a), 2(3 (25), sxiii. 4 sq.; the former 
occupy the rest of the section to xxiii. 19 : 
what follows, xxiii. 20 sq., annexing a promise in 
case of obedience, imparts, as Wellh. observes, 
to the preceeding law-book the character of a 
" covenant " (cp. xxiv. 7). The laws them- 
selves are taken naturally from a pre-existing 
source, in most cases (as it seems) without 
alteration of form, though most critics are of 
opinion that here and there slight parenetic 
additions have been made by the compiler : for 

•> Thus with " observe," Dcut. v. 12 (for " re- 
member"), cp. Deut. xvi. 1; with "as the Lord thy 
God commanded thee," vv. 12, 16, xx. 17, xxiv. 8, xxvi. 
13; with V. 14b, xiv. 29, xv. 10; with the motive of 
gratitude in v. 15 (which takes the place of the reference 
in Exodus to the Creation), xv. 15, xvi. 11, 12, xxiv. 
18, 22 ; with the addition in v. 16b, v. 29 [Heb. 26], vi. 18, 
xii. 25, 28, xxii. 7. 

« Ewald, History, ii. 159 ; Speaker's Comm. i. p. 336 ; 
Dillm. p. 201. 



instance, xxii. 21b-22 (observe in r. 23 [Heb. 
22] him, he, his in the Hebrew, pointing back 
to the sin;/. " sojourner " in v. 21) ; perhaps also 
in xxiii. 23-2.5a. The verses xxiii. 4 sq. will 
hardly be in tlieir original position, for the 
context (on both sides) relates to a different 
matter, viz. just judgment. 

The laws are designed to regulate the life 
of a community living under simjile condition* 
of society, and devoted chiefly to wjriculture. 
After some introductory directions respecting 
the erection of altars xx. 24-20, tiiere follow 
the D''t3SC'0 (xxi. 1), embodying in its main 
principles the civil and criminal law of the 
ancient Hebrews, and (xxiii. 14 sij.) certain 
elementary religious observances. Slaverv, 
murder and manslaughter, manstealino-, injuries 
to life or limb, injuries caused by culpable neglect 
(as by permitting an unruly animal to be at 
large, or opening a pit negligently), theft, 
burglary, damage caused by straying animals 
or tire to a neighbour's field, neglect in the 
care of deposits and loans, seduction, witchcraft,, 
idolatry (xxii. 20), usury and pledges, veracity 
in Uiatters ati'ecting a neighbour's character, and 
impartiality in judgment (xxiii. 1-3, ()-9) are, 
in outline, the subjects dealt with in the code; 
intermixed (x.xii. 21, 22-24, 29-31 ; xxiii. 4, 
5) or appended (xxiii. 9, 10-12, 14-19) are 
precepts touching various religious and moral 
duties (as oppression of strangers or of others 
unable to protect themselves, the olTering of 
firstlings and first-fruits, the prohibition to eat 
nsntD ; the injunction xxiii. 4 sq. not to refuse 
help to an eneniij in his need, the sacred seasons 
— viz. the .Sabbatical year and the Sabbath [of 
both of which the scope, as here defined, is a 
philanthropic one], the three annual pilgrim- 
ages). The character of the society f.r the use 
of which the code is designed, is evident from 
the conditions of life which it presupposes, and 
the cases which it contemplates as likely to 
arise: notice, for instance, the frequency with 
which the ox, the sheep, and the ass are- 
mentioned — they form even the typical examjile 
of the " deposit," xxii. 9, 10 — and the allusions t» 
agricultural life in xxi. 33 sq., xxii. 5, 6, xxiii. 
10 sq., 16. The only forms of punishment pre- 
scribed are retaliation and pecuniary compensa- 
tion. Definite rights are secured to the slave. 
Women do not enjoy the same social equality 
with men. The Ger, or sojourner, living under 
the protection of a family or the community, 
has no legal status, but he must not be op- 
pressed.' It is interesting to compare the Laws 
of the Twelve Tables, or the Laws of Solon 
(preserved in Plutarch, Vit. Solonis), which iu 
many respects presuppose a similar condition 
of society. In what way this code (with 
additions not of course to be neglected) is ma<ie 
the basis of the later legislation of Deuteronomy 
(chs. xii. -xxvi.) has been shown in the article 
on that Book. 

§ 12. The sequel of JE's narrative in chs. xix.- 
xxiv. is xxxi. 18b-xxxiv. 28, comprising the 

f Cp. W. R. Smith, O. T. J. C, p. 336 sq. Notice in 
xxi. 6, xxii. 8 sq. [Heb. 7 sq.], the archaic conception of 
God being the direct source of law : cp. xviii. 16b 
(where Moses' judicial decisions on points submitted to 
him are termed "the statutes and laws of God"), and 
1 Sam. ii. 25. with the writer's note ad loc. 



narrative of the Golden Calf and incidents 
arising out of it. Ch. xxxii. as a whole may be 
assigned plai>sibly to E, only vv. 11-13 being 
somewhat unlike E's usual style and manner, 
and having been perhaps expanded by the com- 
piler of .'E (cp. Gen. xxii. 16-18, to which in 
V. 13 allusion is made). Chs. xxxii. 34, xxxiii. 
1-6 exhibit traces of a double narrative — in 
r. 5b, for instance, the people are commanded to 
do what they have already done {v. 4b) — which 
confirms the prima facie view that vv. 5a, 6 are 
doublets of vv. 3b, 4b. The complication is 
recognised by critics,^ but no generally accepted 
analvsis of the entire passage has been effected. 

Ch. xxxiii. 7-11 is an interesting passage, 
which, as the tenses in the original show,'' de- 
scribes throughout Moses' habitual practice (v. 7, 
*' used to take and pitch," &c.). In its original 
connexion it is not improbable that it was 
preceded by an account of the construction of 
the "Tent of Meeting," and of the Ark,' of 
which the Tent was to be the depository, which, 
it may be conjectured, was the purpose for 
which the ornaments, t/i'. 4-6, were employed: 
when the narrative was combined with that of 
P, this part of it was probably omitted on the 
ground that it was no longer needed by the side 
of the fuller description in chs. xxv., xxxv., &c. 

Chs. xxxiii. 12-xxxiv. 9 form a continuous 
whole : as it is difficult to determine whether 
it belongs definitely to J or to the compiler of 
JE, it is printed in the Table in the line between 
the J and the E lines. Ch. xxxiv. 10-26'' in- 
troduces the terms of the covenant, v. 27 : it 
agrees substantially, often even verbally, with 
the theocratic section of the " Book of the 
Covenant " (xxiii. 10 sq.), the essential condi- 
tions of which appear to be repeated here, with 
some enlargement (especially in the warning 
against idolatry, vv. 12-17), as the terms on 
which the renewal of the covenant is granted. 

The structure of JE's narrative in chs. xix.- 
xxiv., xxxii.-xxxiv. is complicated. The narra- 
tive appears indeed to exhibit unambiguous 
marks of composition; but when the attempt is 
made to distribute it in detail between the 
different narrators, the criteria are frequently 
indecisive ; and it is possible to frame more 
than one hypothesis which will account, at least 
a]iparently, for the facts. Similarl}' the relation 
of the Code xxxiv. 10 sq. to the very similar Code 
in xxiii. 10 sq. is not perfectly evident, and may 
be differently explained. Wellhausen, Dillmann, 
.Tiilicher, and Kuenen have displayed in their 
treatment of the subject surprising ability and 
acuteness : but beyond a certain point their 
conclusions diverge ; and even the most 
plausible cannot claim to be more than a 
jMssible interpretation of the facts. The writer 
has accordingl}' made no attempt to do more 
than indicate the broad and patent lines of 
demarcation which occur in the narrative. In 

K E.g. Kuenen, Theol. Tijdschr. 1881, p. 210. 

" Imperfects, interchanging with perfects and the 
waw consecutive. See the writer's Eebrew Tenses, 
}} 120, 121, or Ges.-Kautzsch,25 ^ 112, 3, a (a). 

' See Deut. x. 1, the terms of which presuppose the 
omission of something in the existing text of Exodus 
(cp. DEUTEROxoirr, J 10). 

k Sometimes called, in contradistinction to chs. xxi.- 
xxiii., the " Little Book of the Covenant," or the 
" Words (see v. 27) of the Covenant." 


all probability it reached its present form by 
a series of stages, which can no longer be wholly 
disengaged with certaint)'-' 

§ 13. We may now revert to chs. xxv.-xxxi. 
18a, which contain P's account of the instruc- 
tions given to Moses respecting the Tabernacle 
and the priesthood. The instructions fall into 
two parts, chs. xxv.-xxix and chs. xxx.-xxxi. 
The contents of chs. xxv.-xxix. relate to (1) the 
vessels of the Sanctuary (ch. xxv.) ; (2) the 
Tabernacle, its curtains, boards, Veil, and Screen 
at the entrance (ch. xxvi.) ; (3) the Court round 
the Tabernacle, containing the Altar of Burnt- 
offering (ch. xxvii.) ; (4) the vestments 
(ch. xxviii.) and rite of consecration (xxix. 
1-37) of the priests ; (5) the daily Burnt-offer- 
ing, the maintenance of which is a primary 
duty of the priesthood (xxix. 38-42), followed 
by what appears to be the close of the entire 
body of instructions (xxix. 43-46), in which 
Jehovah promises to bless the sanctuary thus 
established with His abiding presence. Chs. xxx.- 
xxxi. relate to (1) the Altar of Incense (xxx. 
1-10); (2) the maintenance of public service 
(xxx. 11-16); (3) the Brazen Laver (xxx. 17- 
21); (4) the holy Anointing Oil (xxx. 22-33); 
(5) the Incense (xxx. 34-38); (6) the nomi- 
nation of Bezaleel and Oholiab (xxxi. 1-11); 
(7) the observance of the Sabbath (xxxi. 12-17). 

A critical question of some difficulty here 
arises in connexion with the relation of 
chs. xxx.-xxxi. to chs. xxv.-xxix. It is sur- 
prising to find the Altar of Incense, which from 
its importance might have seemed to demand a 
place in ch. xxv. (among the other vessels of 
the Tabernacle), mentioned for the first time in 
xxx. 1-10, where the directions respecting the 
essential parts of the Tabernacle are seemingly 
complete (ch. xxix. 44-46): even in xxvi. 34 sq. 
(where the position of the vessels of the 
Sanctuary is defined) it is not named. More- 
over, whereas in Ex. xxx. 10 an annual rite to 
be observed in connexion with it is enjoined, in 
the ceremony for the day of atonement, de- 
scribed in detail in Lev. xvi., no notice of such a 
rite is to be found, and only one altar, the Altar 
of Burnt-offering, is mentioned throughout the 
chapter. Furthei", a number of passages occur 
in which the Altar of Burnt-oflfering is described 
as " the altar," implying, apparently, that there 
was no other (e.g. chs. xxvii. -xxix. ; Lev. i.-iii., 
v.-vi., viii., ix., xvi.). It is argued,"" on these 
grounds, that the original legislation of P 
mentioned no Altar of Incense (incense being 
only offered on censers, Lev. xvi. 12, &c.), and 
that both this and other passages in which it is 
spoken of (xxx. 27, xxxi. 8, xxxv. 15, xxxvii. 
25, xxxix. 38, xl. 5, 26 ; Lev. iv. 7, 18 ; Num. 
iv. 11), or which term " the Altar " of xxvii. 1, 
&c., as though for distinction, " the Altar of 
Burnt-offering " (as xxx. 28, xxxi. 9, xxxv. 16, 
xxxviii. 1, xl. 6, 10, 29; Lev. iv.), or "the 
Brazen Altar " (xxxviii. 30, xxxix. 39), belong 
to a secondary and posterior stratum of P. The 
other subjects treated in chs. xxx.-xxxi. (above, 
2-7) are either such as would naturally find 

1 See further on this subject Wellh. Comp, pp. 83 sq., 
327 sq. ; Dillm. Comvi. pp. 189 sq., 331 sq. ; Jillicher, 
JPTli. 1882, pp. 295 sq. ; C. G. Montefiore, Jewish 
Quarterly Revieiu, 1891, pp. 276-291. 

m Wellh. Comp. pp. 137 eq. ; Kuenen, Bex. $ 6. 13. 




place in an Appendix, or (remarkably enough) 
occasion (lilliculties similar to those arising out 
of the mention ot' the Altar of Incense. Thus 
in xxix. 7, Lev. viii. 12, the ceremony of 
anointing is confined to the chief priest 
(Aaron); in xxx. 30 it is extended to the 
ordinary jtriests (his "sons"). The same ex- 
tension recurs in xxviii. 41, xl. 15 ; Lev. vii. 
36, X. 7; Num. iii. o. That the ceremony was 
limited originally to Aaron seems, however, to 
be confirmed by the title " the Anointed Priest " 
api)lied to the chief priest (Lev. iv. 3, 5, 16, vi. 
22 [Heb. 15] : cp. Ex. xxix. 29 s<^. ; Lev. xvi. 32, 
xxi. 10,12; ]^ium. xxxv. 25), which, if the 
priests generally were anointed, would be desti- 
tute of any distinctive significance. 

These arguments are undoubtedly forcible. It 
is true, tlie use of the terra "the Altar" for the 
Altar of Burnt-olfering might in itself be ex- 
plained by the supposition that it was so styled 
Kar' i^ox'fiv, in passages where there was no 
danger of confusion with any other altar ; but 
in order to be jiroperly estimated, tlie usage 
must of course be viewed in connexion with 
the other circumstances referred to. In con- 
sidering the argument based on the silence of 
Lev. xvi., Delitzsch {Studien, iii. p. 117) admits 
that " were Lev. xvi. silent as to the Altar of 
Incense, the distinction drawn by Wellhauseu 
between two strata of P would be established : " 
lie contends, however, that this altar is alluded 
to in V. 18. Dillmann, on the contrary (with 
Oehler, Keil, &c.), considers — as it seems, justly 
— that the order of the ceremonial in Lev. xvi. 
16b-18 supports the view that the Altar of 
Burnt-offering (outside the Tabernacle) is re- 
ferred to in V. 18: admitting thus that the 
Altar of Incense is not alluded to, he is obliged 
to own that at least Ex. xxx. 10 is an addition 
to the original law, designed for the purpose of 
supplementing Lev. xvi. 16b. But, even with 
this concession, it remains that, whatever be the 
explanation," in the body of instructions con- 
tained in Ex. xxv.-xxxi. the Altar of Incense 
holds a secondary place. 

The extension of the ceremony of anointing 
to the ordinary priests is allowed by Dillmann 
(pp. 463 sq.) to be evidence that the passages so 
mentioning it are of secondary origin, unless, 
with Kurtz, it could be assumed that the rite 
alluded to is the sprinkling with oil and blood 
noticed in Ex. xxix. 21, Lev. viii. 30, which, 
however, is not termed " anointing," and is 
subsequent to the anointing proper (Ex. xxix. 
7 ; Lev. viii. 12). It is doubtful, therefore, 
whether this explanation is admissible; and in his 
final discussion of the sources of the Pent. (NDJ. 
p. 635), Dillmann himself implicitly rejects it, 
for he remarks there that the entire section xxx. 
17-38 (together with xxxi. 7-11) appears to be 
a later insertion. The section on the Sabbath 
(xxxi. 12-17), as has been frequently remarked 
(e.g. by Delitzsch, Studien, xii. p. 622), has in 

" Dillmann suggests that it may have been partly due 
to the writer's historic consciousness that the Altar of 
Incense did not form part of the original idea of a 
Tabernacle, as the Table, Candlestick, and Altar of 
Burnt-offering did : Del. supposes that the Divine idea 
of the Tabernacle took shape gradually in the legislator's 
mind, and that the need of an Incense- Altar was only 
rfalised by bim after the plan of the Tabernacle as a 
whole (chs. xxv.-xxis) had been completed. 

!•'•. llV14a afllnities with the Code (the "Law 
of Holiness") of which extracts have been 
preserved in Lev. xvii.-xxvi. ; and the infereiuMi 
is jirobably a just one, that that Code is the 
ultimate source of the verses referred to." 

§ 14. Chs. xxxv.-xl. form the sequel to chs. 
xxv.-xxxi., narrating the execution of the in- 
structions there communicated to Moses. Much 
is repeated verbatim, witli the .sim])le change of 
future tenses into past: there are, however, a 
few cases of omission or abridgment, and the 
order is different. The change oiOider is in most 
cases intelligible. The injunction respecting 
the Sabbath, which stands last in the instruc- 
tions, occupies here the first place (xxxv. 1-3). 
Next follow the presentation of oflerincs bv 
the people, and the appointment of Bezaleel and 
Oholiab to superintend the work (xxxv. 4- 
xxxvi. 7). In the account of the execution of 
the work, the Tabernacle stands first (xxxvi. 
8-38) ; then follow the sacred vessels to be 
placed in it (ch. xxxvii.), the Altar and Laver 
with the Court surrounding them (xxxviii. 
1-20), and jiarticulars of the amount of metal 
employed (xxxviii. 21-31). The Sanctuary 
being thus completed, the dress of the Priests 
is prepared (xxxix. 1-31), and the entire work 
delivered to Moses (xxxix. 32-43.) Finally, 
ch. xl. nari-ates how the Tabernacle was erected, 
and its various vessels arranged in order. The 
Altar of Incense and the Brazen Laver, it will 
be noticed, which appear in the Appendix to chs. 
xxv.-xxix (viz. in ch. xxx.), are here mentioned 
in accordance with the place which they properly 
hold (viz. xxxvii. 25-28 ; xxxviii. 8). A few 
unimportant verses (as xxv. 15, 22, 40) are not 
repeated at all ; some other notices (as xxv. 16, 
21, 30, 37b), chiefly relating to the position of 
the various vessels named, are not rejjeated in 
their corresponding place, but transferred (in 
substance) to xl. 17-33 ; the only material 
omissions are the notices of the Urim and 
Thummim (xxviii. 30), the Consecration of 
Priests (xxix. 1-37), which is deferred till 
Lev. viii., the oil for the lamps (xxvii. 20 sq.), 
and the Daily Burnt-otTering (xxix. 38-42), 
for the repetition of which there would scarcely 
be occasion. The principal instance of abridg- 
ment is xxxvii. 29, where the sections dealing 
with the Anointing Oil and the Incense (xxx. 
22-33, 34-38) are merely referred to briefly. 
In ch. xxxix., as compared with ch. xxxvi., some 
other cases may also be noticed. 

These chapters, like ch. xxx. sq., are treated by 
Wellhaiisen and Kuenen as belonging to a secondary 
stratum of P. If the secondary nature of ch. xxx. sq. be 
admitted, this conclusion will indeed follow of necessity : 
in chs. xxxv.-xxxix. the notices referring to ch. xxxi.sq. 
are introduced in their proper order, and ch. xl. alludes 
to the Altar of Incense : chs. xxxv.-xl. thus presuppose 
chs. xxx. -xxxi. as well as chs. xxv.-xxix. There are 
also other grounds, peculiar to these chapters, thought to 
point in the same direction, for which it must suflBce to 
refer to Kuenen's carefully written note (^Hex. } 6. 15). p 

" See Leviticl's ; or the writer's Introduction to the 
Literature of the G. T. (1391), pp. 43 sq., 54. 

P E.g., ch. xxxviii. 24-28, besides presupposing (in 
the figure 603,550) the census of Num. i., appears to 
imply a misunderstanding of xxx. 11-16, as though the 
contribution imposed there for the maintenance of the 
service of the Sanctuary were designed to meet the cost 
of its construction. 



DiUmann, though In EL. p. 354 sq. he had expreswd 
himself in :i ditTerent sense, in his final review of the 
contents of P {NDJ. p. 635) adopts virtually tlie s-ame 
opinion, supposing the original nucleus of the six 
chapters to have been limited to xxxv. 1-3, 4-5, 20 sq. ; 
>;\xvi. 2-6 ; xl. 1 sq., 34-31?, and considering the rest 
(wiiich presupposes chs. xxv.-xxxi. in its present form) 
to be of later orii;in. 

As soon as the Priest's Code is examined with sufficient 
minuteness, the question of its stratijication—i.e. the 
question whether all its parts are perfectly consistent, 
and belong to the same stage of Hebrew legislation- 
forces itself upon the reader's attention ; though the 
problem whicli thus arises can hardly be said to have been 
as yet adequately grappled with. 

§ 15. The text of Exoilus, with but few ex- 
ceptions, appears to be free from corruptions. 
The question of the origin and probable date of 
the sources of which it is composed will be 
considered under the article Pentateuch, where 
also their most characteristic literary features 
will be noticed. Tlie " Egyptianisras," it per- 
haps need hardly be remarked, which Canon 
Cook affects to discover in the Book,i and which 
Canon Kawlinson accepts as well-established 
fact,' are purely imaginary : the language is as 
genuinply Hebrew as the language of Samuel 
or Isaiah ; and the few words of foreign origin 
which it exhibits (except, of course, certain 
proper names) are simply such as were natural- 
ized in Hebrew, just as words like paradise or 
jjalanquin are naturalized among ourselves. 

§16. Literature. — The Commentaries of 
Diflmanuand Keil on the Pentateuch, mentioned 
under Genesis, and of M. M. Kalisch (London, 
1855); the critical works of Nbldeke {Unter- 
suchunijeii), Wellhausen (Die Comp. des Ilex. ; 
especially pp. 63-100, 136-151, 323-333), 
Kuenen, and Kittel, mentioned ib. 

Special Monographs. — Julius Popper, Der 
hiblische Bericht iiber die Stiftshiitte [on chs. xxv.- 
xxxi. ; xxxv.-xl.], 1862; A. Kuenen, "Bijdragen 
tot de critiek van Pent, en Josua," in the Thcol. 
Tijdschrift, 1880, pp. 281-302 [on ch. xvi. ; 
cp. Wellhausen's criticisms in the Nac''tr(ige to 
Die Compos, des Ilex, u.s.w. (1889), pp. 323-27], 
1881, pp. 16-4-223 [an endeavour to solve the 
problem presented by chs. xix.-xxiv., xxxii.- 
xxxiv.; cp. Wellh. i"6.,pp. 327 sq.];— F. Delitzsch, 
in the Zeitschrift fiir kirchl. Wiss. u. hirchl. 
Lebcn, 1880, pp. 113 sq. (the Incense-altar), 
pp. 337 sq. (the Passover) ; 1882, pp. 281 sq. (the 
Decalogue); — Lemme, Die religiunsgeschichtliche 
Bedeutung des Dekalogs, Breslau, 1880; — Ad. 
.liilicher, Die Quellen von Exodus i.-vii. 7, 
Halls Saxonum, 1880 ; and Die Quellen von 
Exodus vii. 8-xxiv. 11, in the Jahrbiicher fiir 
Brotestantische T.eolojie, 1882, pp. 79-127, 
272-315 ;— C. A. Briggs, " The Little Book of the 
Covenant" [Ex. xxxiv. 11-26], in the Hebrew 
Student (Chicago), May 1883, pp. 264-72; 
"The Greater Book of the Covenant" [Ex. x.x. 22- 
sxiii.], ib., June 1883, pp. 289-503];— W. H. 
Green, The Hebrew Feasts, London, 1886, espe- 
cially pp. 83 sq. [on ch. xii.] ; and in Hebraica 
(Chicago), 1886, pp. 1-12 ;— W. R. Harper, ib., 
1889, pp. 25 sq. ; 1890, pp. 241 sq. ;— W. H. 

1 Speaker's Comm. i. pp. 244, 488 sq. (where there 
arc, besides, many inaccuracies and misstatements). 

' 0. T. Commentary, edited by Bishop Ellicott, 1. 
p. I3flb. 


Green, ib.. 1891, p. 104 sq. ; B. W. Bacon, " JE 
iu the Midd'.e Books of the Pent." in Journ. of 
Bibl. Lit. 1890, pp. 161-200. [S. R. D.] 

EXODUS, THE. The object of this 
article is to describe the Exodus chiefly in its 
geographical aspect, and to give the result.s 
arrived at iu the latest researches on this great 
event. The chronology and history will be only 
shortly referred to, having been treated more 
fully in other articles. 

1. Date. — The date of tlie Exodus is discussed 
under Chronology. Most Egyptologists consider 
that this great event took jjlace under Menephthah, 
the son of Itameses II., and that it was facilitated 
by the troubles which beset the beginning of 
Menephthah's reign, especially by the invasion 
of Mediterranean nations which threatened his 
throne. Lepsius puts the Exodus in the year 
1314 B.C. The date most commonly adopted is> 
1312 ; but it varies according to the views taken 
of Egyptian chronology. Lately, Dr. Mahler of 
Vienna, explaining the plague of darkness as a 
solar eclipse, has fixed the 27th of March, 1335 
B.C., as the day and year of the Exodus. It 
would thus fall, not in the reign of Menephthah, 
but under Rameses II., whose reign the Vien- 
nese astronomer has calculated to have lasted 
from 1347 to 1280 B.C. If we adopt Dr. Mahler's 
calculation as to the Exodus, it raises a con- 
siderable historical difficulty, for it is hardly 
possible to admit that the Hebrews should have 
left Egypt at the beginning of the reign of 
Rameses II., when the king was at the pinnacle 
of his might and power (cp. FSB A. xii. 167 sq., 
xiii. 439 sq.). 

2. History. — The Exodus is a great turning- 
point ill Biblical history. With it the Patri- 
archal dispensation ends and the Law begins, and 
with it tlie Israelites cease to be a family and 
become a nation. It is therefore important to 
observe bow the previous histoiy led up to this 
eveut. The advancement of Joseph, and the 
placing of liis kinsmen in what was to a pas- 
toral people " the best of the land," favoured 
the multiplying of the Israelites, and the pre- 
servation of their nationality. The .subsequent 
persecution bound them more firmly together, 
and at the same time loosened the iiold that 
Egypt had gained upon them. It wt:s thus that 
the Israelites were ready when iloses declared 
his mission to go forth as one man from the 
land of their bondage. 

The history of the Exodus itself commences 
witli the close of that of the Ten Plagues. 
[Pl.\gues of Egypt.] In the night in which, at 
midnight, the firstborn were slain (Ex. xii. 29), 
Pharaoh urged the departure of the Israelites 
(yv. 31, 32). They at once set forth from 
Rameses (ly. 37, 39), a]qMrently during the 
night (v. 42), but towards morning, on the 
15th day of the first month (Num. xxxiii. 3). 
They made three journeys and encamped by the 
Red Sea. Here the vanguard of Pharaoh's army, 
his chariots and horses, overtook them, and the 
great miracle occurred by which they were saved. 

3. Geography. — The determination of the route 
taken by the Israelites when they left Egypt 
is a difficult and much discussed question, on 
which, however, recent excavations have thrown 
some light. The Hebrews were settled in the 
land of Goshen, which originallv was the region 


between the jji-csent towns uf l/elbuis, Zagazig, 
and the site called Tell el-Kebir, and beloiiijed to 
the nome of Ih.'liopolis. When the jicoplc in- 
creased in number, thoy exten<lcd north towards 
Tanis (Zoan), south towards lleliopolis, and east 
in the Wudy Tumeilat [Goshen]. They carried 
with them the name " land of Goshen," which 
applied to all the territory in which they were 
settled; but the centre, Goshen proper, was 



the roEjion originally assigned to them, also 
called "land of lianicsL-s." It contained tlie 
city of Kameses, the site of which has not yet 
been identified. It is from there that they 
started ; there, between Tell el-Kebir and Zagazig, 
was their jilace of meeting, to which flocked the 
j)eoi)le scattered north and south towards Tanis 
and Heliopolis. We do not know where the 
king was living when those events took place ; 

_/Vau///e, Linant, etc. 

—. Sir W. Dawson, 

— I— i-i Ebers, Godet. 

Map to illustrate the Exodus. 

5t has generally been admitted that it was at 
Tanis, but it may have been at Bubastis, a much 
nearer locality, which was then a city of great 
importance, and a favourite residence of the 

In going to the land of Canaan they had the 
choice between two roads. One went through 
Tanis and crossed the Pelusiac branch of the 
Nile at the place now called Kantarah; soon 


afterwards it reached the coast of the Jlediter- 
ranean, and from there the frontiers of tht 
Philistines. This road is called in Scripture 
(Ex. xiii. 17) " the way of the land of the 
Philistines," which the Hebrews were to avoid, 
for they would have had to conquer or to march 
round important strongholds and cities occupied 
by large garrisons which would have imperilled 
considerably their journey. This statement, 

3 U 



<'God led them not by the wa\- of the land of 
the Philistines, although that was near " (Ex. 
xiii. 17), would alone be sufficient to refute the 
opinion of Schleiden (Die Landenqe von Sues), 
who considers the Pj-ID DJ, Yam, Siiph, as being 
not the Red Sea, but Lake Serbonis, on the coast 
of the Mediterranean ; and who makes the 
Hebrews follow a track of sand between the 
lake and the sea. 

The other route, through whicli Moses led the 
people, followed the valley now called Wady 
Tumeilat, and reached the desert near the pre- 
sent town of Ismailia. It was on this way that 
Jacob had arrived several hundred years before, 
since we know that the place where he met 
Joseph was Pithom-Heroopolis. [PiTiiOM.] This 
road skirted the northern end of the Red Sea, 
which at that time extended much further north 
than now, comprising not only the Bitter Lakes, 
but very likely also Lake Timsah. The opinions 
differ as to the exact spot where the Hebrews 
crossed the Yam Suph, the " sea of reeds ;" but 
the scholars and travellers who have dealt with 
the subject lately, agree on one point, that the 
place of the crossing must be looked for north 
of Suez. 

Rameses, the starting-place, must not be con- 
sidered the name of a city, but as referring to 
the land of Rameses. [R.^MEses.] It is more 
natural to suppose that the camping-ground and 
the place of meeting for a large multitude was 
a district rather than a city, which could have 
contained only a small portion of the departing 
people. From there to the border of the desert 
of Etham the distance to be travelled over was 
about thirty miles. 

The first station after Rameses was Succoth, 
a Hebrew word meaning " tents." It seems to 
be a well-appropriated name for the resting- 
place of a nomad population ; but as it refers to 
a locality situated in Egypt, it is more natural to 
take Succoth as an Egyptian word which has 
been slightly distorted in its form, so as to have 
a meaning in the language of the Hebrews, though 
retaining nearly the same sound as in Egyptian. 
Succoth is not a city, it is a district, and may 
be considered as an altered form of the Egyptian 
name Thukct or Thukut, a region the capital 
of which was the city of Pithom. This identi- 
fication, proposed first by Brugsch, has been 
adopted by Ebers, Liebleiu, and other Egypto- 

From Succoth, pushing straightforward, the 
Hebrews reached " Etham in the edge of the 
wilderness " (Ex. xiii. 20). All the desert east 
of the present Suez Canal, where the Israelites 
marched three days after having crossed the sea, 
was called the desert cf Etham. This name is 
transcribed by the Septuagint 'oedfi (Ex. xiii. 20) 
and Boudctf (Num. xxxiii. 6). It has been sug- 
gested that Etham was the Egyptian word 
Xctem, mea,nmg "an enclosure," " a fort," and 
that it referred either to the fortified wall which 
the Pharaohs raised in the isthmus in order to 
be protected against invasions of the Asiatic 
nomads (Ebers, Gosen, p. 522), or to some strong- 
hold of which we cannot fix exactly the site 
(Brugsch, Diet. G^og., p. 646 ; Knobel-Dillmann 
on Exod. xiv. 2). This etymology seems doubtful, 
for the reason that the Hebrew language has also 
the root DHPI, with the same sense ; and it is 
not easy to understand why the Hebrews should 


I have modified the word as if it had been strange 
I to them, while they had it in their own lan- 
guage in the same form, and with the same mean- 
ing. Etham can also be compared to the region 
of Atuina or Atima, mentioned several times in 
the pap\Ti as bordering on Egypt, and inhabited 
by nomad shepherds (Xaville, Pithom, p. 28). 

Following the Wady Tumeilat, along the canal 
dug by Rameses II., parallel in its direction to 
tlie present Freshwater Canal, the Hebrews had 
reached the wilderness, with the intention of 
taking a desert route, the entrance of which is 
still to be recognised, when they received a com- 
mand which at first sight seemed to throw them 
entirely out of their way (Ex. xiv. 2, R. V.) : 
" And the Lord s]iake unto Moses, saying,. 
Speak unto the children of Israel, that they 
turn back and encamp before Pi-hahiroth, be- 
tween Migdol and the sea, before Baal-zephon : 
over against it shall ye encamp by the sea." 

By this command they were compelled, after 
having perhaps retraced their steps for a short 
way, to make a right angle, and to march south,, 
so as to put the sea between themselves and the 
desert. The place where they were to camp is 
pointed out minutely, the neighbouring localities 
being indicated as landmarks ; but the sites can 
only be determined by conjecture, and the identi- 
fications proposed differ considerably. For the 

expression JlT'niT'Q ''35P' "before Pi-hahi- 
roth," the Septuagint have the following trans- 
lations : avivavTi rf/s eVauA-ecos (Ex. xiv. 2, 9), 
eVj ffro/iia Elpud (Num. xxxiii. 7 ; see Swete'ti 
text), aTTfvavTi ElpioO (v. 8). Here again 
several interpretations have been suggesteJ. 
Jablonski proposes the Coptic y\j <?.,'V^I 
ptJlJ'^, " the place where sedge grows," 
which would correspond to the localities called 
at present Ghuweybet-el-boos, " the bed cf 
reeds." This etymology has been adopteil 
by Ebers, while Brugsch has advocated auothei 
translation derived from Semitic roots : " the 
entrance of the caverns or of the pits," 
fidpaOpa (Diet. Ge'og. p. 97). It is also possible 
that Pi-hahiroth should only be a modified form 
of Pi kerehet, the house of the serpent, the name 
of a sanctuary of Osiris belonging to the nome 
of Pithom, and nearer the sea. [Pi-hahiroth.] 
We know with certainty that there was a 
city of Migdol, MaY5&iA.oy (Jer. xliv. 1, xlvi. 14; 
Ezek. xxix. 10, xxx. 6), on the north-eastern 
frontier of the land, the present Tell es Semut, 
twelve miles from Pelusium according to the 
Itinerary of Antoninus ; but the name mentioned 
here clearly refers to another place. The word 
maktar or maktal exists also in the Egyptian lan- 
guage, with a fortified wall as determinative, 
and it means, as in Hebrew, "a tower." We 
know of a " tower of Seti I. ; " and there must 
have been many watch-towers in Egypt, espe- 
cially on the border, just as in Italy there ai'e a 
great number of " Torre." Baal-zephon is a place 
where the Semitic god Baal was worshipped. 
The name is formed like Baal-Gad, Baal-Hamon. 
According to Philo, Zaphon was the Phoenician 
name for the North wind. Baal-zephon, men- 
tioned in a papyrus as Baal Zapuna, would thus 
be Baal of the North, or the North wind, and 
might be located, according to Tischendorf and 
Ebers, on one of the heights overhanging the 
Red Soa. The name being Semitic, it is natural 


to look for the site on the eastern side of the 
sea, op}K)site the camp, — i^tyavrias, according 
to the JSeptuagint. 

From the scanty information we possess of 
these localities, dillerent roads have been pro- 
posed for the crossing of the sea. Ebers makes 
the Israelites change their course near the pre- 
sent city of Ismailia, and marcli south along the 
Bitter Lakes nearly as far as Suez. Pi-hahiroth 
is for him the ruined castle of Agerud, about 
ten miles north-west of Suez. Migdol is near 
the present Shaloof el Terraba, on the east side 
of the present canal ; and liaal-zephon the sum- 
mit of Jlount Atakah, south of Suez, towering 
over the Red Sea. and visible from a great dis- 
tance. Tile Hebrews would have crossed in the 
lagoons which are immediately north of Suez. 
It is the most southeru route proposed, au<l 
advocated also by Professor Godet (BibL annotee, 
p. 415). An objection to which it is open, is 
the very long march which the Hebrews would 
have had to make when they turned round at 
Etham, in order to reach their new camp at 

Sir W. Dawson, who explored the place in 
1883, has come to the following conclusion 
{Modern Science in Bible Lands, p. 389) : — " After 
somewhat careful examination of the country, 
I believe that only one place can be found to 
satisfy the conditions of the Mosaic narrative ; 
namely, the south part of the Bitter Lake, be- 
tween station Fayid on the railway and statmn 
Generteh. Near this place are some inconsider- 
able ancient ruins, and flats covered with 
Arundo and Scirpus, whicli may represent Pi- 
hahiroth. On the west is the very conspicuous 
peak known as Jebel Shebremet, more than 
500 feet high (Migdol), commanding a very 
wide prospect, and forming a most conspicuous 
object to the traveller approaching from the 
north. Opposite, in the Arabian desert, rises 
the prominent northern point of the Jebel er- 
Rabah, marked on the maps as Jebel Maksheih, 
and which may have been the Baal-zephon of 
Moses. Here there is also a basin-like plain, 
suitable for an encampment, and at its north 
side the foot of Jebel Shebremet juts out so as 
to form a narrow pass, easy of defence. Here 
also the Bitter Lake narrows, and its shallower 
part begins, and a north-east wind, combined 
with a low tide, would produce the greatest 
possible effect in lowering the water." 

The route which is advocated by the author 
of this article, and which seems to him to agree 
with the results of the excavations in the Delta, 
as well as with the Biblical narrative, is the 
more northern one, between the Bitter Lakes and 
Lake Timsah. The Israelites, arriving near the 
present city of Ismailia, receive the order to 
turn to the south and to march along the sea as 
far as a place wliere the sea was narrow, the 
water shallow, and where there was a watch- 
tower (Migdol), which is supposed to have been 
on the hill where many centuries afterwards 
Darius erected a stele, anil which has been called 
by the French engineers the Serapeum. Pi-hahi- 
roth would be the Egyptian city of Pikerehet, 
a sanctuary of Osiris, which is represented now 
by the ruins situate at the place where the 
canal issues out of Lake Timsah, at the foot of 
Gebel Miriam. Baal-zephon would be a sanc- 
tuary on a hill, on the other side of the sea, an 



isolated place of worship, like the so-called 
s/tei/chs of the present day. This view, which is 
that of Linant, who derives it chiefly from 
geological arguments, has been adopted by 
Lieblein, Poole, and by the author of the Suez 
Canal, Lesseps. 

The route of the E.vodus has called forth a 
great number of books and papers, the latest of 
which are : Ebers, J)urch Goscn zum Sinui, 2nd 
ed. ; Linant, Me'moire sur les principaux travaux 
d'utUite pnbliq^ie executes en Eijyptc, p. 137 sq. ; 
Lieblein, Handel und Schiffahrt auf dan Jiuthen 
Mccre; Sir W. Dawson, Eijypt and Syria, 
p. 43 sq.; Modern Science in Bible Lands, 
y. 382 sq.; Naviile, The Store City of Pitlioni 
and the Route of the Exodus, 3rd ed. [Memoirs 
of the Egypt Exploration Fund]. [E. N.] 

EXORCIST {i^opKtffTi^s ; exorcista). The 
word exorcist occurs only once in the Bible 
(Acts xix. 13), and is then employed as a de- 
signation of persons who professed to cast out 
evil sjiirits by exorcising them, i.e. by adjuring 
them by some potent name or spell, to come 
out of those whom they possessed (opKiCw vfxas 
rhv 'l-qa-ovv. Acts, I. c. ; cp. e^opKwais, 6pK6w ; 
^ osa\)h. ^Ant. viii. 2, § 5). The cognate verb 
{ii,opKi((o) is found once in the N. T. and once in 
the LXX. Version of the 0. T. ; but in both of 
these places it is used in its classical sense of 
administering an oath to a person, or charging 
him with an oath, and as a synonym of the 
simple verb {6pKi(ai)'n\ the same sense (cp. Matt, 
xxvi. 63, with Mark v. 7 ; Gen. xxiv. 3, Heb. 
^l?''3^'i<, " I will make thee swear," with v. 37 ; 
Demosth. 1265-6. See also 1 Thess. v. 27, where 
ivopKl^w is the generally accepted reading). 

The use of the word "exorcists" in the pas- 
sage from the Acts, as a recognised description 
of certain " strolling Jews," confirms what we 
know from other sources as to the practice of 
exorcism among the Jews. The only example 
of anything at all resembling the practice in 
the 0. T., though as regards the means em- 
ployed it is not properly an exorcism, is the 
familiar instance of David playing on his harp 
before Saul, when " an evil spirit from the Lord 
troubled him " (1 Sam. xvi. 14). The eflect of 
David's playing is said to have been that " Saul 
was refreshed and was well, and the evil spirit 
departed from him" (y. 23). The way in 
which both the malady and its cure are spoken 
of by the servants of Saul (v. 16) shows that 
the idea of demoniacal possession and of deliver- 
ance from it was familiar to the Jews of that 
day. Passing to the N. T., we : find our Lord 
Himself recognising not only the prevalence, 
but in some cases at least the efficacy, of exor- 
cism among the Jews of His own day. When 
the nature of the charge brought against Him 
by the Pharisees, and the circumstances under 
which it was brought, are taken into account, it 
is impossible to regard His question to them, 
" If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do 
your disciples {viol) cast them out ?" (Matt. xii. 
27) as anything short of an admission, that 
there were instances in which exorcism was 
successfully practised by the disciples of the 
Pharisees. The only alternative is to degrade 
Him, morally and intellectually, to the level of 
His adversaries, and to suppose, that in order to 
silence or conciliate them, Ho credited them 

3 U 2 



with a power which He and they alike knew to 
be simulated. The remark ot' the people on 
another occasion, when our Loi\l had cast out a 
devil, " It was never so seen in Israel," and the 
wonder they evinced, may have been called 
forth, as Alt'ord suggests, by the manner rather 
than by the fact of the cure (Matt. ix. 33 ; 
cp. Mark ii. 12). Justin Martyr has an in- 
teresting suggestion as to the possibility of a 
Jew of his day successfully exorcising a devil, 
by employing the name of the God of Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob (a\\' ei (^opKi^oi tis 
vfiaiu Kara rov 6eov ^A0paafi Kcd 6eov 'IffaaK 
Kol 6fov 'Io/C£U/3, Icrcos viroTayrtfffTai [rh Sai- 
fi6viov']. Dial, acm Tri/ph. c. 85, p. 311, C. 
See also Apol. ii. c. 6, p. 45, B, where he 
claims for Christianity superior but not 
necessarily exclusive power in this respect. 
Compare the statements of Iren. adv. Haeres. 
ii. 5, and the authorities quoted by Grotius on 
Matt. xii. 27). But Justin goes on to say that 
the Jewish exorcists, as a class, had sunk down 
to the superstitious rites and usages of the 
heathen ("HSt? /ueVroi ot i^ vfxQiv eTropKicrrai ttj 
rexvri, ucrirep koI to, iOvq, xP'^l^^^^i e^opKi^ovcrt 
Kal dvjxidfj.a(n Kal KaTaSeff/xois xP'^'''^°-'-i e^i'oi'). 
It accords with experience, that the decay of a 
religious system should be marked by the pro- 
fane and spurious imitation of spiritual powers 
which were once really, though it may be excep- 
tionally, possessed by its adherents. " Non 
habebant quidem Judaei exorcistas ex Legis pre- 
scripto : verum scimus Deum, ut in foederis sui 
fide puroque eultu illos retiueret, suam inter eos 
praesentiam variis miraculis subinde testatum 
esse. Ita fieri potuit ut invocato Dei nomine 
daemones fugarent. Populus vero talem Dei 
virtutem expertus, ordinarium sibi munus 
temere instituit " (Calvin on Matt. xii. 27). 
The driving away of an evil spirit by fumiga- 
tion, as described in the Book of Tobit (viii. 
2, 3), though not strictly an exorcism, is an 
example of such perversion. Josephus, after 
asserting of Solomon, TpSirous i^opKciaewi' /care- 
\nrev, ols ivS6fXfva to. SaifiSvta £>s /xriKer' 
iTrave\Be7v eKStivKovai, says that he himself had 
seen one Eleazar, a Jew, releasing people from 
the power of demons by the method of Solomon, 
in the presence of Vespasian and his sons and 
soldiers (Ant. viii. 2, § 5). In another place 
(Bell. Jud. vii. 6, § 3) he has a wild story of 
exorcism by the use of a root, called Baaras, 
from the name of the place where it grows. It 
was the profane use by strolling impostors of 
the name of Jesus, as a charm or spell to dis- 
possess evil spirits, that issued in the disastrous 
failure recorded in the Book of the Acts (xix. 
13 sq.). 

The Christian miracle of casting out devils, 
whether as performed by Christ or by His apos- 
tles and followers, is never called by the name 
of exorcism in the N. T. ; nor does it appear 
that adjuration was used in performing it. The 
simple word of command, coming as it did from 
His lips " with authority and power " (Luke iv. 
36, cp. Mark i. 27), was enough in the case 
of our Lord to ensure the result, though, in 
some instances at least, that word rose, it should 
seem, to special dignity and solemnity, and was 
not obeyed without marked tokens of resistance. 
The word most commonly used by the Evangel- 
ists to describe our Lord's action is iirfTifi^ae. 


It is used of the miracle in the synagogue at 
Capernaum by the only two of them who record 
it, with the addition of the actual terms (((>tfj.<i- 
drjTi, Kal e^eAflf e| aurov) in which the rebuke 
was conveyed (Mark i. 25 ; Luke iv. 35). All 
three of the Syuoptists use it in describing 
the miracle on the possessed child, immediately 
after the Transfiguration (Matt. xvii. 18 ; 
Mark ix. 25; Luke ix. 42); St. Mark alone 
giving the solemn form of address (rh irvev/xa 
rh &\aXov Kal Kcocpdy, iyui croi firiTaffcTCti, 
i^e\6€ t'l auTOVf Kal fxr)KfTi f'ureKBTjs els 
avTOi'), called forth perhaps by the pecu- 
liar malignity of the spirit and his reluc- 
tance to desert his prey (v. 26). In tlie 
miracle in the country of the Gadarenes, St. 
Mark's e|eA.9e (v. 8) becomes in St. Luke TTapr)y- 
yeiXe e^eAdfly (viii. 29 ; or ■jrapiiyyeWe'). The 
daughter of the Syi'o-Phoenician woman was 
set free by His mere volition, without personal 
contact at all (Mark vii. 29, 30). Authority 
(e^ouaia) to cast out devils was bestowed by 
Christ while on earth upon the Apostles and 
the seventy disciples (Matt. x. 1 ; Luke x. 
19 : cp. Luke iv. 36 ; Mark i. 27), and a 
like power was promised by Him to believers 
after His Ascension (Mark xvi. 17). But 
though tliis power was to be exercised by them 
" in His Name " (Luke x. 17 ; Mark xvi. 17 : 
cp. Matt. vii. 22 ; Mark ix. 38), the virtue of 
that JSTame, as simply uttered in faith, appears 
to have sufficed, without any formula of adjura- 
tion such as would properly constitute an exor- 
cism (TrapayyeWci) croi iv r. ovojx. 'iricr. Xp., 
Acts xvi. 18, the only case in which the words 
used are given. See v. 16 ; viii. 7). In one case, 
which however is specially mentioned as excep- 
tional, " handkerchiefs or aprons," carried away 
to them from the body of St. Paul, had power 
to deliver the possessed from the evil spirits 
who tormented them (Acts xix. 12). 

The reality of exorcism, or of the expulsion 
of evil spirits which is commonly understood by 
that name, must of course depend upon the 
reality of possession. If there be no such thing 
as demoniacal possession, there can be no need 
and no room for deliverance from it. But if, 
by a careful consideration of those passages of 
the N. T. which bear upon the subject, we are 
led to the conclusion that " there are evil 
spirits, subjects of the Evil One, who, in the days 
of the Lord Himself and His Apostles especially, 
were permitted by God to exercise a direct in- 
fluence over the souls and bodies of certain 
men " [Demoniacs] ; then it is only reasonable 
to suppose that He Who " for this cause was 
manifested, that He might destroy the works of 
the devil " (1 John iii. 8 ; cp. Acts x. 38), 
should grapple with and overcome that in- 
fluence. At the same time, it should not be 
forgotten that the argument is strong, when 
taken in the reverse order. From the reality of 
expulsion we may reasonably infer the reality 
of possession. No theory of accommodation can 
satisfactorily account for the language used by 
Christ in casting out devils. As well might we 
affirm, " if a physician were solemnly to address 
the moon, Indding it to abstain from harming his 
patient " (Trench, Azotes on the Miracles), that he 
was only employing the popular language which 
speaks of madness as lunacy, as to affirm that 
— when our Lord says to one brought to Him a» 


possessed, " Thou dumb pud deaf spirit, T charge 
thee, come out of him, and enter no more into 
him" (Mark ix. 'Jo) — it is an honest and truth- 
ful accomnioilation to the views and ])rcjudices 
of His hearers on the subject of possession. If 
possession were not real, He Wlio is " the 
Truth " could not so have spoken. If so He 
spoke and was obeyed, then possession and His 
victory over it are undoubteil facts. [T. T. P.J 

EXPIATIOX. [Sacrifice.] 

EYE-SERVICE. It has been pointed out 
(2)'. /^., Anier. ed.) that we are indebted to the 
translators of the Bishops' Bible for this ren- 
dering of o4)6aAjUo5oKA€io (Ei)hes. vi. 6 ; Col. iii. 
22). It describes that service which, duly per- 
formed only when the master's eye is upon it, is 
for that reason reluctant and mercenary. [F.] 

EZAR, 1 Ch. i. 38. [Ezek.] 

EZ'BAI (^3T^^: ; B. 'AC^fial, ^. -$€, A. 'A0i ; 
Asbai), father of Naari, who was one of David's 
thirty mighty men (1 Ch. xi. 37). In the 
parallel list (2 Sam. xxiii. 35) the names are 
given " Paarai the Arbite," which Kennicott 
decides to be a corruption of the reading in 
Chronicles {Dissertation, &c. p. 209). It is to 
be noted that some twenty MSS. of the text in 
Samuel read Oipal vihs tov 'Aafii (Driver in 
loco). [F.] 

EZ'BON (|3VX; Qa(To$w; Esehon). 1. Son 
of Gad, and founder of one of the Gadite families 
(Gen. xlvi. 1(3; Num. xxvi. 16). In the latter 
passage the name is written "i^TN (A. V. Ozni), 
probably by a corruption of the text of very 
early date (or, by tradition, Delitzsch [1887], 
Gen. in loco), since the LXX. (v. 25) have B. 
'A^ei/€t (B"*". 'A(,aj/ei', AF. ' h^aivi). The process 
may have been the accidental omission of the 2 
in the first instance (as in ITI^'^IIN, Abiezer 
[Josh. xvii. 2], which in Num. xxvi. is written 
"Itr^X, Jeezer), and then, when ''3'iiX was no 
lonci-er a Hebrew form, the changing it into 

2. 'A(Te$-J>v. Son of Bela, the son of Ben- 
jamin, according to 1 Ch. vii. 7. It is singular, 
however, that while Ezbon is nowhere else 
mentioned among the sons of Bela, or Benjamin, 
he appears here in company with '"l''!^, Iri, 
which is not a Benjamite family either, accord- 
ing to the other lists, but which is found in 
company with Ezbon among the Gadite families, 
both in Gen. xlvi. 16 (Eri, """ly) and Num. xxvi. 
16. Were these two Gadite families incorporated 
into Benjamin after the slaughter mentioned 
in Judg. XX.? Possiblv thev were from Jabesh- 
Gilead (cp. xxi. 12-14). '[Becher.] 1 Ch. 
vii. 2 seems to fix the date of the census as in 
king David's time. [A. C. H.] 

EZECHI'AS (B. 'ECdas, A. 'ECeKias ; Ozias, 
Ezechias). 1. 1 Esd. ix. 14. Son of Theocanus, 
one of those who took up the matter of "strange" 
marriage with " strauge wives ; " put for Jaii- 
AZIAH (R. V. Jahzeiah), son of Tikvah, in Ezra 
X. 15 (B. AaCeia, N». -as, A. 'laQas). 2. 2 Esd. 
vii. 40. [Hezekiah.] 



EZECI'AS ('£i*6Ki'oy ; Ezechias), 1 Esd. 
ix. 43, one of those wlio stood on the right hand 
of Ezra wiien he read the Book of the Law, for 
HiLKiAU in the parallel passage, Neh. viii. 4. 

EZEKI'AS ('ECsKiaj, and so Westcott and 
Hort in N. T. ; Ezechiaa), Ecclus. xlviii. 17, 22, 
xlix. 4; 2 Mace. xv. 22 ; iMatt. i. 9, 10. [HEZE- 

EZE'KIIiL ("pXpp;?)). The name is derived 

from ?X p;tni, God will strengthen (Gesen. Thes. 

i. 464), or from ?X pin";, God will prevail 
(Simonis Onomast. V. T. p. 499). The name 
has been strangely misrepresented. The LXX. 
calls the Prophet 'l€^e/Ci^\ (so too Ecclus. 
xlix. 8); Josephus, 'l€^€/cii7Aos ; N xAg. Ezechiel ; 
Luther, Hesechiel. The same Hebrew name 
occurs in 1 Ch. xxiv. 16 as that of the head of 
the twentieth of the twenty-four priestly courses, 
and there the A. V. represents it by Jehezekel. 
.Jewish writers give it under the nearer and 
more correct form of Jechezk-el. Abarbanel 
{Praef. in Ezcch.) gives a direct significance to 
the name, as that of '-one who narrated the 
might of God to be dis^ilayed in the future." 
Villalpauilus (^Praef. in Ezech. x.) sees a refer- 
ence by the Prophet to his own name in the 
word D^pTn (on the one hand "impudent," on 
the other "strong" or "firm") in Ezek. iii. 
7-9 ; and at last we get the wholly groundless 
conjecture that it was a title applied to the 
Prophet descriptively after the commencement 
of his career (Sanctius, Prolegom. in Ezech. 
p. 2 ; Carpzov, Introd. ii. pt. ii. ch. v.). 

The Prophet Ezekiel was, as he himself informs 
us, " the son of Buzi the priest" (i. 3). In the 
A. V. and H. V. the clause is rendered " Ezekiel 
the priest, the son of Buzi," and this translation 
is defended by Hengstenberg, who takes it to 
mean that Ezekiel was priest of the exiles 
among whom he lived. The Hebrew accent 
however points to the other rendering, whicli 
is generally adopted by Jewish writers. The 
word Buz (t-IB) means contempt, and it might 
seem strange that such a name should be con- 
ferred on any child, yet this was also the name 
of the second son of Blilcah and Nahor. The 
Rabbis, however, have built a theory upon the 
name. They have a rule that, whenever a 
prophet names his father, the father must also 
have been a prophet, and Rabbi David Qimchi 
in his commentary mentions a conjecture that 
Ezekiel was the son of Jeremiah, who was called 
Buzi because he was rejected and despised. It 
need hardly be said that the conjecture is im- 
possible, as also is the tradition mentioned by 
St. Gregory of Nazianzus that Ezekiel was a 
servant of Jeremiah. Of the real relations 
which subsisted between the two Prophets we 
shall speak further on ; all that we know of 
Buzi is that he was a priest of Jerusalem. 
Ezekiel thus belonged to the highest aristocracy 
of his nation, and it is obvious that he received 
from his father a careful and learned education. 

The date of his birth depends on the interpre- 
tation given to Ezek. i. 1, where he mentions 
liis call "in the thirtieth year," and "in tiie 
fifth year of Jehoiachin's captivity." The 
latter expression gives us, according to the 
Hebrew way of reckoning, the date B.C. 594 ; 



and as in all other places, Ezekiel dates from 
the vear of Jehoiachin's captivity (viii. 1 ; 
xxiv.'l ■ xxix. 17; xxx. 20; xl. 1), we are fairly 
acquainted with the chronology of his prophe- 
cies. The expression " in the thirtieth year " 
has been variously explained. Many commen- 
tators refer it to the thirtieth year from the new 
era of Xabopolassar, father of Nebuchadnezzar, 
who began to reign B.C. 625 (Rawlinson, 
Herwlotm, i. 508). It has been supposed that 
Ezekiel thus furnished a Chaldaean as well as a 
Jewish date, and similar dates are found in Dan. 
ii. 1, vii. 1 ; Ezra vii. 7 ; Neh. ii. 1, v. 14 
(Rosenmiiller, Schol. ad loc. ; Scaliger, de emend. 
Temp. Prokgom. p. xii.). On the other hand, 
Ezekiel nowhere else alludes to this epoch, and 
it does not seem to be certain that the accession 
of Nabopolassar was observed as an era in 
Babylon. Setting aside the conjecture of some 
early commentators mentioned by Jerome 
{Comment, in Ezech.), and followed by R. 
Qimchi and Hitzig, that the expression refers to 
the thirtieth year from the year of jubilee, we 
may observe that the Targum of Jonathan has 
"thirty years after Hilkiah the high-priest had 
found the Book of the Law in the vestibule 
under the porch at midnight, after the setting of 
the moon, in the days of Josiah, &c., in the 
month of Thammuz, in the fifth day of the 
month" (cp. 2 K. xxii. 8-xxiii. 26). This 
view is adopted by Jerome, Grotius, Ussher, 
Havernick, &c. The Book was discovered 
in the eighteenth year of Josiah, and the 
date thus furnished coincides with the refer- 
ence to the fifth year of king Jehoiachin's 
captivity. But there is no trace, either in 
Ezekiel or elsewhere, that the finding of the 
Book of the Law was ever used to mark an era, 
and there can now be little doubt that by the 
expression " in the thirtieth year "* Ezekiel was 
referring to his own age. This is the more 
likely because he is speaking of a strictly 
personal incident, and because at the age of 
thirty a priest assumed his full functions (Num. 
iv. 23-30). To one who writes more than any 
of the earlier Prophets in a priestly spirit, and 
was so deeply saturated with priestly traditions, 
it was natural to refer to a date which added 
new solemnity to the commencement of his 
prophetic mission, because it connected that 
mission with the hereditary duties of his office. 

It is however a fact of profound significance 
that the birth of the Prophet happened at the 
period in which Josiah, startled by the revela- 
tion which he found in the Book of the Law, 
began his great reform of worship. The effects 
of that reform must have been deeply felt in 
the education of a boy whose father was a 
priest, and who lived under the very shadow of 
the Temple. Whetlier Ezekiel during his 
earlier years travelled among the neighbouring 
nations, and so acquired those vivid conceptions 
of their circumstances which he afterwards 
embodied in his prophecies, we cannot tell ; but 
he was brought up amid the influences of a 
reformation, during which the Temple and its 

• The Hebrew expression means literally " In thirty 
years." It may be compared with "after forty 
years," to indicate the age of Absalom in 2 Sam. xv. 7 ; 
unless, with the Peshitto, Vulgate, and many MSS., we 
here read " four " (see Driver in loco). 


ritual occupied no small part of the thoughts 
of his people. Jeremiah, who had attained to 
manhood before the great religious movement 
which marked the days of Josiah, was less pro- 
foundly affected by it. He earnestly enforced 
the truth that ollerings and services were in 
themselves far from sufficient ; and when he 
witnessed that utter ruin of his nation and of 
its Temple which he had prophesied, he became 
the herald of a new covenant, and found comfort 
in the thought of days when there should 
indeed be no Ark and no Temple, yet all 
should know the Lord their God, and have the 
Law written in their hearts (Jer. iii. 15-18; 
xxxi. 31-34). The work to which Ezekiel was 
called was different. The day for the New 
Covenant of which Jeremiah prophesied had not 
yet dawned, and the younger Prophet was com- 
missioned, while teaching to his nation many 
spiritual truths of the deepest importance, to 
keep alive in their hearts that faithfulness to 
the old ordinances which inspired them with 
hope and patriotism during the centuries whicii 
were yet to elapse before the Desire of all 
nations came ."suddenly to that Second Temple 
which the returning exiles raised from the ruins 
of the First (Hag. ii. 7 ; Mai. iii. 1). 

King Josiah, at the early age of thirty-nine, 
fell in the great battle of Megiddo (i;.C. 608), 
after receiving a crushing defeat at the hands of 
Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt. The disastrous 
end of so good a king was a sore trial to the 
faith of the pious Israelites. But worse trials 
were to follow. Pharaoh placed Jehoiakim, the 
eldest son of Josiah, as his vassal on the throne 
of Judah, but in B.C. 605 was himself defeated 
at Carchemish by Nebuchadnezzar. The con- 
queror allowed Jehoiakim to retain his throne, 
but in spite oi this Jehoiakim rebelled against 
Nebuchadnezzar three years later, and was slain 
in the eleventh year of a bad reign (2 K. xxiii. 
37 ; 2 Ch. xxxvi. 8). His son and successor, 
Jehoiachin, reigned but three months and ten 
days, at the close of which Nebuchadnezzar 
carried him away captive to Babylon with his 
family, his treasure, and ten thousand prisoners 
(2 K. xxiv. 14, 16),'' among whom were the 
flower of the aristocracy and of the male popu- 
lation of Jerusalem. This took place in the 
year 597 B.C. 

Among these prisoners was Ezekiel, who must 
accordingly 'have been about twenty-five years 
old. Josephus, indeed, whose account of this 
period is both untrustworthy and marked by 
positive errors, says tliat he was carried away 
to Babylon while he was yet a boy (Jos. Antf. 
X. 7, § 3). But this statement is inherently 
improbable. Ezwkiel's last prophecy is dated in 
the twenty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoia- 
chin (xxix. 17), and it is unlikely that he long 
survived that date. If then he was only a boy 
at the beginning of the exile, he must have died 
at an earl}' age. and must have begun his pro- 
phetic work as a very young man ; a fact which 
would almost certainly have been mentioned by 
tradition. Besides this, it is hardly probable 
that Ezekiel would have received so deep an 

•> According to Jer. Iii. 28, the number of prisoners 
was 3023. For the confusion of dates and numbers in 
the accounts of the variuus deportations, see Ewald, 
Gesch. Isr. iii. 736. 




impioss from tlio Temple scrviecs, ov have pvo- 
sentcHl so vigorous ;iiul mature a typo of the 
priestly cliaracter, as that wliicli is manitested 
in his liook, if he had been taken from Jerusalem 
before his habits and convictions were fully 
formed. There seems to be little ground for 
Thoodoret's supposition that Ezekiel was a 

Nebuchadnezzar was not one of the mere 
rougli soldiers who founded some of the ancient 
monarchies. He resembled Alexander the Great 
in his j)owers of organisation and in tlie breadth 
of his designs, and, like Cyrus and Darius, he is 
always spoken of with respect by the Hebrew 
Proi)liets (Ezek. xxvi. 7 ; Dan. v. 18, &c.). The 
captivitv which he inflicted on the Jewish exiles 
took the form of a dejiortation or transmigra- 
tion, and their lot was not aggravated by need- 
less cruelties. Ezekiel was placed with a little 
colony of his companions at Tel Abib (" Hill of 
grassland ") on the river Chebar (iii. 15). Of 
Tel Abib nothing is known, nor has the site been 
identified.*^ The Vulgate renders it " accrvus 
novariun fnn/ttm;" and the LXX., stumbling 
over it, represents it by fierecopos. It is not 
certain whether the river Chebar was the iYc(/w 
Malha, the " Koyal canal " (Cellarius, Geogr. 
c. 22 ; Bochart, Phaleg. i. 8), or the river 
Kliabour (the ancient ' A^6ppas), which flows into 
the Euphrates 200 miles north of Babylon. 
There can be little doubt that Ezekiel's place of 
exile was in Chaldaea proper (i. 3), and there- 
fore that the Chebar cannot be (as Bleek con- 
jectured, Einleit. § 221. See Fried. Delitzsch, 
Wo lag das Paradiesl p. 47 sq.)the river Habor 
in Gozan (2 K. xvii. 6), which is an afHuent of 
the Tigris. The nominal tomb of Ezekiel is 
shown at a place called Kcfil, south of Babylon 
(Menasse ben Israel, dc Ilesur. Mort. p. 23 ; see 
Ps. Epiphan. do Tit. et iJort. Prophet, ix.). It 
is mentioned by Pietro de la Valle, and fully 
described in the Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela 
(^Itiner. p. 66 ; Hottinger, llies. Phil. ii. i. 3 ; 
Cippi Hehraici, p. 82 ; Carpzov, Apparat. Crit. 
pp. 203, 204). 

It was on the banks of the Cliebar, " in the 
land of the Chaldeans," that God's message first 
reached Ezekiel, and " the heavens were opened " 
to him in the thirtieth year of his age, as to 
Christ in the river Jordan (Origen). In the 
passage describing his call (Ezek. i. 3) the 
Targum interpolates the words " in the land 
[of Israel, and again a second time He spake to 
him in the land"] of the Chaldeans." The inter- 
polation may partly have been suggested by the 
structure of some of Ezekiel's early prophecies, 
in which he imagines himself an ideal spectator 
of scenes in Jerusalem (viii. 7, &c.) ; but it 
also probably sprang from the Jewish notion 
that the Shekinah could not overshadow a 
Prophet out of the Holy Land. For this reason 
Kashi supposes that ch. xvii. was Ezekiel's first 
])rophecy, and was uttered before he went into 
captivity, a view which he supports by the 
Hebrew idiom HTI ^^■^ (A. V. and R. V. "came 

TT T ^ 

' Tel, "mound," is a common element in the names 
of places : cp. Ezra ii. 59 ; Josh. xi. 13, where "in their 
strength " should be rendered " upon their own mound " 
(cp. R. v.). The name Abib in this instance seems 
to have been .ippropriate, for Ammianus Marcellinus 
(xiv. 3) says, " Arborae amnis herbidae riia:-." 

expressly ") in i. 3. K. Qimchi, however, admits 
of exceptions to the Kabliinic rule iu case the 
prophecy was insjiired in some pure and quiet 
spot like a river's bank. 

Unlike his predecessor in the prophetic office, 
who gives us the amplest details of his personal 
history, Ezekiel rarely alludes to the facts of 
his own life, and we have to complete the imper- 
fect picture by the colours of late and dubious 
tradition. We only learn from an incidental 
allusion that he was married, and had a house 
(viii. 1) in his place of exile, and lost his wife 
by a sudden and unforeseen stroke. The way 
in which he bore this deep affliction was due 
to that absorbing recognition of his high call- 
ing which enabled him to face every duty 
which was laid upon him, and even to sub- 
mit to the ceremonial pollution from which he 
shrank with characteristic loathing (iv. 14). It 
is only in one expression that the feelings of the 
man burst through the self-devotion of the 
Prophet. His obedience was unwavering, but 
the deep pathos of his brief allusion to his wife's 
death (xxiv. 15-18) shows what well-springs 
of the tenderest emotion were concealed under 
his uncompromising opposition to every form 
of sin."* 

He lived in the highest consideration among 
hi.s companions in exile, and their elders con- 
sulted him on all occasions (viii. 1, xi. 25, 
xiv. 1, XX. 1, &c.), because in his united offices 
of priest and Prophet he was a living witness 
to " them of the captivity " that God had not 
abandoned them. Vitringa even says (de Synag. 
Vet. p. 332) that "in aedibus suis ut in schola 
quadam publica conventus instituebat, ibique 
coram fiequenti concione divinam interpre- 
tabatur voluutatem oratione facunda " (quoted 
by Havernick). Jewish writers regard these 
meetings as the first beginnings of the future 
synagogues, and to this they refer Ezek. xi. 16, 
"Although I have scattered them among the 
countries, yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary 
in the countries where they be." On this pas- 
sage the Targum distinctly says that the syna- 
gogues are next in holiness to the Temple (see 
Megilla, f. 29, 1 ; Jer. Berakhoth, 5, 1 ; Ham- 
burger, RE. ii. s. v. Synagoge). 

The last date mentioned by the Prophet 
is the twenty- seventh year of the Captivity 
(xxix. 17), so that his mission extended over 
twenty-two years, during part of which period 
Daniel was probably living, and already famous 
(Ezek. xiv. 14, xxviii. 3). Tradition ascribes 
various miracles to him, as, for instance, 
escaping from his enemies by walking dry-shod 
across the Chebar ; feeding the famished people 
with a miraculous draught of fishes, &c. He is 
said to have been murdered in Babylon by some 
Jewish prince (? o riyovixevos tov Xdov, called in 
the Roman martyrology for vi. Id. Apr. " judex 
populi." Carpzov, Introd. 1. c), whom he had 
convicted of idolatry ; and to have been buried 
in a ffirriXaiov SiirXovv, the tomb of Shem and 
Arphaxad, on the banks of the Euphrates. A 
curious conjecture, discredited by Clemens 
Alexandrinus (Strom, i. c. xv. § 70), but con- 
sidered not impossible by Seldeu (Syntagm. de 

d There does not seem to be any ground for regarding 
the death of Ezekiel's wife as an unreal event — a mere 
imaginary symbol — as Ueuss and others do. 



Biis S;ir. ii. p. 120), Meyer and others, identifies 
him with " Nazaratus the Assyrian," the teacher 
of Pythagoras. We need hardly mention the 
foolish suppositions that he is identical with 
Zoroaster, or with the Alexandrian 'E^eKirjAoy 
d Tccv 'lovSa'iKcot' rpaywSicov itoitjttJs (Clem. 
Alex. Strom, i. § lo5 ; Euseb. Fraep. Evamj. 
ix. 28, 29) who wrote a play on the Exodus, 
called 'E^ayoj-y^ (Fabricius, Bibl. Grec. ii. 19). 
This Ezekiel seems to have lived about B.C. 1-10 
(see Griltz, Gesch. d. Jut. iii. pp. 42, 440). 

But by the side of the scattered data of his 
external life, those of his internal life appear so 
much the richer. We have already noticed his 
stern and inflexible energy of will and character ; 
and we also observe a devoted adherence to the 
rites and ceremonies of his national religion. 
Ezekiel is no cosmopolite, but displays every- 
where the peculiar tendencies of a Hebrew 
educated under Levitical training. The priestly 
bias is always visible, especially in chs. viii.- 
xi., xl.-xlviii., and in iv. l:i sq., xx. 12 sq., 
xxii. 8, &c. De Wette and Gesenius attribute 
this to a " contracted spirituality," and Ewald 
sees in it " a one-sided conception of antiquity 
which he obtaiued merely from books and tradi- 
tions," and " a depression of spirit enhanced 
by the long continuance of the banishment and 
bondage of the people." But it was surely this 
very intensity of patriotic loyalty to a system 
whose partial suspension he both predicted and 
survived, wliich cheered the exiles with the 
confidence of the Prophet's hopes for the future, 
and tended to preserve tlie decaying nationality 
of his people. Mr. F. Newman is even more 
contemptuous than the German critics. "The 
writings of Ezekiel," he says, '-painfully show 
the growth of what is merely visionary, and an 
increasing value for hard sacerdotalism" {Hcbr. 
Monarchy, p. 330). He speaks of the " heavy 
materialism " of Ezekiel's Temide as being '' as 
tedious and unedifying as Leviticus itself;" but 
he refutes his own criticisms when he adds 
th:it Ezekiel's predictions "so kept alive in the 
minds of the next generation a belief in a cer- 
tain return from Captivity as to have tended 
exceedingly towards that result." 

VVe shall try to show in the sketch of his 
teaching that what has been called his pre- 
dominating ceremonialism and externalism were 
partly indeed due to his birth and early train- 
ing, but were also essential to the work which 
he was appointed to fulfil. It must be borne in 
mind that five centuries were yet to elapse, even 
after the Restoration of the Captivity, during 
which it was the duty of the Jews to preserve 
their national institutions until the Saviour of 
the world should come. Over the religious life 
of those centuries no Old Testament writer 
exercised a more powerful influence than the 
prophet Ezekiel.' 

It was not only his attainment of the full 
age for priestly functions which called forth 
the prophetic gifts of Ezekiel. God, Who pre- 
pares His servants by the education of history 
and experience, trained the mind of His Prophet 
by the course of events for the first overpower- 
ing revelation which determined his future 

" In our Masoretic canon he is placed third of the 
yebiim Acharonim, or greater Prophets ; in Baha Kama, 
S. 14, 2, he is placed second. 


career. When .Tehoiachin had been taken to 
Babylon, his uncle Zedekiah was left as a viceroy 
over the poor remnants of the people. In the 
fourth year of his reign he joined in a great 
movement of .Tews, Phoenicians, Ammonites, 
Moabites, and Edomites, to throw off the hated 
yoke of Nebuchadnezzar. Such designs could 
not be kept secret, and to afford himself with a 
colourable excuse Zedekiah seems to have gone 
in person to Babylon (Jer. Ii. 59;,f accompanied 
by ambassadors, to some of whom Jeremiab 
entrusted the memorable letter in which he had 
prophesied that the Captivity should last for 
seventy years (xxv. 11), and in which he sternly 
rebuked the false prophets who encouraged the 
exiles in vain hopes (Jer. xxix. 1-32). It was 
probably this letter, and the thoughts which it 
kindled, which awoke the fiame of prophecy in 
the heart of the exiled priest. Jeremiah was at 
this time all but universally hated and perse- 
cuted, and his life was oonstantl)- endangered by 
the fury of lying prujihets and apostate princes 
(Jer. XX. 7-18). By the side of the Chebar it 
was brought home to the mind of Ezekiel that 
he, the aristocratic descendant of Zadok, must 
throw himself into the cause of the poor priest 
of Anathoth, and share the intense odium which 
his prophecies had inspired. It is the mora} 
and spiritual relationship between these great 
Prophets of the epoch of the fall of Judah which 
is dimly shadowed in Jewish legends. Jerome 
supposes that, being contemporaries during a 
part of their mission, they interchanged their 
prophecies, sending them resjiectively ta 
Jerusalem and ChaMaea for mutual confirma- 
tion and encouragement, that the Jews might 
hear as it were a strophe and antistrophe of 
warning and promise, '■ velut ac si duo cantores 
alter ad alterius vocem sese componerent " 
(Calvin, Comment, ad E'zech. i. 2). Although 
it was only towards the close of Jeremiah's 
lengthened office that Ezekiel received his com- 
mission, yet these suppositions are easily 
accounted for by the internal harmony between 
the two Prophets, in proof of which we ma\r 
refer to Ezek. xiii. as compared with Jer. xxiii. 9 
sq., and Ezek. xxxiv. with Jer. xxxiii., &c. This- 
inner resemblance Is the more striking from the 
otherwise wide ditt'erence of character which 
separates the two Prophets. Jeremiah is far 
more of a poet than Ezekiel, though the latter- 
shows a more daring imagination. The elegiac- 
tenderness of Jeremiah is the reflex of his 
gentle and introspective spirit, while Ezekiel, in 
that age when true prophecy was so rare 
(Ezek. xii. 21-25; Lam. ii. 9), "comes forwant 
with all abruptness and iron consistency. Has 
he to contend with a people of brazen front and 
unbending neck ? He possesses on his own part 
an unbending nature, opposing the evil with an 
unflinching spirit of boldness, with words ful7 
of consuming fire." 

Of the reception of Ezekiel's prophecies during: 
the twenty-two years over which — though pro- 
bably at irregular intervals — his work extended 
(Ezek. i. 1, xxix. 17), we have no direct informa- 

f It should, however, be observed that the readings of 
this verse are uncertain. The LXX., followed by Bleek 
anil others, read "from Zedekiah " for "ivith" ; and the- 
Peshitto reads "eleventh" for "fourth" year of hiss 


tidii. It is, however, unlikely that he cscapcil 
the bitter aiul violent opposition which is the 
ordinary fate ot' the true Prophet.* From vai;ue 
and incidental notices we may infer that at first 
he was made to sulfer even to the extent of 
bonds and imprisonment (Ezek. iii. 25); but if 
so, he soon triumphed over his enemies, and 
obtained honour and recognition as a Prophet, 
even while the people took no jiractical heed to 
his words (xxxiii. 82, 33). Put while tlie 
general tenor of his life .seems to have been far 
less stormy and troubled than that of his spi- 
ritual father Jeremiah, his ministry was excep- 
tionally powerful. Its central lesson has been 
summed up in the words " through repentance 
to salvation" (Cornill, Der Prophet EzekicI, 
p. 2G4). The chosen people had drunk to the 
dregs the cup of humiliation ; they had seen 
their kings defeated, dishonoured, dragged into 
captivity, cruelly tortured, shamefully slain; 
they had seen their ro3-al city ruined and dis- 
m.-mtled, and their Temple destroyed by fire. 
They had seen tlie God of Israel become as a 
stranger in His own laud (Jer. xiv. 8). Yet 
there were many of the people who only spoke 
the language of unbelief and defiance. They 
expressed open doubts of God's power (Is. lix. 1) 
or of His justice (Ezek. xviii. 25, 29 ; xxxiii. 
17, 20). It was the task of Ezekiel again and 
again to refute these blasphemies, and to show 
that the secret of Israel's ruin lay exclusively 
in Israel's sins, and especially in the sins of 
gross idolatry (Ezek. viii. xiv. 1-12), lascivious- 
uess (xvi. xxiii.), ind bloodguiltiness (xxiv. <)-9), 
and in the general corruption and trust in lies of 
])rophets, priests, princes and people (xxii. 1-31). 
In preaching his Theodicaea, Ezekiel had espe- 
cially to revive the national faith which had 
beeu so deeply shaken by the miserable end of 
the good king Josiah. He had to show how 
false was the application of the proverb that 
" Tlie father had eaten sour grapes, and the 
children's teeth were set on edge " (xviii. 3-32), 
and how completely the personal punishment of 
his contemporaries was due to their own otVences. 
Put while thus rebuking a rebellious despair, he 
was obliged at the same time to strike down an 
ovei'weeniug confidence. In his days, as in 
those of John tlie Paptist, the people, encou- 
raged in their nntional conceit by false prophets, 
were founding vain hopes on the fact that " they 
had Abraham to their father" (Ezek. xxxiii. 24). 
Ezekiel not only pointed out how futile was 
such a plea for guilty souls (lu. 25-29), but he 
dealt at this pride of birth the most tremendous 
blow which it had ever received when he ex- 
claimed, " Thy birth and thy nativity was of 
the land of Canaan; thy mother was an Hittite, 
and thy father an Amorite ;'' and thine elder 



s He speaks of his people, even his fellow-exiles, as 
" a house of rebellion," ii. 5-8 ; iii. 9, 26, 27 ; xxiv. 3, &c. 
See too xiv. 3, xx. 32. •' The Holy One— blessed be He— 
.ifflicted Ezekiel in order to cleanse Israel from their 
iniquities." (Sanhedrin, f. 39.) 

>> How bitterly this verse was felt by the .Tews is 
shown centuries later by the Rabbis of the Talmud. 
" When the Holy One — blessed be He — commissioned 
Ezakiel to say to Israel, ' Thy father was an Amorite and 
thy mother a Hittite,' a pleading spirit " (according to 
R.\shi, the angel Gabriel) " objected and said, ' If Abra- 
ham and Sarah were to stand here in Thy presence, 
would^st Thou thus humiliate them to their face .' ' " 

sister is Samaria, and thy younger sister that 
dwelleth at thy right hand is Sodom and her 
daugliters" (xvi. 3, 44-59). They relied on 
their holy origin, but their true paternity wa.s 
jiroved by their deeds (Is. i. lu ; Matt. iii. 9 ; 
John viii. 44). 

Side by side however with the insolence of 
obstinate self-defence, Ezekiel found that in the 
hearts of others there was an abject despondency. 
They were saying, "If our transgressions and 
our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, 
how should we then live ? "(xxxiii. 10). It was 
in answer to such melancholy sjiiritsthat Ezekiel 
set forth more clearly than any of his predeces- 
sors the truth that the one object of punish- 
ment is not vengeance, but reformation. The 
key-note of all his teaching was, " I have no 
pleasure in the death of the wicked ; but that 
the wicked turn from his way and live: tur» 
yo, turn ye from your evil ways ; for why will 
ye die, house of Israel?" (xxxiii. 11). Ths? 
sole remedy for the present disastrous conditior> 
of the nation was that heartfelt repentance 
which proves its sincerity by amendment (ii>. 
20; xviii. 24-32; xxxiii. 13). For those whose 
despaii- was too deeply-seated to be reached even 
by this high moral teaching, which for the first 
time set forth Jehovah as the Educator of the 
human race, Ezekiel received his remarkable 
vision of the Kesurrection in the Valley of Dry 
Pones (xxxvii. 1-14). This striking allegory 
liad for its immediate object the revival of 
national hojies ; but it has a far wider and more 
glorious meaning, and, pointing as it does to " a 
hope full of immortality," it is one of the deepest 
notes of revelation which the Old Testament 

Besides his high moral and spiritual teaching, 
it was Ezekiel's mission to keep alive among the- 
Jews a sense of their religious unity and poli- 
tical existence. Judaism was never intended to 
be a cosmopolitan religion ; and when the exilesi 
contrasted the colossal splendour of Babylort 
with their own poor Jerusalem, they needed the- 
message '■^ Fear not, thou worm Jacob" (Is. xli.. 
14), and the reminder that they were not to. 
sink into Babylonians, since they had higher 
hopes and nobler promises. Their tears were- 
but to be as the soltening showers which should 
prepare the soil for a jiurer seed. It was there- 
foi-e essential that they should not relapse into 
the idolatry of their conquerors ; and since they 
had no longer a Temple or sacrifices, it was 
necessary to insist with the utmost stringency 
on their ancient and peculiar institution of the 
Sabbath.'' Ezekiel has been severelv judged 
because, amid the lofty teachings of his eigh- 
teenth chapter, he dwells so strongly on one or 
two negative and positive rules (xviii. 6-9, 11- 

(Sa nhedrin, f. 44, 1.) The passage certainly shows an in- 
tensely unfavourable view of Israel's past, though it was 
not meant to apply to Abraham and Sarah at all, but 
to the heathen origin and moral affinities of the city of 
Jerusalem. See chs. xvi., xx., xxiii. 

' The Rabbis lost themselves in frivolous discussions 
as to whether the scene was real or not ; and, if real, 
wliat became of the men who were raised ! 

^ For the same reason Jeremiah dwells strongly on 
the sacredness of the Sabbath (Jer. xvii. 21-27). It was 
the strongest bulwark of the Law and national life of 
the Jews. 



13^ 15~17). The criticism is unjust, oecause 
those rules are not meant to include all 
morality, but are aimed at the dangers which 
most immediately menaced the national exist- 
<.Qce — idolatry, impurity, greed, and unkind- 
ness. How little the teaching of Ezekiel was 
akin to Pharisaism may be seen in his insistence 
on the fact that a new heart and a new spirit 
(xxxvi. 26, 27) are not the reward of merit, but 
the gift of God's free love ^vv. 21-23, 32, 33 ; 
xvi. 02, G3 ; xx. 43, 44). By this mixture of 
doctrine and morality, by his thorough examina- 
tion of the problems of sin and punishment, 
and repentance and free grace (xviii. 32), and by 
his reference of all questions to the will and 
glory of God, Ezekiel has earned the title of 
'•the Paul of the Old Testament." Further 
than this, by his chosen title " Son of Man " and 
its accordance with his deepest thoughts, he 
becomes a type of Christ (Isidore, de Vit. et ob. 
Scinct. 39). 

That title was no ordinary one. It is true 
that "son of man" is common in Scripture in 
the sense of " man " ; but the only two Prophets 
to whom the title is given are Daniel, who is thus 
addressed once only (Dan. viii. 17), and Ezekiel, 
to whom the phrase is applied ninety times. It 
is equivalent to v:eak mortal, and is doubtless 
suggested by the noble language of the viiith 
Psalm (viii. 4, 5). If in one aspect it implies the 
deep humility of the Prophet in the presence of 
Him Who had revealed Himself as throned upon 
the Cherubim, in another it suggests to Ezekiel 
as to David the glory of his privilege in being 
chosen to receive the messages of God (see i. 28; 
iii. 23 ; xliii. 3 ; xliv. 4). [F. W. F.] 

EZE'KIEL, BOOK OF. We see in his 

Book the gradual transition from the Prophet 
into the scribe. He is the precursor of Ezra 
in inaugurating the religion of legalism. He 
was neither a statesman nor a politician, but 
resembles the figure of his own visions, — the 
man in the white robe with the inkhorn by 
liis side (Ezek. ix.). Jeremiah, "the last great 
Prophet, the evening star of the declining day 
■of prophecy, occupies the dividing line between 
two ages, and without intending it closes the 
species of entirely pure prophecy." He points 
to the new covenant (Jer. xxxi. 33, 34),'' while 
it was the main duty of Ezekiel to secure and 
protect the resuscitation of the old covenant 
until the fulness of the times. The object of 
the " new heart and a new spirit " is " that 
they may walk in Jly ordinances and observe 
My statutes." He does not, like Isaiah, look 
mainly for new heavens and a new earth 
{Is. Ixv. 19 ; Ixvi. 22), but sketches a new 
and minutely regulated national life.'' It is 
•only in his denunciations that Ezekiel treads 
in the footsteps of his prophetic predecessors ; 
his remedies and ideals are priestly, and his 
personal work was to a great extent of a 

• Kuenen, "Ezekiel" {Mod. Eev. p. 616, Oct. 1SS4), 
§} xi. 20, xxxvi. 27. 

•> Compare Jer. iii. 16; vii. 4, 11-14, 21-23; ix. 25, 
26 ; xxiv. 6, 7. Chapters xxx., xxxi. exhibit sOch " ele- 
vation of thought and expansion of horizon " that 
Movers, Hitzig, and others have unwarrantably sup- 
posed that they were written by " the second Isaiali " 
(see Dr. R. Williams, The Heirew Prophets, ii. 60). 


pastoral and didactic character (see xxiii. 6), 
such as suited a period of national inaction. 

I. Style. — His prophetic method was very 
varied. He furnishes instances of visions (viii.- 
xi.), symbolic actions (iv. v. xii.), similitudes 
(xv. xvi.), parables (xvii.), proverbs (xii. 22; 
xviii. 2), poems (xix.), allegories (xxi. xxiii. xxiv.), 
and direct prophecies (vi. xx., &c.). Carpzov 
says, " Tanta ubertate et figurarum variatione 
floret ut unus omnes prophetic! sermonis nu- 
meros ac modos explevisse, jure suo sit dicendus " 
{Introd. ii. pt. iii. 5). Jlichaelis and others talk 
of his " plagiarism ; " but although his language 
is undoubtedly moulded by his early studies, it 
shows a marked originality in form, in concep- 
tion, and in many unique phrases, which maybe 
seen by contrasting liis prophecy against Tyre 
(xxviii.) with that of Isaiah (xxiii.). He is 
indeed more of a writer than either a poet or 
an orator, and his style is in general the 
result of literary elaboration rather than of 
spontaneous passion. This is doubtless due to 
the fact that many of his prophecies do not 
seem to have been publicly uttered, but re- 
corded in private. He seems to have been 
a man of silent, meditative, and almost 
melancholy character," and this gave to his 
expressions the " evenness and repose " of which 
Ewald speaks. The style of Ezekiel bears a 
certain indefinable stamp of distinction and 
self-restraint, which makes it contrast with the 
more impassioned eloquence of his persecuted 
contemporary, Jeremiah. On the other hand, 
some of his symbols, images, and expressions are 
crude and displeasing (xvi. 1-5 ; xxiii. passim), 
and he is sometimes prolix from the many itera- 
tions and recurrent formulae.* His composite 
symbols show clear traces of the extent to 
which his attention had been seized by the 
strange ibrms of art by which he was sur- 
rounded amid the temples and palaces of Babylon. 
The attempt to interpret these by painting 
taxed the highest powers even of an Albrecht 
Diirer and a llaphael. These symbols furnish 
an almost unique phenomenon in Semitic litera- 
ture, and one which can only be explained by 
recent familiarity with Aryan surroundings. 
But Ezekiel shows in the combination of these 
diverse elements a daring imagination and an 
architectonic skill. They have exercised a 
strong fascination over the minds of thinkers. 
St. Gregory of Nazianzus (Or. 23) calls Ezekiel 
the loftiest and most wonderful of all Prophets, 
6 Tci)y fXijaXuiv eiroTrr^s Kal e^T]y7]Tris fivcTry)plu}V 
(see Carpzov, Introd. i. 192), and Herder de- 
scribes him as the Aeschylus and Shakspeare of 
the Hebrews. Schiller wished that he had 
learnt Hebrew mainly because he wished to read 
Ezekiel in his own language. Havernick is 
perhaps too enthusiastic in speaking of " his glow 
of divine indignation," and the " torrent of his 
eloquence resting on a combination of power 
and consistency, the one as unwearied as the 

« To speak of him as probably " atQicted by a chronic 
nervous malady " {Stud. u. Krit. 1877) is quite to exceed 
the limits of legitimate conjecture. 

d Duhm {Die Theol. d. Propheten) contrasts him un- 
favourably both with Jeremiah and the later Isaiah, but 
the difference between them does not necessarily prove 
inferiority. The work as well as the style of Ezekiel 
was of another order from that of his predecessors. 


other is imposing." St. Jerome, on the other 
hanJ, writes too ooldly when he says, " Sermo 
ejus uec satis disurtus nee admodum rusticus, 
sed ex utroque genere medio tcmperatur " 
(^Praef. in Ezech.). Among the most siilendid 
jiassages are ch. i., the prophecy against Tyrus 
(xxvi.-xxviii.) ; that against Assyria, " the 
noblest monument of Eastern iiistory "' (xxxi.) ; 
and ch. viii., the account of what ho saw in the 

" wlicD, bj- the vision led. 

His oyo surveyed the dark idolatries 

Of alienated Judah."— JIilton, I'ar. Lost, i. 

The depth of his matter, and the marvellous 
nature of his visions, make him occasionally 
obscnre, but chieily in passages which were 
designedly shrouded in enigmatic language (e.g. 
xxi. and xxxix.). His jirophecy was placed by 
the Jews among the |''TJil (treasures), those por- 
tions of Scripture which (like the early part of 
Genesis and the Canticles) were not allowed to 
be read till the age of 30 (Jer. Ep. ad Eustoch. ; 
Orig. proem, homil. iv. in Cantic. ; Hottinger, 
Tlics. Phil. ii. 1, 3). Hence Jerome compares 
the " inextricabilis error " of his writings to 
Virgil's labyrinth (" Oceanus Scripturarum, 
inysteriorumque Dei labyrinthus "), and also to 
the catacombs. The Jews classed him in the 
very highest rank of Prophets. The Sanhedrin 
is said to have hesitated long whether his Book 
should form part of the Canon, from its occa- 
sional obscurity, and from its sup])osed contra- 
dictions to the Lr.w (xviii. '20-.\x. 5, xxxiv. 7 ; 
Jer. xxxii. 18). But in point of fact these 
i.jjparent oppositions are the mere expression of 
truths comj)lementary to each other, as Moses 
himself might have taught them (Deut. xxiv. 
16). Although, generally speaking, comments 
on this book were forbidden, R. Ananias under- 
took to reconcile the supposed dift'erences." 
Spinoza, Tract. Theol. Polit. ii. 27, partly from 
these considerations, inferred that the present 
Book is made up of mere fragments, but his 
argument from its commencing with a % and 
from the expression in i. 3 above alluded to, 
hardly needs refutation. 

H. Unity. — As to the unity of the Book there 
has never been any serious question. Josephus 
indeed (Antt. x. 5, § 1) has the following pas- 
sage : ov fiovov 5e ovtos (Jeremiah) TrpoeOecnricre 
TavTa aWa Koi 6 irpo(p7iT7}s 'le^fKiriXos [6s] 
■jrpwTos Trep] tovtuv ^vo fii^Xia ypai^ias KaTeXinev. 
The undoubted meaning seems to be that Ezehiel 
(although Eichhorn on various grounds applies 
the word to Jeremiah) left two books of pro- 
phecy ; which is also stated by Zonaras, and the 
Latin translation of Athanasius, where, after 
mentioning other lost books, and tivo of Ezekiel, 
the writer continues, " Nunc vero jam unum 
duntaxat inveniri scimus. Itaque haec omnia 
per impiorum Judaeorum amentiam et incuriam 
periisse manifestum est" (S;/nops. p. 136, but 
the passage does not occur in the Greek). In 

e " Revere the memory of Hananiah ben Hizkiah, for 
had it not been for him the Book of Ezekiel would have 
been suppressed, because it contradicts the Law. By the 
help of 300 bottles of oil he prolonged his studies till he 
reconciled all the discrepancies " (Shabbath, f. 13, 2). 
Rashi refers to Ezek. xliv.Sl, slv. 20, as passages which 
eeem to contradict the Law. 

EZEKIEL, 1300K OF 1035 

confirmation of this view (which Is held by 
Maldonatus anii others) some liave referred to pas- 
sages (luotcd in Clem. Alex. Pacdaij. i. 10, § 91, 
iv o) fupu (Te tV avr^ Kol Kpivut at : and again, 
TiroKev Kol ov riroKiv (prjcrlv 7] ypa(i)Ti (Id. 
Strom, vii. 16, § 93). Tertullian says, " Legimus 
apud Ezechielem de vacca ilia quae peperit et 
non peperit " (de Cam. Christi, § 23 ; cp. Epi- 
phan. //acres, xxx. 30), and refers the supposed 
prophecy to the Virgin Jlary. The attempt to 
identify it with Job xxi. 10 can hardly be 
maintained. That these passages (quoted by 
Fabricius, Cod. Pseudcpiijr. Vet. Test. § 221) 
can come from a lost genuine book is extremely 
improbable, since we know from the Talmud 
the extraordinary care with which the later 
Jews guarded tlie ASyta ^wj/ra. They may 
indeed come from a lost apocryphal book, al- 
though we find no other trace of its existence 
(Sixtus Sen. Bibl. Sanct. ii. 61). Le Moyne 
( I'ar. Sacra, ii. p. 332 sq.) thinks that they 
undoubtedly belong to some collection of tradi- 
tionary Jewish apophthegms, such as those 
which are preserved \nPirkeAhoth, or the " chap- 
ters of the fathers." Just in the same way we 
find certain aypa<pa SSy/xara attributed to our 
Lord by the Fathers, and even by the Apostles 
(Acts XX. 35), on which see a monograph by 
Kuinoel. The simplest supposition about the 
passage in Josephus is either to assume that he 
is in error, or to admit a former division of 
Ezekiel into two books at ch. xxv., or possibly 
at ch. xxxix. Le Jloyne adopts the latter view, 
and supports it by analogous cases. There is 
nothing which militates against it in the fact 
that Josephus mentions Svo /nSya Ka\ etKOfft 
fii^\ia (c. Apion. i. 22) as forming the Cnnon. 

IH. Genuineness. — Of the genuineness of 
the Book of Ezekiel there has never been any 
serious doubt. It is true that in Baba Bathra, 
f. 15, 1, we are told that "the men of the 
Great Synagogue wrote the Book of Ezekiel, the 
Twelve Minor Prophets, the Book of Daniel, 
and the Book of Esther," where Rashi says 
that "the men of the Great Synagogue were 
Haggai, Malachi, Zerubbabel, Mordecai, and 
their associates." But " the Great Synagogue " 
is by many considered a purely unhistorical body, 
and it is clear that "wrote" can only mean 
" edited." It has indeed been rashly supposed 
by Oeder, Vogel, and a writer in the Monthly 
Magazine (1798) that the last nine chapters are 
a spurious addition to the Book, and it has even 
been suggested that they were written by some 
Samaritan author to induce the Jews to permit 
the co-operation of the Samaritans in the build- 
ing of the Second Temple ! Corrodi also doubted 
the genuineness of chs. xxxviii. and xxxix. 
It. is needless to enter into the very slight show 
ot' argument which was advanced in favour of 
these views, because they have long been aban- 
doned. Zunz went further (Gottcsdicnstl. 
Vortr. p. 183 ; Gesamm. Schriften, i. 217), and 
impugned the genuineness of the whole Book, 
which he believed to have been written between 
B.C. 440 and B.C. 400. He argued (1) from 
the specific character of some of the predictions 
(e.g. xvii. 10 ; xxiv. 2 sq.) ; (2) from the im- 
possibility of believing that in B.C. 570 Ezekiel 
should have dreamed of suggesting a new set of 
laws, a new kind of Temple, and a new division 
of the Holy Land ; (3) from the absence of any 


allusion to Ezekiel in the Books of Jeremiah and 
Esther; (-!■) from the allusions to Daniel 
(xiv. l-t) ; (5) from certain grammatical and 
linf'uistic peculiarities. In answer to these 
objections of a sincere and learned author we 
may reply generally that, even if we allow 
the purely a priori objection to specilic predic- 
tions, they would only prove at the outside that 
Ezekiel had edited his Book as a literary whole 
towards the end of his life. The views of the 
ancients and the moderns about literary methods 
ditfered widely, and the addition of subsequent 
touches mny have been in no disaccord with the 
customs of an undeveloped literature, and the 
conditions under which the Book was made 

Such is the suggestion of Ewald and Kuenen ;'' 
and although it cannot be proved, and therefore 
need not be accepted, it would be absurd to view 
such circumstances from a modern standpoint, 
or to attribute such subsequent editing to 
literary fraud. The second objection of Zunz 
must be treated separately. The third is a 
mere argumentum e silcniio, which, as has been 
]iroved again and again by the most decisive 
instances, has no validity at all, either in ancient 
or modern days. The fourth objection does not 
seem to have any intrinsic weight, and is of too 
vague a character to be dealt with. The fifth 
again has no validity because the conditions of 
the Exile are quite sufficient to account for mauy 
linguistic phenomena, and because it is far from 
improbable that some of these linguistic pecu- 
liarities may be due to a text which is regarded 
by many scholars as being the most corrupt in 
the Old Testament. 

IV. Contents. — That Ezekiel was the editor 
as well as the author of the Book is admitted 
equally by Ewald, Keil, Kuenen, and nearly all 
other inquirers. The prophecies are arranged 
according to a definite plan. The Book is 
divided into two great parts, separated fi'om each 
other by the destruction of Jerusalem. The 

f According to the headings of the prophecies, chs. 
i.-vii. were delivered in the fifth year of Jehoiachin's 
captivity; viii.-xix. in the sixth year; xx.-xxiii. inthe 
seventh year ; xxiv. in the ninth year. If those head- 
ings apply to the entire contents of each chapter, 
Kzekiel distinctly predicted the peculiar fate of Zede- 
kiah (xii. 13), and the particulars of the siege and fall 
of Jerusalem. Kuenen argues that ch. xvii. could 
not have been written in the sixth year of Jehoiachin's 
captivity, because Zedekiah had not then actually re- 
volted, nor could he at that time have made a covenant 
with Egypt, since Egypt is not mentioned in Jer. 
xxvii. 3. He also thinks that xxi. 20-32 could not 
have been written in b.c. 591, because " the reproach cf 
the Ammonites" (xxv. 1-7) could not have been 
tittered till after the fall of Jerusalem and the profana- 
tion of the sanctuary. Hence he argues that Ezekiel 
" did not trouble himself about scrupulous accuracy in 
the literary reproduction of his spoken prophecies" 
{J'rop?iets, p. 328, E. T.). His view is that Ezekicl's 
slight subsequent additions to what he had previously 
written or delivered did not in any way militate with 
ancient and Eastern conceptions of literary good faith. 
Reuss (Les I'rophHcs, ii. ]-i2) goes even farther, and 
supposes that the first twenty-four chapters were merely 
written from an ideal standpoint anterior to the ruin of 
the Temple. The manner in which E/.ekicl, in xxix. 
17-21, professedly modifies and supplements without 
altering his original prophecy against Tyre, is wholly 
unlike the editing process suggested by these critics, and 
BO far tells against their view. 


first division consists of chs. i.-xxiv. ; the second 
of chs. xxv.-xlviii. So marked is the division 
that the close of the twenty-fourth chapter 
marks the exact half of the Book.s There are 
also marked difi'erences between the general 
character of these great divisions. The first 
section is mainly characterised by threats of 
judgment; the second section by promises of 
deliverance, the idea of which is also involved iu 
the threats against heathen nations. The Book 
may also be divided chronologically into three 
sections, viz. : — 1. The prophecies before the 
fall of Jerusalem (i.-xxiv.) ; 2. Those delivered 
during the siege (xxv.-xxxii.) ; 3. Those deli- 
vered after the beginning of the final captivity 
(xxxiii.-xlviii.). Ezekiel himself gives fourteen 
dates for his grouj)S of prophecies — namely, 
those delivered in the fifth year of Jehoiachin's 
captivity (i.-vii.) ; in the sixth year (viii.-xix.) ; 
in the teventh year (xx.-xxiii.) ; in the ninth 
year (xxiv. xxv.) ; in the tenth year (xxix. 
1-16) ; in the eleventh year (xxvi.-xxviii. ; xxx. 
20-26; xxxi.); inthe twelfth year (xxxii., and 
jierhaps xxxv.-xxxix.) ; in the twenty-fifth year 
(xl.-xlviii.) ; in the twenty-seventh year (xxix. 
17-xxx. 1-20)." 

1. Looking yet more closely at the structure 
of the Book, we find that the first great section 
is composed of — I. The glorious vision which 
inaugurated the Prophet's work (i. ii. iii.). 
II. The general carrying out of his commission 
(iii.-vii.) by various symbolic actions (iv. v.) ; 
by the rebuke of idolatry (vi.) ; and the threat 
of the final doom of Judah (vii.). III. Details 
of the profanation of the Temple by idolatry, 
and of the consequent judgment which shall 
come upon Jerusalem (viii.-xi.). IV. Further 
rebukes of the special sins of the age, inter- 
spersed with exhortations to repentance, and 
threats of punishment (xii.-xix.). V. The 
imminence of the doom, and renewed denuncia- 
tion of the crimes by which it had been pre- 
cipitated (xx.-xxiii.). VI. The significance of 
the now-commencing punishment (xxiv.). 

2. The next section (xxv.-xxxii.) is composed 
of seven oracles against Ammon, Jloab, Edom, 
the Philistines, and Sidon,' together with the 
long and magnificent philippics against Tyre 
(xxvi.-xxviii. 19) and Egypt (xxix.-xxxii.) ; 
which, as the Prophet explains (xxviii. 24-26), 
are intended as a source of consolation to Israel. 
They were delivered during the eighteen months 
of the siege. Between the beginning of the 
siege and the destruction of the Temple the 
Prophet has no direct message to his country- 
men ; and some have even understood xxiv. 27, 
xxix. 21, xxxiii. 22 (cp. iii. 26) in the sense 
that during the progress of the siege he was 
actually dumb or silent, and that this accounts 
for the parenthetic character of these chapters.'' 

e It need hardly be said that the division of the Book, 
into actual chapters did not take place until centuries 
after the days of Ezekiel. 

^ xxix. 17 sq. is a postscript to modify what had been 
eaid about the sack of Tyre in xxvi. See infra. 

' The comparatively insignificant Sidon (xxviii. 20-23) 
would perhaps hardly have been included among these 
denunciations except from the myotic significance 
attached to the number seven. 

'^ The real or ideal dumbness was removed " in th» 
twelfth year of our captivity" (xxxiii. 21), but in this 
passage the Peshitto reads " eleventh," and is followed 


In this section one paragraj)!! (xxix. 17-21) is 
jilaced out of its proi)er clii'oiu)lo;^ical order, 
having betMi uttered in the twenty-.-eventh year 
of the captivity of Jehoiachin, and therefore 
being tlie latest of all the prophecies of which 
Ezekiel himself furnishes a date. It was added 
seventeen years after the general prophecy 
against Tyr(>, and may perhaps serve to explain 
circumstances about the siege which had not 
originally come into the sphere of the Prophet's 
vision, and of which the details are not accu- 
rately known to us. 

3. The third section consists of eight oracles 
delivered after the fall of Jerusalem. They are 
more directly full of hojie and consolation. The 
tiiirty-fourth chapter contains the reproof of the 
shepherds that feed themselves, and the thirty- 
fifth is the judgment of Mount Seir. The 
thirty-seventh cimtains the splendid vision in 
which, under the image of the dry bones in the 
A'alley, Ezekiel not only encourages his people 
to believe in the possibility of their restoration, 
but also foreshadows, more nearly than any of liis 
])redecessors, the great docti'ine of the resurrec- 
tion of the body. The thirty-ei^jllith and thirty- 
ninth chaptei's contain in four divisions the 
l)rophecy against Gog and Magog. This general 
j)icture of God's judgments is no doubt partly 
intended, like Rev. xx. 7-10, in which it is 
imitated, to indicate the final conflict and over- 
throw of the powers of evil, but may also be 
meant to indicate in a cryptographic manner 
the doom of Babylon. This would account for 
the obscurity of the prophecy, and the sort of 
apocalyptic twilight in which it is enveloped. 

4. The last section contains nine chajiters 
(xl.-xlviii.) w-hii!'li have suggested many ditiicul- 
ties, and have been explained in widely different 
manners. They fall into three sections. The 
first (xl.-xliii.) minutely describes the construc- 
tion of the Temple ; the second (xliv.-xlvi.) the 
relation of different classes to the Temple and 
its service ; the third (xlvii. xlviii.) the blessing 
which streams from the Temple, and its position 
in the redistributed territories of the land. On 
the way in which we understand this section 
depends our apprehension of the whole work 
and mind of Ezekiel, and of the remarkable 
position which he occupies in Jewish history. 

Of the general views respecting these chapters 
some may be dismissed at once and finally. 1. 
It is certain that they are not historical, for 
the details differ absolutely from tlie details of 
Solomon's Temple, as well as from those of the 
second and of Herod's Temple. 2. It is equally 
certain, in spite of such isolated expressions as 
xliii. 10, xlv. 1, &c., that they could never have 
been meant to be literally carried out, for they 
abound in impossibilities on every page, and all 
commentators alike are compelled to admit that 
there can be nothing literal in the vision of the 
holy waters (xlvii. 1-12). 3. The attempt to 
give them a future applicability lands us in the 
absurd conclusion that there is to be a millennial 
retrogression from Christianity to the " weak and 
beggarly elements " of Jewish bondage. 4. All 
endeavours to explain them allegorically or 
symbolically have hopelessly failed, because, 

by some ^ISS., as also by Ewald, Hitzig, Kuenen, and 
•others. Jerusalem was taken in the eleventh year of 
Zedekiah's reign (Jer. li. 5-12). 



although such meaning may be attaciied to some 
of the numbers and arrangements, they cannot 
be applied without the utmost arbitrariness to 
the great mass of minute ])articulars. 5. Hence 
there can be no reasonable doubt that in this, as 
in the previous vision of Gog and Magog, and 
indeed by a literary method which prevails 
throughout his Book, Ezekiel is simjdy clothing 
general views and conceptions in elaborate and 
concrete forms. It is clear from his appeal to 
direct Divine sanction (xliii. 10, 11) that he is 
not indulging in an objectless play of fancy ; and 
indeed his general views and enactments, as 
Keuss truly says, were not without influence on 
subsequent legislation. Nevertheless in these 
eight oracles we are evidently moving in the 
region of a pure Utopia, and dealing only with 
an imaginative composition.' That this ideal 
picture was incapable of realisation may be seen 
from the facts that (o) it sets at defiance the 
geography of the Holy Land," and the entire 
circumstances of the returning exiles, (fi) The 
Temple with its precincts is a mile square, or 
larger than all Jerusalem, and yet is on the top 
of a mountain. (7) It is also placed nine and a 
half miles tVom the utmost bound of the city, 
and more than fourteen miles from its centre. 
(5) If equal strips of land were, in defiance of 
all principles of justice, assigned to the twelve 
tribes, the Temple could have nothing to do with 
Zion, and would be well on the road to Samaria." 
(t) The " oblation " (xlv. 1) of holy land for the 
sanctuary cannot by any possibility be brouffht 
into the limits assigned for Palestine (xlvii. 15- 
21). (0 The distribution of lands to the tribe."!,' 
besides its other incongruities, directly contra- 
dicts the prediction of Obadiah v. 19. (77) The 
land assigned to the sujiport of the Temple and 
its sacrifices is wholly inadequate, and yet the 
enormous size of the area set apart for the 
Temple itself leaves no room for some of the 
tribes in the districts marked out for them. It 
may therefore be regarded as unquestionable 
that all the concrete imagery is but the literary 
development of a free ideal. 

But what was the object of the Prophet in 
this ideal ? The answer is that it represents in 
concentrated form the view which he held of 
his entire mission. The famous nine chapters 
were written with the same kind of object as 
Plato's Bepublic, Sir Thomas More's Utopia, 
Bacon's l\cio Atlantis, Campanella's Civitas 
Solis, Harington's Oceana, and Fenelon's Salent. 
They clothe in concrete forms, which were never 
meant for actual realisation, Ezekiel's conceptions 
as to the future development of the theocracy, 
and they are therefore to be regarded as being,' 
from his point of view, the crown and flower of, 
all his work. He saw that it was God's wilB 
that the future of Israel should differ widely 

' Hence the views of Ezekiel are not once alluded to 
in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah, or in the prophecies 
of Haggai and Zechariah. 

m The Transjordanic territory is excluded. The re- 
mainder of the strip assigned to the Holy City is 
divided between the priests of thi' house of Zadok, the 
other Levites, and the prince (xlviii.). 

" The peculiar order of the tribes, in which Reuben is 
inserted between Ephraim and Judah (xlviii. 6, 7), was 
ideally intended to counteract the tendency of Ephraim 
to vex Judah, and Judah to envy Ephraim (Is. xi. 13). 


from the past, and that practical securities must 
be devised against the danger of a national 
relapse into former idolatries. He saw that 
those securities could best be provided in the 
then condition of his people by tlie development 
of an elaborate system of ritual. A priest by 
birth, by training, and by all his sympathies, lie 
was also taught by the logic of events and the 
revelation of God, that hereafter the Temple 
and its service must occupy a diflerent and more 
important position than it had done during the 
whole period since the Exodus. It was intended 
to fulfil the function of a necessary education to 
the Jews until the fulness of the time should 
come. They were to be reminded by every de- 
tail of worship that they were a peculiar people. 
The Temple was to be the centre and symbol of 
their life. That Temple could not be rich with 
treasures of gold and silver, like the Temple of 
Solomon, but (Jdedly^ it was to be built with 
elaborate and symboHc symmetry, and isolated 
in the centre of an immense domain, and to be 
made the scene of continuous and solemn sacri- 
fices. The king or prince was no longer to 
claim the prominent functions with regard to it 
which he had previously usui'ped, but was to be 
sun-ounded with safeguards against the tempta- 
tions to oppression (xlv. 7, 8), and was to employ 
his revenues to supply the priests with sacrifices 
(xlv. 16, 17). The feasts and the offerings are 
carefully specified. The whole system is to be 
placed under the charge of a special order, the 
priests of the family of Zadok, who are to be 
the exclusive guardians of the sacred precincts. 
The aim of the code is " holiness " in the sense 
of consecrated separation (Lev. xix. 2) : " the 
holy mount surrounded by the holy territory of 
the priests ; the holy house upon the holy 
mount ; the holy men to serve the holy house." 
In other words, the state is practically to be 
transformed into a Church, and the theocracy is 
to assume the form of a monocracy under the 
administration of scribes and people. 

V. Ezekiel and Leviticus. — We have now to 
consider the modern theories respecting these 
chapters, which at the present time form one of 
the most debated problems of the Old Testament. 
The resemblances between Ezekiel and Lev. 
xvii.-xxvi. are of the most remarkable character, 
.and it cannot be for a moment denied that there 
is some connexion between the two Books. A 
similarity so close can only have arisen in one of 
four ways : (1) Either Ezekiel borrowed largely 
from the Book of Leviticus; or (2) those chapters 
of the Book of Leviticus are a later addition to 
the Pentateuch by authors who borrowed largely 
from the Book of Ezekiel ; or (3) both are alike 
influenced in large measure by some common 
source ; or (4) both were written by the same 

The last conclusion (4) is that of Graf (Die 
Gesch. Biicher des Alien Testamentes, 1866, pp. 
81-83), whose theory was laboriously supported 
by Bishop Colenso {Pentateuch, pt. vi. ch. i. ii.).° 
Kayser, in the main, maintained the same views 

He held that Ezekiel wrote Lev. xxvi., and possibly 
Lev. xviii.-xx. ; but, seeing the many expressions not 
found in Ezekiel which occur in Lev. xxiii., xxiv., xxv., 
xxvil., he thought that others of the last ten chapters of 
Leviticus were written either by Ezekiel or by a writer 
or writers who stood in dose relation t-o him. 


(Jahrb. f. prot. Tlieol. 1881, pp. 541 sq.), by 
eliminating from the chapters certain elements 
which he regarded as Elohistic. The argu- 
ment in favour of this opinion loses nearly all 
its force when side by side with the verbal 
resemblances we observe the differences between 
the systems of the two Books. Those differences 
are most striking. Thus Ezekiel ignores the 
existence of a high-priest, unless it be very 
indirectly implied in xli. 3. It is still more 
strange that he ignores the Day of Atonement, 
the Feast of Pentecost, and the New Moons, and 
says nothing of an evening sacrifice (xlvi. IS- 
IS) or of the Paschal Lamb. He also changes 
many other details of the Law as laid down in 
the Pentateuch, as for instance in the ritual of 
the Feast of Tabernacles (xlv. 25 : op. Num. 
xxix. 12-24, 35 ; Lev. xxiii. 36, 39. Compare 
also Ezek. xliv. 20 ; Lev. xxi. 5 ; Ezek. xliv. 22 ; 
Lev. xxi. 7, 13, 14, &c.).p Accordingly this 
theory is rejected by Klostermann, Zeitschr. f. 
luther. Theol. 1877, pp. 401 sq..; VVellhausen, 
Einl. in d. 4. T., Von Bleek, 1878, p. 173 ; 
Reuss, L'Hist. Saintc ct la Loi, p. 253 ; Smend, 
Die Proph. Ezekiel crkldrt. p. xxvii. ; Delitzsch, 
Zeitsch. f. kirchl. Wiss. 1880, xii. 618; and 
Kuenen, Do Godsdienst von Israel, ii. 94—96. 
The theory has however been again taken up 
by Horst, who in his Lev. xvii.-xxvi. U7id 
Hezekiel argues that the last nine chapters of 
Ezekiel were written by the Prophet long after 
the chapters in Leviticus, and in his prophetic 
capacity, while the Priestly-codex, as the section 
of Leviticus is often called, had been not so 
much written as compiled by him twenty-five 
years earlier from existing documents. 

The first hypothesis — that Ezekiel borrowed 
largely from the Book of Leviticus — is the one 
adopted by Klostermann (/. c.) ; Dillmann, 
Komm. Ex. Levit., who, however, admits the 
possibility of additions to Leviticus at the time 
of the Exile and later ; Hofi'mann, Magazin f. d. 
Wissensch. des Judenth., 1879, pp. 209-215 ; 
Noldeke, Zur Kritik des A. T., pp. 67-71, and 
Delitzsch, Pent, kritische Stud., p. 620. ■> It is 
in favour of this opinion that, so far as phrase- 
ology is concerned, Ezekiel is not an original 
writer, for he borrows very largely from Amos, 
Hosea, Isaiah, Zephaniah, and above all Jeremiah. 
If this hypothesis be true, the extent of Ezekiel's 
indebtedness still remains a remarkable problem, 
especially since many of the words and expres- 
sions are unique. Against these must indeed 
be set a certain number of peculiarities and 
differences. Hoffmann uses these as a pi-oof that 
Ezekiel could not have written the Priest- 
codex, because in it there are none of the 

P On the many differences between Ezekiel and the 
Mosaic Law and later custom, see Professor Gardiner 
" on Ezekiel and the Law," Jourri.of Soc. of Bibl.Lit., 
June 1881. Strack, in his article on the Pentateuch 
(Herzog, i;.ff.2 xi.), argues further that the mention of 
the year of Jubilee in Lev. xxv. 8, and of the Urim and 
Thummim in Lev. viii. 8, is inconsistent with the theory 
that the main part of the Levitic legislation is of post- 
Exilian origin. See Edersheim, Prophecy and History, 
1885, pp. 2:0-273. 

1 See the long list of parallels in Smend's Commentary, 
pp. xxiv., xxv. Hoffmann showsthat no less than eighty- 
one passages in this section of Leviticus have eighty- 
three parallels in Ezekiel, so that one of the writers 
must have seen the other. 


appvoximatidiis to the lanjjuacje of oliior writers 
wliicli arc (ouiul in the prdjihocy ; and also 
because in the I'riest-codex the parallels are to 
the language of Ezckiel onl)', and not to the 
phrases which he lias in comnmu with Deu- 
teronomy and Jeremiah. Full weight must be 
allowed to those considerations, but it still 
remains difficult to account for the circumstance 
that Ezekiel should have written a Book of 
forty-eight chapters, and should have singled 
out from the wliole Pentateucli one small section, 
and especially one isolated chapter (Lev. x.Kvi.), 
for such deej) study as to have become thoroughly 
saturated with its style and expressions, and to 
have borrowed from' one chapter nearly fifty 
expressions, of which eighteen occur nowhere 
else in the Bible."' 

The second hypothesis (2) — that the Priestly- 
codex is in reality later than Ezekiel and 
jiartially founded on him — is, with trivial varia- 
tions, that of Wellhausen, Kuenen, Smend, Eeuss, 
Lagarde, Stade, and Robertson Smith. Their 
opinion is that the Book of Deuteronomy was in 
the main the Book found — or, as they would say, 
produced — by the high-priest Hilkiah in the 
reign of Josiah, and that the chapters in Leviti- 
cus are a modification of Ezekiel's preparatory 
and ideal scheme. They consider that the 
Prophet meant his Torah to be a sketch for the 
ritual of the Restoration, which was to supersede 
the old and corrupt usage of the Temple (xliii. 
7 ; xliv. 5 ; xlv. 8, 9), and which was to be at 
unce a reward for the repentance of his country- 
men and a scheme to protect them from again 
falling into like sins (Rob. Smith, The Prophets 
of the Old Testament, pp. 374-387). The 
essence of this new ideal is its sacerdotalism, in 
that it gives prominence to an atoning ritual, 
and ])uts an end to the sacrifices of individual 
Jsraelites. This it eflects partly by a stated 
national sacrifice, and partly by separating the 
worshippers from the sacrifices by "a double 
cordon of priests and Levites." The Levitical 
legislation, according to this view, is but a 
practical adaptation of Ezekiel's essential prin- 
ciples to the actual circumstances of the second 
Temple, when Jews were no longer a free people 
but a religious community. In the so-called 
" Priestly Codex " of Leviticus the nation be- 
comes " the congregation ; " the civil order is 
almost absorbed in the ecclesiastical ; the State 
becomes a Church ; the old prophetic ideal be- 
comes a sacerdotal ideal.' Ezekiel's last nine 
chapters are regarded as the modification of an 
old priestly Torah, and Lev. xvii.-xxvi. as a 
practical adaptation of this Torah, but with the 
re-admission of many ancient ordinances. On 
this hypothesis Lev. xxvi. is considered to be 
an intentional imitation of the style and manner 
of Ezekiel. For criticism of this view, we must 
refer to the paper of Prof. Gardiner already 
quoted. No literary question seems more diffi- 
cult on a priori grounds than the decision as to 
which of two writers has borrowed from the 



' See Horst, p. 85 ; Colenso, vi. 9. The argument from 
the use of hapax legomena is, however, always pre- 
carious. See Stanley Leathes, Witness of the Old Test. 
to Christ, p. 282 sq. 

' See the view developed in Prof. J. E. Carpenter's 
" Through the Prophets to the Law," Modern Rev., Jan. 

other. For instance, every fresh critic takes a 
dillerent view of the obvious relations between 
the K|)istles to the E])hesians and Colossians, 
and l)etween St. Jude an<i "J Pet. ii. ; and quite 
recently there have been oi)i)osite opinions as to 
whether the Epistle of Barnabas boirows from 
the ^Teaching of the Twelve Apostles or vice 
versa. All that can be regarded as certain in 
this instance is tliat there is some direct rela- 
tion between the two sections of Ezekiel and 
Leviticus. Writers like Hoffmann and Kalisch, 
among others, adopt the third hyj-othesis (3), 
that both alike are founded on an older work ; 
but no one could comjiare such paragraphs as 
Lev. xxvi. 30-33 with Ezek. vi. 3-7, or again 
Lev. xxvi. with Ezek. xxxiv. 25-31, without a 
strong conviction that one of the writers must 
have actually seen the existing work of the 
other. The questions here suggested cannot be 
regarded as finally settled, but meanwhile we 
may see as clearly as Luther did centuries ago, 
that the authorship of this or that section of the 
Pentateuch is a matter to be decided (as alone 
it can bo decided) by simple criticism, and that 
it lies altogether out of the domain of religion. 

There are no direct quotations from Ezekiel 
in the New Testament, but in the Apocalypse 
there are many parallels and obvious allusions 
to the later chapters. A useful list of these 
will be found in Dr. Currey's Commentary 
{Speaker's Coinmcntari/, vi. 1'2-16). 

The Vision of Ezekiel (" The Chariot ") be- 
came one of the chief studies of the Kabbalists, 
and the repetition of it was supposed to be 
surrounded with perils. The Talmud tells us of 
a child who was trying to comprehend Chasmal 
(A. V. " amber," Ezek. i. 4), when a fire came 
out ci the Chasmal and consumed him (^ChacjigUy 
f. 13, 1). Many other wonderful circumstances 
about the N!l|)l?? are nari-ated in the same 
treatise, and in f. 11, 2, that there were four 
questions relating to it into which, if a man 
pried, " it were better for him that he had never 
been born." See, too, Siikka, f. 28, 1, and 
Klein, Le Jxida'isme, p. 32. 

The text of Ezekiel is considered to be the 
most corrupt in the Old Testament except that 
of the books of Samuel. It may often be con- 
jecturally emended from the general character 
of the prophet's style, and sometimes from the 
renderings of the LXX., though many of the 
various readings are obviously older than that 
Version. Some are due to glosses and manipu- 
lations of later scribes, especially in chs. xL— xlviii. 
See Smend, Dcr Proph. Ezcchiel, p. xxix. 

VI. Bibliography. — The chief commentators 
on this " most neglected of the prophets " are, 
among the Fathers, Origen, Jerome, and Theo- 
doret ; among the Jews, Rabbis David Qimchi 
and Abarbanel ; among the Reformers, Oecolam- 
padius and Calvin ; among Romanists, Pradus 
and Villalpandus. There are modern commen- 
taries by Marck (1731), Venema (1790), New- 
come, Greenhill, Fairbairn (1851), Kliefoth 
(1856), Henderson, Hiivcrnick (1843), Hitzig 
(1847), Hengstenberg (1867), Keil (1868), 
Smend- (1880), Schroder (in Lange's Pibelicerk), 
Cornill (1886), and Orelli (in Strack u. Zockler's 
ITgf. Komm., 1888). In the Speaker's Commen- 
tary (1876) the Book is edited by Dr. Currey ; 
in Bishop Ellicott's Commentary (1884), by Dr. 




Besides these commentaries, we may refer to 
Carpzor, Introd. iv. 20o sq. ; Kayser, Jahrh. f. 
prot. TbeoL, 1881 ; Klostermann, Zcitschr. f. 
luthcr. Tlieol, 1877 ; Delitzsch, Zcitschr. f. 
kirchl. Wissensch., 1880 ; Hofl'mann, Magazin 
f. d. Wissensch. d. JuJenth., 1879, pp. 210-215 ; 
Ewald, Die Propheten d. Alton liundes (2nd ed. 
1868), and Geschichte dcs Volkes Israel, iv. ; 
ivueuen, Die Profcten, and De Godsdienst von 
Israel, ii. ; Duhm, Die Theologie der Propheten, 
187 J ; Zunz, Gottesdienstlicke Vtrtriiiie, and 
Gcsatnmelte Schriften, 1875; Graf, Die Gcschicht- 
liche Biicher dcs Alien Bundcs, 1866 ; Niildeke, 
Zur Kritik d. A. Test., i)p. 67-71 ; Colenso, 
Pentateuch and Book of Joshtta, part vi. 1872 ; 
Wellhausen, Prole jomena zur Gesch. Israels (2nd 
ed. 1883); Horst, Lev. xvii.-xxvi. und Ilezekiel, 
1881 ; Dr. Robertson Smith, The Prophets of 
the Old Testament, pp. 374-387 ; Reuss, L'His- 
toire Sainte et la lot, i. 253 sq. ; Kalisch, 
ZeviticiiSj p. 386; Driver, LOT. ch. v.; and 
for Jewish views. Hamburger, BE. s. v. 
'Jechezkel' [F. W. F.] 

E'ZEL, THE STOXE (^TXH I3Xn ; B. rh 
'Ep7a/3 iKilvo, A. tpyoy; lapis cui nomcn est 
Ezcl). A well-known stone in the neighbour- 
hood of Saul's residence, the scene of the parting 
of David and Jonathan when the former finally 
lied from the court (1 Sam. xx. 19). At the 
second mention of the spot (w. 41) the Hebrew 

text(n33n ^iXP; A. V. and R. V. "out of a 
place toward the south,"' R. V. marg.//wn beside 
the south) is, in the opinion of critics, undoubt- 
edly corrupt (see the emendation of the text 
in Driver, Notes on the Ileb. Te.ct of the BB. of 
Sam. on 1 Sam. xx. 19). The true reading is in- 
dicated by the LXX. B., which in both cases has 
Ergah or Arijah — in v. 19 for the Hebrew Eben, 
"stone," and in v. 41 for han-negeh, "the south." 
Ergah is doubtless the Greek rendering of the 
Hebrew Argoh = a, heap of stones. The true 
reading of v. 41 will therefore be as follows : 
" David arose fi-om close to the stone heap," — 

close to which (the same preposition, PVX, A. V. 
*' by ") it had been arranged beforehand that he 
should remain {y. 19). The change in v. 41 from 
3inxn, as the text stood at the time of the 
LXX., to 2J3n, as it now stands, is one which 
might easily take place. [G.] [W.] 

E'ZEM (DVy = 6owe; B. -BooadX, A. Boa- 
xt6ix ; Asom), one of the towns of Simeon (1 Ch. 
iv. 29). In the lists of Joshua (xix. 3) the 
name appears in the slightly different form of 
AzEM (the vowel being lengthened before the 
cause). [G.] 

E'ZER ("lyr ? = treasure ; 'E^fp ; Ezer). 1. A 
son of Ephraim, who was slain by the aboriginal 
inhabitants of Gath, while engaged in a foray on 
their cattle (1 Ch. vii. 21). Ewald (Geschichte, 
1. 490) assigns this occurrence to the pre- 
Egyptian period. 2. A priest noticed in the 
Book of Nehemiah (xii. 42; 'U(ovp, LXX.). 
3. 1 Ch. iv. 4. [W. L. B.] 

EZERI'AS (B. 6 Z^xpias, A. 6 'EC^pias; 
Azarias), 1 Esd. viii. 1. [Azariah, 7.] 

EZI'AS (B. 6 'OClas, A. 'ECi'as; Azahel), 1 Esd. 
viii. 2. [Azariah ; Aziei.] 

E'ZION-GA'BER, or . . . GE'BER (J^'>V|r 
")5.3 = ike gianfs hick-hone; Vaalwv Va^ep; 
Asiongaber ; Num. xxxiii. 35 ; Deut. ii. 8 ; 1 K. 
ix. 26, xxii. 48; 2 Ch. viii. 17), the last station 
named for the encampment of the Israelites 
before thev came to " the wilderness of Zin. 
which is Kadcsh," subsequently the station of 
Solomon's navy, described as near " Eloth, on 
the sea shore, in the land of Edom " (R. V.) ; 
and where that of Jehoshaphat was afterwards 
" broken " — probably destroyed on the rocks 
which lie in " jagged ranges on each side " 
(Stanley, S. <|- P. p. 2). Wellsted (ii. ch. ix. 
153) would find it in Dahab [Dizahab], but 
this could hardly be regarded as "in the land 
of Edom " (although possibly the rocks which 
Wellsted describes may have been the actual 
scene of the wreck), nor would it accord with 
Josephus (Ant. viii. 6, § 4)" as "not far from 
Elath." According to the map of Kiepert (in 
Robinson, 1856), it stands at Mm cl-Ghudyan, 
about 10 miles up what is now the dry bed of 
the Arabah, but, as he supposed, was then the 
northern end of the gulf, which may have 
anciently had, like that of Suez, a further ex- 
tension. This probably is the best site for it. 
By comparing 1 K. ix. 26, 27 with 2 Ch. viii. 
17, 18, it is probable that timber was floated 
from Tyre to the nearest point on the Mediter- 
ranean coast, and then conveyed over land to the 
head of the Gxdf of Akabah, where the ships 
seem to have been built ; for there can hardly 
have been adequate forests in the neighbourhood. 
[Wilderness of the Wandering.] [H. H.] 

EZ'NITE, THE (13 ^TH, Keri ^JVyn ; B. 6 
' Kffciovcuos, A. ' Pi.(T(iivaos ; Vulg. omits). Accord- 
ing to the statement of 2 Sam. xxiii. 8, " Adino 
the Eznite " was another name for (R. V.) " Josh- 
ebbasshebeth a Tachcemonite (A. V. " the Tach- 
monite that sate in the seat "), chief among the 
captains." The passage is, however, one of the 
most disputed in the whole Bil)le, owing partly to 
the difficulty of the one man bearing two names 
so distinct without any assigned reason, and 
partly to the discrepancy between it and the 
parallel sentence in 1 Ch. xi. 11, in which fur 
the words "Adino the Eznite" other Hebrew 
words are found, not very dissimilar in ap- 
pearance, but meaning " he shook (A. Y. and 
R. v. "lifted up") his spear." Modern critics 
(see Driver, Notes on the Ileb. Text of the BB. of 
Sam. in loco) are mostly agreed that the words 
in Chronicles preserve the original text, which in 
the Book of Samuel has become corrupted. The 
form of this particular word is the original text 
(the Kcthih) Etzno, which has been altered to Etzni 
by the Masoret scribes (in the Keri), apparently 
to admit of some meaning being obtained from 
it. Jerome read it Etzno, and taking it to be 
a declension of Etz ( = "wood") has rendei'ed 
the words "quasi tenerrimus Wgni vey'miciUus." 
The LXX. and some Hebrew MSS. (see Davidson's 
Heh. Text) add the words of Chronicles to the 
text of Samuel, a course followed by the A. V. 

The passage has been examined at length by 
Kennicott (Dissertation 1, 71-128) and Gesenius 
(Thes. pp. 994, 995), to whom the reader must 

» 'Acri(oyya|3apos, outt) BepeviKTj KoAeiTOt, oil noppia 




}>e referred for detjiils. Their conclusion is that 
the readinsi; of tlie Chronicles is correct (see 
Lriver, /. c). Ewald does not mention it (Gesch. 
iii. 180, note). [G.] [W.] 

EZ'RA (Xnir = help ; "EaSpas). 1. The 
head of .me of tiie twenty-two courses of priests 
which returned from captivity with Zerubbabel 
and Jeshu;i (Xeh. xii. 2). But in the somewhat 
parallel list of Neh. x. 2-8, the name of the 
same person is written Hntl?, Azariah, as it is 
probablv in Ezra vii. 1. 

2. A'man of Judah (1 Ch. iv. 17). 

3. The fimous scribe and priest, descended 
from Hilkiali the high-priest in Josiah's reign, 
from wiiose younger son Azariah sprung Seraiah, 
i-^zra's father (Ezra vii. 1), thought by many to 
be quite a ditierent person from Seraiah the 
high-i)riest. All that is really known of Ezra 
is contained in the last four chapters of the 
Book of Ezra and in Neh. viii. and xii. 26. 
From these passages we learn that he was a 
learned and pious priest residing at Babylon in the 
time of Artaxerxes Longimanus (B.C. 465-425). 
The origin of his influence with the king does 
not appear, but in the seventh year of his reign, 
in spite of the unfavourable report which had 
been sent by Hehum and Shimshai (Ezra iv. 8, 9), 
he obtained leave to go to Jerusalem, and to 
take with him a company of Israelites, together 
with priests, a few Levites, singers, porters, and 
Nethinim. Of these a list, amounting to 1754, 
is given in Ezra viii. ; and these, also, doubtless 
form a part of the full list of the returned 
captives contained in Neh. vii., and in duplicate 
in Ezra ii. (cp. Smend, Die Listen d. BB. Esra 
M. Neh,), Including women and children, the 
number probably amounted to between 6,000 
and 8,000 souls. The journey of Ezra and his 
companions from Babylon to Jerusalem took just 
four months ; and they brought up with them 
a large free-will oftering of gold, silver, and 
silver vessels, contributed, not only by the 
Babylonian Jews, but by the king himself and 
his counsellors. These offerings were for the 
House of God, to beautify it, and for the pur- 
chase of bullocks, rams, and the other offerings 
required for the Temple-service. In addition to 
this, Ezra was empowered to draw upon the 
king's treasurers beyond the river for any 
further supplies he might require ; and all 
priests, Levites, and other ministers of the 
Temple, were exempted from taxation. Ezra 
had also authority given him to appoint magis- 
trates and judges in Judaea, with power of life 
and death over all off'enders. This ample com- 
mission was granted him at his own request 
(v. 6), and it appears that his great design was 
to effect a religious reformation among the 
Palestine Jews, and to bring them back to the 
observation of the Law of Moses, from which 
they had grievously declined. His first step, 
accordingly, was to enforce a separation from 
their wives upon all who had made heathen 
marriages, in which number were many priests 
and Levites, as well as other Israelites. This 
was eff'ected in little more than six months after 
his arrival at Jerusalem.* With the detailed 

" The steps of Ezra's Teformation are well, if some- 
what imaginatively, described by Himter, AJ'ttv the 
Exile, ii., chs. i. ii.— [F.] 


account of this important transaction Ezra's 
autobiography ends aliruptly, and we hear 
nothing more of him till, thirteen years after- 
wni'ds, in the twentieth of Artaxerxes, we find 
iiim again at Jerusalem with Nehemiah "the 
'I'irshatha." It is generally assumed that Ezra 
had continued governor till Nehemiah superseded 
him ; but as Ezra's commission was only of a 
temporary nature, " to inquire concerning Judah 
and Jerusalem " (Ezra vii. 14), and to carrj- 
thither "the silver and gold which the king' 
and his counsellors had freely ottered unto the 
God of Israel " (v. 15), and as there is no trace 
whatever of his presence at Jerusalem between 
the eighth and tlie twentieth of Artaxerxes, it 
seems probable that after he had eff'ected the 
above-named ref'orniatiou, and had appointed 
competent judges and magistrates, with authoritj' 
to maintain it, he himself returned to the king 
of Persia. This is in itself what one would 
expect, and what is borne out by the parallel 
case of Nehemiah, and it also accounts for the 
abruj)t termination of Ezra's narrative, and for 
that relapse of the Jews into their former irre- 
gularities which is apparent in the Book of 
Nehemiah. Such a relapse, and such a state of 
affairs at Jerusalem in general, could scarcely 
have occurred if Ezra had continued there.** 
Whether he returned to Jerusalem with Nehe- 
miah, or separately, does not appear certainly; 
but as he is not mentioned in Nehemiah's narra- 
tive till after the completion of the wall (Neh. 
viii. 1), it is perhaps probable that he followed 
the latter some months later, having, perhaps, 
been sent for to aid him in his work. The 
functions he executed under Nehemiah's govern- 
ment were purely of a priestly and ecclesiastical 
character, such as reading and interpreting the 
Law of Moses to the people during the eight 
days of the Feast of Tabernacles, praying in the 
congregation, assisting at the dedication of the 
wall, and in promoting the religious refor- 
mation so happily eff'ected by the Tirshatha. 
But in this he filled the first place ; being 
repeatedly coupled with Nehemiah the Tirshatha 
(viii. 9; xii. 26), while Eliashib the high-priest 
is not mentioned as taking any part in the 
reformation at all, through (as some think ; cp. 
Hunter, ii. 235) hostility to the course pursued. 
In the sealing to the covenant described in 
Neh. X., Ezra's name does not occur, probably 
because this formal act on the part of the man 
who had drawn up the covenant was not 
considered necessary, though some consider that 
he sealed under the patronymic Seraiah or 
Azariah (v. 2). As Ezra is not mentioned after 
Nehemiah's departure for Babylon in the thirty- 
second year of Artaxerxes, and as everything 
fell into confusion during Nehemiah's absence 
(Neh. xiii.), it is not unlikely that Ezra may 
have died or returned to Babylon before that 
year (see his character, Mai. ii. 5-7). Josei)hus, 
who should be our next best authority after 
Scripture, evidently knew nothing about the 
time or the place of his death. He vaguely 
says, " He died an old man, and was buried in 
a magnificent manner at Jerusalem " (^Ant. 

b On the otlier hand, it is argued that Ezra remained 
all tbistime in Jerusalem, but was forced into inactivity 
by the strong reaction against his Puritan regime. Cp. 
Hunter, ii. 96 sq. — [F.] 

3 X 




si. 5, § 5), and places his death in the high- 
priesthood of Joacim, and before the government 
of Nehemiah ! But that he lived under the 
high-priesthood of Elinshib and the government 
of Neliemiah is expressly stated in Nehemiah ; and 
there was a strong Jewish tradition that he was 
buried in Persia. Thus Benjamin of Tudela 
says of Nehar-Samorah — apparently some place 

on the lower Tigris, on the frontier of Persia, 
Zamuza according to the Talmudists, otherwise 
Zamzumu — "The sepulchre of Ezra the priest 
and scribe is in this jilace, where he died on his 
journey from Jerusalem to king Artaxerxes " 
(i. 116), a tradition which certainly agrees very 
well with the narrative of Nehemiah. This 
sepulchre is shown to this day {ih. ii. 116, note). 

Tomb of Ezra on the tanks of the Euptaiates. 

As regards the traditional history of Ezra, 
it is extremely difficult to judge what portion 
of it has any historical foundation. The 
principal works ascribed to him by the Jews, 
and, on the strength of their testimony, by 
Christians also, are: — 1. The institution of the 
Great Synagogue, of which, the Jews say, Ezra 
was president, and Daniel, Haggai, Zechariah, 
Malachi, Zorobabel, Mordecai, Jeshua, Nehemiah, 
&c., were members; Simeon the Just, the last 
survivor, living on till the time of Alexander 
the Great ! 2. The settling the Canon of Scrip- 
ture, and restoring, correcting, and editing the 
whole sacred volume according to the threefold 
arrangement of the Law, the Prophets, and the 
Hagiographa, with the divisions of the Pesukim, 
or verses, the vowel-points handed down by 
tradition from Moses, and the emendations of 
the Keri. 3. The introduction of the Chaldee 
character instead of the old Hebrew or Samari- 
tan. 4. The compilership of the Books of Chro- 
nicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and, some add, Esther ; 
and, many of the Jews say, also of the Books 
of Ezekiel, Daniel, and the twelve Prophets. 
5. The establishment of synagogues. Of most of 
these works a full account is given in Prideaux's 
Connexion, i. 308-348 and 355-376 ; also in 
Buxtorf's Tiberias. References to the chief 
rabbinical and other authorities will be found in 
Winer ; Fiirst, Dcr Kanon d. A. Ts., p. 112 sq. ; 
and Hamburger, E.E. s. n. A compendious 
account of the arguments by which most of 

these .Tewish statements are proved to be 
fabulous is given in Stehelin's Rabhin. Literat. 
pp. 5-8. The chief are drawn from the silence 
of the sacred writers themselves, of the apo- 
cryphal books, and of Josephus — and, it might 
be added, of Jerome — and from the fact that 
they may be traced to the author of the 
chapter in the Mishna called Pirke Avoth. 
Here, however, it must suffice to observe that 
the pointed description of Ezra (vii. 6) as " a 
ready scribe in the Law of Moses," repeated in 
vv. 11, 12, 21, added to the information 
concerning him that " he had prepared his 
heart to seek the Law of the Lord, and to do it, 
and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments " 
(vii. 10), and his commission " to teach the laws 
of his God to such as knew them not " (v. 25), 
and his great diligence in reading the Scriptures 
to the people, all give the utmost probability to 
the account which attributes to him a corrected 
edition of the Scriptures, and the circulation of 
many such copies. The Books of Nehemiah and 
Malachi must indeed have been added later ; pos- 
sibly by Malachi's authority ; and some tradition 
to this effect may have given rise to the Jewish 
fable of Malachi being the same person as Ezra. 
But we cannot affirm that Ezra inserted in the 
Canon any Books that were not already acknow- 
ledged as inspired, as we have no sufficient 
ground for ascribing to him the prophetic 
character. Even the Books of which he was 
the compiler may not have assumed definitely the 


cli.-iracter of Scuii'TURE till they were sanc- 
tioned by I\I:il;ichi. There does not, however, 
seem to be sudiciont ground for forming a defi- 
nite opinion on the details of the siiliject. In 
like niauner one can only say that the introduc- 
tion of the Chaldee character, and the com- 
mencement of such stated meetings for hearing 
the Scriptures read as led to the regular 
synagogue-service, are things likely to have 
occurred about this time. For the question of 
Ezra's authorship, see Chronicles and Ezra, 
JiOOK OF. [A. C. H.] 

EZ'RA, BOOK OF. I. Title and Structure 
of the Book. — Tiie Book of Ezra speaks for 
itself to any one who reads it with ordinary 
intelligence, and without any prejudice as to 
its nature and composition. It is manifestly 
a continuation of the Books of Chronicles, us 
indeed it is called by Hilary, Bishop of Poitiers, 
Sermones dierum Esdrac (ap. Cosin's Canon of 
Scr. 51). It is naturally a fresh Book, as com- 
mencing the history of the returned captives 
after seventy years of suspension, as it were, of 
the national life. But when we speak of the 
Book as a chroiiidc, we at once declare the nature 
of it, which its contents also abundantly confirm. 
Like the two Books of Chronicles, it consists of 
the contemporary historical journals kept from 
time to time by the Prophets, or other author- 
ised persons, who were eye-witnesses for the 
most part of what they record, and whose 
several narratives were afterwards strung toge- 
ther, and either abridged or added to, as the 
case required, by a later hand. That later 
hand, in the Book of Ezra, was doubtless Ezra's 
own, as appears by the last four chapters, as 
well as by other matter inserted in the previous 
chapters. "While therefore, in a certain sense, 
the whole Book is Ezra's, as put together by 
him, yet, strictly, only the last four chapters 
are his original work. Nor will it be difficult 
to point out with tolerable certainty several of 
the writers of whose writings the first six 
chapters are composed. It has already been 
suggested [Chronicles, p. 577, col. 1] that the 
chief portion of the last chapter of 2 Ch. and 
Ezra i. may probably have been written by Daniel. 
The evidences of this in Ezra i. must now be 
given more fully. No one probably can read 
Daniel as a genuine Book, and not be struck 
with the very singular circumstance that, while 
he tells us in ch. ix. that he was aware that the 
seventy years' Captivity, foretold by Jeremiah, 
was near its close, and was led thereby to pray 
earnestly for the restoration of Jerusalem, and 
while he records the remarkable vision in answer 
to his prayer, yet he takes not t'he slightest notice 
of Cyrus's decree, by which Jeremiah's prophecy 
was fulfilled, and his own heart's desire and 
prayer to God for Israel was accomplished, and 
which must have been the most stirring event 
in his long life, not even excepting the incident 
of the den of lions. He passes over in utter 
silence the first year of Cyrus, to which pointed 
allusion is made in Dan. i. 21, and proceeds in 
ch. X. to the third year of Cyrus. Such silence 
is utterly unaccountable. But Ezra i. supplies 
the missing notice. If placed between Dan. ix. 
and X. it exactly fills up the gap, and records the 
event of the first year of Cyrus, in which Daniel 
was so deeply interested. And not only so, but 



the manner of the record is exactly Daniel's. 
Ezra i. 1 : "And in the first year of Cyrus, king 
of Persia," is the precise formula used in Dan. i. 
1; ii. 1 ; vii. 1 ; viii. 1; ix. 1 ; x. 1 ; xi. 1. 

I he designation (w. 1, 2, 8) "Cyrus, king of 
Persia," is that used in Dan. x. 1 ; the reference 
to the prophecy of Jeremiah in v. 1 is similar Ut 
that in Dan. ix. 2, and the natural sequence to 
It. The giving the text of the decree, vv. 2-4 
(cp. Dan. iv.), the mention of the name of "Mith- 
redath the treasurer," v. 8 (cp. Dan. i. 3, 11), 
the allusion to the sacred vessels placed by 
Nebuchadnezzar in the house of his god, v. 7 
(cp. Dan. i. 2), the giving the Chaldee name of 
Zerubbabel, vv. 8, II (cp. Dan. i. 7), and the 
whole locus standi of the narrator, who evidentlv 
wrote at Babylon, not at Jerusalem, are all 
circumstances which in a marked manner point 
to Daniel as the writer of Ezra i. Nor is there 
the least improbability in the supposition that 
if Ezra edited Daniel's papers he might think 
the chapter in question more convenientlv 
placed in its chronological position in the 
Chronicles than in the collection of Daniel's 
prophecies. It is scarcely necessary to add 
that several chapters of the Prophets Isaiah 
and Jeremiah are actually found in the 
Book of Kings, as e.g. Is. xxxvi.-xxxix. in 
2 K. xviii.-xx. In the opinion then of the 
writer of this article, Ezra i. was by the hand 
of Daniel. 

As regards Ezra ii., and as far as iii. 1, where 
the change of name from Sheshbazzar to Zerub- 
babel in V. 2, the mention of Nehemiah the 
Tirshatha in vv. 2 and 63, and that of Mordecai 
in V. 2, at once indicate a different and much 
later hand, we need not seek long to discover 
where it came from, because it is found in ex- 
tenso, verbatim et literatim (with the exception 
of clerical errors), in ch. vii. of Nehemiah, to 
which it belongs beyond a shadow of doubt 
[Nehemiah, Book of]. This portion then was 
written by Nehemiah, and was placed by Ezra, 
or possibly by a still later hand, in this position, 
as bearing upon the return from Captivity related 
in ch. i., though chronologically out of place. 
Whether the extract originally extended so far 
as iii. 1 may be doubted." The next portion 
extends from iii. 2 to the end of ch. vi. With 
the exception of one large explanatory addition 
by Ezra, extending from iv. 6 to 23 (see b«low), 
this portion is the work of a writer contem- 
porary with Zerubbabel and Jeshua and an eye- 
witness of the rebuilding of the Temple in 
the beginning of the reign of Darius Hystaspis. 
The minute details given of all the circum- 
stances, such as the weeping of the old men who 
had seen the first Temple, the names of the 
Levites who took part in the work, of the 
heathen governors who hindered it, the expres- 
sion (vi. 15) " This house was finished," &c., the 
number of the sacrifices offered at the dedica- 
tion, and the whole tone of the narrative 
bespeak an actor in the scenes described. Who 
then was so likely to record these interesting 
events as one of those Prophets who took an 
active part in promoting them, and a portion of 
whose duty it would be to continue the national 
chronicles^ That it was the Prophet Haggai 

» Oettli (5 4) 

historical source. 

that chs. i.-iii. belong to one 



becomes tolerably sure when we observe further 
the following coincidences in style. 

1. The title "the Prophet" is throughout 
this portion of Ezra attached in a peculiar way 
to the name of Haggai. Thus in v. 1 we 
read, "Then the Prophets, Haggai the Prophet, 
and Zechariah the son of Iddo, prophesied," &c. ; 
and in vi. 14, " They prosj)ered through the pro- 
phesying of Haggai the Prophet, and Zechariah 
the son of Iddo." And in Ijke manner in Hag. i. 
1, 3, 12. ii. 1, 10, he is called " Haggai the 

2. The designation of Zerubbabel and Jeshua 
is identical in the two writers : " Zerubbabel 
the son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua the son of 
Jozadak" (cp. Ezra iii. 2, 8, v. 2, with Hag. 
i. 1, 12, 14, ii. 2, 4, 23). It will be seen that 
Doth writers usually name them together, and 
in the same order : Zechariah, on the contrary, 
does not once name them together, and calls 
them simply Zerubbabel and Jeshua. Only in 
vi. 11 he adds "the son of Josedech," where the 
difference in transliteration is merely an in- 
accuracy in the A. V. corrected in the R. V. 
" Jehozadak." 

3. The description in Ezra v. 1, 2 of the 
effect of the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah 
upon Zerubbabel, Jeshua, and the people, is 
identical with that in Hag. i., only abbreviated. 
And Hag. ii. 3 alludes to the interesting circum- 
stance recorded in Ezra iii. 12. 

4. Both writers mark the date of the trans- 
actions they record by the year of " Darius the 
king " (Ezra iv. 24, vi. 15, compared with Hag. 
i. 1, 15, ii. 10, &c.). 

6. Ezra iii. 8 contains exactly the same enu- 
meration of those that worked, viz. " Zerub- 
babel, Jeshua, and the remnant of their 
brethren," as Hag. i. 12, 14, where we have 
"Zerubbabel, and Jeshua, with all the remnant 
of the people " (cp. too Ezra vi. 16 and Hag. 
ii. 2). 

6. Both writers use the expression " the work 
of the house of the Lord " (Ezra iii. 8, 9 
compared with Hag. i. 14) ; and both use the 
phrase " the foundation of the Temple was laid " 
(Ezra iii. 6, 10, 11, 12, compared with Hag. ii. 

7. Both writers use indifferently the expres- 
sions the " house of the Lord " and the " Temple 
of the Lord," but the former much more fre- 
quently than the latter. Thus the writer in 
Ezra uses the expression " the house " (.71^3) 
twenty-five times, to six in which he speaks of 

" the Temple " (?D^^). Haggai speaks of " the 
house " seven times, of " the Temple " twice. 

8. Both writers make marked and frequent 
references to the Law of Moses. Thus cp. 
Ezra iii. 2, 3-6, 8, vi. 14, 16-22, with Hag. i. 8, 
10, ii. 5, 11-13, 17, &c. 

Such strongly-marked resemblances in the 
compass of two such brief portions of Scripture 
seem to prove, in the opinion of the writer of 
this article, that they are from the pen of the 
same writer. 

But the above observations do not apply to 
Ezra iv. 6-23, which is a parenthetic addition 
by a much later hand, and, as the passage most 
clearly shows, made in the reign of Artaxerxes 
Longimanus (B.C. 465-425). The compiler who 
inserted ch. ii., a document drawn up in the reign 


of Artaxerxes, to illustrate the return of the cap- 
tives under Zerubbabel, here inserts a notice of 
two historical facts, — of which one occurred in 
the reign of Xerxes, and the other in the reign 
of Artaxerxes, — to illustrate the opposition 
offered by the heathen to the rebuilding of the 
Temple in the reigns of Cyrus and Cambyses. 
He tells us that in the beginning of the reign of 
Xerxes, i.e. befoi'e Esther was in favour, they 
had written to the king to prejudice him 
against the Jews— a circumstance, by the way, 
which may rather have inclined him to listen to 
Haman's proposition ; and he gives the text of 
letters sent to Artaxerxes, and of Artaxerxes' 
answer, on the strength of which Rehum and 
Shimshai forcibly hindered the Jews from re- 
building the city. These letters doubtless came 
into Ezra's hands at Babylon, and may have led 
to those endeavours on his part to make the 
king favourable to Jerusalem which issued in 
his own commission in the seventh year of his 
reign. At v. 24 Haggai's narrative proceeds 
in connexion with v. 5. The mention of 
Artaxerxes in vi. 14 is of the same kind. 
The last four chapters, beginning with chapter 
vii., are Ezra's own, and continue the history 
after a gap of fifty-eight years — from the 
sixth of Darius to the seventh of Artaxerxes. 
The only history of Judaea during this interval 
is what is given in the above-named parenthesis, 
from which we may infer that during this time 
there was no one in Palestine to write the 
Chronicles. The history of the Jews in Persia 
for the same period is given in the Book of 

[In the canon of the Jewish Church the Books 
of Ezra and Nehemiah are reckoned as one 
{Baha Bathra, f. 15 a), and Ezra was regarded 
as the " writer." Josephus, Origen ('E. wpwros 
Kot bfvirepos iv fvl 'E^joa in Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 
vi. 25), Melito of Sardis, Epiphanius, Jerome, 
and the LXX. (K. and A.) also counted the two 
as one ; led to their conclusion as much by the 
literary character of the Books as by a supposed 
desire to bring the number of the Canonical 
Books into keeping with the number of the 
letters in the Hebrew and Greek alphabets. The 
abrupt ending, or rather non-ending, of Ezra, 
lent itself to this conclusion ; while some of 
the most interesting episodes in the history of 
Ezra are to be found not in the Book which 
bears his name but in Nehemiah (vii. 73 b-x). 
It seems impossible now to determine when the 
separation between the two Books (Heb. text, 
LXX. B., and Vulg.) took place ; but at least 
the point fixed upon — the appearance of Nehe- 
miah upon the scene — commends itself as the 
most natural which could be selected. 

The question of authorship, or perhaps 
compilership, is by no means settled. In the 
case of the Book Ezra (for the Book of Nehemiah, 
see s. M.), separate compilershi)) being pre- 
supposed, the style of the portions admitted to 
be his {e.'j. vii. 27, ix. 15) is declared to be in 
agreement with that found elsewhere in the 
Book ; and such peculiarities as transition from 
the first to the third person, or sections 
alternately Hebrew and Aramaic, are not con- 
sidered incompatible with the view that Ezra 
was himself the compiler. On this supposition 
Ezra's Book was written " in B.C. 457 or very 
shortly afterwards " (Sayce, pp. 28-33). On the 




other heind, the peculiarities above mentioned 
are with some critics matters of special moment ; 
and dual compilership with a final redMction not 
being considered satisfactory, a date is taken 
from Neh. xii. 23 (" Darius the Persian " being 
taken to be Darius Codomannus, n.C. 336-3:50), 
and the Book is — as regards its jiresent form — 
placed at the end of the 4th cent, or in the begin- 
ning of the 3rd cent. B.C. (Oettli, § 5.) — F.] 

II. Text. — The te.xt of the Book of Ezra is 
not in a good condition. There are a good many 
palpable corruptions both in the names and 
numerals, and perhaps in some other points. 
It is written partly in Hebrew, and partly in 
Chaldee. The Chaldee begins at iv. 8, and 
continues to the end of vi. 18. The letter or 
decree of Artaxerxes (vii. 12-26) is also given 
in the original Chaldee. There has never been 
any doubt about Ezra being canoHical, although 
there is no quotation from it in the N. T. 
Augustine says of Ezra, "magis rerum gesta- 
rum scriptor est habitus quam propheta " {do 
Civ. Dei, xviii. 36). The period covered by 
the Book is eighty years, from the first of Cyrus 
(B.C. 536) to the beginning of the eighth of 
Artaxerxes (B.C. 456). It embraces the govern- 
ments of Zerubbabel and Ezra, the high-priest- 
hoods of Jeshua, Joiakim, and the early part of 
Eliashib ; and the reigns of Cyrus, Cambyses, 
Smerdis, Darius Hystaspis, Xerxes, and part of 
Artaxerxes. Of these Cambyses and Smerdis 
are not named. Xerxes is barely named iv 6. 
[EsDRAS, First Book of.] [A. C. H.] 

III. Literature. — The best edition of the 
Heb.-Aram. text is Baer's Lihri Danielis, Ezrae, 
ct Nehemiae, 1882, with glossary, &c. by Fried. 
Delitzsch. Good commentaries are supplied by 
Bertheau-Ryssel - (in the Kgf. Hdb. z. A. T.); 
Keil (in Keil u. Delitzsch's Bibl. Komm.); Schultz 
(in Lange's . Theol.-hom. Bibehv.) ; Neteler, Die 
BB. Hsdras, Neh., u. Esther; Rawlinson (in 
Speaker's Commentary) ; Sayce (^Introd. to the 
]'>ooks of Ezra, Neh. and Esther) ; Ryle (in Cam- 
bridge Bible for Schools); Driver (LOT. p. 507 
sq.) ; and Oettli (in Strack und Zockler's Kgf. 
Komm. z. d. heil. Schriften d. A. T.), who also 
supplies references to numerous German mono- 
graphs on special points. [F.] 

EZ'RAHITE, THE OnnT^ri; B. b Zap^irris, 
A. 6 'ECpaiJ^'TTjJ [in K.], BX. 'lo-poTjAeiTTjs [in 
Pss.] ; Ezrahita), a title attached to two persons 
— Ethan (1 K. iv. 31 ; Ps. Ixxxix. title) and Heman 
(Ps. Ixxxviii. title). The word is naturally 
derivable from Ezrah, or — which is almost the 
same in Hebrew — Zerach, n"lT ; and accordingly 
in 1 Ch. ii. 6, Ethan and Heman are both given 
as sons of Zerah the son of Judah. Another 
Ethan and another Heman are named as Levites 
and musicians in the lists of 1 Ch. vi. and 
fclsewhere. [G.] 

EZ'RI C'lTy = my help; 'EaSpi, A. 'ECpa'i; 
Ezri), son of Chelub, superintendent for king 
David of those who worked " for tillage of the 
ground " (1 Ch. xxvii. 26). [G.] 


FABLE (fivdos ; fabula). Taking the words 

" fable " and " parable," not in their strict ety- 
mological meaning, but in that which has been 
stamped upon them by current usage — looking, 
i.e. at the Aesopic fable as the type of the 
one, at the Parables of the N. T. as the type of 
the other, — we have to ask, (1) In what relation 
they stand to each other, as instruments of 
moral teaching ? (2) What use is made in the 
Bible of this or of that form ? That they have 
much in common is, of course, obvious enough. 
In both we find " statements of facts, which 
do not even pretend to be historical, used as 
vehicles for the exhibition of a general truth " 
(Neander, Leben Jcsu, p. 68). Both differ from 
the Mythus, in the modern sense of that word, 
in being the result of a deliberate choice of 
such a mode of teaching, not the spontaneous, 
unconscious evolution of thought in some 
symbolic form." They take their place so far as 
species of the same genus. What are the 
characteristic marks by which the fable and 
the Parable differ from each other, it is perhaps 
easier to feel than to define. Thus we have 
(cp. Trench, Notes on the Parables, p. 2) 
(1) Lessiug's statement that the fable takes 
the form of an actual narrative, while the 
Parable assumes only that what is related 
might have happened ; (2) Herder's, that the 
difference lies in the fable's dealing with brute 
or inanimate nature, in the Parable's drawing 
its materials exclusively from human life ; 
(3) Olshausen's (on Matt. xiii. 1), followed by 
Trench (/. c), that it is to be found in the 
higher truths of which the Parable is the 
vehicle. Perhaps the most satisfactory sum- 
ming up of the chief distinctive features of 
each is to be found in the following extrtict 
from Neander (/. c.) : — " The Parable is distin- 
guished from the fable by this, that, in the 
latter, qualities or acts of a higher class of 
beings may be attributed to a lower (e.g. those 
of men to brutes) ; while, in the former, the 
lower sphere is kept perfectly distinct from that 
which it seems to illustrate. The beings and 
powers thus introduced always follow the law 
of their nature, but their acts, according to 
this law, are used to figure those of a higher 

race The mere introduction of brutes 

as personal agents, in the fable, is not sufficient 
to distinguish it i^rom the Parable which may 
make use of the same contrivance ; as, for ex- 
ample, Christ employs the sheep in one of His 
parables. The great distinction here, also, lies 
in what has already been remarked ; brutes 
introduced in the Parable act according to the 
law of their nature, and the two spheres of 
nature and of the kingdom of God are care- 
fully separated from each other. Hence the 
reciprocal relations of brutes to each other are 
not made use of, as these could furnish no 
appropriate image of the relation between man 
and the kingdom of God." 

» On the myth see Bishop Westcott, Essays on the 
History of the Religious Thought in the West, p. 3. 



Of the fable, as thus distinguished from the 
Parable, we have but two examples in the Bible : 
(1) that of the trees choosing their king, ad- 
dressed by Jotham to the men of Shechem 
(Judo;, ix. 8-15) — unnecessarily placed by some 
(op. Bleek-Wellhausen,'' p. 194) in the times of 
the Kings; (2) that of the cedar of Lebanon 
and the thistle, as the answer of Jehoash to the 
challenge of Amaziah (2 K. xiv. 9). The narra- 
tive of Ezek. xvii. 1-10, though, in common 
with the fable, it brings before us the lower 
forms of creation as representatives of human 
characters and destinies, differs from it, in the 
jioints above noticed, (1) in not introducing 
them as having human attributes, (2) in the 
higher prophetic character of the truths con- 
veyed by it. The great eagle, the cedar of 
Lebanon, the spreading vine, are not grouped 
together as the agents in a fable, but are simply, 
like the bear, the leopard, and the lion in the 
visions of Daniel, symbols of the great mon- 
archies of the world. 

In the two instances referred to, the fable has 
more the character of the Greek alvos (Quintil. 
Inst. Orat. v. 11) than of the fxtidos : that is, 
it is less the fruit of a vivid imagination, sport- 
ing with the analogies between the worlds of 
nature and of men, than a covert reproof, 
making the sarcasm which it affects to hide all 
the sharper (Miiller and Donaldson, Hist, of 
Greek Literature, vol. i. ch. xi.). The appearance 
of the fable thus early in the history of Israel, 
and its entire absence from the direct teaching 
both of the 0. and N. T., are, each of them 
in its way, significant. Taking the received 
chronology, the fable of Jotham was spoken 
about 1209 B.C. The Arabian traditions of 
Lokman do not assign to him an earlier date 
than that of David. The earliest Greek alvos 
is that of Hesiod {Op. et D. v. 202), and the 
prose form of the fable does not meet us till we 
come (about 550 B.C.) to Stesichorus and Aesop. 
The first example in the history of Rome is the 
apologue of Menenius Agrippa B.C. 494, and its 
genuineness has been questioned on the ground 
that the fable could hardly at that time have 
found its way to Latium (Miiller and Donald- 
son, I. c). It may be noticed, too, that when 
collections of fables became familiar to the 
Greeks, they were looked on as imported, not 
indigenous. The traditions that surround the 
name of Aesop, the absence of any evidence that 
he wrote fables, the traces of Eastern origin in 
those ascribed to him, leave him little more 
than the representative of a period when the 
forms of teaching, which had long been familiar 
to the more Eastern nations, were travelling 
westward, and were adopted eagerly by the 
Greeks. The collections themselves are de- 
scribed by titles that indicate a foreign origin. 
They are Libyan (Arist. Rhet. ii. 20), Cyprian, 
Cilician. AH these facts lead to the conclusion 
that the Hebrew mind, gifted, as it was, in a 
special measure, with the power of perceiving 
analogies in things apparently dissimilar, at- 
tained, at a very early stage of its growth, the 
power which does not ai)pear in the history of 
other nations till a later period. Whatever 
antiquity may be ascribed to the fables in the 
comparatively later collection of the Pancha 
Tantra, the land of Canaan is, so far as we have 
any data to conclude from, the fatherland of 


fable. To conceive brutes or inanimate objects 
as representing human characteristics ; to per- 
sonify them as acting, speaking, reasoning ; to 
draw lessons from them applicable to human 
life. — this must have been common among the 
Isr,-.elites in the time of the Judges. The part 
assigned in the earliest records of the Bible to 
the impressions made by the brute creation on 
the mind of man when '• the Lord God formed 
every beast of the field and every fowl of the 
air, and brought them unto Adam to see what 
he would call them " (Gen. ii. 19), and the 
apparent symbolism of the serpent in the narra- 
tive of the Fall (Gen. iii. 1), are at once indica- 
tions of teaching adapted to men in the posses- 
sion of this power, and must have helped to 
develop it (Herder, Geist der Ebrdischen Foesie ; 
Werke, xxxiv. p. 16, ed. 182G). The large 
number of proverbs in which analogies of this 
kind are made the bases of a moral precept, 
and some of which (e.g. Prov. xxvi. 11, xxx. 15, 
25-28) are of the nature of condensed fables, 
show that there was no decline of this power as 
the intellect of the people advanced. The ab- 
sence of fables accordingly from the teaching of 
the 0. T. must bo ascribed to their want of 
fitness to be the riedia of the truths which that 
teaching was to convey. The points in which 
brutes or inanimate objects present analogies to 
man are chiefly those which belong to his lower 
nature, his pride, indolence, cunning, and the 
like ; and the lessons derived from them ac- 
cordingly do not rise higher than the pruden- 
tial morality which aims at repressing such 
defects (cp. Trench, Notes on the Parables, 1. c). 
Hence the fable, apart from the associations 
of a grotesque and ludicrous nature which 
gather round it, apart too from its present- 
ing narratives which are " nee 'v erae nee 
verisimiles" (Cic. cle Invent, i. 19), is in- 
adequate as the exponent of the higher truths 
which belong to man's spiritual life. It may 
serve to exhibit the relations between man and 
man ; it fails to represent those between man 
and God. To do that is the office of the 
Parable, finding its outward framework in the 
dealings of men with each other, or in the 
world of nature as it is, not in any grotesque 
parody of nature, and exhibiting, in either case, 
real and not fanciful analogies. The fable seizes 
on that which man has in common with the 
creatures below him ; the Parable rests on the 
truths that man is made in the image of God, 
and that " all things are double one against 

It is noticeable, as confirming this view of 
the office of the fable, that though those of 
Aesop (so called) were known to the great 
preacher of righteousness at Athens, though a 
metrical paraphi-ase of some of them was 
among the employments of his imprisonment 
(Plato, Phaedon, pp. 60, 61), they were not 
employed by him as illustrations, or channels of 
instruction. While Socrates shows an apprecia- 
tion of the power of such fables to represent 
some of the phenomena of human life, he was 
not, he says, in this sense of the word, fj.vdo\o- 
jikSs. The myths which appear in the Gorgias, 
the Phaedrrcs, the Phaedon, the Republic, are as 
unlike as possible to the Aesopic fables, are (to 
take his own account of them) oh fj.vdoi 6.\\a 
\6yoi, — true, though figurative, representations 


of spiritual realities; while the illustrations 
from the coniinon facts of life which were so 
consjiicuous in his ordinary tcachin:,', though 
(iiH'ering in being conii>ari.sons mther tlian narra- 
tives, come nearer to the paraliles of the Bible 
(cp. tlie contrast between ra ScoKparj/ca, as 
examples of the irapafioXr] and the \6yoi 
Aiauwiioi, Arist. lihct. ii. 20). It may be said 
indeed that the use of the fable as an instru- 
ment of teaching (apart from the embellish- 
ments of wit and Amcy with whicii it is asso- 
ciated by such writers as Lessing and La Fon- 
taine) belongs rather to childhood, and the 
child-like period of national life, than to a 
more advanced development. In the earlier 
stages of jjolitical change, as in the cases of 
Jotham, Stesichorus (Arist. llJict. 1. c), Mene- 
nius Agrippa, it is used as an element of per- 
suasion or rei)roof. It ceases to appear in the 
higher eloquence of orators and statesmen. The 
special excellence of fables is that they are 
SrjiJLTiyoptKoi (Arist. Ehct. 1. c.) ; that " ducere 
animos solent, )iraecipue rusticorum et imperi- 
torum " (Quint. Inst. Orat. 1. c). 

The fMvdoi of false teachers claiming to belong 



to the Christian Church, alluded to by writers 
of the N. T. in connexion with yfi'fa\oyic.t 
kirtpaPToi (1 Tim. i. 4), or with epithets '\ov- 
SaiKol (Tit. i. 14), ypawSe'ii (1 Tim. iv. 7), 
a€fro<piaix(voi (2 I'et. i. Kj), do not appear to have 
had the character of fables, projterly so called. 
As applied to them, the word takes its general 
meaning of anything false or unreal, and here 
we need not the nature of the falsehoods 
so referred to (see liiehm, 7/117?. s. n. " Fabel ; " 
Cremer, Lihl.-Thcol. WortiTh.* s. v. /iD0os). 
On the large use and specimens of fable in the 
Talmudical writings, see Hamburger, HE. 
Abth. ii. s. V. " Fabel." [E. H. P.] [F.] 

FAIR HAVENS (KoAol Ai/xeves), a harbour 
in the island of Crete (Acts xxvii. 8), not 
mentioned in any other ancient writing. There 
seems no probability that it is, as liiscoe sug- 
gested (on the Acts, p. 347, ed. 1829), the KaA.7/ 
'A/cTT) of Stejih. Byz. — for that is said to be a 
city, whereas Fair Havens is described as "a place 
near to which was a city called Lasaea " (tSttos 
ris Si iyyvs ijy itJAij A.). Moreover Mr. Pashley 
found (Travels in Crete, ii. 57) a district 

called Acte ; and it is most likely that KaXyj 
'Akt'Jj was situated there ; but that district is 
in the W. of the island, whereas Fair Havens 
was on the S. Its position is now quite certain. 
Though not mentioned by classical writers, it is 
still known by its old Greek name, as it was in 
the time of Pococke, and other early travellers 
mentioned by Mr. Smith (Voyage and Ship^o. 
of St. Paul,^ pp. 80-82). Lasaea, too, has 
recently been most explicitly discovered. In 
fact Fair Havens appears to have been practi- 
cally its harbour. These places are situated 4 
or 5 miles to the E. of Cape Matala, which is 
the most conspicuous headland on the S. coast 
of Crete, and immediately to the VV. of which 
the coast trends suddenly to the N. This last 

circumstance explains why the ship which con- 
veyed St. Paul was brought to anchor in Fair 
Havens. In consequence of violent and con- 
tinuing N. W. winds she had been unable to 
hold on her course towards Italy from Cnidus 
(v. 7), and had run down, by Salmone, under the 
lee of Crete. It was possible to reach F\air 
Havens: but beyond Cape Matala the difficulty 
would have recurred, so long as the wind re- 
mained in the same quarter. A considerable 
delay took place (v. 9), during which it is possible 
that St. Paul may have had opportunities of 
preaching the Gospel at Lasaea, or even at 
GORTYNA, where .Jews resided (1 Mace. xv. 23), 
and which was not far distant : but all this is 
conjectural. A consultation took place, at which 



it was decided, against the Apostle's advice, to 
make an attempt to reach a good harbour named 
Phenice, their present anchorage being avevde- 
ros TTphs Trapax^';""''''"'' ("■ ^2). All such terms 
are comiiarative : and there is no doubt that, as 
a safe winter harbour, Fair Havens is infinitely 
inferior to Phenice ; though perhaps even as a 
matter of seamanship St. Paul's advice was not 
bad. However this may be, the south wind, 
which sprang up afterwards (y. 13), proved 
delusive ; and the vessel was caught by a 
hurricane [Euroclydon] on her way towards 
Phenice, and ultimately wrecked. Besides a 
view (p. 81), Mr. Smith gives a chart of Fair 
Havens with the soundings (p. 257), from which 
any one can form a judgment for himself of the 
merits of the harbour. [J. S. H.] [W.] 

FAIRS (D''yi3-fy; ayopd; nimdinae, forum), 
a word which occurs only in Ezek. xxvii. and there 
no less than seven times (uy. 12, 14, 16, 19, 22, 
27, 33): in the last of these verses it is ren- 
dered by the A. V. " wares ; " and this, being the 
true meaning of the woi-d, is used by the K. V. 
throughout. It will be observed that the word 
stands in some sort of relation to 3"iyO through- 
out the whole of the chapter, the latter word 
also occurring seven times, and translated by 
A. v. sometimes "market" (vv. 13, 17, 19), and 
elsewhere "merchandise" (vv. 9, 27, 33, 34, the 
rendering of R. V.). The words are used 
alternately, and represent the alternations of 
commercial business in which the merchants of 
Tyre were engaged. That the first of these 
words cannot signify " fairs " is evident from 
V. 12 ; for the inhabitants of Tarshish did not 
visit Tyre, but vice versa. Let the reader 
substitute the R. V. " traded for thy wares " for 
the A. V. " traded in thy fairs," and the sense 
is much improved. The relation which this 
term bears to maarab, which properly means 
" barter," appears to be pretty much the same as 
Bxists between exports and imports. The re- 
quirements of the Tyrians themselves, such as 
slaves (u. 13), wheat {v. 17), steel (y. 19), were a 
matter of maarah ; but where the business con- 
sisted in the exchange of Tyrian wares for 
foreign productions, it is specified in this form, 
" Tarshish paid for thy wares with silver, iron, 
tin, and lead." The use of the terms would 
probably have been more intelligible if the 
Prophet had mentioned what the Tyrians gave 
in exchange : as it is, he only notices the one 
side of the bargain, viz. what the Tyrians 
received, whether they were buyers or sellers. 
[W. L. B.] [F.] 

FALLOW-DEER (n-IDHS'' yachnur ; Arab. 

,^0^^^''i A. fiov^aXos; bubalus ; R. V. roe- 
buck). The Heb. word, which is mentioned 
only in Deut. xiv. 5, as the name of one of the 
animals allowed by the Levitical law for food, 
and in 1 K. iv. 23 as forming part of the provi- 
sions for Solomon's table, appears to point to the 
Antilope bubalis, Pallas, the Alcelaphus bubalis 
of recent naturalists ; the j8ou;8aAos of the Greeks 
(see Herod, iv. 192 ; Aristotle, Hist. Anim. iii. 6, 

« From the root IJ^n. " to be red " (see MV.n). 


ed. Schneider, and De Part. Anim. iii. 2, 11, ed. 
Bekker ; Oppian, Cyn. ii. 300) is ])roperly, we be- 
lieve, identified with the before-named antelope. 
Fi'om the diflerent descriptions of the yachnur, 
as given by Arabian writers, and cited by 
Bochart (Rieroz. ii. 284 sq.), it would seem 
that this is the animal denoted ; though Damir's 
remarks in some respects are fabulous, and he 
represents the yachmur as having deciduous 
horns, which will not apply to any antelope. 
Still Cazuinus, according to Rosenmiiller, iden- 
tifies the yachmur ^ with the bekker-el-wash 
(" wild cow "), which is the modern name in 
N. Africa for the Antilope bubalis. Kitto (Pict. 
Bibl. Deut. I. c.) says, " The yachmur of the 
Hebrews is without doubt erroneously identified 
with the ftillow-deer, which does not exist in 
Asia," and refers the name to the Oryx leucoryx, 
citing Niebuhr as authority for stating that this 
animal is known among the Eastern Arabs by 
the name of yazmur. The fallow-deer (Cervus 
dama) is undoubtedly a native of Asia ; indeed 
Persia seems to be its proper country. Hassel- 
quist (Trav. p. 211) noticed this deer in Mount 
Tabor. But it was unknown in Egypt, and can 
never, from its habits as a dweller in woods, have 
existed in Arabia. It was, therefore, unlikely 
to be mentioned by Mosos. The authority of the 
LXX., however, in a question of this kind, has 
some weight : accordingly we have little doubt 
but that the yachmur of the Heb. Scriptures 
denotes the bekker-el-wash, or " wild ox," of 
Barbary and N. Africa (see Shaw's Travels, 
p. 242, and Suppl. p. 75, folio; Buffon, Hist. 
Natur. xii. p. 294). The Greek fiovfiaKos evi- 
dently points to some animal having the general 
appearance of an ox. Pliny (iV. H. viii. 15) 
tells us that the common people in their igno- 

Aletlaphiis bubatis. 

ranee sometimes gave the name of bubalus to the 
Bison (Aurochs) and the Urtis. He adds, the 
animal properly so called is produced in Africa, 

•> Tachmiir, Ruber ; " animal ad genus pertinens cui 
est apud Arabes nomen ±s».J^ jaj" (Freytag, 
lex. Ar.") 




and bears a resemblance to the calf and the 
stag. That this anteloi)e partakes in external 
form of the characters belonging both to the 
Cerrine and Uovine ruminants will be evident 
to any one who glances at the woodcut. 

The bckkcr-cl-ivasli api)ears to be depicted in 
the Egvi>tian monuments, where it is repre- 
sented as being hunted for the sake of its flesh, 
which Shaw tells us (Suppl. p. 7;')) is very sweet 
an<l nourishing, much jtreferablo to that of tlie 
red deer (see Wilkinson's Anc. Eijijpt. i. pp. 214- 
47 [smaller ed. 1878]). This animal, which 
is about the size of a stag, was common in 
N. Africa up to the last century, in the early 
part of which Dr. Shaw speaks of it as common 
on the Atlas mountains, where it is now all but 
extinct. It lives in small herds. The range of 
the Bubale is from Morocco to Arabia ; and 
though 1 never myself obtained it in Palestine, 
yet 1 have found the Ai"abs east of Jordan per- 
fectly familiar with it, and have seen its horns 
in their possession. They stated that they often 
shot it at its watering-places. 

But we believe that the yachmur equally in- 
cludes the roebuck, and that the Revisers were 
fully justified in so rendering the word. The 
roebuck (Cervus capreolus, L.) identical with 
the British species was found, though now very 
rare in Palestine, by myself in the Galilaean 
woods, and by Major Oonder on Mount Carmel 
{Proc. Zool. Soc, London, 1876, pp. 420, 701). 
An animal so capable of maintaining itself in 
the neighbourhood of man, and still existing, 
cannot formerly have been rare. The Arabs are 

perfectly familiar with it, and call it .»^* "j 

identical with the Hebrew name. In general 
appearance, with its short horns and somewhat 
heavy gait, it would bear to incurious ob- 
servers the semblance of a diminutive bubale; 
and as the larger animal became scarcer and 
almost forgotten, the name would be applied to 
the more familiar and smaller one. In a similar 
way, since the bustard and the stork became 
extinct in England, their names are applied by 
the country-folk to the smaller Norfolk plover 
and the heron. [H. B. T.] 

FAMINE. When the "sweet influences 
(R. V. " cluster ") of the Pleiades " are bound, 
and " the bands of Orion " cannot be loosed * 
(Job xxxviii. 31), then it is that famines 
generally prevail in the lands of the Bible. In 
Egypt a deficiency in the rise of the Nile, with 
drying winds, produces the same results. The 
famines recorded in the Bible are traceable to 
both these phenomena ; and we generally find 
that Egypt was resorted to when scarcity 
afflicted Palestine. This is notably the case in 
the first three famines, those of Abraham, of 
Isaac, and of Jacob, although in the last case 
Egypt was involved in the calamity, and only 
saved from its horrors by the provident policy 
of Joseph. In this instance, too, the famine 
was widespread, and Palestine further suffered 
from the restriction which must have been 

» That is to say, when the best and most fertilising of 
the rains, which fall when the Pleiades set at dawn 
(not exactly hcliacally) at the end of autumn, fail. 
[For other interpretations, see Delitzsch, Davidson, 
Bradley, and .S^jeafce?-'* Comm. in loco.] 

placed on the supplies usually derived, in sucn 
circumstances, from Egypt. 

In the whole of Syria and Arabia, the fruits 
of the earth must ever be dependent on rain : 
the watersheds have few large springs, and 
the small rivers are not sufficient for the 
irrigation of even the level lands. If therefore 
the heavy rains of November and December 
fail, the sustenance of the people is cut off in 
the parching drought of harvest time, when 
the country is almost devoid of moisture. 
Further, the pastoral tribes rely on the scanty 
herbage of tlie desert-plains and vallevs for 
their flocks and herds; for the desert is inter- 
spersed in spring-time with spontaneous vege- 
tation, which is the product of the preceding 
rainfall, and fails almost totally without it. 
It is therefore not difficult to conceive the 
frequent occurrence and severity of famines 
in ancient times, when the scattered population 
of a country — pastoral rather than agricultural 
—was dependent on natural phenomena which, 
however regular in their season, occasionally 
failed, and with them the sustenance of man 
and beast. 

Egypt, again, owes all its fertility — a fertility 
that gained for Zoan [San] the striking 
comparison to the " garden of the Lord " — to 
its mighty river, whose annual flood is sufficient 
to inundate nearly the whole land and renders 
the cultivation of cereals an easy certainty. 
But this very bounty of nature has not un- 
frequently exposed the country to the opposite 
extreme of drought. With scarcely any rain, 
and that chiefly on the Mediterranean coast 
(though of late years showers have become 
more common at Cairo, and have even reached 
Thebes;, and with wells only supplied by 
filtration from the river through a nitrous 
soil, a failure in the rise of the Nile almost 
certainly entails a degree of scarcity ; but if 
it is followed by cool weather, and occurs only 
for a single year, the labour of the people 
may in a great measure avert the calamity. 
Dearth and famine in Egypt are caused by 
defective inundation, preceded, accompanied, 
and followed, by prevalent easterly and southerly 
winds. Both these winds dry up the earth, 
and the latter, keeping back the rain-clouds 
fi"om the north, are perhaps the chief cause of 
the defective inundation, to which they also 
contribute by accelerating the current of the 
river, which northerly winds would retard. 
Famines in Egypt and Palestine seem to be 
affected by drought extending from Northern 
Syria, through the meridian of Egypt, as far 
as the highlands of Abyssinia. 

The first famine recorded in the Bible is 
that of Abraham, after he had pitched his tent 
on the east of Bethel : " And there was a 
famine in the land : and Abram went down 
into Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine 
was grievous in the land" (Gen. xii. 10). We 
mav conclude that this famine was extensive, 
although this is not quite proved by the fact 
of Abraham's going to Egypt ; for on the 
occasion of the second famine, in the days of 
Isaac, this patriarch is recorded to have found 
refuge with Abimelech king of the Philistines 
in Gerar, and to have been warned by God 
not to go down into Egypt, whither therefore 
we may suppose he was journeying (Gen. xxvi. 




1 sq.). We hear no more of times of scarcity 
until the great famine of Egypt which " was 
over all the face of the earth ; " " and all 
countries came into Egypt to Joseph to buy 
corn, because that the famine was sore ia 
all lands" (Gen. xli. 56, 57). "And the 
sons of Israel came to buy corn among those 
that came: for the famine was in the land 
of Canaan" (xlii. 5). Thus, in the third 
generation, Jacob is afflicted like his ancestors, 
and sends from Hebron to Egypt when he hears 
that there is corn there ; and it is added in 
a later passage, on the occasion of his sending 
the second time for corn to Egypt, " and the 
famine was sore in the land," i.e. Hebron (Gen. 
xliii. 1). 

The famine of Joseph need be discussed here 
onlv with reference to its physical character- 
istics. We have mentioned the chief causes of 
famines in Egypt : this instance differs in the 
remarkable occurrence of seven consecutive 
years of plenty, whereby Joseph was enabled to 
provide against the coming dearth, and to 
supply not only the population of Egypt with 
corn, but those of tlie surrounding countries : 
" And the seven years of plenty, that was in 
the land of Egypt, came to an end. And the 
seven years of famine began to come, according 
as Joseph had said : and there was famine in all 
lands ; but in all the land of Egypt there was 
bread. And when all the land of Egypt was 
famished, the people cried to Pharaoh for 
bread ; and Pharaoh said unto all the Egyptians, 
Go unto Joseph ; what he saith to you, do. 
And the famine was over all the face of the 
earth : and Joseph opened all the storehouses, 
and sold unto the Egyptians ; and the famine 
was sore in the land of Egypt " (Gen. xli. 53- 
56, R. v.). 

The modern history of Egypt throws some 
curious light on these ancient records of 
famines ; and instances of their recurrence 
may be cited to assist us in understanding 
their course and extent. They have not been 
infrequent since the Muhammadan conquest, 
according to the testimony of Arab historians : 
one of gi'eat severity, following a deficient rise 
of the Nile, in the year of the Flight 597 (a.d. 
1200), is recorded by 'Abd-el-Latif, an eye- 
witness and a trustworthy authority. He 
gives a most interesting account of its horrors, 
.states that the people throughout the country 
were driven to the last extremities, eating offal 
and even their own dead, and mentions, as an 
instance of the dire straits to which they were 
driven, that persons who were burnt alive 
for eating human flesh were themselves, thus 
ready i-oasted, eaten by others. Multitudes 
fled the country, only to perish in the desert- 
road to Palestine (^Relation de I'Egi/pte, trans. 
S. de Sacy, p. 360 sq. ; White's text, p. 210 sq.). 

But the most remarkable famine occurred 
in the reign of the Fatimy Khalif el-Mustansir, 
the only famine of seven years' duration on 
record in Egypt since the time of Joseph. This 
famine (a.h. 457-464, a.d. 1064-1071) ex- 
ceeded in severity all others of modern times, 
and was aggravated by the anarchy which then 
ravaged the country. Vehement drought and 
pestilence (says Es-Suyuty, in his Husn el 
MuhdduruK) continued for seven consecutive 
years, so that they [the people] ate corpses. 

and animals that died of themselves ; the 
cattle perished ; a dog was sold for five dinars, 
and a cat for three dinars . . . and an ardebb 
(about five bushels) of wheat for one hundred 
dinars, and then it failed altogether. He adds, 
that all the horses of the Khalif, save three, 
perished, and gives numerous instances of the 
straits to which the wretched inhabitants 
were driven, and of the organised bands of 
kidnappers who infested Cairo and caught 
passengers in the streets by ropes furnished 
with hooks and let down from the windows, in 
order to provide themselves with food. This 
account is confirmed by El-Makrizy (in his 
Khitat : cp. QuatremM'e, M^moires ge'ographiques 
ct historiques sur I'Eijypte, ii. 286), from whom 
we further learn that the family and even 
the women of the Khalif fled, by the way of 
Syria, on foot, to escape the peril that 
threatened all ranks of the population. The 
whole narrative is worthy of attention, since 
it contains a parallel to the duration of the 
famine of Joseph, and at the same time enables 
us to form an idea of the character of famines 
in the East. The famine of Samaria resembled 
it in many particulars ; and that very briefly 
recorded in 2 K. viii. 1, 2 (R. Y.\ affoi-ds 
another instance of one of seven years : " Now 
Elisha had spoken unto the woman whose son 
he had restored to life, saying. Arise, and go 
thou and thy household, and sojourn whereso- 
ever thou canst sojourn : for the Lord hath 
called for a famine ; and it shall also come upon 
the land seven years. And the woman arose, 
and did according to the word of the man of 
God : and she went with her household and 
sojourned in the land of the Philistines seven 
years." Bunsen (^Egypt's Place, &c., iii. 334, 
335) quotes the record of a famine in the reign 
of Usurtasen I., which he supposes to be that 
of Joseph ; but on chronological grounds alone 
the theory is untenable. The " famine lasting 
many years," referred to in the inscription in 
the tomb of Baba at El-Kab (immediately 
before the 18th Dynasty ; Brugsch, Hist, of 
Egypt under the Pharaohs^, i. 158, 302 sq., and 
Die bibl. sieben Jahre d. Hungersnoth, 1891), if 
" a pious fraud," yet shows the existence of a 
tradition that there had been, at some early 
date, a seven years' period of severe distress 
(Renouf, PSBA. 1891, xiii. 444). 

In Arabia, famines are of frequent occurrence. 
The Arabs, in such cases, when they could not 
afford to slaughter their camels, used to bleed 
them, and drink the blood, or mix it with 
the shorn fur to make a kind of black-pudding. 
They ate also various plants and grains, which 
at other times were not used as articles of 
food. And the tribe of Hanifeh were taunted 
with having in a famine eaten their god in a 
dish of dates mashed up with clarified butter 
and a preparation of dried curds of milk (Lane, 

Ar. Lex. s. v. *x> ). [E. S. P.] 

FAN. [Agriculture, pp. 66, 67.] 

FARTHING. Two names of coins, one the 
fourth part of the other, are rendered in the 
A. V. and in the R. V. by this word. 

1. acradptov (Matt. x. 29; Luke xii. 6), 
properly a small as, assarium, but in the N. T. 
period used as the Greek equivalent of the 



Latin as. The Vulg. in Matt. x. 29 renders it 
by as, and in Luke xii. 6 transL-ites " two 
assaria " by dipondius ; tlie dupondius, or di- 
))ondius, being equal in value to two asses. 
The Graeco-Koman, or technically Greek im- 
))erial, coin equivalent to the Roman as is no 
doubt intended by the Evangelists. 

2. KoSpafTTts, qnadruns (Matt. v. 26 ; Mark 
xii. 42), a coin equivalent to two lepta (\iirra. 
Svo, u iariv KoSpavrris, Mark, /. c). The ])lain 
meaning of this ])assage is that two lepta were 
equal to a quadrans, the lepton (AeTTTiu/) being a 
coin current in Palestine, but the quadrans not 
necessarily so. St. Luke's use of Latin • words 
renders it quite possible that he intended to give 
the information that two common Palestinian 
coins were equivalent to a Roman one, or to the 
fourth part of the as. There is no question that 
the smallest Roman coin of the earlier emperors 
was a quadrans, and that the smallest Judaean 
copper coin was lighter, and could well be 
reckoned as its half, it being remembered that 
bronze or copper money is always of the nature 
of a token -currency, and that the weight con- 
sequently is not to be taken too seriously into 
account. It is doubtful if the currency of 
Palestine at the time referred to contained a 
KoSpdvrrjs. [R. S. P.] 

FASTING AND FASTS. Fasting, in the 
sense of a religious or ceremonial abstinence 
from food, either partial or complete, for a 
certain time, at recurring periods, or under 
special public or private emergencies, is a 
practice the beginnings of which, like those of 
most other instinctive religious customs, are lost 
in the mists of an immemorial past. " Food I have 
not eaten ; weeping is my fare ; . . . tears are 
my meat and drink," is the cry of the old 
Accadian penitent, we know not how many 
thousands of years before our era." And in 
certain old Babylonian calend rs for the months 
of Intercalary Elul, Ve-Adar, Sebat, Tebet, 
Sivan, 2nd Kisan, and Marchesvan, prescrib- 
ing the rites to be observed by the king on 
each day of the month, we find that on five 
days — viz. the 7th, 14th, 19th, 21st, and 
28th — the kmg was religiously bound to ab- 
stain from certain kinds of food and other 
indulgences, such as riding in his chariot.'' 
In this connexion, it should be borne in mind 
that Babylonia is the earliest recorded home of 
the fathers of Israel (Gen. xi. 31 ; Josh. xxiv. 2) ; 
and that the civilisation of Accad is the oldest, 
of which any authentic documents remain. On 
the other hand, the monuments of Egyptian 
antiquity make no mention of the usage of 
fasting.'^ The brief statements of Herodotus, 
to the effect that the Egyptians fasted before 
sacrificing to Isis (ii. 40 ; cp. iv. 186), if cor- 
rect, refer only to the voluntary practice of iso- 
lated localities at a comparatively late period. 

» [n - NU] - KU - i IR - SUKUMMA - M0 . . . IK - UA - MU= 

[ritum]ul akul ; hikitum kurmati . , . dimtu masliti. 
(Haupt, ASKT. No. 15.) 

b These calendars belong to the Assyrian collections 
of the British Museum. That for Intercalary Elul was 
published in W. A. I., iv. 32, 33. The remains of the 
others are given in the new edition. See Pll. 32, 33, 33*. 

So I am informed by Mr. Le Page Renouf. Neither 
in this nor in many other cases must we look to Egypt 
for the origin of Hebrew religious customs. 

Although there is no direct inculcation of 
fasting as a religious practice in the sacred 
literature of China before Buddhism, we find 
its discii)linary value recognised in the JJoctrine 
of the Mean (e.g. in the phrase chai ming, to 
purify the mind by abstinence), a work ascribed 
to the grandson of Confucius. The Vedas 
prescribe fasting ; and the practice of it forms 
an important element in the ascetic dis- 
cipline both of the Brahman and the Bud- 
dhist. The system of Zoroaster and its modern 
representative Parsism naturally neglect an 
observance which, if favourable to the calm 
contemplative life of the religious mystic, is not 
compatible with the active stir and strain of a 
business career. The strict ,fast of the ninth 
month (Ramadan), univer.sally observed in 
Islam, was probably instituted not without 
reference to Jewish and Christian precedents. 
Nor was the practice unknown to the Greeks and 
Romans, although it does not appear to have 
been a matter of general obligation as in the 
case of Semitic religions. It was customary in 
the Eleusinian mysteries ; and the women who 
celebrated the Thesmophoria abstained from 
common food, though they might eat cakes of 
sesame and honey. 

On the occasion of certain prodigia at Rome, 
B.C. 191, the Sibylline books ordered a quin- 
quennial fast to be instituted in honour of Ceres; 
but this prescription doubtless concerned the 
priesthood only, and such of the laity as chose 
to honour it (Liv. xxxvi. 37). The idea involved 
was that of a sympathetic share in the grief of 
the goddess, who abstained from food and 
drink during her long search for her lost 
Proserpine. Tertullian informs us that on the 
occasion of a severe drought, the heathen kept 
a thoroughly Jewish fast, and walked in pro- 
cession barefoot (De Jejunio, 15). On our Monday 
(dies Jovis) a fast in honour of Jupiter was 
recognised as meritorious by the Romans (Hor. 
Sat. ii. 3, 288-292). But, upon the whole, the 
practice had no more than a sporadic and 
isolated prevalence in classical antiquity. 

In the Old Testament we find numerous refer- 
ences to fasting. The term D-1 V — rendered vriaTeia 
by the LXX., and jejimium in the Latin Versions, 
denoting first " fasting " and then " a fast," in 
the concrete sense (plural mOIV, Esth. ix. 31) — 
is common in the Prophets (including the histo- 
ries) and occurs thrice in the Psalms (xxxv. 13 ; 
Ixix. 10; cix. 24), but not once in the Law, 
where we find instead (Lev. xvi. 29, 31 ; Num. 
XXX. 13) the striking expression t^'Q]J HZV, " to 
afliict, abase, or humble the soul," i. e. the self 
(Ps. iii. 2 ; Is. Ii. 23), or perhaps specially the 
appetites and desires (Ps. xlii. 4 ; Prov. vi. 30 ; 
Jer. ii. 24). 

It was only on one day in the year, the great 
Day of Atonement, that the Law required all 
Israelites to fast. [Atonement, Day of.] It 
has been maintained by a powerful school 
of modern critics (Graf, Wellhausen) that the 
Day of Atonement is of post-Exilic origin, 
on the grounds that it is only mentioned 
in the " Priestly Legislation," and that no 
reference is made to it in the narrative 
(Neh. viii.-x.). We have seen, that so far as 
the element of religious fasting is concerned, 
that custom is of unknown antiquity; and the 
Hebrew phrase which describes it as an " abasing 


of the soul," m.ay belong to a very distant past, 
independently of the relative age of the canoni- 
cal documents in which it is now first found. 
No very profound study is required to enable 
persons of ordinary intelligence to realize the 
fact that the great fundamental conceptions and 
observances of religion are, broadly speaking, 
the same throughout the ancient world. The 
Old Testament adopts the common external 
forms of worship and service, and adapts 
them to the expression of the higher mean- 
ings of revealed religion. Thus it does not 
expressly originate sacrifice, although it lays 
down particular rules to be observed in sacrifice. 
It nowhere defines a temple or an altar as 
something previously unknown, any more than 
it defines the idea of God. It takes for granted 
that Israel is already familiar with these and a 
hundred other necessary elements of religion ; 
yet it incidentally reveals, in the clearest way, 
the ancient and original sense of such a term as 
" altar," when it uses as a synonymous expres- 
sion " the table of Jehovah " (Ezek. xli. 22 ; 
Mai. i. 7-12). Modern researches have demon- 
strated that this phrase covers the ultimate pre- 
historic concejrtion of an altar. And yet the 
first Old Testament writers in which it occurs, 
both belong to the period after the fall of the 
Jewish monarchy. To argue that the idea was 
post-Exilic, on that ground, would be evidently 
absurd. The assumption, however, that Israel 
did not before the post-Exilic period observe the 
Day of Atonement, rests, as we have seen, upon 
the precisely similar ground that the Day is 
not mentioned by any writer previous to " the 
Priestly Legislation," which is referred to that 
period. This is not the place to discuss the age 
and authorship of the Book of Leviticus and of 
that section of the Hexateuch to which it belongs 
[Pentateuch]. The inherent weakness of an 
argument which assumes that a religious usage 
or prescription cannot be primitive, because no 
relatively early record of it happens to have 
survived, hardly requires to be pointed out. 
We may recognise the fact that the historical 
Books of the Old Testament nowhere mention 
the annual Fast of the tenth day of the seventh 
month (Tishri), without drawing Graf's inference 
that therefore it was unknown before the Exile 
(Graf, Die ijesch. Biich. des A. T. p. 41). How 
many other things are missing in those frag- 
mentary outlines of Israel's history ! Some, at 
least, who carefully note the characteristics of 
these narratives, with their express references to 
fuller accounts upon which they are based, and 
their occasional episodes or " cameos " of per- 
sonal history, interpersed unequally in the 
course of mere annals abbreviated at times to 
little more than a thin line of royal and 
dynastic names, will not be inclined to set much 
store by this argument from omission, where so 
much besides of equal or greater consequence is 
likewise omitted. 

But the Day of Atonement is not mentioned 
in Neh. viii.-x. " Even in 444 B.C. the year of 
the publication of the Pentateuch by Ezra," 
writes Wellhausen, "the great Day of Atonement 
has not yet come into force. Ezra begins the 
reading of the Law in the beginning of the 
seventh month, and afterwards the Feast of 
Tabernacles is observed on the fifteenth ; of an 
atoning solemnity on the tenth of the month 


not a word is said in the circumstantial narra- 
tive, which, moreover, is one specially interested 
in the liturgical element, but it is made up for 
on the twenty-fourth (Neh. viii. ix.). This testi- 
monium e silentio is enough ; down to that date 
the great day of the Priestly Code (now intro- 
duced for the first time) had not existed " (^Pro- 
legomena to the Hist, of Israel, p. Ill, Eng. tr.). 
It is true that the chronicler exhibits a strong 
interest in everything that concerns the Temple 
and its services ; but his narrative in these 
chapters is far from being " circumstantial " in 
the sense required by this argument, viz. that 
of containing a complete " record of proceedings 
from the first day of the seventh month onwards 
to the twenty-fourth," as stated by Professor 
Robertson Smith (Old Test, in Jewish Church, 
p. 377). The chronicler does not profess to 
supply such a consecutive relation within the 
space of these three chapters. Had that been 
his intention, the long prayer of the Levites 
(Neh. ix. 4-38) would hardly have been allowed 
to occupy such an altogether disproportionate 
share of his space. But why is the authority 
of the chronicler's compilation, which is referred 
by these learned critics to the " very end of the 
Persian or the beginning of the Greek period," 
preferred in this instance to that of the 
" Priestly Legislation," which they allow to 
have been published in its completeness at least 
a century and a half before his time .■" On the 
one hand, no writer suggests that the author 
of Chronicles-Ezra-Nehemiah was ignorant of 
the ordinance of the tenth day of the seventh 
month. On the other, critics have not scrupled 
to suppose him capable of freely antedating 
the customs and institutions of later times. 
If then he does not mention the Day of Atone- 
ment in this passage, it certainly is not 
because he did not believe that it had been 
observed at all before B.C. 444, nor because 
he intended to suggest such a surprising 
inference ; but rather because he wished to 
dwell at length upon the exceptional public 
humiliation of the twenty-fourth day of the same 
month. After all, in this as in other portions 
of liis compilation he made his choice of excerpts 
in his own way, like other Oriental compilers, 
without having the fear of modern criticism 
before his eyes. Perhaps, indeed, the celebration 
of the Day was not recorded in the source he 
was using. It is evident from the whole account 
that the returned exiles were unfamiliar with 
the ordinances of the ancient Law, which had 
fallen into desuetude during their long captivity 
in a heathen land. This it was that necessitated 
the public reading and exposition of the Law 
recorded in the eighth chapter. In the then 
irregular state of things, their religious leaders 
may not have judged it possible or expedient 
to proclaim the observance of the Day of Atone- 
ment on that occasion. The ceremonies of the 
Day, which were specially concerned with the 
purification of the high priest and his family, 
and then that of the Temple and its vessels, 
would hardly have seemed appropriate, at a 
time when the people had not yet formally 
undertaken to observe the Law, and to provide 
for the maintenance of the sacrificial worship 
(Neh. X. 29 sq.) ; when the dues of the priest- 
hood were left unpaid, and " the house of God 
was forsaken " (cp. Neh. xiii. 10, 11). The entire 


picture presented to us in these vivid though 
fragmentary cha])ters is one of a provisional 
state of things ; of the gradual restoration and 
regulation of tlie public worship after long 
disuse and disorder. The walls of Jerusalem 
were not rebuilt in a day ; nor were the pre- 
cepts of the Law carried out at once in all 
their fulness by the struggling community of 
Judea. The remainder of the Book, which 
relates how the population of Jerusalem was 
recruited, the Levitical ministry re-established 
in the Temple, the observance of the Sabbath 
vindicated, witnesses to the fact clearly enough.'' 
There remains one other objection. It is 
urged that the Day of Atonement contliets with 
that purely joyous conception of worship which 
characterised ancient Israel. But that concep- 
tion is no more than a plausible hypothesis, 
which itself conflicts with the general analogy 
of the history of religion. Reference has already 
been made to those old Accadian confessions of 
sin which the "Semitic Assyrians of the 7th 
century B.C. copied from Babylonian texts for 
their own use. Hebrew human nature even in 
the earliest period probably resembled human 
nature at large in respect of an occasional con- 
sciousness of guilt and the need of expiation. 
And there were too many occasions in the 
national history, when foreign oppression or 
domestic disaster, when the sword or drought 
or pestilence, irresistibly suggested the Divine 
wrath, to allow us to acquiesce in the pro- 
position that national sin, atonement, and exj)ia- 
tion became principal ideas in the religious 
consciousness of Israel only after the Exile. The 
witness of the Prophets and of the prophetical 
histories is against this view. Would the 
troubles of the times of the Judges, or the 
jjlague in David's reign, be the occasion of holi- 
day rites and joyous feasting round the altar? 
On the other hand, what proof is there that 
during the period of the Exile " men felt them- 
selves . . . unceasingly under the leaden pressure 
of sin and wrath " (Wellhausen, p. 112) ? Such 
a conception of the time seems to be unnatural ; 
or at least the statement is rhetoi'ically exagge- 
rated. The sorrowful utterances of the Lamen- 
tations do not express the uniform experience 
of the entire Captivity. If that were so, the 
buoyant oracles of the Prophets of the period are 
as inexplicable as the fact that so many of the 
banished preferred to stay in Babylonia, and so 
few took advantage of the Edict of Deliverance." 

"1 The " circumstantial narrative " omits to notice the 
Sabbatic character of the first day of the seventh month, 
and the blast on the priestly trumpets with which it 
was ushered in (Lev. xxiii. 24 ; cp. Neh. viii. 1), though 
the former fact is implied in the statement that "the 
day is holy unto our Lord " (Neh. viii. 10). Whether 
the trumpet-blast " ill-befitted its quiet solemnity " 
(Wellhausen, p. 110) or not, may be a matter of 
opinion. Mirth was not necessarily implied by the 
lilowing of trumpets, but simply the proclamation of 
the fact that the day had begun. See Friedlander, 
Text-hook of the Jewish Religion^, p. 19. 

e The late Friedrich Bleek maintained, on the ground 
of its peculiar contents, that Lev. xvi. was of Mosaic ori- 
gin {EMeUung, $ 12 sq.). The proceedings with refer- 
ence to the desert-fiend (Azazel) can hardly have been 
instituted for the first time in the 5th cent. ; and, as a 
matter of fact, this demon belongs to primitive Accadian 
leligion (see PSBA., June 1890). 


During the Exile four annual fast-days were 
established, in commemoration of the fall of 
Jerusalem and subsequent calamities. These 
days were the ninth of the fourth month, for 
the cajiture of Jerusalem (Jer. lii. 6); the 
tenth of the fifth month, for the destruction of 
the city and the Temple (2 K. xxv. 8, 9 ; Jer. lii. 
12); the fast of the seventh month, for the 
murder of Gedaliah (2 K. xxv. 25 ; Jer. xii. 1, 
2); and that of the tenth day of the tenth 
month, for the beginning of the siege (2 K. xxv, 
1 ; Jer. lii. 4- ; Zech. viii. 19, 20). The Mishna 
(Taanith, iv. G) and St. Jerome (in Zech. viii.), 
following contemporary Jewish notions, connect 
other events with these fasts, regardless of 
manifest anachronisms. After the Return, and 
when the rebuilding of the Temple had begun, 
the Jews of Babylon sent to inquire of the 
priests at Jerusalem whether they were still 
bound to keep the fast of the fifth month. 
Thereupon the Prophet Zechariah took occasion to 
rebuke their hypocritical observance of the fast- 
days of both the fifth and the seventh months 
(Zech. vii. 5, 6) ; and declared that all the four 
fasts would hereafter be turned into days of 
"joy and gladness and cheerful feasts " (viii. 19). 
According to Jewish tradition, this led to the 
abolition of the fasts, but they were re-intro- 
duced after the destruction of the second Temple. 
The Prophet's words, however, are scarcely a 
direct injunction to discontinue the four fasts. 
But it is a remarkable coincidence that Titus 
took Jerusalem in the fourth month, and the 
Temple was burnt in the fifth (on tlie 10th 
Lous = Ab, according to Josephus ; on the 9th of 
Ab, according to the Talmud). The Jews still 
observe these fasts (Friedlander, pp. 32, 33). 

Fasting is one form of sacrifice, the essential 
idea of which is the surrender of some personal 
good in order to propitiate the Divine favour. 
The necessity of self-denial is illustrated at the 
very outset of Scripture by the parable of the 
Forbidden Fruit (cp. Tertull. de Jejun. 3). Fast- 
ing is, moreover, a natural outward evidence of 
inward self-abasement before God, and of humble 
acquiescence in the Divine chastisements ; it is 
an instinctive mode of manifesting sorrow for 
sin, and of enhancing and intensifying that 
sorrow. Consequently, so long as the sense of 
sin, in any degree beyond a merely sentimental 
regret, shall survive ; so long as it is felt that 
our worst transgressions are directly due to the 
indulgence of a fallen nature and the corrupt 
desires of the flesh, — so long will it seem right to 
earnest spiritual minds to mortify the body by 
the discipline of fasting. 

As a natural accompaniment and token of 
intense grief, fasting finds many incidental illus- 
trations in the Old Testament. It is associated 
with mourning for the dead (1 Sam. xxxi. 13 ; 
2 Sam. i. 12) ; with private and personal dis- 
tresses (1 Sam. i. 7 ; Ps. cix. 24) ; with sym- 
pathetic sorrow for the misfortunes of friends 
(1 Sam. XX. 34 ; Ps. xxxv. 13) and for national 
calamities (Judg. xx. 26 ; Neh. i. 4 ; Baruch i. 5 ; 
Joel i. 14, ii. 12, 16); with the expression of 
penitence for one's own offences (1 K. xxi. 27 ; 
Ecclus. xxxiv. 26) and for those of the com- 
munity (1 Sam. vii. 6 ; Deut. ix. 18 ; Jonah iii. 5 ; 
Ps. Ixix. 10 ; Ezra x. 6 ; Neh. ix. 1). Persons 
fasting often displayed other signs of mourning, 
such as wearing sackcloth, rending their gai-- 


ments and plucking out the hair of bead and 
beard, sprinkling the head with earth and 
ashes weeping, lying prostrate on the ground, 
neo-lect of washing and anointing the person, 
and walking barefoot (2 Sam. i. 11, xii. 16, 
20 ; IK. xxi. 27 ; Ezra ix. 3 ; Neh. ix. 1 ; 
Esth. iv. 3; Add. to Esth. xiv. 2; Is. Iviii. 5; 
Jonah iii. 6 ; Dan. ix. 3 ; Judith viii. 6 ; 1 Mace, 
iii. 47). 

In the case of individuals, fasting was recog- 
nised as auxiliary to undisturbed communion 
with God, and as a preparation for the reception 
of Divine revelations (Exod. xxxiv. 28 ; Deut. 
ix. 9 ; Dan. x. 2 ; 2 Esd. v. 13, 20, vi. 31, 35, 
&c. ; Matt. iv. 2). Upon similar grounds, the 
practice of a fasting reception of the Eucharist 
may be justified (cp. also Acts xiii. 3). 

In special emergencies extraordinary general 
fasts were sometimes proclaimed, in token of 
national humiliation for sin, and by way of 
averting the Divine wrath or of ensuring the 
Divine assistance in public enterprises (1 Sam. 
vii. 6 ; 2 Ch. xx. 3 ; Ezra viii. 21 ; Jer. xxxvi. 6, 
9 ; 2 Mace. xiii. 12 ; Judith iv. 9, 10, vi. 19 : 
cp. 1 Sam. xiv. 24; 1 K. xxi. 9, 12).'' 

The writings of the Prophets of the Exile and 
the Return reveal the origin of a popular ten- 
dency to regard fasting as in itself so pleasing 
to God as to atone for the flagrant neglect of 
the higher duties of righteousness, mercy, and 
truth. Against this delusion the Prophets of 
the period raise their protest, as their prede- 
cessors had done, against a similar heathenish 
view of the value of the old sacrificial system. 
Like the Ionic philosopher, they bid their 
countrymen fast from wickedness (vriffreveiv 
KaKdTriTos, Empedocles, Fragm. 454. See Is. 
Iviii. 3 sq. ; Zech. vii. 5 sq., viii. 16 sq. : 
and cp. Joel ii. 12, 13; Jer. xiv. 12), without 
implying any denunciation of the proper use of 
literal fasting as a spiritual discipline. 

To this period must be referred the origin of 
fasting "twice in the week " (Luke xviii. 12), 
which was the regular custom of the Pharisees, 
the days chosen being the second and the fifth 
(Monday and Thursday, which were the days 
appointed for public fasts, according to Taanith, 
ii. 9). See also Matt. ix. 14, vi. 16 ; Mark ii. 
18 ; Luke v. 33. Judith is represented as 
fasting daily, except on the Sabbaths and New 
Moons and the eves of those festivals (Judith viii. 
6) ; a fact which clearly indicates the growing 
rigour of the standard of outward sanctity 
(cp. also Judith iv. 9 ; Tob. xii. 8 ; Ecclus. xxxiv. 
26 ; Luke ii. 37). 

Custom varied in the matters of time and 
strictness. There was the one day fast from 
evening to evening (Jos. Ant. iii. 10, § 3), termin- 
ating witli the appearance of the stars ; a limit 
which is still observed by the Moslems in their 
fast of Ramadan. But besides this, we read also 
of a fast of three days (Esth. iv. 16 ; 2 Mace. 
xiii. 12); of four (Acts x. 30, probably); of 
seven (1 Sam. xxxi. 13) ; and even of forty days. 
Iq the longer periods, we have to think of re- 

' In later times, the Sanhedrin was wont to order a 
general fast if the beginning of the rainy season was 
delayed. And Josephus informs us of a fast which the 
Pharisee Ananias succeeded in getting imposed upon the 
town of Tiberias, fur his own private ends (Life, $ 56). 

FAT , 

striction to bare necessaries (Dan. x. 2, 3),8 and 
perhaps of abstinence even from these until night- 
fall.'' The rules of fasting, which were long in 
dispute between the schools of Hillel and 
Shammai, are systematized in the Talmudic 
tracts Joma and Taanith. 

It is important to remember that our Lord 
has emphatically recognised the religious value 
of fasting (Matt. vi. 16-18 ; ix. 15). He couples 
it with prayer as a source of spiritual power 
(Matt. xvii. 21). If His disciples are said not to 
have fasted so long as " the Bridegroom " was 
with them, the denial relates only to the frequent 
and excessive fasts of the Jewish sects (Matt. 
xi. 19 ; cp. ix. 15). Fasting was naturally 
important in the practice of John's disciplei;, 
their master's work being especially a preaching 
of repentance. 

In view of our Lord's attitude towards this 
observance, we are not surprised to find that in 
the primitive Church not only did Jewish 
Christians long continue to keep the Jewish 
fast-days, but fasting and prayer were united in 
the practice of Gentile believers also, especially 
in the case of Ordination (Acts xiii. 1-3 ; xiv. 
23). With St. Paul's warnings against the 
tendency to attach an independent value to 
fasting, and to reduce Christian holiness to 
a mere external asceticism (Rom. xiv. 2, 6, 
17, 21 ; CoL ii. 16, 21-23 ; 1 Tim. iv. 3-5, 8, 
V. 23), we have also to consider his precept 
(1 Cor. vii. 5) in favour of fasting, and, above 
all, his own practice (2 Cor. vi. 5 ; xi. 27). 

It is not logical to confess the Divine authority 
of Christ, and the inspiration of His Apostles, 
and at the same time to treat as of no perma- 
nent obligation an ordiHance for which the 
Master Himself laid down rules, and which both 
He and His immediate followers carefully ob- 
served in practice. So far from being, as some 
suppose, contrary to the spirit of the Gospel ; as a 
token of sorrow for sin, as a means of crucifying 
the flesh, as an act of obedience to the precepts 
and a following of the example of Christ, fast- 
ing is one of the proofs of a sincere acceptance 
of the Gospel. [C. J. B.] 

FAT. The Hebrews distinguished between 
the suet or pure fat of an animal (2?n), and 
the fat which was intermixed with the lean 
(QiaOtJ'lp, Neh. viii. 10). Certain restrictions 
were imposed upon them in reference to the 
former : some parts of the suet — viz. about the 
stomach, the entrails, the kidneys, and the tail 
of a sheep, which grows to an excessive size in 
many Eastern countries, and produces a large 
quantity of rich fat [Sheep]— were forbidden to 
be eaten in the case of animals offered to 
Jehovah in sacrifice (Lev. iii. 3, 9, 17 ; vii. 3, 
23). The ground of the prohibition was that 
the fat was the richest part of the animal, and 

e Cp. Tertullian's porticnale jejunium, or partia) 
fast, i.e. abstinence from particular liinds of food. 

'' So the Council of Chalcedon decreed that in fastins 
one should take neither food nor drink all day until 
after the evening prayer {The Sixteenth Homily). It 
was the rule of the Essenes to abstain altogether from 
flesh and wine, and only to partake of such food as 
bread, vegetables, millet, and water, after sunset. 



therefore belonged to Him (iii. 16). It has 
been supposed that other reasons were super- 
added, as that the use of fat was unwholesome 
in the liot climate of Palestine. 'I'lici-e appears, 
however, to be no ground for such an assump- 
tion. The presentation of the fat as the 
richest part of the animal was agreeable to the 
dictates of natural feeling, and was the ordi- 
nary practice even of heathen nations, as 
instanced in the Homeric descriptions of sacri- 
fices {II. i. 460, ii. 423 ; Od. iii. 457), and in 
the customs of the Egyptians (Her. ii. 47) and 
Persians (Strab. .xv. p. 732). Indeed, the term 
cheU'b is itself significant of the feeling on 
which the regulation was based ; for it describes 
metaphorically the beat of any production (Gen. 
.xlv, 18 ; Num. .wiii. 12 ; Ps. Ix.xxi. 16, cxlvii. 
14: cp. 2 Sam. i. 22; Judg. iii. 29; Is. x. 16). 
With regard to other parts of the fat of sacri- 
fices or the fat of other animals, it might be 
consumed, with the exception of those dying 
either by a violent or a natural death (Lev. vii. 
24), which might still be used in any other 
way. The burning of the fat of sacrifices was 
particularly specified in each kind of offering, 
whether a peace-oti'eriug (Lev. iii. 9), consecra- 
tion offering (viii. 25), sin-ofi'ering (iv. 8), 
trespass-offering (vii. 3), or redemption-offering 
(Num. xviii. 17). The Hebrews fully appre- 
ciated the luxury of well-fatted meat, and had 
their stall-fed oxen and calves (1 K. iv. 23 ; Jer. 
xlvi. 21 ; Luke xv. 23); nor is there any reason 
to suppose its use unwholesome. [W. L. B.] 

FAT (A.-S. faet. Cp. Germ, fass), i.e. Vat. 
The word employed in the A. V. and R. V. to 
translate the Hebrew term 3i?."|, Yekeb, in Joel 
ii. 24, iii. 13 only. The word commonly used 
for yckiib, indiscriminately with gath, nH, is 
" wine-press " or " wine-fat," and once " press- 
fat " (R. V. "wine-tat," Hag. ii. 16): but the 
two appear to be distinct — gath, the upper re- 
ceptacle or " press " in which the grapes were 
trod ; and yekeb, the " vat," on a lower level, into 
which the juice or must was collected. The 
word is derived by Gesenius (^Thes. 619 6) from 
a root signifying to " hollow or dig out " : and in 
accordance with this is the practice in Palestine, 
where the " wine-press " and " vats " were 
excavated in the native rock of the hills on 
which the vineyards lay. Rock-cut presses 
ai'e found in every part of the hills of Palestine. 
They usually consist of two square basins. The 
upper, which was large and shallow, was used 
for treading the grapes. A short channel led to 
the smaller and deeper basin, yekeb, into which 
the wine ran, and whence it was sometimes 
strained off into a third basin. The " wine- 
fat " (R. v. " wine-press ") of Mark xii. 1 is 
viroXriviov, which is frequently used by the LXX. 
to translate rjekeb in the 0. T. [G.] [W.] 

FATHER (ii/), IN, Chald. Abba, N3N*, Mark 
xiv. 36, Rom. viii. 15; traT-fip; pater: a primi- 
tive word, but following the analogy of ilZlN, to 
show kindness, Gesen. Ilies. pp. 6-8). 

The position and authority of the father as 
the head of the family is expressly assumed and 
sanctioned in Scripture, as a likeness of that of 
the Almighty over His creatures; an authority, 
as Philo remarks, intermediate between human 



and divine (Philo, irepl yovdwu Tt/iTjs, § 1). It 
lies of course at the root of that so-called pa- 
triarchal government (Gen. iii. 16 ; 1 Cor. xi. 3) 
which was introductory to the more definite 
systems which followed, and which in part, but 
not wholly, superseded it. When therefore the 
name of " father of nations" was given to Abram 
[Abraham], he was thereby held up not only as 
the ancestor, but as the examjde to those who 
should come after him (Gen. xviii. 18, 19 ■ Rom, 
iv. 17). The father's blessing was regarded as 
conferring special benefit, but his malediction 
special injury, on those on whom it fell (Gen. 
ix. 25, 27 ; xxvii. 27-40; xlviii. 15, 20; xlix.) ; 
and so also the sin of a i)arent was held to affect, 
in certain cases, the welfare of his descendants 
(2 K. V. 27), though the Law was forbidden to 
jiunish the son for his father's transgression 
(Deut. xxiv. 16; 2 K. xiv. 6; Ezek. xviii. 20). 
The command to honour parents is noticed by St. 
Paul as the only one of the Decalogue which bore 
a distinct promise (Ex. xx. 12 ; Eph. vi. 2), and 
disrespect towards them was condemned by the 
Law as one of the worst of crimes (Ex. xxi. 15, 
17 ; 1 Tim. i. 9 : cp. Virg. Aeri. vi. 609 ; 
Aristoph. Han. 274-773). Instances of legal 
enactment in support of parental authority are 
found in Ex. x.\ii. 17 ; Num. xxx. .3, 5, xii. 
14 ; Deut. sxL 18, 21 ; Lev. x.x. 9, xxi. 9, 
xxii. 12 : and the spirit of the Law in this 
direction may be seen in Prov. xiii. 1, xv. 5, 
xvii. 25, xix. 13, xx. 20, xxviii. 24, xxx. 17 ; Is. 
xiv. 10 ; Mai. i. 6. The father, however, had 
not the power of death over his child (Deut. 
xxi. 18-21; Philo, I. c). 

From the patriarchal spirit also the principle 
of respect to age and authority in general appears 
to be derived. Thus Jacob is described as bless- 
ing Pharaoh (Gen. xlvii. 7, 10 : cp. Lev. xix. 
32, Prov. xvi. 31 ; Juv. Sat. xiii. 54, 55 ; Philo, 
I. c. § 6). 

It is to this well-recognised theory of parental 
authority and supremacy that the very various 
uses of the term '' father " in Scripture are due. 
(1.) As the source or inventor of an art or prac- 
tice (Gen. iv. 20, 21; Job xxxviii. 28, xvii. 14; 
John viii. 44; 2 Cor. i. 3). (2.) As an object of 
respect or reverence (Jer. ii. 27 ; 2 K. ii. 12, 
V. lo, vi. 21). (3.) Thus also the pupils or 
scholars of the prophetical schools, or of any 
teacher, are called sons (1 Sam. x. 12, 27 ; 1 K. 
XX. 35; 2 K. ii. 3, iv. 1; Heb. xii. 9; 1 Tim. i.2). 
(4.) The term father and also mother is applied 
to any ancestor of the male or female line re- 
spectively (2 Sam. ix. 7 ; 2 Ch. xv. 16 ; Is. Ii. 
2; Jer. xxxv. 6, 18; Dan. v. 2). (5.) In the 
Talmud the term father is used to indicate the 
chief, e.g. the principal of certain works are 
termed " fathers." Objects whose contact causes 
pollution are called "fathers" of defilement 
(Mishn. Shabb. vii. 2, vol. ii. p. 29 ; Fcsach i. 6, 
vol. ii. p. 137, Surenh.). (6.) A protector or 
guardian (Deut. xxxii. 6; Job xxix. 16; Ps. 
Ixviii. 5). Many personal names are found with 
the prefixes 3K and 3N, as Ab-salom, Abi-shai, 
Abi-ram, &c., implying some quality or attribute 
possessed, or ascribed (Gesen. pp. 8, 10. See 
reff. under Abia). 

There is no word in Hebrew for " grand- 
ftvther," and thus the word " fathers " is used in 
the sense of seniors (Acts vii. 2, xxii. 1), and of 
parents in general, or ancestors (Dan. v. 2 ; 



Pusey, Daniel, p. 405 ; Jer. xxvii. 7 ; Matt. 
xsiiLSO, 32). , . , 

Among Mohammedans parental authority has 
(Treat weight during the time of pupilage. The 
son is not allowed to eat, scai-cely to sit, in his 
father's presence. Disobedience to parents is 
reckoned one of the most heinous of crimes (Burck- 
hardt, Notes on Bed. i. 355 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. 
i. 84). [H. W. P.] 

FATHOM. [Measures.] 

FAUCHION (Judith xiii. 6, xvi. 9), some- 
times spelt faulchion or falchion. The Greek 
word aKivd.K.7\s is variously considered to have 
been a straight sword, or a crooked sword, or 
a short spear (see Speaker's Comin. on the 
Apocrypha in loco). A drawing of the "Aki- 
nakes " is given on p. 159. 

FEASTS. [Festivals.] 

FEET. For customs relative to the feet, see 
Dust, Mourning, Sandal, and Washing. 

FELIX (*^Ai| ; Felix), Antonius Felix (Tac. 
Hist. V. 9). As a freedman of Antonia, mother 
of the Emperor Claudius, he had assumed her 
family name. He was brother of Pallas, one of 
the great freedmen who were the real adminis- 
trators of the empire in the reign of Claudius. 
Felix was procurator of Judaea at the time of 
St. Paul's arrest at Jerusalem, and to Felix at 
Caesarea he was sent for trial (Acts xxiii. 24, 
26). After hearing Tertullus and St. Paul 
(Acts xxiv. 1-21), Felix put off the Jews with 
the pretext that he would wait for the evidence 
of Lysias before deciding, though the chief 
captain's opinion was already before him in 
writing. A remarkable reason is given for the 
postponement (Acts xxiv. 22) — namely, that 
" he had more exact knowledge concerning the 
Way ; " that is to say, that he knew a good 
deal about Christianity and its relation to 
Judaism ; or, as may po.ssibly be implied by the 
comparative, more than Paul's accusers had 
chosen to tell him. The postponement is there- 
fore represented in the narrative as being made 
in St. Paul's favour, though a bolder and juster 
man would at once have acquitted the accused. 
On this statement of his knowledge of "the Way" 
follows naturally the account of the audience 
given by Felix to St. Paul on the subject of the 
Christian faith (Acts xxiv. 24). The Apostle 
chose topics of direct personal application to 
Felix and Drusiila themselves. The guilty con- 
science of Felix was moved to fear. He dis- 
missed St. Paul abruptly. Other interviews fol- 
lowed, but the impression made does not seem 
to have been renewed, as we are expressly told 
that " he sent for him the oftener and com- 
muned with him," in the hope of getting a bribe 
for his release (Acts xxiv. 26). Two years' 
imprisonment followed the trial. Felix was 
recalled ; and, desiring to gain favour with the 
Jews in view of the complaints which he knew 
would follow him to Rome, he left St. Paul in 
bonds (Acts xxiv. 27). The gross injustice of 
the imprisonment of an innocent man, prolonged 
for two years in the hope of obtaining a bribe 
for his release, is surely sufficient to meet the 
charge that the character of Felix in the Acts 


is inconsistent with that given by profane 
writers. For criticism in this direction, see 
Overbeck in loco; De W eite, AjMstdyesch.* The 
account in Josephus (B. J. iv. 13) represents 
Felix only as a stern governor in a time of great 
turbulence, dispersing rebels and crucifying 
robbers. But the later narrative of Ant. xx. 
7, 8, shows him in his true colours, and from it 
we learn the following particulars. He per- 
suaded Drusiila to desert her husband Aziz and 
live with him [Drusill.\]. He induced Eleazar, 
the brigand chieftain, to surrender on promise of 
safety, and then sent him to Rome for punish- 
ment. He grew weary of the repeated admoni- 
tions of Jonathan the high-priest, to whom he 
owed his position, and procured his assassina- 
tion. He made no attempt to restrain the war- 
fare of the factions in Jerusalem. Things went 
on as if there was no government (is eV airpo- 
(TTarT^Tw ■7r6\ei). On Felix's return to Rome he 
was followed by accusers from Judaea, and " he 
would certainly have suffered punishment for 
the wrongs he had committed against the Jews, 
had not Nero yielded to the urgent entreaties of 
Pallas (brother of the accused), who was then 
in great favour with the emperor" (Ant. xx. 8, 9). 
Tacitus mentions Felix twice, and his own 
fellow-countryman paints him even in blacker 
colours than Josephus the Jew. " Relying on his 
brother's infl-uence, Felix counted on impunity 
for any misdeeds he might commit. His reme- 
dial measures were such as to stimulate crime " 
(Tac. Ann. xii. 54). " He had the soul of a slave 
with the power of a sovereign, and he exercised 
his power in all manner of cruelty and lust " 
(Tac. Hist. y. 9). After all this, Tertullus' 
reference to the " peace " enjoyed by his means, 
and to the " clemency " which characterised 
him, sounds like the bitterest irony (Acts xxiv. 

It remains to notice very briefly a serious dis- 
crepancy between the statements of Josephus 
and Tacitus, which is as yet unreconciled. Taci- 
tus states that Felix was joint procurator with 
Cumanus, having Samaria as his portion, before 
his appointment as sole procurator of Judaea, 
Samaria, Galilee, and Peraea. On the troubles 
between the Jews and Samaritans being referred 
to the legate of Syria, Quadratus acquitted 
Felix and sent Cumanus with others to Rome for 
trial (Tac. Ann. xii. 54). Josephus, on the 
other hand, while he gives a full account of the 
Samaritan troubles, and the legate's inquiry 
into them, does not mention Felfx till his ap- 
pointment to Judaea after the trial and con- 
demnation of Cumanus at Rome. Ewald accepts 
Tacitus' account (^Hist. Israel, vii. 418 sq.), but 
critics generally reject it as mistaken. It may 
be remarked that it is difficult to understand 
why Jonathan should have asked for Felix as 
procurator (Jos. Ant. xx. 8, 5) unless the latter 
had already served in Syria and gained favour 
with the Jews. The interest of the discrepancy 
for N. T. students lies in the justification which 
has been sought from this lengthened procura- 
torship of Felix for the words of St. Paul (Acts 
xxiv. 10), " of many years " (cp. " Jampridem 
Judaeae impositus," Tac. Ann. xii. 54). But 
accepting Wieseler's chronology (^Chron. Apost. 
Zeit. pp. 66-88), Felix had been procurator for 
five years (a.d. 53-58) at the time of the trial, 
and in a government where so many changes 


had occurred this was a long period. The addi- 
tion of S'lKaiov to Kpir-nv in some low authorities, 
feebly justified by Chrysostom, would be a piece 
of flattery impossible in St. Paul's mouth. The 
only other mention of Feli.x is in Suetonius 
{Claud. 28), who calls him " the husband of 
three queens." One of the three was Drusilla, 
already mentioned. Another wife of royal 
descent was a grand-daughter of Antony and 
Cleopatra, also named Drusilla by Tacitus {Hist. 
V. 9). But probably this is by confusion with 
Drusilla the daughter of Herod Agrippa. The 
third " queen " is unknown. [E. K. B.] 

FELLER (Is. xiv. 8 ; A. V. and R. V.), a 
cutter of wood, from the A.-S. fellan, " to fell." 
The word describes the destructive character of 
the king of Babylon. [F.] 

FELLOES (A.-S. foelge), the curved pieces 
forming the circumference of a wheel (1 K. vii. 
33, A. V. and R. V. ; Lumby, " Glossary of 
Bible Words " in Eyre and Spottiswoode's 
Teachers' Bible). - [F.] 

FENCED CITIES (Dnvnp, or nhvnjD. 

Dan. xi. 15, from 1V3, cut off, separate, equiva- 
lent to n'nV? Cl^'"^^^- P- 231 ; Tt6XeiS oxvpai, 
reixllpet^f Teretxta'nevai ; urbes, or civitates, mu- 
ratae, munitae, munitissimae, firmae). The broad 
distinction between a city and a village in 
Biblical language has been shown to consict in 
the possession of walls. [City.] The City had 
walls, the village was unwalled, or had only a 



watchman's tower (^"tJO ; trvpyos ; turris cus- 
tuduin ; compare Gesen. p. 2G7), to which the 
villagers resorted in times of danger. A three- 
fold distinction is thus obtained — 1, cities ; 
2, unwalled villages ; ',i, villages with castles or 
towers (1 Ch. xxvii. 25). The district east of 
the Jordan, forming the kingdoms of Moab and 
Bashan, is said to have abounded from very early 
times in castles and fortresses, such as were 
built by Uzziah to protect the cattle, and to 
repel the inroads of the neighbouring tribes, 
besides unwalled towns (Amm. Marc. xiv. 9 ; 
Deut. iii. 5; 2 Ch. xxvi. 10). Of these many 
remains probably exist undiscovered at the 
present day, if many have been discovered 
(Porter, Damascus, ii. 197 ; Conder, Heth and 
Moab, p. 127). The dangers to which unwalled 
villages are exposed from the marauding tribes 
of the desert, and also the fortifications by 
which the inhabitants sometimes protect them- 
selves, are illustrated by Sir J. Malcolm 
(Sketches of Persia, ch. xiv. 148 ; and Frazer, 
Persia, pp. 379, 380 ; cp. Judg. v. 7). Villages 
in the Haurdn are sometimes enclosed by a 
wall, or rather the houses being joined together 
form a defence against Ai-ab robbers, and the 
entrance is closed by a gate (Burckhardt, Syria, 
p. 212). 

A further characteristic of a city as a fortified 
place is found in the use of the word nj3, to 
build, and also fortify. So that " to build " a 
city appears to be sometimes the same thing as 
to fortify it (cp. Gen. viii. 20 and 2 Ch. xvi. 6 
with 2 Ch. xi. 5-10 and 1 K. xv. 17). 

Fortified place belonging to an enemy of the Assyrians. 

The fortifications of the cities of Palestine, 
thus regularly "fenced," consisted of one or 
more walls crowned with battlemented parapets, 
niSS, having towers at regular intervals (2 Ch. 
xxxii. 5 ; Jer. xxxi. 38), on which in later times 
engines of war were placed, and watch was kept 
by day and night in time of war (Judg. ix. 45 ; 
2 K. ix. 17; 2 Ch. xxvi. 9, 15). Along the 
oldest of the three walls of Jerusalem, there 
were 90 towers ; in the second, 14 ; and in the 
third, 60 (Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 2). One such 


tower, that of Hananeel, is repeatedly mentioned 
(Jer. xxxi. 38 ; Zech. xiv. 10), as also others 
(Neh. iii. 1, 11, 27). The gateways of fortified 
towns were also fortified and closed with strong 
doors (Judg. xvi. 2, 3 ; 1 Sam. xxiii. 7 ; 2 Sam. 
xviii. 24, 33 ; 2 Ch. xiv. 7 ; Neh. ii. 8, iii. 3, 6, 
&c. ; 1 Mace. xiii. 33, xv. 39). In advance of 
the wall there appears to have been sometimes 

an outwork (^''PI, ■n-poTelxto'fj.a), in A. V. marg. 
ditch, R. v. " rampart " (1 K. xxi. 23 ; 2 Sam. 
XX. 15 [A. V. " trench," marg. the outmost 

3 Y 



wall ; R. V". " rampart "] ; Ges. Tlies. p. 454), 
which was perhaps either a palisade or wall 
lining the ditch, or a wall raised midway within 
the ditch itself. Both of these methods of 
strengthening fortified places, by hindering the 
near approach of machines, were usual in earlier 
Egyptian fortifications (Wilkinson, Anc. Eij. i. 
408 [1878]), but would generally be of less 
use in the hill forts of Palestine than in Egypt. 
In many towns there was a keep or citadel for a 
last resource to the defenders. Those remaining 
in the Haurdn and Ledja are square. Such existed 
at Shechem and Thebez (Judg. is. 46, 51, viii. 17 ; 
2 K. ix. 17), and the great forts or towers of Pse- 
phinus, Hippicus, and especially Antonia, served 
a similar purpose, as well as tliat of overawing 
the town at Jerusalem. These forts were well 
furnished with cisterns (Acts xxi. 34 ; 2 Mace. 
V. 5 ; Joseph. Ant. xviii. 4, § 3 ; B. J. i. 5, § 4, 
V. 4, § 2, vi. 2, § 1). At the time of the en- 
trance of Israel into Canaan there were many 
fenced cities existing, which at first caused great 
alarm to the exploring party of seai'chers (Num. 
xiii. 28), and afterwards much trouble to the 
people in subduing them. Many of these were 


refortified, or, as it is expressed, rebuilt by the 
Hebrews (Num. xxxii. 17, 34-42 ; Deut. iii. 4, 5 ; 
Josh. xi. 12, 13 ; Judg. i. 27-33), and many, 
especially those on the sea-coast, remained for a 
long time in the possession of their inhabitants, 
who were enabled to preserve them by means of 
their strength in chariots (Josh. xiii. 3, 6, xvii. 
16; Judg. i. 19; 2 K. xviii. 8; 2 Ch. xxvi. 6). 
The strength of Jerusalem was shown by the 
fact that that city, or at least the citadel, or 
" stronghold of Zion," remained in the posses- 
sion of the Jebusites until the time of David 
(2 Sam. V. 6, 7 ; 1 Ch. xi. 5). Among the 
kings of Israel and Judah several are mentioned 
as fortifiers or " builders " of cities : Solomon 
(1 K. ix. 17-19 ; 2 Ch. viii. 4-6), Jeroboam I. 
(1 K. xii. 25), Rehoboam (2 Ch. xi. 5, 12), Baasha 
(1 K. XV. 17), Omri (1 K. xvi. 24), Hezekiah 
(2 Ch. xxxii. 5), Asa (2 Ch. xiv. 6, 7), Jehosha- 
phat (2 Ch. xvii. 12), but especially Uzziah 
(2 K. xiv. 22 ; 2 Ch. xxvi. 2, 9, 15) ; and in the 
reign of Ahab the town of Jericho was rebuilt 
and fortified by a private individual, Hiel of 
Bethel (1 K. xvi. 34). Herod the Gi-eat was 
conspicuous in fortifying strong positions, as 

Assyrian Fortifications 

Masada, Machaerus, Herodium, besides his great 
works at Jerusalem (Joseph. B. J. vii. 6, 
§§ 1, 2, and 8, § 3 ; B. J. i. 21, § 10 ; Ant. 
xiv. 13, § 9). 

But the fortified places of Palestine served 
only in a few instances to check effectually the 
progress of an invading force, though many in- 
stances of determined and protracted resistance 
are on record, as of Samaria for three years 
(2 K. xviii. 10), of Jerusalem (2 K. xxv. 3) for 
four months, and in later times of Jotapata, 
Gamala, Machaerus, Masada, and above all Jeru- 
salem itself, the strength of whose defences drew 
forth the admiration of the conqueror Titus 

(Joseph. B. J. iii. 6, iv. 1 and 9, vii. 6, §§ 2-4 
aud 8 ; Robinson, i. 232). 

The earlier Egyptian fortifications consisted 
usually of a quadrangular and sometimes double 
wall of sun-dried brick, 15 feet thick, and often 
50 feet in height, with square towers at inter- 
vals, of the same height as the walls, both 
crowned with a parapet, and a round-headed 
battlement in shape like a shield. A second lower 
wall with towers at the entrance was added, 
distant 13 to 20 feet from the main wall, and 
sometimes another was made of 70 or 100 feet 
in length, projecting at right angles from the 
main wall to enable the defenders to annoy the 


assailants in flank. The ditch was sometimes 
fortified by a sort of tenaille in the ditch itself, 
or a ravelin on its edge. In later times the prac- 
tice of fortifying towns was laid aside, and the 
large temples with their enclosures were made 
to serve the purpose of forts (Wilkinson, Anc.' 
Egypt, i. 408, 409 [1878]). 

The fortifications of Nineveh, Babylon, Ecba- 
tana, and of Tyre and Sidon are all mentioned, 
either in the Canonical Books or in the Apocrypha. 



The so-called Golden Gate of Jerusalem, showing snpirased 
remains of the old Jewish Wall. 

In the sculptures of Nineveh representations are 
found of walled towns, of which one is thought 
to represent Tyre, and all illustrate the mode of 
fortification adopted both by the Assyrians and 
their enemies (Jar. li. 30-32, 58 ; Ezek. xxvii. 
11; Amos i. 10; Nah. iii. 14; Zech. is. 3; Tob. 
i. 17, xiv. 14, 15; Judith i. 1, 4; Layard, Nin. 
ii. pp. 275, 279, 388, 395; Nin. ^ Bah. pp. 231, 
358 ; Mon. of Nin. pt. ii. 39, 43). [H. W. P.] 

FERRET (np3X, andkdh ; nvyaXri ; mygale ; 
R. V. " Gecko "), one of the unclean, creeping 
things forbidden as food in Lev. si. 30. All 
commentators are agreed that the rendering of 
the A. V. is erroneous. That of the R. V. seems 
the most probable (see the marg. note in loco). 
This and the three which follow it in Leviticus 
are " creeping things," or reptiles ; and the 
name is from a root p3X, " to sigh or groan," 
well applicable to the rapid clucking sound 
made by the Gecko (^Ptyodactylus gecko) by 
vibrating its tongue against its palate, whence 
the name. The LXX. translates it ixvya\-/\, 
the shrew mouse (^Sorex araneus), which is 
common enough in Palestine, where are also 
other species of shrew. The Rabbinical writers 
identify andkdh with the hedgehog, which, 
though not uncommon in the country, would 
not be classed with the creeping things, but is 
looked upon as a small porcupine (Lewysohn, 
Zool. des Talmuds, §§ 129, 134). The gecko is 
extremely common in the Holy Land and in 
Arabia. It runs with great rapidity on walls 
and on smooth, indented surfaces, attaching itself 
to a ceiling by means of a remarkable provision 

in the structure of the underside of its toes, a 
series of fine laminae or plates, so that its move- 
ments appear like those of a fly. [H. B. T.] 

FESTIVALS. I. The student of antiquity 
soon discovers that there is little that can be 
called strange or peculiar in the principal 
features of the Mosaic system of ritual and 
observance. The ceremonial actions in which 
the religious spirit found natural expression are 
much the same h(!re as elsewhere [see Fasting]; 
allowing for modifications of more or less im- 
portance, introduced from time to time by 
special enactment, or originating in the altered 
circumstances of the Israelitish people at the 
various stages of their history. The Higher 
Revelation could find free course in the ancient 
channels ; new ones were needless, and might 
even have proved a hindrance to its beneficent 
progress. What was good or capable of ex- 
pressing good in existing religious usage was 
taken up and moulded to its own purposes by 
the religion of Moses and the Prophets. Among 
the institutions of natural * religion which were 
thus accepted by Mosaism as legitimate and 
worthy of adoption and regulation in the 
interests of a more spiritual faith and a more 
enlightened practice, was the festival. 

A festival or feast is a period of time con- 
sisting of one or more consecutive holy days ; 
that is, days hallowed or set apart for the 
honour of God. Generically a holy season, the 
festival is specifically a season of rejoicing, and 
thus excludes the fast. The principal business 
of the festival in the ancient world was sacrifice 
with its attendant ceremonies ; and this natur- 
ally involved a more or less entire cessation 
of the ordinary business of life. 

The opinion that the germ of the festival, as 
of all other worship, is to be found in periodical 
offerings and prayers to the departed, is far 
from being borne out by the oldest available 
evidence. It directly contradicts the testimony 
of the documents of the extremely primitive 
Accadian religion ; where the chief objects of 
adoration are not ghosts, but elemental Powers 
of Heaven, Earth, the Deep, Fire, Wind, and 
Water : a religion which takes us back to at 
least five thousand years before our era, and 
whose beginnings must be referred to a yet 
remoter epoch. Ea, the Creator of Man, who 
has his home in "the waters under the earth," 
is no more a magnified ghost than is Nanna the 
Moon, or Utu the Sun, or Mermer the Wind, or 
Bilgi the Fire, or Nergal the God of W^ar, or 
Ningirsu (the Chinese Siennung) the God of 
Tillage. Yet these deities belong to the earliest 
records of the oldest known language — the 
primitive speech of the land of Shamir and 

To make " Animism " the one original form 
of religion is to ignore the fact that the im- 
pressions received in dreams and associated with 
the mystery of death were neither the most 
frequent nor the most vivid of the influences 
to which the primitive mind was subject. 
The powers of nature, the great objects of 
the physical world, the sun and moon daily 
departing and returning, apparently of their 

" By " natural," in this connexion, I mean, nniversallj 
resultmg from the religious instincts of humanity. 

3 y 2 




own will and motion, the sound and force of 
the unseen winds, the terrific phenomena of the 
storm, would from the outset impress ignorant 
but receptive humanity *" with those lively 
emotions of wonder and awe which find an 
instinctive expression in worship ; even if we 
must grant that man first appeared upon this 
earthly scene in that forlorn destitution of 
reason and conscience and spiritual intuition 
which current speculation so freely presupposes. 
" Animism," to say the least, is no more a com- 
plete account of the origin of religion than the 
chemistry of the body is a complete account of 
human nature ; and there is no ground in 
archaeology for denying that the sense of Unseen 
Non-human Living Powers is as truly an 
aboriginal endowment of humanity as the sense 
of an external world. 

The Christian apologist is by no means con- 
cerned to prove the absolute originality of the 
Festivals prescribed or permitted by the Mosaic 
Law. It is enough for his purpose to establish 
the fact that these and other customary ob- 
servances were vitalized under the new religion 
by the infusion of a new spirit. That Israel, 
like other contemporary peoples, observed 
certain festivals before the time of Moses is a 
fact which might reasonably be taken for 
granted. In those times no festivals could only 
mean no religion. Besides, if the ancestors of 
Israel migrated from " Ur of the Chaldees " 
(Gen. xi. 31), and if they there had "served 
other gods " (Josh. xxiv. 2), they must have 
kept the festivals of the Moon, the tutelar god 
of Ur. It is an arbitraiy and ignorant concep- 
tion, justified neither by the sacred records nor 
by historical experience, which imagines that 
the Mosaic legislation implied or made possible 
a clean sweep of all primitive traditions, and 
abolished for Israel the entire heritage of the 
past. That is not the method by which progress 
has been achieved in the history of religion. 

But we have the positive evidence of the 
Hebrew language, with its use of the primitive 
Semitic term JH (chag), which is common to 
Hebrew and the cognate dialects, and must have 
descended from the period when the great Semitic 
family had not yet broken up into distinct 
nations. It is the term rendered " feast " in 
Exod. X. 9 ; cp. iii. 18, v. 1. The tenacious 
vitality of traditional festivals is well known 
from general history, and may be illustrated by 
the long survival of the Roman Saturnalia, 
under more or less transparent disguises, in 
Christian times. 

In Israel, as in other ancient nations, we find 
Festivals or holy times associated (1) with the 
periodic changes of the moon, and (2) with the 
recurring seasons of the year. Of the former 
kind were the New Moons and Sabbaths ; of the 
latter, the three great annual Pilgrimage- 
Feasts. As regards the question of i-elative 
antiquity, the lunar Festivals would seem to be 
the older. All indications go to suggest that 
they were of primitive observance in Israel, and 
the opening page of Genesis represents the 
Sabbath as of immemorial institution; in perfect 
harmony with what we learn from other 

«> I suppose no one would credit " anthropoid apes " 
with any sort of worship — even that of their dead 

sources, viz. that a Sabbath or Day of Rest was 
known in ancient Babylonia, the primeval home 
of the forefathers of Jacob, and that the New 
Moons were there observed with prescribed 
hymns and offerings (see W.A.I, iv.^, plates 25 
and 32-33*). The difl'erences of detail in regard 
to the observance of the Sabbath, e.g. that the 
Babylonian Kalendars seem to restrict it to the 
king and certain members of the priestly classes, 
and that the 19th day of the month is charac- 
terised in the same terms as the 7th, 14th, 21st, 
and 28th, cannot reasonably be considered to 
weaken the evidence for the Babylonian origin 
of the Sabbath. We should expect that in this 
as in other instances the efl'ect of Mosaism 
would be to develop and spiritualize a pre- 
existing institution. In the prominence which 
it gave to the Sabbath, in the strictness and the 
universality of the ordinance, and above all in 
the religious significance associated therewith, 
we may still say with Dillmann that Mosaism 
was " quite original and creative." "^ 

As Wellhausen has remarked, it is probable 
that the Sabbath was originally regulated by 
the phases of the moon, and thus occurred on 
the 7th, 14th, 21st (and 28th) days of the month, 
the new moon being reckoned as the first day. 
Hence the anxious care with which from the 
earliest period watch was kept for the first ap- 
pearance of the new moon which determined the 
beginning of the month. The service rendered to 
man by this planet as a measurer of time and 
an indicator of holy seasons is more than once 
recognised in the Old Testament. It is called 
" the faithful witness in the sky " (Ps. Ixxxis. 
37), and is said to have been appointed " for set 
seasons " (Ps. civ. 19 ; cp. Gen. i. 14). 

That the New Moons, i.e. the first days of the 
twelve or thirteen lunar months of the Hebrew 
year [see Year], were held in high estimation 
from ancient times in Israel, is sufficiently 
attested, both by the Historical and by the 
Prophetical Books (1 Sam. xx. 5, 18 ; 2 K. iv. 
23 ; Amos viii. 5 ; Hos. ii. 11 ; Is. i. 13 ; cp. Ps. 
Ixxxi. 3) ; while the Law lent its sanction to 
these traditional holy days by the prescription 
of additional offerings (Num. xxviii. 11-15) for 
ail of them, and by raising the New Moon of the 
Seventh Month to a position of special sanctity 
(Lev. xxiii. 24 sqq. ; Num. xxix. 1 sqq. ; Feast 
OF Trumpets). The observance of the New 
Moons lasted even to Christian times (Col. ii. 

The position accorded to the New Moon of the 
seventh month is not an isolated fact. It stands 
in connexion with that peculiar extension of the 
Sabbatical idea to months and years, of which 

' The late George Smith, quoted by Wellhausen, 
Proleg. p. 112, n. 2, speaks of " a general prohibition 
of work on these days" {Assyr. Eponym Canon, 
pp. 19, 20). Mr. Smith appears to have inferred this 
from the expression ud gdl-gal, " a bad (or unlucky) 
day," vmu limnu, which the Babylonian Kalendars 
apply to the foiu (five) days. The texts, however, say 
nothing about general observance. They only regulate 
the conduct of the king and two other ofQcial persons — 
a priest and a soothsayer. 

The definition preserved in W.A.I, ii. 32, 16 ab, 
um nuh libbi \ sabattum, "The Day of Rest of the 
Heart | The Sabbath," is very remarkable. There is, 
however, no documentary evidence connecting it with 
the five days mentioned in the text. 




no trace has been found outside of Mosaism. 
Thus, as the first day of the seventh month was 
to be liallowed by entire rest from work 
{shabbathda) and by religious assembly and 
sacrifice, so the seventh year was ordained as a 
year of rest for the laud, during which the 
sacred soil, Jehovah's gift to His people, was to 
keep " a Sabbath of perfect rest " {shabbath 
shabbuthon; Lev. xxv. 4) by being left to lie 
fallow all the year (Ex. xxiii. 11 ; Lev. xxv. 2-7 ; 
Deut. XV. 1 sq.). Similarly, it was ordered that 
after the lapse of seven times seven years, or 
" seven Sabbaths (weeks) of years," the year of 
Jubilee should be celebrated (Lev. xxv. 8). 

The great annual Festivals connected with the 
seasons of the year seem to have had their origin 
in the joy and thankfulness which led men to 
offer to God the firstlings of their flocks and 
herds and the first-fruits of the field and the 
vineyard (cp. Gen. iv. 3, 4), Hence the spring 
and autumn Festivals, vestiges of which are 
found in the remains of so many ancient peoples, 
remote from each other in space and time, in 
race and language. Among nations akin to the 
Hebrews, the festival of New Year was kept by 
the Babylonians and Assyrians, as we learn 
from the cuneiform inscriptions of Esarhaddon 
and Nebuchadnezzar ; ^ while the Sacaean feast 
which was celebrated five days in the eleventh 
month, and was a kind of Saturnalia, may per- 
haps represent the Autumn feast (Berosus ap. 
Athen. Deipn. xiv. 9, 44 ; Ctesias, Fragm. M.ssyr. 
20). The Syrians of Harran had a famous 
spring festival (Chwolsohn, Ssabier, ii. 25); and 
the Arabs before Muhammad appear to have 
observed their seventh month, Kajab, as a holy 
festival month. Among peoples of Aryan race, 
the ancient Persians are said to have held a new 
year's festival (Nairoz) for six days at the 
beginning of the first month (Farvardin = 
March-April), and an autumn feast also of six 
days' duration (Mihrgan), from the 16th 
day of the seventh month (Mihr = September- 
October) onwards. The Hindus still celebrate 
their //u/i'-feast in March, and a feast of harvest 
in September. The general practice of antiquity, 
as established by these and similar instances, 
raises a strong presumption in favour of the 
historical character of the three great annual 
Festivals of Israel. It is true that there is little 
specific mention of these Festivals outside the 
Books of the Law. But here again, as in the 
case of Fasts, we have to bear in mind the 
poverty of our documents. The unexceptionable 
evidence of the prophetic allusions may be con- 
sidered to supply the deficiencies of the historical 
narratives. We know from Amos (v. 21 ; viii. 
5, 10) and Hosea (ii. 13 ; ix. 5) that the annual 
Feasts, as well as the New Moons and Sabbaths, 
were, with whatever deviations from the strict 
order of Mosaism as represented by the more 
orthodox practice of Judah, diligently observed 
in Northern Israel ; and the references of Isaiah 
(i. 12-14 ; xxix. 1 ; xxx. 29) prove the popu- 
larity of the traditional Festivals in the southern 
kingdom. As regards the premonarchical 
period, Dillmann justly considers the notice of 

d The feast was called Zagmukku, a term explained 
to mean res satti, "Beginning of the year" (=;Heb. 
^3t^'^ Ci'N^). and derived from the Accadian zag, 
"head," and mog, mu, " year." 

the first celebration in Canaan of Passover and 
the Feast of Unleavened Bi-ead (Josh. v. 10, 11) 
to be ancient and authentic. The annual feast, 
celebrated with dances of virgins at Shiloh in 
the time of the Judges, appears from the context 
to have been a vintage-feast, and thus to repre- 
sent the Feast of Tabernacles (Judg. xxi. 
19 sq.) ; and towards tl>e close of this period 
we have the yearly pilgrimage of Elkanah and 
his family to the same sanctuary (1 Sara. i. 3, 
21). The sacrifices which Solomon offered 
" three times in a year " (1 K. ix. 25) are 
rightly referred by the later historian to the 
three great annual Feasts (2 Ch. viii. 13); and 
that sovereign is recorded to have dedicated the 
Temple in the seventh month immediately 
before the Feast of Tabernacles (1 K. viii. 2, 65, 
66 ; cp. 2 Ch. vii. 9, 10). The important and 
unquestionably authentic notice of Jeroboam's 
transference of this last great Festival from the 
seventh to the eighth month proves at once its 
previous observance and the strong hold which 
it had upon the people (1 K. xii. 32). We thus 
have adequate if not abundant evidence in 
favour of what is, after all, the natural con- 
clusion that Israel, like every other ancient 
people of note, had from the outset its regular 
Festivals and Holy Days. When, therefore, it is 
said (2 K. xxiii. 22) that no such Passover as 
that of the eighteenth year of Josiah had been 
held " from the days of the Judges," it is obvious 
that we are not to understand that the Passover 
had never before been celebrated at all. This 
extraordinary inference of a defunct criticism 
does violence to the contest (Heb. " the like of 
this Passover "), and, moreover, would prove 
too much ; for the chronicler has made a similar 
statement in regard to this celebration (2 Ch. 
XXXV. 18), and a yet more inclusive one in 
regard to the Feast of Tabernacles (Neh. viii. 
17) ; and no critic would accuse that writer of 
disbelief in the Mosaic institution of the three 
great Festivals. The plain meaning of these 
passages is that the Festivals in question had 
not previously been observed in perfect accord- 
ance with the letter of the written Law. 

While all the holy times of the Hebrews 
were alike Mo'adim (DnWID), " fixed or ap- 
pointed seasons " (Gen. i. 14 ; Lev. xxiii. 2), 
the three annual Feasts of Passover and Un- 
leavened Bread, of Pentecost, and of Tabernacles, 
were also called Chaggim (D"'iin) ; a term which, 
according to its etymology, may have originally 
denoted dances in a ring, probably accompanied 
by music and singing, like the Greek cyclic 
chorus. The cognate verb (J^PI) means " to 
dance," 1 Sam. xxx. 16 ; elsewhere it is " to 
keep festival " (Ex. xxxii. 6, 18, 19 ; Judg. sxi. 
19 ; Lev. xxiii. 39 ; Ps. xlii. 4), " because they 
danced and expanded the Good Day (i.e. the 
Feast) with rejoicing," as Kimchi explains." 

e In Arabic the root ^ , hhag^a, is "to go on 

pilgrimage " to Mecca ; wMch agrees with the fact that 
the Hebrew chaggim were pilgrimage-feasts. 
The Talmud uses the term Qt^J"!, regalim, in this 

sense ; owing to a misunderstanding of the sense of that 
term in Ex. xxiii. 14 ; cp. Num. xxii. 28 (= "times ") 
(Ges. Thes. s. v. ^J~)). 



Besides the earlier prescription of these Feasts 
in Ex. xsiii. 14-19, xxsiv. 18 sq. (cp. Deut. 
rvi.), the middle section of the Law, now com- 
monly known as " The Priestly Legislation " 
(das PriesterhucK), which Dillmann dates circ. 
1000 B.C., but which Graf, Wellhausen, and 
their school refer to the age following the 
Return, furnishes a more elaborate Kalendar ot 
Festivals (Lev. xxiii. ; Num. xxviii., xxis.). In 
all, seven holy seasons (" set times," mo'adim, 
Lev. xxiii. 2) are reckoned in addition to the 
weekly Sabbath, as follows : — 

(1.) Passover, on the 14th of the first month. 

(2.) Unleavened Bread, seven days, beginning 
with the 15th of the first month. 

(3.) Pentecost, the 50th day after the 16th 
of the first month. 

(4.) New Moon, or first day, of the seventh 

(5.) Day of Atonement, on the 10th day of 
the seventh month. 

(6.) Feast of Tabernacles, seven days, from 
the 15th of the seventh month. 

(7.) The Asereth ; that is, perhaps, the Closing 
Bay, on the 22nd of the seventh month. 

Thus six of the seven annual sacred times 
fall in the first and seventh months. The five 
(or six) months which include winter and the 
seasons of ploughing and sowing are unmarked 
by any annual feasts or holy seasons. So for as 
the numbers are concerned, there is no material 
divergence between the different accounts. 
Where only three Feasts are enumerated, the 
great popular Pilgrim-festivals {Chaggim) are 
intended. For particulars as to these Feasts, 
see the special articles. Here it may be observed 
that the Feast of Unleavened Bread, falling in 
the month Abib, i.e. the month of Ears of Corn 
(Ex. xxiii. 15), which was the month of the 
vernal equinox (March-April) when the first 
ears ripened, marked the beginning, as the Feast 
of Pentecost marked the end, of the corn- 
harvest ; while the Feast of Tabernacles was 
essentially a vintage-feast. The agricultural 
basis of these festivals is evident from their 
alternative names. But the mode in which the 
Law associated new facts of religious import 
even with observances which in their origin 
had a different significance, and thus turned 
them into celebrations commemorative of great 
providential events in the history of Israel, is 
clearly seen in the reason assigned for making 
this month Abib the beginning of the year (Ex. 
xii. 2),E and in the sacramental meaning as- 
cribed to the ordinances of the Passover and of 
Unleavened Bread (Deut. xvi. 1-3). Even the 
Feast of Tabernacles, or of Ingathering (Ex. 
xxiii. 16), with its more obvious import of 
harvest joy and thanksgiving, had a historical 
reference connected with the feature of dwelling 
in leafy booths (Lev. xxiii. 42, 43). Abib or 
Nisan was, however, the first month of the 
Babylonian year {Nisannu; a softened form ef 
the Accadian ni-sanga, "that which is first"); 

*■ After the introduction of the Seleucid era, the New 
Moon of the seventh month became a sort of New Year's 

e According to another reckoning (Kx. xxiii. 16"), 
which was the rule in Syria, the year began in autumn 
[see YEAn]. 


as Tisri, the seventh month, had the same name 
and position in the Babylonian Kalendar (Tdi- 
ritii, probably meaning " Consecration "). The 
Accadian name ITI Dr AZAG, " month of the 
Pure Abode," suggests a possible connexion with 
the Feast of Tabernacles.'' However this may 
be, the fact that these two 7-day Festivals 
began on the 15th day of the month, — that is, 
at the time of full moon, which was also a 
Babylonian sacred season, — seems to indicate a 
connexion with the lunar cycle (cp. Num. ix. 
9 sq.). The special importance of the Feast 
of Tabernacles, both in earlier and in later times, 
is evident from Jeroboam's interference with it 
(1 K. xii. 32) and from Zechariah's prophecy 
concerning it (Zech. xii. 14). 

Ewald and Dillmann have plausibly grouped 
the six annual Festivals, including the Day of 
Atonement and excluding the seventh New 
Moon, round the two great Feasts of Unleavened 
Bread and Tabernacles. Each greater Festival 
is ushered in by a preliminary holy day (Vor- 
feier) and terminated by a closing celebration 
(Nachfeier'). The Passover and Pentecost are 
thus subordinated to the spring Festival ; the 
Day of Atonement and the Asereth to that of 
autumn. Dillmann's ingenious argument must 
not, however, blind us to the fact that the 
documents always name three, never two Pil- 
grim-Feasts (Chaggini). A love of symmetry 
and system is apt to carry us beyond our evi- 
dence. Neither the Day of Pentecost nor that 
of Atonement really fit into the framework pro- 
vided for them. Both are independent celebra- 
tions of the greatest importance ; and the latter 
is not a " festival " at all in the sense of the 
three Pilgrim-Feasts. 

All these sacred times involved the cessation 
of ordinary business. But seven days within 
the feast-cycle were distinguished as Days of 
Holy Convocation (Ex. xii. 15 ; Lev. xxiii. ; 
Num. xxviii. ; Is. i. 13), and were observed with 
a more Sabbatical strictness. They were the 
first and seventh days of the Feast of Un- 
leavened Bread, the Day of Atonement, the 
first of the Feast of Tabernacles, the eighth day 
(Asereth} which immediately followed it, the 
New JMoon of the seventh month, and the Day 
of Pentecost. Of these, the Day of Atonement 
demanded absolute cessation of every kind of 
work (Lev. xvi. 29, xxiii. 2, 31; Num. xxix. 7); 
on the other six, abstention from all " servile 

■work " (m^y n3N?0 ; perhaps chiefly hus- 
bandry) was enough (Lev. xxiii. 7, 8, 21, 25, 35, 
36; Num. xxviii. 18, 19: cp. Ex. xii. 16). On 
all these days assemblies were called for public 
worship. Owing to their Sabbath-like cha- 
racteristics, they are designated by a kindred 
Hebrew term (shahbdthon ; formed from shab- 
bdth: Lev. xxiii. 24, 39): the Day of Atonement 
is distinguished by a title which combines the 
two expressions (shabbath shabbdthon ; Lev. xxiii. 
32).' On any other day of the great 7-day 

•» The term on is explained sukku, "hut,"— which 
seems to answer to the Heb. sukkoth, ni3D> 'ii tl^e 

name of the feast, — as well as subtu, "dwelling," and 
tilu, "mound " (see S<=. 25, 28, 30). AVe may remember 
that the booths of the Feast were set up on the house- 
i At the end of the verse, simply ShAxbbath, Sabbath. 




festirals work was for obvious reasons permis- 
sible, provided the day did not happen to 
coincide with a weekly Sabbath. 

Festival days were naturally marked in the 
public service of the national Sanctuary by 
special sacrilices, and in some cases by oli'erings 
characteristic of the occasion, in addition to the 
ordinary morning and evening sacrifice (Lev. 
xxiii. ; Num. xxviii., xxix.). As regards the 
attendance of tiie people, it is evident that the 
public proclamation of a " Day of Holy Convo- 
cation " invited the presence at the services of 
all Israelites who might be in the neighbour- 
hood of the Sanctuary ; and for the three great 
Pilgrim-feasts, attendance was enjoined by the 
Law upon all males (Ex. xxiii. 14-17, xxxiv. 
23 sqq. ; Deut. xvi. 16). It was expressly for- 
bidden to come empty-handed ; and the custom 
was to take advantage of the pilgrimages for 
the presentation of obligatory as well as free- 
will oft'erings. The fact that no penalties are 
threatened for non-attendance may indicate that 
the Law is rather regulating ancient and 
popular usage than ordaining new observances. 
At all events, the general enthusiasm for the 
pilgrimage-feasts from ancient times is suffi- 
ciently attested (Ps. xlii. 5, Ixxxiv. 6, 7 ; and 
the Pilgrims' Hymn-book, Pss. cxx.-cxxxiv. ; 
cp. 1 K. xii. 32). In individual cases, allowance 
would naturally be made for untoward circum- 
stances, such as distance, difficulties of travel- 
ling, poverty, and other material obstaclet. (cp. 
John vii. 8, 10). Philo of Alexandria was even 
satisfied with a single pilgrimage, like a modern 
Mahometan Haggi. 

Although women were not under formal 
obligation to make the annual pilgrimages, the 
examples of Hannah (1 Sam. i. 7 ; ii. 19) and 
of the Blessed Virgin (Luke ii. 41) indicate 
the practice of pious women in regard to 
the greater Festivals from the earliest period 
to the latest. In spite of all deductions, the 
conflux of Jews from all parts of the world 
to Jerusalem for the celebration of the three 
great Feasts, especially that of Pentecost (Acts 
ii. 9 sq.), was, in the period after the Return, 
enormous. Josephus estimates the number at- 
tending the Passover at over two millions ; and 
the Roman procurator was always careful to 
make a strong show of military force in Jeru- 
salem on these occasions, in order to overawe 
the multitudes of fervid patriots (Jos. Ant. xvii. 
9 § 3, 10 § 2, XX. 8 § 11 ; Bell. Jud. ii. 12 § 1 : 
cp. Matt. xxvi. 5; Luke xiii. 1; Acts xxi. 31 
sq.). The great influence of these gatherings, 
not only as vivifying old religious memories and 
intensifying devotion, but also as fostering a 
sense of national unity, was already recognised 
in the early period of the monarchy (1 K. xii. 
26, 27; cp. 2 Ch. xxx. 1); and their effect 
upon the maintenance of Judaism as a living 
force throughout the Greek and Roman world 
until the fall of Jerusalem can hardly be 

II. In the period after the Return, certain 
annual festivals were instituted in commemora- 
tion of historical events in which the mercy of 
God was especially recognised. Of these the 
chief were : — (1) The Feast of Purim (Esth. ix. 
20 sq. : see Purim), in memory of the deliver- 
ance of the nation from the designs of Haman ; 
and (2) the Feast of the Dedication, instituted 

B.C. 164 by Judas Maccabaeus (1 Mace. iv. 56 : 
see Dedication). Other new festivals of this 
period — such as Nicanor's Day, commemorating 
the victory of the 13th Adar, b.C. 161 (see Nl- 
CANOlt: 1 Mace. vii. 4'J ; Jos. Ant. xii. 10, § 5), 
and the anniversary ot the taking of the Acra 
by Simon, B.C. 141 (1 Mace. xiii. 52) — soon fell 
into disuse, though the former appears to have 
survived until the time of Josephus. The so- 
called " Feasts of the Wood-carryings," kopToi 
Twv ^vXo^opiuv (Jos. Bell. Jud. ii. 17, §§ 6, 7 ; 
Taanith, iv. 5) grew out of the circumstance 
that the offerings of wood for Temple use (Neh. 
X. 34 ; xiii. 21) came in the course of time to be 
brought to Jerusalem by all contributors ou 
the same day, viz. the 14th of the fifth month 
(Loos=r Ab). 

III. The New Testament does not record the 
formal institution of any Christian Festivals. 
But although not a word is said of its insti- 
tution, we find the Lord's Day already recog- 
nised by the Church (Acts xx. 7 : cp. 1 Cor. 
xvi. 1, 2; Heb. x. 25; Rev. i. 10); and the 
earliest external testimonies confirm the natural 
inference from these passages [see Lord's Day]. 
The first Christians, moreover, followed the 
example of their Master in observing the 
greater Festivals of the Jewish Church, at least 
until the destruction of the Holy Place. Those 
Festivals, indeed, had received a new significance 
for them, by association with the principal 
events in the history of Redemption; just as 
the Law had given them a higher import for 
ancient Isi'ael, by making them commemorative 
of the turning points in the historical emanci- 
pation of Jehovah's people. Thus the Passover 
was consecrated anew by the sacrifice of Christ 
our Passover (1 Cor. v. 7, 8) ; Pentecost, by the 
outpouring of the Holy Ghost (Acts ii. 1 sq. ; 
xviii. 21 ; xx. 16). 

For the rest, it is a superficial error to sup- 
pose that the cycle of Festivals is an unnecessary 
addition to the simplicity of the Gospel. A 
mechanical observance, and a total misconcep- 
tion of the use and meaning of festal solem- 
nities, may make it such in effect, as happened 
in the case of the old Jewish Church. But a 
similar perversion of the Lord's Day is by no 
means unknown in the history of Christian 
sects. The widespread, indeed we may say 
universal observance of special days and seasons 
among the great historical races of mankind, is 
a fact which goes far to prove that they answer 
to some special needs of human nature ; and 
reason cannot refuse to admit that the same 
grounds of religious expediency which suggested 
the institution of festivals and holy days in all 
the great pre-Christian systems, have lost little 
of their original force in the lapse of time. It 
seems plain that in our present circumstances — 
and more now, in the busy, restless modern 
world, than at any former period — such days 
and seasons of detachment, and holy meditation, 
and joyful commemoration of the great facts of 
Redemption — yes, and of the lives and deaths of 
those glorious patterns of our humbler walk, 
the saints of old, — can only be neglected at the 
deadly risk of complete absorption in the cares 
and pleasures of the passing scene. No stronger 
indication of the truth can well be imaginei 
than the necessity that has driven religious 
bodies, which in time past have exhibited the 



greatest hostility to the "ecclesiastical super- 
stition " of Saints' days, to the observance of 
unauthorised equivalents such as anniversaries, 
and harvest festivals, and " Flower Services," 
and " Watch Night." What are these and 
similar novelties but so many unconscious testi- 
monies to the wisdom of the Church Catholic 
in her ordinance of fixed holy days ? Festivals, 
in short, would seem to be necessary for the 
average of mankind, if the spiritual life needs 
recurring stimulus and renewal, if religion is to 
have its due, and if the homage of public wor- 
ship and thanksgiving is to be offered at fitting 
intervals and with due solemnity to our Divine 
Lord and King. 

See Reland, Antiq. Heir.; Bahr, Symbolik ; 
Ewald's Antiquities of Israel; Dillmann apud 
Schenkel's Bibellexicon, s. r. Feste ; Riehm, 
HWB., p. 430 sq. ; Graf, Die gesch. Biicher des 
A. T. ; Prof. W. Robertson Smith, Prophets, 
p. 383 ; Wellhausen's Prolegomena, pp. 83-120 ; 
Encycl. Brit.^ s. v. Festivals ; Hooker, Eccl. Pol. 
V. ch. Ixix. sq. [C J. B.] 

FESTUS (iria-Tos ; Festus'). Porcius Festus 
was sent by Nero as the successor of Felix in 
the government of Judaea, and probably arrived 
there in the summer of A.D. 60. On his reaching 
Jerusalem the case of St. Paul was at once 
brought before him by the chief priests, and on 
his return to Caesarea he held an inquiry. 
Perplexed by the religious questions raised on 
the trial (Acts xxv. 20), and still more from a 
desire to gain favour with his new subjects, he 
was disposed to carry St. Paul to Jerusalem for 
a further trial. The danger involved in this 
led St. Paul to appeal to Caesar. On the 
arrival of Agrippa, Festus related to him the 
whole affair, and sought his assistance in gain- 
ing understanding of the religious questions 
involved. The doctrine of the resurrection 
called out from Festus the words "Paul, thou 
art mad ; " but the discourse strengthened the 
governor's conviction of the prisoner's innocence 
of the chai-ges of the Jews, who had probably 
sought both before Felix and Festus to identify 
St. Paul with the religious impostors (^y6riTes) 
who under both governors played a prominent 
part in the disturbances of the time (cp. also 
Acts xxi. 38). Festus shows exactly the same 
selfishness as Felix in his readiness to gratify 
the Jews at St. Paul's expense. But he may 
not have heard of the conspiracy and ambush 
two years before, and may have suspected no 
treachery. Beyond this there is nothing to 
blame in him as a magistrate, and the narrative 
of the Acts harmonises with the account of 
Josephus (5. J. ii. 14, 1), who contrasts him 
favourably with his successor Albinus. His 
cynical inability to understand religious earnest- 
ness contrasts unfavourably with his predeces- 
sor's " knowledge of the Way " and awakened 
conscience ; but Festus was certainly a better 
governor and probably a better man. His 
friendship with Herod Agrippa II. (Acts xxv. 
13) is illustrated by an incident recorded by 
Josephus (^Ant. xx. 8, 11), in which he takes 
Agrippa's part. He died in less than two years 
after his appointment. [E. R. B.] 

FETTERS (p)7\m; "pni ; Q-'ipT). 1. The 
first of these Hebrew words, nechushtaim, ex- 


presses the material of which fetters were 
usually made, viz. brass (Tre'Sai x^^'^'"' ? -^^ V. 
and R. V. " fetters of brass "), and also that 
they were made in pairs, the word being in the 
dual number: it is the most usual term for 
fetters (Judg. xvi. 21; 2 Sam. iii. 34; 2 K. 
xxv. 7 ; 2 Ch. xxxiii. 11, xxxvi. 6 ; Jer. xxxix. 
7, Iii. 11). Iron was occasionally employed for 
the purpose (Ps. cv. 18, cxlix. 8). 2. Cebel 
occurs only in the above Psalms, and, from its 
appearing in the singular number, may perhaps 
apply to the link which connected the fetters. 
Zikkim ("fetters," Job xxxvi. 8) is more usually 
translated " chains " (Ps. cxlix. 8 ; Is. xlv. 14 ; 
Nah. iii. 10), but its radical sense appears to 
refer to the contractioti of the feet by a chain 
(Gesen. Thesaur. p. 424). [W. L. B.] 

FEVER (.nmpj ni"5|l_, "iniri; iKrepos, 
plyos, ipeQian6s ; Lev. xxvi. 16 ; Deut. xxviii. 
22). These words, from various roots signify- 
ing heat or inflammation, are rendered in the 
A. V. by various words suggestive of fever, or 
a feverish affection. The word ^liyos ("shudder- 
ing ") suggests the ague as accompanied by 
fever, as in the opinion of the LXX. probably 
intended ; and this is still a very common 
disease in Palestine. The third word, which 
they render ipedtfffiSs (a term still known to 
pathology), a feverish irritation, and which in 
the A. V. is called burning fever, may perhaps 
be erysipelas. The cases in the Gospels are St. 
Peter's wife's mother (Matt. viii. 14 ; Mai'k i. 
30 ; Luke iv. 38) and the " nobleman's son " 
(John iv. 52, TrupeVcoi/cra, TTvperSs), but neither 
having any distinctive symptom. Fever con- 
stantly accompanies the bloody flux, or dysentery 
(Acts xxviii. 8 ; cp. De Mandelslo, Travels, 
ed. 1669, p. 65). Fevers of an inflammatory 
character are mentioned (Burckhardt, Arab. i. 
446) as common at Mecca, and putrid ones at 
Djidda. Intermittent fever and dysentery, the 
latter often fatal, are ordinary Arabian diseases. 
For the former, though often fatal to strangers, 
the natives care little, but much dread a 
relapse. These fevers sometimes occasion most 
troublesome swellings in the stomach and legs 
(ii. 290, 291). [H. H.] 

FIELD (nib). The Hebrew sadeh is not 
adequately represented by our " field ;" the two 
words agree in describing cultivated land, but 
they differ in point of extent, the sadeh being 
specifically applied to what is unenclosed, while 
the opposite notion of enclosure is involved in 
the word field. The essence of the Hebrew word 
has been variously taken to lie in each of these 
notions, Gesenius {Thesaur. p. 1321) giving it 
the sense o{ freedom, Stanley (S. and P. p. 490) 
that of smoothness, deriving arvum from arare. 
On the one hand, sadeh is applied to any culti- 
vated ground, whether pasture (Gen. xxix. 2, 
xxxi. 4, xxxiv. 7 ; Ex. ix. 3), tillage (Gen. xxxvii. 
7, xlvii. 24 ; Ruth ii. 2, 3 ; Job xxiv. 6 ; Jer, 
xxvi. 11 ; Micah iii. 12), woodland (1 Sam. xiv. 
25, A. V. and R. V. " ground ;" Ps. cxxxii. 6), 
or mountain-top (Judg. ix. 32, 36 ; ' 2 Sam. i. 
21) ; and in some instances in marked opposi- 
tion to the neighbouring wilderness (Stanley, 
pp. 236, 490), as in the instance of Jacob 
settling in the field of Shechem (Gen. xxxiii. 


19), the field of Moab (Gen. xxxvi. 35 ; Num. 
xxi. 2U, A. V. '• country ;" Ruth i. 1), and the 
▼ale of Siddim, i.e. of the cultivated fields, which 
formed the oasis of the Pentapolis (Gen. xiv. 3, 
8; see Dolitzsch [1887] and Diilmann^), though 
a ditl'erent sense has been given to the name by 
Gesenius (Thesaur. p. 1321). On the other hand, 
the sadeh is frequently contrasted with what is 
enclosed, whether a vineyard (Ex. xxii. 5 ; Lev. 
XXV. 3, 4; Num. xvi. 14, xx. 17; cp. Num. xxii. 
23, "the ass went into the field," with v. 24, "a 
path of the vineyards, a wall being on this side 
and a wall on that side "), a garden (the very 
name of which, JJ, implies enclosure), or a walled 
town (Deut. xxviii. 3, 16) : unwalled villages or 
scattered houses ranked in the eye of the Law as 
fields (Lev. xxv. 31), and hence the expression 
its Tovs aypovs = houses in the fields (in villas, 
Vulg. ; Mark vi. 36, 56). In many passages 
the term implies what is remote from a house 
(Gen. iv. 8, xxiv. 63 ; Deut. xxii. 25) or settled 
habitation, as in the case of Esau (Gen. xxv. 27 ; 
the LXX., however, refers it to his character, 
aypolKos) : this is more fully expressed by ^J3 
nn^n, " the open field " (Lev. xiv. 7, 53, xvii. 
5; Num. xix. 16; 2 Sam. xi. 11), with which 
is naturally coupled the notion of exposure and 
desertion (Jer. ix. 22 ; Ezek. xvi. 5, xxxii. 4, 
xzxiii. 27, sxxix. 5). 

The separate plots of ground were marked off 
by stones, which might easily be removed (Deut. 
xix. 14, xxvii. 17 ; cp. Job xxiv. 2 ; Prov. xxii. 
28, xxiii. 10) : the absence of fences rendered 
the fields liable to damage from straying cattle 
(Ex. xxii. 5) or fire (v. 6 ; 2 Sam. xiv. 30) : 
hence the necessity of constantly watching 
flocks and herds, the people so employed being 
in the present day named Natoor (Wortabet, 
Syria, i. 293). A certain amount of protection 
was gained by sowing the tallest and strongest 
of the grain crops on the outside : " spelt " 
appears to have been most commonly used for 
this purpose (Is. xxviii. 25, as in the margin). 
From the absence of enclosures, cultivated land 
of any size might be termed a field, whether it 
were a piece of ground of limited area (Gen. 
xxiii. 13, 17 ; Is. v. 8), a man's whole inherit- 
ance (Lev. xxvii. 16 sq. ; Ruth iv. 5 ; Jer. xxxii. 
9, 25 ; Prov. xxvii. 26, xxxi. 16), the ager 
pvhlicus of a town (Gen. xli. 48 ; Neh. xii. 29), 
as distinct, however, from the ground imme- 
diately adjacent to the walls of the Levitical 

cities, which was called B'lJO (A. V. and R. V. 
" suburbs "), and was deemed an appendage of 
the town itself (Josh. xxi. 11, 12), or lastly the 
territory of a people (Gen. xiv. 7, xxxii. 3, 
xxxvi. 35 ; Num. xxi. 20 ; Ruth i. 6, iv. 3 ; 

1 Sam. vi. 1, xxvii. 7, 11). In 1 Sam. xxvii. 5, 
"a town in the field" (A. V. and R. V. 
" country ") = a provincial town as distinct 
from the royal city. A plot of ground sepa- 
rated from a larger one was termed iTl'tJ' rip?n 
(Gen. xxxiii. 19 ; Ruth ii. 3 ; 1 Ch. xi.^ 13), or 

simply np?n (2 Sam. xiv. 30, xxiii. 12 ; cp. 

2 Sam. xix. 29). Fields occasionally received 
names after remarkable events, as Helkath- 
Hazzurim, the field of the strong men, or possibly 
of the sharp knives (R. V. marg., 2 Sam. ii. 16 ; 
cp. Driver, Notes on the Hcb. Text of the BB. of 



Sam. The LXX. has a difTerent reading), or 
from the use to which they may have been 
applied (2 K. xviii. 17 ; Is. vii. 3 ; Matt, 
xxvii. 7). 

It should be observed that the expressions 
"fruitful field" (Is. x. 18, xxix. 17, xxxii. 15, 
16) and " plentiful field " (Is. xvi. 10 ; Jer. xlviii. 
33) are not connected with sadeh, but with 
carmel, meaning a park or well-kept wood, as 
distinct from a wilderness or a forest. The 
same term occurs in 2 K. xix. 23 and Is. xxxvii. 
24 (A. V. " Carmel "), Is. x. 18 (" forest "), and 
Jer. iv. 26 (" fruitful place ") [Carmel]. Dis- 
tinct from this is the expression in Ezek. xvii. 
5, y"]rnnb (A. v. " fruitful- field "), which 
means a field suited for planting suckers. 

We have further to notice other terms — 
(1.) Shedemoth (DlDn^), translated "fields," 
and connected by Gesenius with the idea of 
enclosure. It is doubtful, however, whether 
the notion of burning does not rather lie at the 
bottom of the word. This gives a more con- 
sistent sense throughout. In Is. xvi. 8, it 
would thus mean the withered grape ; in Hab. 
iii. 17, blasted corn ; in Jer. xxxi. 40, the burnt 
parts of the city (no " fields " intervened be- 
tween the south-eastern angle of Jerusalem and 
the Kedron) ; while in 2 K. xxiii. 4, and Deut. 
xxxii. 32, the sense of a place of burning is ap- 
propriate. It is not therefore necessary to treat 
the word in Is. xxxvii. 27, " blasted," as a 
corrupt reading (cp. 2 K. xix. 26). (2.) Abel 

(73X), a y}(M-watered spot, frequently employed 
as a prefix in proper names. (3.) Achu (-inX), 
a word of Egyptian origin (see refF. in MV."), 
given in the LXX. in a Grecised form, ^^f 
(Gen. xli. 2, 18, "meadow;" Job viii. 11, "flag;" 
Is. xix. 7, LXX.), meaning the green flags and 
rushes that grow in the marshes of Lower Egypt. 
(4.) Maareh (ITirD), which occurs only once 
(Judg. XX. 33, "meadows"; R. V. " Maareh- 
Geba "), with a sense of openness or bareness or 
exposure : thus, " they came forth on account 
of the exposure of Gibeah," the Benjamites 
having been previously enticed away (v. 31). 
[W. L. B.] [F.] 

FIELD, FULLER'S, THE. [Fuller's 
Field, The.] 

FIELD, POTTER'S, THE. [Aceldama ; 
Potter's Field, The.] 

FIG, FIG-TREE (njNFl, teenah; Arab. 

/.wVi), teen ; avK^ ; ficus) belongs to the natural 

order of the Bread-fruit family, and the sub- 
order Moreae, which includes also the mulberry. 
It is a word of frequent occurrence in the 0. T., 
where it signifies the tree Ficus Carica of Lin- 
naeus, and also its fruit. The LXX. render it 
by ffvKTi and ctvkov, and when it signifies fruit 
by avK^i — also by (TvKewf or avudiv, ficetum, in 
Jer. V. 17 and Amos iv. 9. In N. T. avKri is the 
fig-tree, and crvKa the figs (Jas. iii. 12). It is 
indigenous in Southern Europe, North Africa, the 
Canary Islands, Asia Minor, Syria, Persia, Ar- 
menia, and Noi'thern India. It has a very smooth 
bark, with very large, thick, and palmate leaves. 
The branches are numerous, wide and spreading, 
presenting an object of striking beauty when in 



full leaf. The fruit, unlike any other in this 
country, is an enlarged, succulent, hollow re- 
ceptacle, containing the imperfect flowers in its 
interior. Hence the blossom of the fig-tree is 
not visible till the receptacle has been cut open. 
The ficr-tree is very common in Palestine (Deut. 
viii. 8). Mount Olivet was famous for its fig- 
trees in ancient times, and they are still found 
there (see Stanley, S. & P. pp. 187, 421, 422). 
The name probably means "early ripening," 

from 'i\, "to be in good time." See MV." 
In Gen. iii. 7, the identification of H^NJ!! 11?^ 
with the leaves of the Ficus Carica has been 
disputed by Gesenius, Tuch, and others (see 
Delitzsch [1887] in loco), who think that the 
large leaves of the Indian Musa Paradisiaca 
are meant (Germ. Adamsfeige, Fr. figuier 
cCAdarri). These leaves, however, would not 
have needed to be strung or sewn together, and 
the plant itself is not of the same kind as 
the fig-tree. Dillmann* considers that the 
writer chose the fig-leaf as the largest with 
which he was familiar among Palestine leaves. 

The failure or destruction of the fig is re- 
peatedly threatened by the Prophets as one of 
Jehovah's sore judgments upon the land, which 
was " a land of wheat and barley and vines and 
jig-trees " (Deut. viii. 8). " He smote their 
vines also and fig-trees " (Ps. cv. 33). It must 
be borne in mind that the dried fig is not only 
an agreeable luxury, but, as an important article 
of daily food, is one of the staples of the 
country. Dried figs along with barley-cakes 
are the usual provender of the traveller, as 
well as the cheapest food. 

" To sit every man under his vine and under 
his fig-tree" (1 K. iv. 25; 2 K. xviii. 31 ; Is. 
xxxvi. 16 ; Mic. iv. 4, Zech. iii. 10) conveyed 
to the Jew the fullest idea of peace, security, 
and prosperity. Nor is the expression merely 
figurative. There is no protection against the 
rays of an Eastern sun more complete than the 
dense foliage of the fig-tree, which often touches 
the ground at its circumference. Under such a 
fig-tree, screened from all human observation, 
had Nathanael wrestled in prayer, but was noted 
by the omniscient eye of Jesus the Messiah. 

When figs are spoken of as distinguished from 
the fig-tree, the plur. form D''3XP1 is used (see 
Jer. viii. 13). 

2. There are also the words n"l-132, 39, and 
n!?5'''> signifying different kinds of figs. 
(a.) in Hos. ix. 10, n^NRZl miSa signifies the 
first ripe of the fig-tree, and the same word 
occurs in Is. xxviii. 4, and in Mic. vii. 1 
(cp. Jer. xxiv. 2). Lowth on Is. xxviii. 4 
quotes from Shaw's Trav. p. 370 sq. a notice 
of the early fig called buccore, and in Spanish 
Alhacora (see MV." s. n.). (6.) iS is the 
unripe fig, which hangs through the winter. 
It is mentioned only in Cant. ii. 13, and its 
name comes from the root 332, crudus fuit. The 
LXX. render it oKvvOoi. It is found in the Greek 
word B-qdcpay}) — ''3X2 71^3, "house of green 
figs " (see Buxt. p. 1691). (c.) In the Historical 
Books of the 0. T. mention is made of cakes of 
figs, used as articles of food, and compressed 
into that form for the sake of keeping them. 
They also appear to have been used remedially 


for boils (2 K. xx. 7 ; Is. xxxviii. 21). Such a cake 

was called PIT'^'I, or more fully D''3X)il nl??'^. 

from a root which iu Arab, dahala = to make 
into a lump. Hence, or rather from the Syr. 

^{n?3^, the first letter being dropped, oame 
the Greek word iraXaOr}. Athenaeus (xi. p. 500, 
ed. Casaub.) makes express mention of the ira- 
XdQr] 'SvptaKT). Jerome on Ezek. vi. describes the 
TvaKdOri to be a mass of figs and rich dates, 
formed into the shape of bricks or tiles, and 
compressed in order that they may keep. Such 
cakes harden so as to need cutting with an axe. 

Few passages in the Gospels have given occa- 
sion to so much perplexity as that of St. Mai'k 
xi. 13, where the Evangelist relates the circum- 
stance of our Lord's cursing the fig-tree near 
Bethany : " And seeing a fig-tree afar off having 
leaves, He came, if haply He might find any 
thing thereon : and when He came to it, He 
found nothing but leaves ; for the time of figs 
was not yet " (R. V. " for it was not the season of 
figs"). The apparent unreasonableness of seek- 
ing fruit at a time when none could naturally 
be expected, and the consequent injustice of the 
sentence pronounced upon the tree, is obvious 
to every reader. 

The fig-tree, as has been stated above, in 
Palestine produces fruit at two, or even three, 
different periods of the year : first, there is the 
biccurdh, or " early ripe fig," which ripens from 
May to August, according to situation. The 
biccurdh drops oft' the tree as soon as ripe ; 
hence the allusion in Nah. iii. 12, when shaken 
they "even fall into the mouth of the eater." 
Shaw (Trav. i. 264, 8vo ed.) aptly compares 
the Spanish name breba for this early fruit, 
" quasi breve," as continuing only for a short 
time. About the time of the ripening of the 
biccHrim, the karmous or summer fig begins to 
be formed ; these rarely ripen before September, 
when another crop, called " the winter fig," 
appears. Shaw describes this kind as being of 
a much longer shape and darker complexion 
than the karmous, hanging and ripening on the 
tree even after the leaves are shed, and, pro- 
vided the winter pi-oves mild and temperate, 
being gathered as a delicious morsel in the spring 
(cp. also Plin. JV. If. xvi. 26, 27). 

The attempts to explain the above-quoted 
passage in St. Mark are numerous, and for the 
most part very unsatisfactory. 

The explanation which has found favour with 
most writers is that which understands the 
words Kaiphs crvKoiv to mean " the fig-harvest ; " 
the yap in this case is referred not to the clause 
immediately preceding, " He found nothing but 
leaves," but to the more remote one, " He came 
if haply He might find any thing thereon " (for 
a similar trajection it is usual to refer to Mark 
xvi. 3, 4) ; the sense of the whole passage being 
then as follows : " And seing a fig-tree afar off 
having leaves, He came if perchance He might 
find any fruit on it (and He ought to have found 
some), for the time of gathering it had not yet 
arrived, but when He came He found nothing 
but leaves " (see the notes in the Greek Testa- 
ment of Burton, Trollope, Bloomfield, Webster 
and Wilkinson ; Macknight, Harm, of the Gospels, 
ii. p. 591, note, 1809 ; Elsley's Annot. ad /. c, 
&c.), A forcible objection to this explanation 


will lie found in the fact that at the time im- 
plied, viz. the end of March or the beginning 
of April, no figs at all eatable would be found 
on the trees ; the hiccurim seldom ripen in 
Palestine before the end of June, and at the 
time of the Passover the fruit, to use Shaw's 
expression, would be "hard and no bigger than 
common plums," corresponding in this state to 
the paggim (D*5B) of Cant. ii. 13, wholly unfit 
for food in an unprepared state ; and it is but 
reasonable to infer that our Lord expected to 
find something more palatable than these small 
sour things upon a tree which by its show of 
foliage l)espoke, though falsely, a corresponding 
show of good fruit, for it is important to re- 
member that the fruit comes before the leaves. 
Again, if Katphs denotes the " fig-harvest," we 
must suppose that, although the fruit might 
not have been i"ipe, the season was not very far 
distant, and that the figs in consequence must 
have been considerably more matured than 
these hard pagijim; but is it probable that St. 
Mark should have thought it necessary to state 
that it was not yet the season for gathering figs 
in March, when they could not have been fit to 
gather before June at the earliest ? 

The difficulty is best met by looking it full in 
the face, and by admitting that the words of 
the Evangelist are to be taken in the natural 
order in which they stand, neither having re- 
course to trajectiun, nor to unavailable attempts 
to prove that edible figs could have been found 
on the trees in March. It is true that occa- 
sionally the winter figs remain on the tree in 
mild seasons, and may be gathered the following 
spring, but this is not to be considered a usual 

But, after all, where is the unreasonahlencss 
of the whole transaction ? It was stated above 
that the fruit of the fig-tree appears before the 
leaves ; consequently if the tree produced leaves 
it should also have had some figs as well. As 
to what natural causes had operated to effect so 
unusual a thing for a fig-tree to have leaves in 
March, it is unimportant to inquire ; but the 
stepping out of the way with the possible chance 
(et &pa, si forte, " under the circumstances ; " 
see Winer, Gram, of N. T. Diction, p. 465, Mas- 
son's transl.) of finding eatable fruit on a fig-tree 
in leaf at the end of March, would probably be 
repeated by any observant modern traveller in 
Palestine. The whole question turns on the 
pretensions of the tree : had it not proclaimed 
by its foliage its superiority over other fig-trees, 
and thus proudly exhibited its joriJCoaoMsness; or, 
had our Lord at that season of the year visited 
any of the other fig-trees upon which no leaves 
had as yet appeared with the prospect of finding 
fruit — then the case would be altered, and the 
unreasonableness and injustice real. The words 
of St. Mark, therefore, are to be understood in 
the sense which the order of the words naturally 
suggests. The Evangelist gives the reason why 
no fruit was found on the tree, viz. " because 
it was not the time for fruit ; " we are left to 
infer the reason why it ought to have had fruit 
if it were true to its pretensions ; and it must 
be remembered that this miracle had a typical 
design, to show how God would deal with the 
Jews, who, professing like this precocious fig- 
tree " to be first," should be " last " in His 
favour, seeing that no fruit was produced in 



their lives, but only, as Wordsworth well ex- 
presses it, " the rustling leaves of a religious 
profession, the barren traditions of the Pharisees, 
the ostentatious display of the Law, and vain 
exuberance of words without the good fruit of 

The question is well summed up by Arch- 
bishop Trench (Notes on the Miracles, p. 438) : 
"All the explanations which go to prove that, 
according to the natural order of things in a 
climate like that of Palestine, there might have 
been even at this early time of the year figs on 
that tree, either winter figs which had survived 
till spring or the early figs of spring them- 
selves : all these, ingenious as they often are, 
yet seem to me beside the matter. For, without 
entering further into the question whether they 
prove their point or not, they shatter upon that 
ou yap T)v Kaiphs cvkccv of St. Mark ; from which 
it is plain that no such calculation of probabilities 
brought the Lord thither, but those abnormal 
leaves which He had a right to count would have 
been accompanied with abnormal fruit." See also 
Trench's admirable reference to Ex. xvii. 24. 

In the fig-tree as in all other plants, there 
are individual peculiarities, and the writer has 
often noticed, both in Palestine and especially in 
the Canary Islands, trees which naturally, or 
from their situation, put forth their leaves much 
earlier than their neighbours. But the fruit 
also precedes the foliage. Yet occasionally we 
have found trees in leaf without fruit. These 
were generally young trees which had been 
making vigorous growth. In some moist and 
hot nooks, as at Engedi, and in some Canary Is- 
land glens, the fig-tree never sheds its leaf and 
bears sparingly throughout the year. In Palestine 
irregular pieces of ground, the mouths of wells, 
and corners of vineyards are generally occupied 
by a fig-tree, " A fig-tree planted in a vine- 
yard." The fig still maintains its repute in the 
East as the best poultice (Is. xxxviii. 21), and 
its use is familiar among ourselves as efficacious 
for gumboils. [H. B. T.] 

FIR (B'i"l3, iSrosh; D^niia, bSrothim [see 
MV."]; from tr^S, "to cut," 6es. p. 246, ren- 
dered indifferently in LXX. as &pKev6os, KeSpos, 
TTirvs, Kvndpiffffos, irevKri : abies, cupressus ; A. V. 
and R. V. " fir ; " R. V. marg. cypress). The 
word occurs very frequently in the 0. T., gene- 
rally in connexion with Lebanon and other 
mountain districts, and the A. V. translation is 
probably correct, though the term may have 
included the cypress, which is a conifer, and 
the juniper, which is similar in general appear- 
ance. That it is a general expression, like our 
own word " fir," may be inferred from the 
LXX. rendering it sometimes ireu/crj (pine), at 
other times Kvndpicra-os (cypress), or &pKevdos 
(juniper), all of which must have been well 
known to the Alexandrines. The timber was 
used for boards or planks for the Temple (1 K. 
vi. 15) ; for its two doors (r. 34) ; for the ceiling 
of the greater house (2 Ch. iii. 5) ; for ship- 
boards (Ezek. xxvii. 5) ; for musical instruments 
(2 Sam. vi. 5). The red heart-wood of the tall 
fragrant juniper of Lebanon was no doubt ex- 
tensively used in the building of the Temple ; 
and the identification of berosh or beroth with 
this tree receives additional confirmation from 
the LXX. words &pKevdos and KfSpos, " a 



juniper." The deodar, the larch, and Scotch fir, 
which have becE by some writers identified with 
the berosh, do not exist in Syria or Palestine. 
The most abundant species of pine now found in 
Lebanon and Western Palestine is Pinus halepcn- 
sis (Mill.) or Aleppo pine, a very handsome tree, 
not unlike our Scotch fir. It must be this 
species, still common on Lebanon, which is asso- 
ciated with the cedar for its noble growth. 
" The fir-trees were not like his boughs " 
(Ezek. xxxi. 8). " The choice fir-ti-ees of 
Lebanon " (Is. xxxvii. 24). On Gilead and other 
mountainous regions east of Jordan its place is 
taken by Fimis carica (Don.), an allied species. 
The Aleppo pine is found occasionally throughout 
the country as far south as Hebron, but has 
generally been destroyed for fuel. In the time of 
the Crusades there was a fir-wood on the hills 
between Jerusalem and Bethlehem, of which 
not a trace now remains. A few trees linger 
far south of Hebron, near Jattir ('Attir). Pinus 
laricio (Poir.), the Austrian pine, has been intro- 
duced on the coast, where also Pinaster pinca, 
&c., is found sparingly. The only true fir, as dis- 
tinguished from pine, is Abies cilicica (Ant. and 
K.) on Lebanon, probably abundant in ancient 
times. But the handsome Juniperus excelsa 
(Flor. cane.) is still very common, and Cupressus 
sempervirens (L.), both native and planted, is 
frequent. [Cedar.] [H. B. T.] 

FIRE (1. £^N ; irvp ; ignis : 2. i^K, and also 
"l-IX; (\)(os; lux; flame or light). The applica- 
tions of fire in Scripture may be classed as : — 

I. Beligious. (1.) That which consumed the 
burnt sacrifice, and the incense-offering, begin- 
ning with the sacrifice of Noah (Gen. viii. 20), 
and continued in the ever-burning fire on the 
Altar, first kindled from heaven (Lev. vi. 9, 13, 
is. 24), and rekindled at the dedication of Solo- 
man's Temple (2 Ch. vii. 1, 3). 

(2.) The symbol of Jehovah's Presence, and the 
instrument of His power, in the way either of 
approval or of destruction (Ex. iii. 2, xiv. 19, 
six. 18; Num. xi. 1, 3; Judg. xiii. 20; IK. 
xviii. 38; 2 K. :. 10, 12, ii. 11, vi. 17; cp. 
Is. li. 6, Ixvi. 15, 24; Joel ii. 30 ; Mai. iii. 2, 3, 
iv. 1 ; Mark ix.44; 2 Pet. iii. 10; Rev. xx. 14, 
15 ; Reland, Ant. Sacr. i. 8, p. 26 ; Jennings, 
Jewish Ant. ii. 1, p. 301 ; Joseph, ^n^. iii. 8, § 6, 
viii. 4, § 4). Parallel with this application of fire 
and with its symbolical meaning is to be noted 
the similar use for sacrificial purposes, and the 
respect paid to it, or to the heavenly bodies as 
symbols of deity, which prevailed among so many 
nations of antiquity, and of which the traces are 
not even now extinct (W. R. Smith, The Eeligion 
of the Semites, i. Index s. n. " Fire ") : e.g. the 
Sabaean and Magian systems of worship, and their 
alleged connexion with Abraham (Spencer, de Leg. 
Hebr. ii. 1, 2) ; the occasional relapse of the Jews 
themselves into sun-, or its corrupted form of fire- 
worship (Is. xxvii. 9 ; cp. Gesen. jSn, p. 489 ; 
Deut. svii. 3 ; 2 K. xvii. 16, xxi. 3, sxiii. 5, 10, 
11, 13; Jer. viii. 2; Ezek. viiL 16; Zeph. i. 5; 
Jahn, Arch. Bibl. c. vi. §§405, 408) [Moloch] ; 
the worship or deification of heavenly bodies or 
of fire, prevailing to some extent, as among the 
Persians, so also even in Egypt (Her. iii. 16; 
Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, i. 328 [1878]) ; the 
sacred fire of the Greeks and Romans (Thuc. i. 


24, ii. 15 ; Cic. de Leg. ii. 8, 12 ; Liv. xxviii. 12 ; 
Dionys. ii. 67 ; Plut. Nunux, 9, i. 263, ed. Reiske); 
the ancient forms and usages of worship, differ- 
ing from each other in some important respects, 
but to some extent similar in principle, of 
^Mexico and Peru (Prescott, Mexico, i. 60, 64 ; 
Peru, i. 101); and lastly the theory of the so- 
called Guebres of Persia, and the Parsees of 
Bombay (Frazer, Persia, c. iv. 141, 162, 164 ; 
Sir R. Porter, Travels, ii. 50, 424; Chardin, 
Voyages, ii. 310, iv. 258, viii. 367 sq.; Niebuhr, 
Voyages, ii. 36, 37 ; Mandelslo, Travels, b. i. 
p. 76 ; Gibbon, Hist. c. viii., i. 335, ed. Smith ; 
Benj. of Tudela, Early Trav. pp. 114, 116; 
Burckhardt, Syria, p. 156). 

The perpetual fire on the Altar was to be 
replenished with wood every morning (Lev. 
vi. 12 ; cp. Is. xxxi. 9). According to the 
Gemara, it was divided into three parts, one for 
burning the victims, one for incense, and one for 
supply of the other portions (Lev. vi. 15 ; Re- 
land, Antiq. Hcbr. i. 4, 8, p. 26 ; and ix. 10, 
p. 98). Fire for sacred purposes obtained else- 
where than from the Altar was called " strange 
fire," and on account of their use of such Nadab 
and Abihu were punished with death by fire from 
God (Lev. X. 1, 2; Num. iii. 4, xxvi. 61). 

(3.) In the case of the spoil taken from the 
Midianites, such articles as could bear it were 
purified by fire as well as in the water ap- 
pointed for the purpose (Num. xxxi. 23). The 
victims slain for sin-offerings were afterwards 
consumed by fire outside the camp (Lev. iv. 12, 
21, vi. 30, xvi. 27 ; Heb. xiii. 11). The Nazarite 
who had completed his vow, marked its com- 
pletion by shaving his head and casting the hair 
into the fire on the Altar on which the peace- 
offerings were being sacrificed (Num. vi. 18). 

II. Domestic. Besides for cooking purposes, 
fire is often required in Palestine for warmth 
(Jer. xxxvi. 22 ; Mark xiv. 54 ; John xviii. 18 ; 
Harmer, 06s. i. 125 ; Riiumer, p. 79). For this 
purpose a hearth with a chimney is sometimes 
constructed, on which either lighted wood or 
pans of charcoal are placed (Harmer, i. 405). 
In Persia a hole made in the floor is sometimes 
filled with charcoal, on which a sort of table is 
set covered with a carpet ; and the company 
placing their feet under the carpet draw it over 
themselves (Olearius, Travels, p. 294 ; Chardin, 
Voyages, viii. 190). Rooms in Egypt are 
warmed, when necessary, with pans of char- 
coal, as there are no fire-places except in 
the kitchens (Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 41 ; English- 
woman in Egypt, ii. 11). 

On the Sabbath the Law forbade any fire to 
be kindled, even for cooking (Ex. xxxv. 3 ; Num. 
XV. 32). To this general prohibition the Jews 
added various refinements, e.g. that on the eve 
of the Sabbath no one might read with a light, 
though passages to be read on the Sabbath by 
children in schools might be looked out by the 
teacher. If a Gentile lighted a lamp, a Jew 
might use it, but not if it had been lighted for 
the use of the Jew. If a Festival day fell on the 
Sabbath eve, no cooking was to be done (Mishn. 
Shabh. i. 3, xvi. 8, vol. ii. pp. 4,56; Moed Katan, 
ii. vol. ii. p. 287, Surenhus.). 

III. The dryness of the land in the hot season 
in Syria of course increases liability to accident 
from fire. The Law therefore ordered that any 
one kindling a fire which caused damage to corn 


in a field, should make restitution (Ex. xxii. 6 ; 
cp. Judg. XV. 4, 5 ; 2 Sam. xiv. 30 ; Mishn. 
Maccoth, vi. 5, 6, vol. iv. p. 48, Surenh. ; Burck- 
hardt, Si/ria, pp. 496, 622). 

IV. Punishment of death by fire was awarded 
by the Law only in the cases of incest with a 
mother-in-law, and of unchastity on the part of 
a daughter of a priest (Lev. xx. 14, xxi. 9). In 
the former case both the parties were to suffer, 
in the latter the woman only. This sentence 
appears to have been a relaxation of the original 
practice in such cases (Gen. xxxviii. 24). Among 
other nations, burning appears to have been no 
uncommon mode, if not of judicial punishment, 
at least of vengeance upon captives ; and in a 
modified form was not unknown in war among 
the Jews themselves (2 Sam. xii. 31 ; Jer. xxix. 
22 ; Dan. iii. 20, 21). In certain cases the 
bodies of executed criminals and of infamous 
persons were subsequently burnt (Josh. vii. 25 ; 
2 K. xxiii, 16). 

The Jews were expressly ordered to destroy 
the idols of the heathen nations, and especially 
any city of their own relapsed into idolatry (Ex. 
xxxii. 20 ; 2 K. x. 26 ; Deut. vii. 5, xii. 3, xiii. 
16). In some cases, the cities, and in the case 
of Hazor, the chariots also, were, by God's order, 
consumed with fire (Josh. vi. 24, viii. 28, xi. 6, 
9, 13). One of the expedients of war in sieges 
was to set fire to the gate of the besieged place 
(Judg. ix. 49, 52). [Sieges.] 

V. Incense was sometimes burnt in honour of 
the dead, especially royal personages, as is men- 
tioned specially in the cases of Asa and Zede- 
kiah, and negatively in that of Jehoram (2 Ch. 
xvi. 14, xxi. 19 ; Jer. xxxiv. 5). 

VI. The use of fire in metallurgy was well 
known to the Hebrews at the time of the Exo- 
dus (Ex. xxxii. 24, xxxv. 32, xxxvii. 2, 6, 17, 
xxxviii. 2, 8; Num. xvi. 38, 39). [Handi- 

VII. Fire or flame is used in a metaphorical 
sense to express excited feeling and divine 
inspiration, and also to describe temporal cala- 
mities and future punishments (Ps. Ixvi. 12 ; 
Jer. XX. 9 ; Joel ii. 30 ; Mai. iii. 2 ; Matt. xxv. 
41 ; Mark ix. 43; Rev. xx. 15). [H. W. P.] 

FIREPAN (nPinO ; irvpelov, ev/xiaTrtpiou ; 
ignium receptaculum ; thurihulurn), one of the 
vessels of the Temple service (Ex. xxvii. 3, 
xxxviii. 3 ; 2 K. xxv. 15 ; Jer. Iii. 19). The 
same word is elsewhere rendered " snuff-dish " 
(Ex. xxv. 38, xxxvii. 23 ; Num. iv. 9 ; eira- 
pvffT-np; emunctoriurn) and "censer" (Lev. x. 1, 
xvi. 12 ; Num. xvi. 6 sq.), a variety of ren- 
dering preserved by the R. V. There appear, 
therefore, to have been two articles so called : 
one, like a chafing-dish, to carry live coals for 
the purpose of burning incense ; another, like a 
snuffer-dish, to be used in ti-imming the lamps, 
in order to carry the snuffers and convev away 
the snuff. [W. L. B.] 

FIRKIN. [Measures.] 

FIRMAMENT. This term was introduced 
into our language from the Vulgate, which 
gives firmainentum as the equivalent of the 
ffrepfdi/Ma of the LXX. (better Greek Ven. — 
rdfia from Telvu), and of the rakia (l?''p"l) of the 
Hebrew text (Gen. i. 6). The Hebrew term first 



demands notice (cp. Delitzsch [1887] and Dill- 
mann^ in loco). It is generally regarded as 
expressive of simple expansion, and is so ren- 
dered in the margin of the A. V. (/. c. ; R. V. 
" expanse ") ; but the true idea of the word is 
a complex one, taking in the inotlc by which the 
expansion is etfected, and consequently implying 
the nature of the material expanded. The verb 
raka means to expand by beatintj, whether by 
the hand, the foot, or any instrument. It is 
especially used, however, of beating out metals 
into thin plates (Ex. xxxix. 3; Num. xvi. 39), 
and hence the substantive DTj?~l = " broad 
(R. V. " beaten ") plates " of metal (Num. xvi. 
38). It is thus applied to the flattened surface 
of the solid earth (Is. xlii. 5, xliv. 24 ; Ps. 
cxxxvi. 6), and it is in this sense that the term 
is applied to the heaven in Job xxxvii. 18 (R. V.) 
— " Canst thou with Him spread " (rather ham- 
mer) "out the sky, which is strong as a 
molten mirror " — the mirror to which he refers 
being made of metal. The sense of soliditij, 
therefore, is combined with the ideas of expan- 
sion and tenuity in the term rakia. Saalschiitz 
(^Archaeol. ii. 67) conceives that the idea of 
solidity is inconsistent with Gen. ii. 6, which 
implies, according to him, the passage of the 
mist through the rakia; he therefore gives it 
the sense of pui'e expansion — it is the large and 
lofty room in which the winds, &c., have their 
abode. But it should be observed that Gen. ii. 
6 implies the very reverse. If the mist had' 
penetrated the rakia, it would have descended 
in the form of rain ; the mist, however, was 
formed under the rakia, and resembled a heavy 
dew — a mode of fructifying the earth which, 
from its regularity and quietude, was more 
appropriate to a state of innocence than rain, 
the occasional violence of which associated it 
with the idea of Divine vengeance. But the 
same idea of solidity runs through all the refer- 
ences to the rakia. In Ezek. i. 22-26, the 
" firmament " is the floor on which the throne 
of the Most High is placed. That the rakia 
should be transparent, as implied in the com- 
parisons with the sapphire (Ex. I. c.) and with 
crystal (Ezek. I. c. ; cp. Rev. iv. 6), is by no 
means inconsistent with its solidity. Further, 
the office of the rakia in the economy of the 
world demanded strength and substance. It was 
to serve as a division between the waters above 
and the waters below (Gen. i. 7). In order to 
enter into this description we must carry our 
ideas back to the time when the earth was a 
chaotic mass, overspread with water, in which 
the material elements of the heavens were in- 
termingled. The first step, therefore, in the 
work of orderly arrangement, was to separate 
the elements of heaven and earth, and to fix a 
floor of partition between the waters of the 
heaven and the waters of the earth ; and 
accordingly the rakia was created to support 
the upper reservoir (Ps. cxlviii. 4), itself being 
supported at the edge or rim of the earth's disk 
by the mountains (2 Sam. xxii. 8 ; Job xxvi. 11). 
In keeping with this view the rakia was pro- 
vided with "windows" (Gen. vii. 11; Is. xxiv. 
18; Mai. iii. 10) and "doors" (Ps. Ixxviii. 23), 
through which the rain and the snow might 
descend. A secondary purpose which the rakia 
served was to support the heavenly bodies, sun, 
moon, and stars (Gen. i. 14), in which they were 



fixed as nails, and from which, consequently, 
they might be said to drop off (Matt. xxiv. 29). 
In all these particulars we recognise the same 
view as was entertained by the Greeks and, to a 
certain extent, by the Latins. The former 
applied to the lieaven such epithets as " brazen " 
(XciA-Keoj/, //. xvii. 425 ; iroXvxaXKov, It. v. 504) 
and " iron " (crtS'fipfOf, Od. xv. 328, xvii. 565) — 
epithets also used in the Scriptures (Lev. xxvi. 
19); and that this was not merely poetical 
embellishment appears from the views promul- 
gated by their philosophers, Empedocles (Plu- 
tarch, Plac. Phil. ii. 11) and Artemidorus (Senec. 
Quaest. vii. 13). The same idea is expressed in 
the caelo affixa sidera of the Latins (Plin. ii. 39, 
xviii. 57). If it be objected to the Mosaic 
account that the view embodied in the word 
rakia does not harmonize with strict philoso- 
phical truth, the answer to such an objection is, 
that the writer describes things as they appeared 
to him rather than as they are. The writer 
purposed " to give, in a few broad and powerful 
strokes, the great outlines of creation : shadow- 
ing forth its deep mysteries in a series of grand 
and impressive representations on a scale of 
magnificence which is without parallel. In the 
tone of description suited to such a purpose, 
minute specification is out of place. All is vast 
and general. Let anything be added in the way 
of minute distinction, or of explanation and 
conciliation, and the whole style of conception 
is changed " (Conant). In truth the same ab- 
sence of philosophic truth may be traced 
throughout all the terms applied to this subject, 
and the objection is levelled rather against the 
principles of language than anything else. 
Examine the Latin coelum (/coTA-of), the " hollow 
place " or cave scooped out of solid space ; our 
own " heaven," i.e. what is heaved up ; the Greek 
oiipavSs, similarly significant of height (Pott. 
Etym.Forsch. i. 123); or the German ''Himrael," 
from heimeln, to cover — the "roof" which con- 
stitutes the " heim " or abode of man : in each 
there is a large amount of philosophical error. 
Correctly speaking, of course, the atmosphere is 
the true rakia by which the clouds are sup- 
ported, and undefined space is the abode of the 
celestial bodies. There certainly appears an 
inconsistency in treating the rakia as the sup- 
port both of the clouds and of the stars, for it 
could not have escaped observation that the 
clouds were below the stars : but perhaps this 
may be referred to the same feeling which is 
expressed in the coelum ruit of the Latins, the 
downfall of the rakia in stormy weather. Al- 
though the rakia and the shamayim (" heaven ") 
are treated as synonymous in Gen. i. 8, yet it 
would be more correct to recognise a distinction 
between them, as implied in the expression 
"firmament of the heavens" (Gen. L 14), the 
former being the upheaving power and the 
latter the upheaved body — the former the line 
of demarcation between heaven and earth, the 
latter the strata or stories into which the 
heaven was divided. Dr. Conant {B. D. Amer. 
ed.) has pointed out that it is well to distinguish 
the merely ideal and poetical imagery in later 
writings (Ps. civ. 3 ; 2 Sam. xxii. 8 ; Job xxvi. 
11, xxxvii. 18) and in symbolic vision (Ezek. i. 
22-26) from the purely descriptive, though 
manifestly phenomenal, representation in the 
Book Genesis. [W. L. B.] [F.] 


FrRST-BORN ("1133; TrpcoTf^To/cos ; primo- 
genitus ; from "1D3, cai-l'y, ripe, Gesen. p. 206), 
applied equally both to animals and human 
beings. That some rights of primogeniture 
existed in very early times is plain, but it is not 
so clear in what they consisted. They have been 
classed as, a. authority over the rest of the 
family ; 6. priesthood ; c. a double portion of the 
inheritance. The birthright of Esau and of 
Reuben, set aside by authority or forfeited by 
misconduct, proves a general privilege as well as 
quasi-sacredness of primogeniture (Gen. xxv. 23, 
31, 34, xlix. 3 ; 1 Ch. V. 1 ; Heb. xii. 16), and 
a precedence which obviously existed, and is 
alluded to in various passages (as Ps. Ixxxix. 27 ; 
Job xviii. 13 ; Rom. viii. 29 ; Col. i. 15 ; Heb. 
xii. 23) ; but the story of Esau's rejection tends 
to show the supreme and sacred authority of 
the parent irrevocable even by himself, rather 
than inherent right existing in the eldest son, 
which was evidently not inalienable (Gen. xxvii. 
29, 33, 36 ; Grotius, Calmet, Patrick, Knobel ; 
Dillmann,^ Delitzsch [1887] on Gen. xxv. and 

Under the Law, in memory of the Exodus, the 
eldest son was regarded as devoted to God, and 
was in every case to be redeemed by an offering 
not exceeding five shekels, within one month 
from birth. If he died before the expiration of 
thirty days, the Jewish doctors held the father 
excused, but liable to the payment if he out- 
lived that time (Ex. xiii. 12-15, xxii. 29; Num. 
viii. 17, xviii. 15, 16 ; Lev. xxvii. 6 ; Lightfoot, 
Hor. Hehr. on Luke ii. 22 ; Philo, de Pr. Sacerd. 
i. [ii. 233, Mangey]). This devotion of the first- 
born was believed to indicate a priesthood be- 
longing to the eldest sons of families, which 
being set aside in the case of Reuben, was 
transferred to the tribe of Levi. This priest- 
hood is said to have lasted till the completion of 
the Tabernacle (Jahn, Arch. Bihl. x. §§ 165, 387 ; 
Selden, de Syn. c. 16 ; Mishn. Zebachim, xiv. 4, 
vol. V. 58 ; cp. Ex. xxiv. 5). 

The ceremony of redemption of the first-born 
is described by Calmet from Leo of Modena 
(Calm, on Num. xviii.). The eldest son received 
a double portion of the father's inheritance 
(Deut. xxi. 17), but not of the mother's (Mishn. 
Becoroth, viii. 9. Cp. M. Bloch, Das Mos.-Talm. 
Erbrecht, § 16, 1890). If the father had married 
two wives, of whom he pi-eferred one to the 
other, he was forbidden to give precedence to 
the son of the one, if the child of the other were 
the first-born (Deut, xxi. 15, 16). In the case 
of levirate marriage, the son of the next brother 
succeeded to his uncle's vacant inheritance (Deut, 
xxv. 5, 6). Under the monarchy, the eldest son 
usually, but not always, as appears in the case 
of Solomon, succeeded his father in the kingdom 
(1 K. i. 30, ii. 22). 

The male first-born of animals (DHT "1133 ; 
^lavoiyov fx-f^rpav ; quod aperit vulvarn) was also 
devoted to God (Ex. xiii. 2, 12, 13, xxii. 29, 
xxxiv. 19, 20; Philo, /. c, and Quis rerum div. 
haeres. 24 [i. 489, Mang.]). Unclean animals 
were to be redeemed with the addition of one- 
fifth of the value, or else put to death ; or, if not 
redeemed, to be sold, and the price given to the 
priests (Lev. xxvii. 13, 27, 28). The first-born 
of an ass was to be redeemed with a lamb ; or, if 
not redeemed, put to death (Ex. xiii. 13, xxxiv. 


20; Num. xviii. 15). Of cattle, goats, or sheep, 
the first-born from eight days to twelve months 
old were uot to be used, but oilercd in sacrifice. 
After the burning of the fat, the remainder 
was appropriated to the priests (Ex. xxii. 30 ; 
Num. xviii. 17, 18; Deut. xv. 19, 20; Neh. x. 
36). If there were any blemish, the animal was 
not to be sacrificed, but eaten at home (Deut. xv. 
21, 22, and xii. 5-7, xiv. 23). Various refine- 
ments on the subject of blemishes are to be 
found in Mishn, Bccoroth (see Mai. i. 8. By 
"firstlings," Deut. xiv. 23, comi)ared with Num. 
xviii. 17, are meant tithe animals : see Keland, 
Antiij. iii. 10, p. 327 ; Jahn, Arch. Bibl. 
§ 387). [H. W. P.] 


[Plagues, No. 10.] 

FIRST-FRUITS. 1. Dn.133 in pi. only, 
or D''"}33> Gesen. p. 206 : usually irpuToyevvfi- 
fiara, airapxcd rwv irpcoToyevvqixaTiav (Ex. xxiii. 
19) ; primitiae, fruguin initia, primitiva. 2. 
n*K^N"n, from C*X"I, head or top in two places, 
followed by CniSa, Ex. xxiii. 12, xxxiv. 26 
(Gesen. pp. 1249, 1252). 3. HD-nn, Gesen, 
p. 1276 : acpaipefia, airapxh j primitiae. 

Besides the first-born of man and of beast, 
the Law required that oiferings of first-fruits of 
produce should be made publicly by the nation 
at each of the three great yearly Festivals, and 
also by individuals without limitation of time. 
No ordinance appears to have been more dis- 
tinctly recognised than this, so that the use of 
the term in the way of illustration carried with 
it a full significance even in N. T. times (Prov. 
iii. 9 ; Tob. i. 6 ; 1 Mace. iii. 49 ; Rom. viii. 23, 
xi. 16 ; Jas. i. 18 ; Rev. xiv. 4). 

1. The Law ordered in general, that the first 
of all ripe fruits and of liquors, or, as it is twice 
expressed, the first of first-fruits, should be 
offered in God's House. (Ex. xxii. 29, xxiii. 19, 
xxxiv. 26 ; Philo, de Monarchia, ii. 3 [ii. 224, 

2. On the morrow after the Passover sabbath, 
i.e. on the 16th ofNisan, a sheaf of new corn was 
to be brought to the priest, and waved before 
the Altar, in acknowledgment of the gift of 
fruitfulness (Lev. xxiii. 5, 6, 10, 12 ; ii. 12). 
Josephus tells us that the sheaf was of barley, 
and that when this ceremony had been per- 
formed, the harvest work might be begun 
(Joseph. Ant. iii. 10, § 5). 

3. At the expiration of seven weeks from this 
time, i.e. at the Feast of Pentecost, an oblation 
was to be made of two loaves of leavened bread 
made from the new flour, which were to be 
■waved in like manner with the Passover sheaf 
(Ex. xxxiv. 22 ; Lev. xxiii. 15, 17 ; Num. 
xxviii. 26). 

4. The feast of ingathering, i.e. the Feast of 
Tabernacles in the seventh month, was itself 
an acknowledgment of the fruits of the harvest 
(Ex. xxiii. 16, xxxiv. 22 ; Lev. xxiii. 39). 

These four sorts of offerings were national. 
Besides them, the two following were of an in- 
dividual kind, but the last was made by custom 
to assume also a national character. 

5. A cake of the first dough that was baked 
was to be offered as a heave-offerinc (Num. xv. 
19 21). 



6. The first-fruits of the land were to be 
brought in a basket to the holy place of God's 
choice, and there jiresented to the priest, who 
\vas to set the basket down before the Altar. 
The offerer was then, in words of which the 
outline, if not the whole form was prescribed, to 
recite the story of Jacob's descent into Egypt, 
and the deliverance therefrom of his posterity; 
and to acknowledge the blessings with which 
God had visited him (Deut. xxvi. 2-11). 

The offerings, both public and private, resolve 
themselves into two classes: a. produce in general, 
in the Mishna Dni33, Biccurim, first-fruits) 
primitivi fructus, irpuroyfvvrifjLara, raw produce. 
b. mO-1"IJ1, Terumoth, offerings, primitiae, airap- 
Xai, prepared produce (Gesen. p. 1276 ; Augus- 
tine, Quaest. in Hept. iv. 32, vol. iii. p. 732 ; 
Spencer, de Leg. Hehr. Vn. 9, p. 713; Reland, 
Antiq. iii. 7 ; Philo, de Pr. Sacerd. i. [ii. 233, 
Mang.] dc Sacrific. Abel, et Cain, 21 [i. 177, M.]). 

a. Of the public offerings of first-fruits, the 
Law defined no place from which the Passover 
sheaf should be chosen, but the Jewish custom, 
so far as it is represented by the Mishna, pre- 
scribed that the wave-sheaf or sheaves should be 
taken from the neighbourhood of Jerusalem 
{Terumoth, x. 2). Deputies from the Sanhedrin 
went on the eve of the Festival, and tied the 
growing stalks in bunches. In the evening of 
the Festival day the sheaf was cut with all pos- 
sible publicity, and carried to the Temple. It 
was there threshed, and an omer of grain, after 
being winnowed, was bruised and roasted ; and 
after it had been mixed with oil and frankincense 
laid upon it, the priest waved the offering in all 
directions. A handful was thrown on the altar- 
fire, and the rest belonged to the priests, to be 
eaten by those who were free from ceremonial 
defilement. After this the harvest might be 
carried on. After the destruction of the Temple 
all this was discontinued, on the principle, as it 
seems, that the House of God was exclusively 
the place for oblation (Lev. ii. 14, x. 14, xxiii. 
13 ; Num. xviii. 11 ; Mishn. Terum. v. 6, x. 4, 5 ; 
Schekalim, viii. 8 ; Joseph. Ant. iii. 10, § 5 ; 
Philo, de Pr. Sacerd. i. [ii. 233, Mang.] ; Reland, 
Antiq. iii. 7, 3, iv. 3, 8). 

The offering made at the Feast of the Pentecost 
was a thanksgiving for the conclusion of wheat 
harvest. It consisted of two loaves (according 
to Josephus one loaf) of new flour baked with 
leaven, which were waved by the priest as at 
the Passover. The size of the loaves is fixed by 
the Mishna at seven palms long and four wide, 
with horns of four fingers' length. No private 
offerings of first-fruits were allowed before this 
public oblation of the two loaves (Lev. xxiii. 15, 
20 ; Mishn. Terum. x. 6, xi. 4 ; Joseph. Ant. iii. 
10, § 6 ; Reland, Antiq. iv. 4, 5). The private 
oblations of first-fruits may be classed in the 
same manner as the public. The directions 
of the Law respecting them have been stated 
generally above. To these the Jews added or 
from them deduced the following. Seven sorts 
of produce were considered liable to oblation, 
viz. wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, 
olives, and dates (Gesen. p. 219; Deut. viii. 
8 ; Mishn. Bicurim, i. 3 ; Hasselquist, Travels, 
p. 417), but the Law appears to have con- 
templated produce of all sorts, and to have 
been so understood by Neheraiah (Deut. xxvi. 



2 • Neh. X. 35, 37). The portions intended to 
be offered were decided by inspection, and the 
selected fruits were fastened to the stem by a 
band of rushes {Bic. iii. 1). A proprietor might, 
if he thought fit, devote the whole of his pro- 
duce as first-fruits (ibid. ii. 4). But though the 
Law laid down no rule as to quantity, the mini- 
mum fixed by custom was g'gth (Reland, Antiq. 
iii. 8, 4). No offerings were to be made before 
Pentecost, nor after the feast of the Dedication, 
on the 25th of Cisleu (Ex. xxiii. 16 ; Lev. xxiii. 
16, 17 ; Bic. i. 3, 6). The practice was for com- 
panies of twenty-four persons to assemble in the 
evening at a central station, and pass the night 
in the open air. In the morning they were 
summoned by the leader of the Feast with the 
words, " Let us arise and go up to Mount Zion, 
the House of the Lord our God." On the road 
to Jerusalem they recited portions of Psalms 
exxii. and el. Each party was preceded by a 
piper, a sacrificial bullock having the tips of his 
horns gilt and crowned with olive. At their 
approach to the city they were met by priests 
appointed to inspect the offerings, and were 
■welcomed by companies of citizens proportioned 
to the number of the pilgrims. On ascending 
the Temple mount each person took his basket, 
containing the first-fruits and an offering of 
turtle-doves, on his shoulders, and proceeded to 
the court of the Temple, where they were met 
by Levites singing Ps. xxx. 2. The doves were 
sacrificed as a burnt-offering, and the first-fruits 
presented to the priests with the words appointed 
in Deut. xxvi. The baskets of the rich were of 
gold or silver ; those of the poor of peeled willow. 
The baskets of the latter kind were, as weJl as 
the offerings they contained, presented to the 
priests, who waved the offerings at the S.W. 
corner of the altar: the more valuable baskets 
were returned to the owners (^Bic. iii. 6, 8). 
After passing the night at Jerusalem, the 
pilgrims returned on the following day to their 
homes (Deut. xvi. 7 ; Temm. ii. 4). It is men- 
tioned that king Agrippa bore his part in this 
highly picturesque national ceremony by carry- 
ing his basket like the rest, to the Temple 
(Bic. iii. 4). Among other by-laws were the 
following : 1. He who ate his first-fruits else- 
where than in Jerusalem and without the proper 
form was liable to punishment (Maccoth, iii. 3, 
vol. iv. 284, Surenh.). 2. Women, slaves, deaf 
and dumb persons, and some others were exempt 
from the verbal oblation before the priest, 
which was not generally used after the Feast of 
Tabernacles (Bic. i. 5, 6). 

6. The first-fruits prepared for use were not 
required to be taken to Jerusalem. They con- 
sisted of wine, wool, bread, oil, date-honey, 
onions, cucumbers (Tentm. ii. 5, 6; Num. xv. 
19, 21 ; Deut. xviii. 4). They were to be made, 
according to some, only by dwellers in Palestine; 
but according to others, by those also who 
dwelt in Moab, in Ammonitis, and in Egypt 
(Terum. i. 1). They were not to be taken from 
the portion intended for tithes, nor from the 
corners left for the poor (ibid. i. 5, iii. 7). The 
proportion to be given is thus estimated in that 
treatise : a liberal measure, ;,'jj, or, according to 
the school of Shammai, ,'g ; a modei-ate portion, 
■^ ; a scanty portion, Jj (see Ezek. xlv. 13). 
The measuring-basket was to be thrice estimated 
during the season {ih. iv. 3). He who ate or 


drank his offering by mistake was bound to add 
i, and present it to the priest (Lev. v. 16 ; xxii. 
14), who was forbidden to remit the penalty 
(^Tcrtim. vi. 1, 5). The offerings were the pei-- 
quisite of the priests, not only at Jerusalem, but 
in the provinces, and were to be eaten or used 
only by those who were clean from ceremonial 
defilement (Num. xviii. 11 ; Deut. xviii. 4). 

The corruption of the nation after the time 
of Solomon gave rise to neglect in these as well 
as in other ordinances of the Law, and restora- 
tion of them was among the reforms brought 
about by Hezekiah (2 Ch. xxxi. 5, 11). Nehe- 
miah also, at the Return from Captivity, took 
pains to re-organise the offerings of first-fruits 
of both kinds, and to appoint places to receive 
them (Neh. x. 35, 37 ; xii. 44). Perversion or 
alienation of them is reprobated, as care in 
observing is eulogised by the Prophets, and 
specially mentioned in the sketch of the restora- 
tion of the Temple and Temple-service made by 
Ezekiel (Ezek. xx. 40, xliv. 30, xlviii. 14 ; Mai. 
iii. 8). 

An offering of first-fruits is mentioned as an 
acceptable one to the prophet Elisha (2 K. iv. 

Besides the offerings of first-fruits mentioned 
above, the Law directed that the fruit of all 
trees freshly planted should be regarded as uncir- 
cumcised, or profane, and not to be tasted by 
the owner for three years. The whole produce 
of the fourth year was devoted to God, and did 
not become free to the owner till the fifth year 
(Lev. xix. 23-25). The trees found growing by 
the Jews at the conquest were treated as exempt 
from this rule (Mishn. Orlah, i. 2). 

Offerings of first-fruits were sent to Jerusalem 
by Jews living in foreign countries (Joseph. 
Ant. xvi. 6, § 7). 

Offerings of first-fruits were also customary 
in heathen systems of worship (see, for in- 
stances and authorities, Parker, Bibliotheca, v. 
515 ; Patrick, On Deut. xxvi. ; and a copious list 
in Spencer, de Leg. Hcbr. iii. 9, de Priinitiarum 
Origine ; also Leslie, On Tithes, Works, vol. ii. ; 
Winer, s. v. Erstlinge). [H. W. P.] 

FISH, FISHING. Fishes, with the other 
inhabitants of the waters, as sea-monsters, 
whales, and great reptiles, as well as the fowl 
of the air, are the products of the fifth day, or 
creative epoch (Gen. i. 21). Their place in the 
record of creation is in exact accord with the 
results of geological investigation ; which shows 
them to be the earliest vertebrate animals found 
in the stratified rocks. The earliest types appear 
in the Old Red Sandstone, the ganoid fishes 
of the Dura Den deposits. From these strata 
upwards fishes gradually increase, reaching their 
fullest development in the Cretaceous or chalk 
epoch, when the warm-blooded mammals or 
quadrupeds were beginning to prevail. 

The Jewish literature does not show that the 
nation ever acquired any intimate knowledge 
of this branch of natural history. The fisher- 
men, whether of the sea or the lake, doubtless 
had distinctive names for the various species 
which they caught, but of these only one is 
preserved in Josephus, and none in Scripture 
or in the Rabbinical writings. They simply 
classified them as great or small, clean or un- 
clean. The latter is the only distinction between 


the kinds of fish in the law of Jloses (Lev. xi. 9- 
12). The unclean fish, forbidden as food, were 
such as had no fins or scales. This would com- 
prise all aquatic reptiles, the Siluridae or Sheat 
fish, very common in the Nile and .Jordan, the 
Maiidae or Skate fish, and the Petromizidae or 
Lampreys. To these the Kabbis afterwards 
added the Muraenidae or Eels, whose scales are 
very minute and covered with a slimy secretion. 
The Egyptians adopted a .similar classification, 
and looked on all fishes without fins or scales as 
unwholesome (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, ii. 191-2 
[1878]). One of the laws of El Hakim pro- 
hibits the sale or even the capture of such 
(Lane, Mod. Egypt, i. 132). This distinction 
is probably referred to in the terms aairpa. {esui 
non idonca, Schleusner, Lex. s. v. ; Trench, 
Parables, p. l;57) and KaXd (Matt. xiii. 48). 
The second division is marked in Gen. i. 21 (as 
compared with v. 28), where the great marine 

animals (Dv"I5n D^Vlinn; »c:/Jtt; fieyaKa), 
generically described as "whales" in the A. V. 
and " sea-monsters " in the R. V. (Gen. l. c. ; 
Job vii. 12) [Whale], but including also other 
animals, such as the crocodile [Leviathan] 
and perhaps some kinds of serpents, are dis- 
tinguished from "every living creature that 
creepeth " (n^Onn ; A. V. and R. V. " moveth "), 
a description applying to fish, along with other 
reptiles, as having no legs. To the former class 
we may assign the large fish referred to in Jon. 

ii. I (bSli yi; K7IT0S iJ-fya, Matt. xii. 40), 
which Winer (art. Fische), after Bochart, iden- 
tifies with a species of shark (Canis carcharias) ; 
and also that referred to in Tob. vi. 2 sq., iden- 
tified by Bochart {Hieroz. iii. p. 697 sq.) with 
the Silurus glanis, but by Kitto (art. Fkli) with 
a species of crocodile (the seesar") found in the 
Indus (see Speaker's Comm. in loco). The 
Hebrews were struck with the remarkable 
fecundity of fish, and have expressed this in 
the term J^, the root of which signifies increase 
(cp. Gen. xlviii. 16), and in the secondary 
sense of |*")K', lit. to creep, thence to multiply 
(Gen. i. 20, viii. 17, ix. 7 ; Ex. i. 7), as well as 
in the allusions in Ezek. xlvii. 10. Doubtless 
they became familiar with this fact in Egyjit, 
where the abundance of fish in the Nile, and in 
the lakes and canals (Strab. xvii.' p. 823 ; Diod. 
i. 36, 43, 52 ; Herod, ii. 93, 149), rendered it 
one of the staple commodities of food (Num. 
xi. 5 ; cp. Wilkinson, I. c). The destruction of 
the fish was on this account a most serious 
visitation to the Egyptians (Ex. vii. 21 ; Is. xix. 
8). Occasionally it is the result of natural 
causes: thus St. John {Travels in Valley of the 
Nile, ii. 246) describes a vast destruction of fish 
from cold, and Wellsted (^Travels in Arabia, i. 
310) states that in Oman the fish are visited 
with an epidemic about every five years, which 
destroys immense quantities of them. 

The worship of fishes was expressly forbidden 
by the law of Moses : " The likeness of any fish 
that is in the waters beneath the earth " (Deut. 
iv. 18). This strange form of idolatry was 
widely spread and still exists in the East. It 
arose, perhaps, from the fecundity of fishes, 
which caused them to be taken as the emblems 
of abundance and increase. The blessing of 




Jacob upon the sons of Josepli was, " Let them 
grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth," 
A. V. marg. as Jis/ws do increase (Gen. xlviii. 
16). Nations the widest ajjart, as tlie Tartars and 
the ancient Britons, had their fish-gods, the one 
the Nataghi, the other the Brithyl'i of the Kelts 
and Belgae. In Egypt many sjiecies of fishes 
were objects of worship (Herod, ii. 72). Hero- 
dotus, in the passage referred to, mentions only 
two kinds as venerated, but we find from other 
authors that different fishes were worsiiipped in 
different j)laces (Plut, do Is. § 18 ; Wilkinson, 
/. c). Cuvier noticed no less than ten distinct 
species depicted on the walls of the sepulchral 
caves of Thebes (see also Kawlinson, Herod. 
ii. 120). The mummies of several kinds of 
fishes are found in great numbers stored up 
in the Egyptian temples. Fish-worship extended 
also to Assyria. The fish-god, a male form of the 
Phoenician Dagon, is represented on one of the 
sculptures of Khorsabad, though Rawlinson con- 
siders them distinct {Herod, i. 593). The male- 
god is also described by Berosus(Layard, Nineveh, 
ii. p. 466). Ichthyolatry spread also to India 
(Baur, Mythologie, ii. 51) ; but among the Phi- 
listines the fish-god or goddess was a national 
deity, and had temples in all their cities, notably 
at Gaza and Ashdod. In Scripture records 
Dagon was thought to have been represented 
with the head, arms, and body of a man, and 
the tail of a fish (cp. 1 Sam. v. 4 ; A. V.) ; '• onlv 
the stump {fishy part, marg.) of Dagon was left 
to him ;" but (cp. Ii. V.) the belief that his 
bo'dy terminated in the tail of a fish arose from 
a mistaken etymology of the name [Dagon]. 
This worship of Dagon remained to the time of 
the Hasmonaeans, who destroyed the temple at 
Ashdod. At a later period the idol was of female 
form, as we find from Lucian {De Bed Syr.') 
and Diodorus Siculus, who describes the image 
at Ashkalon as having the face of a woman 
and the body of a fish. Sidon was also the fish- 
goddess of Phoenicia (Cic. de Nat. Deor. iii.). 
For an exhaustive summary of historical refer- 
ences, see Selden, de Dis Syris, de Dagone. The 
superstitious veneration of certain fishes still 
remains even among the Moslems in Northern 
Syria and Mesopotamia. A few miles north of 
the Syrian Tripoli is a monastery of dervishes, 
with a spring and pool swarming with fish, 
which are held sacred, as being inhabited by the 
souls of the faithful departed, and to which 
offerings are made. So at Orfa, the ancient 
Edessa, the fishes of the river are held sacred by 
the Moslems (see Robertson-Smith, The Eeligion 
of the Semites, i. 157 sq.). 

Fish was a principal article of diet in Egypt, 
although forbidden to the priests. " We re- 
member the fish which we did eat in Egypt freely," 
was the complaint of the Israelites when they 
murmured in the wilderness. Not only was 
there, and still is, prodigious abundance of fish 
in the Nile, and especially in the Delta, but the 
variety of species is very great. Herodotus, 
Josephus, and Strabo give us the names of 
several kinds, most of which are difficult of 
identification. Herodotus names the AeiriSwros, 
probably Cyprinus Icpidotus, allied to the carp, 
hi^vppvyxos {Mormyrus oxyrhynchus), and the 
eel, as sacred fish (ii. 72, and Plut. de Is. vii. 18, 
22). Strabo mentions these, and also KopaKivos 
{Clarias macrocanthus) ; Kearpevs, a species of 

3 Z 



mullet ; (pdypos, a bream, and many others which 
cannot be satisfactorily identified, iis inhabiting 
the Nile (Strabo, Geogr. svii. p. 1164: ; ed. 
Falconer, Oxford, 1807)." The fresh-water fishes 
of Ecfvpt are as varied as they are numerous, 
belonging chiefly to the families of the Sparidae, 
Znbridae, Chromidae, and Cyprinidae, the bream, 
perch, and carp. It is very remarkable that 
while the Greek language possesses over 400 
names for fishes, not more than one or two have 
been preserved in Hebrew. 

The fishes of the Jordan, its lakes and affluents, 
bear a strong affinity to many of the species of 
the Nile, though with far less admixture of 
species found in other rivers of the Eastern 
JMediterranean. In fact, the ichthyology of the 
Jordan system is the most isolated and unique, 
as regards geographical distribution, in the 
world. Thirty-six species have been ascertained, 
and of these only one {Blennius lupulus) belongs 
to the ordinary Mediterranean fauna. Two others, 
Chromis niloticus and Clarias macr acanthus, are 
Nilotic. Seven other species occur also in the 
rivers of South-West Asia, as the Tigris and 
Euphrates. Ten more are found in other parts 
of Syria, chiefly in the Damascus lakes; and 
the remaining sixteen species of the families 
Chromidae, Cyprinodontidae, and Cyprinidae 
are peculiar to the Jordan. This analysis points 
to a very close affinity of the Jordan with 
the rivers and lakes of tropical Africa. The 
affinity is not only of families, but of genera, 
for Chromis and Heihichromis are peculiarly 
Ethiopian forms, while the other species are 
identical with, or very closely allied to, the 
fishes from other fresh waters of Syria. 
But the African forms are a very large pro- 
portion of the whole ; and considering the 
difficulty of transportation in the case of 
fresh-water fishes, these peculiarities are of 
great significance. These fishes probably 
date from the earliest time after the eleva- 
tion of the country from the Eocene ocean. 
They form a group far more distinct and 
divergent from that of the surrounding 
region than can be found in any other class 
of existing life. During the epochs subse- 
quent to the Eocene, owing to the unbroken 
isolation of the basin, there have been no 
opportunities for the introduction of new 
forms, nor for the further dispersion of the old 
ones. The affinity is very close to the forms 
of the rivers and fresh-water lakes of East 
Africa, even as far south as the Zambesi ; but 
while the genera are the same, the species are 
rather representative than identical. The solu- 
tion appears to be, that during the Meiocene 
and Pleiocene periods, the Jordan basin formed 
the northernmost of a vast system of fresh- 
water lakes, extending from north to south ; of 
which, in the earlier part of the epochs, perhaps 
the Red Sea, and certainly the Nile basin, the 
Nyanza, the Nyassa, and Tanganyika lakes, and 
the feeders of the Zambesi, were members. 
During that warm period, a fluviatile ichthyo- 
logical fauna was developed suitaWe to its then 
conditions, consisting of representative and, 
perhaps, identical species throughout the area. 

The advent of the Glacial period was, like its 

» For a fuller account of the Nile fishes, see Athe- 
naeus, vii. 55 sq. 


close, gradual. Many species must have perished 
under the changed conditions. The hardiest 
survived ; and some, perhaps, have been modified 
to meet those new conditions. Under this strict 
isolation it could hardly be otherwise ; and 
however severe the climate may have been — that 
of the Lebanon, with its glaciers, corresponding 
with the present temperature of the Alps at 
a similar elevation (regard being had to the 
difference of latitude), the fissure of the Jordan 
being, as we certainly know, as much depressed 
below the level of the ocean as it is at present, i.e. 
1300 feet at the Dead Sea — there must have been 
an exceptionally warm temperature in its waters, 
in which the existing species could survive. 

The most important species in the Lake of 
Galilee are two species of blenny, Blennius 
lupulus and B. va7-us ; Chromis niloticus, known 
as Bolti in Egypt, and Moxicht by the fishermen 
of Tiberias ; Chromis tiberiadis, the Mouchtlebet 
of the fishermen, found in amazing shoals ; 
C. Andreae, C. Siitionis, C. Flavii-Josephi, the 
Addadi of the fishermen ; C. microstomus, the 
Moucht hart of the fishermen, Hemichromis 
sacra, all peculiar to the lake ; Clarias macro- 
canthus, the silurus, KopaKtvos of Josephus, 
harbour of the fishermen; Ba7-bus canis and 

An Egyptian Laudiug-uet. (Wilkinson.) 

B. lonijiceps, the Escheri of the fishermen, 
both peculiar, and swarming in the Jordan, 
as well as in the lake. The fishes of the 
genera Chrojnis and Hemichromis have an extra- 
ordinary manner of propagation. The spawn 
is deposited in a little cavity, and the male fish 
takes the ova into his mouth one by one, and 
hatches them there ; and for several weeks after, 
until they are nearly four inches long, the 
young continue to live in his mouth and gills, 
which are distended so that his jaws cannot 
meet. Dr. Livingstone noticed a similar habit 
in a fish of the Lake Tanganyika. The density 
of the shoals of fish in the Lake of Galilee can 
scarcely be conceived by those who have not 
witnessed them. They sometimes cover an acre 
or more on the surface in one dense mass, their 
dorsal fins standing out of the water. Josephus 
notices this abundance, and mentions also the 
Corctcinus, which, being the same as the Sheat- 
fish of the Nile, suggested the belief that the lake 
was connected with the Nile (Bell. Jud. iii. 10, 
8). There was also a tradition that one of the 
ten laws of Joshua enacted that the fishing of 
the lake should be free to all comers (Lightfoot, 
Tabn. Ex. Matt. iv. 18). 


Many of the fish are carried by the rapid 
stream of the Jordan in shoals into the Dead Sea, 
wiiere they are stupified and soon perish, and 
may be seen floating dead on the surface. No 



Fisherman of Ihe Sea of Galilee cajiing liis utt. 

more vivid illusti-ation ot the regeneration of the 
land by the waters of life could be presented than 
the vision of Ezekiel, showing these waters of 
death peopled by living things : " The fishers 
shall stand upon it from Engedi even unto En- 
eglaim : they shall be a place to spread forth 
nets ; their fish shall be according to their kinds, 
as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many " 
(xlvii. 10). 

While the Jews diligently prosecuted fishing 
in the Sea of Galilee (Joseph. Bell.Jud. iii. 10, § 9) 
they do not appear to have themselves worked 
the fisheries on their coast ; but they possessed 
few localities adapted for boat harbours. Joppa 
was indeed their only port where any consider- 
able fleet of fishing-boats could find shelter; 
for the northern ports were held by the Phoeni- 
cians, who, from Tyre and Sidon, extensively 
practised this industry. The Hebrew name of 
Sidon signifies " fishing-place ; " and fishing is 
the only remaining industry of the squalid village 
which occupies the site of Tyre. " Tyre shall 
be a place for the spreading of nets in the 
midst of the sea " (Ezek. xxvi. 5). Jerusalem 
was supplied with fish by Phoenician fishermen, 
"men of Tyre" (Neh. xiii. 16) who came up 
from Joppa ; probably with dried fish, such as is 
still largely consumed. The trade in fish must 
have been considerable, as one of the gates of 
Jerusalem was the fish-gate (2 Ch. xxxiii. 14), im- 
plying a fish-market, which would be contiguous 
to it, as each commodity to the present day has 
its distinct bazaar. Salt-fish is often spoken of 

in the Talmud, where it is called WpD (Lightfoot 
on JIatt. xiv. 17). There is no clear evidence 
that the Jews preserved fish alive in ponds or 
tanks as the Egyptians did. In the passages 
which are supposed to suggest this (Cant, 
vii. 4, *' fish-pools in Heshbon "), " fish " is 
an interpolation, omitted in R. V. In Is. xix. 
10 " all that make sluices and ponds for fish " 
is rendered in R. V. "all they that work for 
hire (marg. that make d ems') shall be grieved 

in soul"; the word "fish" not being in the 

Numerous allusions to the art of fishing occur 
in the Bible : in the 0. T. these allusions are of 
a metaphorical character, de- 
scriptive either of the conver- 
sion (Jer. xvi. 10; Ezek. xlvii. 
10) or of the destruction (Ezek. 
xxix. 3 sq. ; Eccles. ix. 12 ; 
Amos iv. 2 ; Hab. i. 14) of the 
enemies of God. In the N. T. 
the allusions are of a historical 
chai-acter for the most part, 
though the metaphorical appli- 
cation is still maintained in 
Matt. xiii. 47 sq. 

The Sea of Galilee was fished 
principally by means of the 
drag- or draw-net — H'lpDip, 
michinoreth, cayi]V7\, saijena, 
whence " seine," as we still 
call it (Is. xix. 8 ; Hab. i. 15 ; 
Jlatt. xiii. 47), — a large net, 
leaded and buoyed, which is 
carried out by a boat, cast, and 
then drawn in in a circle, so as 
to "enclose a great multitude 
of fishes." It is this kind of 
net to which our Lord compares the kingdom 
of Heaven (Matt. xiii. 47-50). The number 
of boats on the lake in our Lord's time was 
very large (Joseph. Bell. Jud. iii. 10, § 9), and 
the few boats which still exist there employ 

Fishing. (Kouyanjlk.) 

the draw-net. The fishing is carried ou at 
night, the best time for taking fish, as we 
know in our own seas, and as we read in Luke 
V. 5. Another net A-ery commonly used was 

3 Z 2 



the casting-net — D"l.n, chercm{Rnh. i. 15; Ezek. 
xxvi. 5, 14, xlvii. 10), aix<plfi\7](rrpov (Matt. iv. 
18; Mark i. 16), rcte, — elsewhere expressed by 
the generic term SIktvov. This was used either 
by a naked fisherman wading from the shore, and 
by a rapid motion throwing his net and then 
drawing it in in a circle, or thrown in the same 
manner from a boat. It was this casting-net 
that Peter and Andrew were using when called 
to be fishers of men (Matt. iv. 18), and it was 
also the same kind, as we see from the details 
of the narrative, which enclosed the second 
miraculous draught after the Resun"ection(John 
xxi. 6-8). The casting-net is still in common 
use round the lake. Another mode of fishing 
which was and still is practised on the rivers 


was by weirs or stake-nets formed of a sort of 
cane wattle. According to the Rabbis, one of the 
traditional laws of Joshua forbade the use of stake- 
nets in the Lake of Gnlilee, where the fishing was 
free to all, lest the boats should be damaged by 
them (Lightfoot, Talm. Ex. Matt. iv. 18). 

Other modes of taking fish in present use in 
Palestine, and alluded to in Scripture, are by 
the hook and line. Angling is often depicted on 
the Assyrian and Egyptian monuments. It was 
a favourite amusement, and was also followed 
as a livelihood (Wilkinson, ii. 186 [1878]). 
It is referred to by Isaiah (xix. 8), " They 
that cast angle (Heb. nsn) into the Nile " 
(R. V.) ; Hab. i. 15, and 'job xli. 1. Two 
other words are used by Amos: TWi, tzinnah. 

and ^*D, sir, i.e. " thorn " (ch. iv. 2) ; in Matt. 
xvii. 27, we read " cast an hook " (&yKiffTpou). 
Hooks were used with lines, with or without a 
rod, and especially with night-lines. Fly-fishing 
was unknown, as none of the fishes of the Nile 
or Palestine will rise like the Saliiionidae to a fly. 
In Job xli. 2, " Canst thou put an hook into his 
nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn?" 
the reference is not to fishing, but to the keeping 
alive, after the Egyptian fashion, in tanks, fishes 
not required for immediate use, by a hook through 
their gills (nin, choach; " thorn," A.V. ; " hook," 
R. v.). This was attached to a stake by a rope 
of rushes (|b|lt<, agmon, " hook ; " A. V. " rope ; " 
R. V. marg., rope of rtishes). 

Another method of fishing was with the fish- 
spear, still used in the Lebanon and North Syria. 
This is alluded to by Job (xli. 7 ; Hebr. xl. 31), 
" Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons ? 
or his head with fish-speai-s ? " 

The fish is a favourite symbol in the Christian 
Church, frequent in the catacombs of Rome, and 
familiar especially on early Christian sepulchral 
monuments in Northern Syria and other parts 
of the East, — not, as has been absurdly suggested, 
from an old superstition, or in honour of the fisher- 
men of Galilee, but from the circumstance that 
the initial letters of the words 'IiytroDs XpiffTo's, 
®eov vlos, 'S.uiTTip, form the word 'Ix^vs (see Diet. 
of Christ. Antiq. s. n. " Fish "). [H. B. T.] 

FISH GATE (a^:^ri -li;^), Neh. iii. 3, xii. 
39 ; Zeph. i. 10. A gate in the north wall of 

Jerusalem ; it may have led to the fish market, 
or the Tyrian merchants who brought fish to 
the city (Neh. xiii. 16) may have sold them in 

front of it. [JERUSALEM.] [W.} 

FISH-POOLS. Cant. vii. 4. More cor- 
rectly Pools, as in R. V. [Heshbon.] 

FITCHES (i.e. Vetches). Two Hebrew 
v/ords are so rendered in A. V. : (1) DDDB, 
kussemeth (Ezek. iv. 9) ; elsewhere A. V. " rye," 


Nigtlla saliva. 

R. V. " spelt ; " see Rye. (2) nVi!), ketsach ; 
lxf\dv$iov ; gith ; R. V. marg. black cummin 


(Is. xxviii. 25, 27), denotes without doubt the 
Niijclla sativa, L., an herbaceous annual plant 
belonging to the natural order Jiammculaccac 
and sub-order JIdlcborcae, which grows in the 
S. of Europe and in the N. of Africa. It is 
cultivated in Palestine for the sake of its 
seeds, wliich are to this day used in Eastern 
countries as a medicine and a condiment. They 
are black, whence the name, and hot to the 
taste, and are sprinkled thickly over the flat 
cakes of the country before they are baked, in 
the same way that caraway seeds are used among 
ourselves. The seeds may be seen on all the 
little j)rovision stalls in the markets. The leaves 
of the plant are laciniated,like those of the ranun- 
culus, the flower yellow (in other species red or 
purple), and the seed-vessel is a cup divided into 
partitions or cells with a fringe of horns. This 
plant is mentioned only iu Is. xxviii. 25, 27, 
where esjiecial reference is made to the mode 
of thresliing it; not with "a threshing in- 
strument" (]'-l"in), but "with a staff" (H^O), 
because the heavy-armed cylinders of the former 
implement would have crushed the seeds of the 
Nigella. The fxtXavQiov of Dioscorides (iii. 83, 
ed. Sprengel) is unquestionably the Nigella ; both 
these terms having reference to its black seeds, 
which, according to the above-named author and 
Pliny (jV. H. xix. 8), were sometimes mixed with 
bread. The word gith is of uncertain origin. It 
is used by Pliny (A\ H. xx. 17), who says, 
" Gith ex Graecis alii melanthion, alii melasp^r- 
mon vocant." Plautus also (^Rud. v. 2, 39) has 
the same word git : " Os calet tibi ! num git 
frigide factas." Cp. Celsius {Hierob. ii. 71). 

Besides the N. sativa, there are seven other 
species found wild in Palestine ; iV. arvensis, L., 
and N. damascena, L., being common field 
weeds ; but the seeds of all the wild species 
are less aromatic than those the cultivated 
plant. [H. B. T.] 

FLAG. See Bulrush. 

FLAGON, a word employed in the A. V. to 
render two distinct Hebrew terms : 1. Ashtshah, 
n^-'P'N (2 Sam. vi. 19; 1 Ch. xvi. 3; Cant. 
ii. 5 ; Hos. iii. 1). The real meaning of this 
word, according to the conclusions of Gesenius 
(Thcs. p. 166), is a cake of pressed raisins. He 
dei'ives it from a root signifying to compress, 
and this is confirmed by the renderings of the 
LXX. (Kdyavov, afMupiTrj, Treixfiara) and of the 
Vulgate, and also by the indications of the Tar- 
gum Pseudojon. and the Mishna (Nedarim, 6, 
§ 10). In the passage in Hosea there is probably 
a reference to a practice of offering such cakes 
before the false deities (R. V. renders " a cake," 
or " cakes of raisins "). The rendering of the A. V. 
is perhaps to be traced to Luther, who in the 
first two of the above passages has ein Nossel 
Wein, and in the last Kanne Wein ; but 
primarily to the interpretations of modern Jews 
Xe.g. Gemara, Baba Bathra, and Targum ou 
Chronicles), grounded on a false etymology (see 
Michaelis, quoted by Gesenius, and the observa- 
tions of the latter, as above). It will be 
observed that in the first two passages the 
words " of wine " are interpolated, and that in 
the last " of wine " should be " of grapes." 

2. Nebel, 733 (Is. xxii. 24 only). Nehel is 
commonly used for a bottle or vessel, originally 



probably a skin, but in later times a piece of 
pottery (Is. xxx. 14). But it also frequently 
occurs with the force of a musical instrument 
(A. V. generally "psaltery," but sometimes 
"viol"), a meaning which is adopted by the 
Targum, the Arabic and Vulgate Versions, 
Luther, and given in the margin of the A. V. 
The text, however, follows the rendering of 
the LXX., and with this agrees Gesenius's 
rendering, " Bechcn und Flaschen, von allcr/iand 
Art." [G.] [W.] 

FLAX. Two Hebrew words are nsed for 
this plant in 0. T., or rather the same word 
slightly modified — ^RE^'^ and VipQ. About 
the former there is no question. It occurs only 
in three places (Ex. ix. 31 ; Is. xlii. 3, xliii. 17). 
As regards the latter, there is probably only one 
passage where it stands for the j)lant in its 
undressed state (Josh. ii. 6). Eliminating all 
the places where the words are used for the 
article manufactured in the thread, the piece, or 
the made-up garment [Linen ; Cotton], we 
reduce them to two : Ex. ix, 31, certain, and 
Josh. ii. 6, disputed. 

In the former the flax of the Egyptians is 
recorded to have been damaged by the plague of 

hail. The word ?l}2i is retained by Onkelos; 
but is rendered in LXX. aTrepixaTi^of, and in 
Vulg. folliculus gej~minahat. The A. V. seems 
to have followed the LXX. (IjoHed = (nrep^ua- 
ri^ov); and so Rosenm., "globulus seu nodus 
lini niaturescentis " (Schol. ad loc.). Gesen. 
makes it the calyx, or corolla ; he refers to the 
Mishna, where it is used for the calyx of the 
hyssop, and describes this explanation as one of 
long standing among the more learned Eabbins 
(TJies. p. 261). 

For the flax of ancient Egypt, see Herodot. 
ii. 37, 105 ; Cels. ii. p. 285 sq. ; Heeren, Ideen, 
ii. 2, p. 368 sq. For that of modern Egypt, see 
Hasselquist, Journey, p. 500 ; Olivier, Voyage, 
iii.^p. 297; Girard's Observations in Descript. de 
I'Egypte, t. xvii. (e'tat moderne), p. 98; Paul 
Lucas, Voyages, pt. ii. p. 47. 

From Ritter's Erdkunde, ii. p. 916 (cp. his 
Vorhalle, &c., pp. 45-48), it seems probable that 
the cultivation of flax for the purpose of the 
manufacture of linen was by no means confined 
to Egypt ; but that, originating in India, it 
spread over the whole continent of Asia at a 
very early period of antiquity. That it was 
grown in Palestine even before the conquest of 
that country by the Israelites appears from 
Josh. ii. 6, the second of the two passages 
mentioned above. There is, however, some 
difference of opinion about the meaning of the 
words )'yn ""rit^S; ?uvoKa\dixr] ; Vulg. stipulae 
lini; and so A. V. "stalks of flax;" Joseph, 
speaks of \ivov d-y/coAiSas, armfuls or bundles of 
flax; but Arab. Vers, "stalks of cotton." Ge- 
senius, however, and Rosenmiiller are in favour 
of the rendering "stalks of flax." If this be 
correct, the place involves an allusion to the 
custom of drying the flax-stalks by exposing 
them to the heat of the sun upon the flat roofs 
of houses ; and so expressly in Josephus (^Ant. 
v. i. § 2), \ivov yap ayKa\iSas iirl rod riyovs 
expvx^- In later times this drying was done in 
ovens (Rosenm. Alterthumsh.). There is a 
decide d reference to the raw material in the 



LXX. rendering of Lev. xiii. 47, fyuoTi'ip ctuit- 
vvivqi, and Judg. xv. 14, ffTviririov : cp. Is. 

i. 31. 

The various processes employed in preparing 
the flax for manufacture into cloth are indicated 

1. The drying process (see above). 2. The 

peeling of the stalks, and separation of the 
fibres (the name being derived by Gesen. from 
\y^B, " to tear apart," " to stretch out." But 
the term is probably of foreign origin). 3. The 
hackfmg (Is. xix. 9 ; LXX. \ivot> rh (TX^(Tt6v : 
vid. Gesen. Lex. s. v. p*"lb ; and for the combs 
used in the process, cp. Wilkinson, Anc. E-jypt. 
ii. 90 [1878]). The flax, however, was not 
always dressed before weaving (see Ecclus. xl. 
4, where o}jj.6Kivov is mentioned as a species of 
clothing worn by the poor). That the use of 
the coarser fibres was known to the Hebrews, 
may be inferred from the mention of tow 
(ITIW) in Judg. xvi. 9, Is. i. 31. That flax 
was anciently one of the most important crops 
in Palestine appears from Hos. ii. 5, 9 ; and 
that it continued to be grown, and manu- 
factured into linen in N. Palestine down to 
the Middle Ages, we have the testimony of 
numerous Talmudists and Rabbins. It is still 
cultivated there, but not so extensively as the 
cotton plant. [Cottox ; Linen.] [T. E. B.] 

FLEA (CJ'17'IQ, par'osh; tpvWos; pulex) is 
ouly twice mentioned in Scripture (1 Sam. 
xxiv. 14, xxvi. 20), where David addressing Saul 
compares himself to it, as the most insignificant 
.iiid contemptible of living things. The flea, 
J'ulex irritans, L., of the insect order Aphani- 
ptera, though world-wide in its distribution, is 
nowhere more abundant than in the East. It 
j)ropagates there in countless myriads among 
the dust of caves, especially if used occasionally 
by cattle, and among the stubble and refuse of 
old camps. Woe betide the traveller who 
incautiously pitches on the site of an old 
Bedouin encampment! The villagers in the 
wattled huts of Northern Syria are frequently 
driven away by the swarms of fleas, and are 
compelled to desert their homes for a year 
or two. [H. B. T.] 

FLESH. [Food.] 

FLINT (^'''Oj'n. The corresponding Assyr. 
elmeiu may betoken the diamond. See MV."). 
The Hebrew quadriliteral is rendered flint in 
Deut. viii. 15, xxxii. 13 ; Ps. cxiv. 8 ; and Is. 1. 7. 
In Job xxviii. 9 the same word is rendered rock 
in the text, and flint in the margin (R. V. text, 
"flinty rock"). In the first three passages the 
reference is to God's bringing water and oil out 
of the naturally barren rocks of the Wilderness 
for the sake of His people. In Isaiah the word 
is used metaphorically to signify the firmness 
of the Prophet in resistance to his persecutors. 
In Ezek. iii. 9 the English word "flint" occurs 
in the same sense, but there it represents the 
Hebrew Tzor. So also in Is. v. 28 we have like 
flint applied to the hoofs of horses. In 1 Mace. 
X. 73, k6x^o-^ is translated flint, and in Wisd. xi. 
4 the expression ere ■n-eVpas aKpoTdfiov is adopted 
from Deut. viii. 15 (LXX.). [W. D.] 

FLOOD. [Noah.] 


FLOOE. [Pavement. 

FLOUR. [Bread.] 

FLOWER. [Palestine, Botanv of.] 

FLOWERS, only in the phrase "her 
flowers," A. V. ; " her impurity," R. V. (rin'nj ; 
7] aKaOapcria avrris, eV rij acptSpcfi avrfis ; 
tcmpus sanguinis menstrualis), Lev. xv. 24, 33. 
" Stains " of the menstruation is intended ; the 
earliest source of the expression being probably 
Plato, Jiejy. 429 D, where rh &v6os means " the 
dye," there of purple (aXovpyov) ; see also 
557 C, TTacTii' &vde(riv ■KiTtoiKiKfxevov. [IssUE OF 
Blood.] [H. H.] 

FLUTE, THE (Aramaic Mashrauqitho 
[Nn^pnt^D], Dan. iii. 5, 7, 10, 15), is one of 
the oldest musical instruments known. It is, 
no doubt, identical with the Hebrew Chalil 

(7''7n, 1 Sam. X. 5); but although old, and 
having naturally undergone much development 
and many clianges of construction, it has yet 
preserved its two chief characteristics. its 
piccolo is capable of producing very sharp notes 
indeed, — and hence its name Mashrauqitho : cj). 
Is. V. 26 ; Zech. x. 8. On the other hand, it has 
the power of imitating the feeble whisper of the 
dying, and the mysterious death-rattle. It is 
for these reasons that the ancient Hebrews em- 
ployed this instrument on the most opposite 
occasions — at burials (Mishna Kethuhoth, iv. 4), 
at weddings (Mishna Bobo Metzi'o, vi. 1), and 
at festivals, both private (Is. xxx. 29) and public 
(1 Kings i. 40), profane (Is. v. 12) and religious 
(Mishna Sukkah, v. 1). [S. M. S.-S.J 

FLUX, BLOODY {^vaevrepia., Acts xxviii. 
8), the same as our dysentery, which in the 
East is, though sometimes sporadic, generally 
epidemic and infectious, and then assumes its 
worst form. It is always attended with fever. 
[Fever.] A sharp gnawing and burning sensa- 
tion seizes the bowels, which give off in purging 
much slimy matter and purulent discharge. 
When blood flows, it is said to be less dangerous 
than without it (Schmidt, Bibl. Medic, c. xiv. 
pp. 503-507). King Jehoram's disease was 
probably a chronic dysentery and the " bowels 
falling out," perhaps the prolapsus ant, known 
sometimes to ensue (2 Ch. xxi. 15, 19); but 
possibly it was the actual discharge of portions 
of the diseased organs (see Bihlisch-Talmiuiisihc 
Medicin, by R. J. Wunderbar, iii. B, c). [H. H.] 

FLY, FLIES. The two following Hebrew 
terms denote flies of some kind. 

1. ZebUb (HIST; fMv7a; inusca) occurs only in 
Eccles. X. 1, "Dead z&mbim cause the ointment 
of the apothecary to send forth a stinking 
savour," and in Is. vii. 18, where it is said, 
" The Lord shall hiss for the zebiib that is in the 
uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt." The 
Hebrew name, it is probable, is a generic one 
for any insect, but the etymology is a matter 
of doubt (see Gesenius, Thes. p. 401 ; MV."). 
In the first-quoted passage allusion is made 
to flies, chiefly of the family Muscidae, getting 
into vessels of ointment or other substances ; 
even in this country we know what an in- 
tolei'able nuisance the house-flies are in a hot 


summer when thoy abound, crawling every- 
where and into everything; but in the East the 
nuisance is tenfold greater, where in a few 
minutes they will jiollute a dish of food. Tlie 
zSbub from the rivers of Egypt has by some 
writers, as by Oedmann ( Vcrmisch. Samm. 
vi. 79), been identified with the zimb of which 
Bruce (7'mu. v. 190) gives a description, and 
which is evidently some species of Tabanus. 
Sir G. Williinson has given some account 
{Transac. of the Entomol. Sue. ii. p. 183) of a 
gad-riy {Oestrus) under the name of Dthebab, 
a term almost identical with z&)ub. Though 
zSbub is probably a generic name for any flics, in 
this passage of Isaiah it may be used to denote 
some very troublesome and injurious fly, /car' 
i^oxvv. "The Dthebab is a long grey fly, 
wiiich comes out about the rise of the Nile, and 
is like the Cleg of the north of England; it 
abounds in calm hot weather, and is often met 
with in June and July, both in the desert and 
on the Nile." This insect is very injurious to 
camels and horses, and causes their death, if the 
sores which it generates are neglected ; it attacks 
both man and beast. We have found it ex- 
tremely tormenting to our horses and mules in 
the hotter parts of Palestine. 

So grievous a pest was the zebub in the plains 
of Fliilistia, that the Phoenicians invoked against 
it the aid of their God, under the name of 
B.\AL-ZEBUB, "the Lord of the fly." Though 
such a title may seem a term of derision, and 
has been so interpreted, as applied in contempt 
by the Israelites (Selden, Dc Diis S;/ris, p. 375), 
yet there seems no reason to doubt that this 
w'as the name given to their god by his 
worshippers ; and the torments caused by flies 
in hot climates amply account for the designa- 
tion. Similarly the Greeks gave the epithet 
air6fji.vios to Zeus (Pausan. v. 14, § 2 ; Clem. 
Ale.x. Frotrept. ii. 38). Pliny speaks of a Fly- 
god, Myiodes (xxix. 6, 34). The Jews in 
derision changed the name Baal-zebub to Baal- 
zebul, " Lord of the dunghill," and applied it 
in the time of our Lord to the prince of the 
devils (Matt. xii. 24, &c.). 

2. 'Arob QIW; Kwo/xvia; omne genus mus- 
carum, muscae dkersi generis, niusca gravissima ; 
" swarms of flies," " divers sorts of flies," A. V. 
and R. V.), the name of the insect, or insects, which 
God sent to punish Pharaoh : see Ex. viii. 21-31 ; 
Ps. Ixxviii. 45, cv. 31. The question as to what 
particular insect is denoted bv 'oro6. or whether 
any one species is to be understood by it, has 
long been a matter of dispute. The Scriptural 
details are as follows : — -The ^arob filled the 
houses of the Egyptians, covered the ground, 
lighted on the people, and the land was laid 
waste on their account. The LXX. explain 
^(irub by Kvv6/xvia, i.e. '• dog-fly : " it is not 
very clear what insect is meant by this 
Greek term, which is frequent in Homer, who 
often uses it as an abusive epithet. It is not 
improbable that one of the Hippoboscidae or 
horse-flies, perhaps H. Equina, Linn., is the 
Kvydfivia of Aelian (iV. A. iv. 51), though Homer 
may have used the compound term to denote 
extreme impudence, implied by theshamelessness 
of the dog and the teasing impertinence of the 
common fly (Musca). As the '«/-o6 is said to 
have filled the houses of the Egyptians, it seems 



not improbable that common flies (Muscidae) 
are more especially intended, and that the 
compounil Kvv6ixvia flenotes the grievous nature 
of the plague, though we see no reason to 
restrict the ^iirob to any one familv. It may 
include, besides the horse-fly, those blood-sucking 
tormentors the gnats or mosquitoes (Culicidae), 
and the gad-flies (Oestrus). The common 
horse-fly is, however, quite tormenting enough 
to have been of itself the Egyjitian ]>lague. It 
settles on the human body like the mosquito, 
sucks blood, and produces festering sores. " Of 
insects," says Sonnini (Trav. iii. p. 199), "the 
most troublesome in Egypt are flies ; both man 
and beast are cruelly tormented with them. 
No idea can be formed of their obstinate rapacity. 
It is in vain to drive them away, they return 
again in the self-same moment, and their perse- 
verance wearies out the most patient spirit." 
It is the great instrument of spreading the well- 
known purulent ophthalmia, which is conveyed 
from one individual to another by these dreadful 
pests, which alight on the diseased eye, and then 
with their feet moist from the discharge inocu- 
late the next healthy person on whom they 
settle. See for cases of Myosis produced by 
Dipterous larvae, Transactions of Entomol. Soc. 
ii. pp. 266-269. 

The identification of the 'drob with the cock- 
roach (Blatta Orientalis), which Oedmann ( Verm. 
Sam, pt. ii. c. 7) suggests, and which Kirby 
(Bridgw. Treat, ii. p. 357) adopts, has nothing 
at all to recommend it, and is purely gratuitous, 
as Mr. Hope proved in 1837 in a paper on this 
subject in the Trans. Entomol. Soc. ii. 179-183. 
The error of calling the cockroach a beetle, and 
the confusion which has been made between it 
and the sacred beetle of Egypt (Ateuchus sacer), 
has been repeated by M. Kalisch (Hist, and 
Crit. Comment. Exod. I. c). The cockroach, as 
Mr. Hope remarks, is a nocturnal insect, and 
prowls about for food at night, " but what 
reason have we to believe that the fly attacked 
the Egyptians by night and not by day ? " We 
see no reason to be dissatisfied with the reading 
in our own Version. [W. H.] [H. B. T.] 

FOOD. The diet of Eastern nations has 
been in all ages more light and simple than our 
own. The chief points of contrast are the 
small amount of animal food consumed, the 
variety of articles used as accompaniments to 
bread, the substitution of milk in various forms 
for our liquoi's, and the combination of what we 
should deem heterogeneous elements in the same 
dish, or the same meal. The chief point of agree- 
ment is the large consumption of bread, the 
importance of which in the eyes of the Hebrew 
is testified by the use of the term lechem (ori- 
ginally food of any kind) specifically for bread, 
as well as by the expression " staff of bread " 
(Lev. xxvi. 26 ; Ps. cv. 16 ; Ezek. iv. 16, xiv. 
13). Simpler preparations of corn were, how- 
ever, common ; sometimes the fresh green ears 
were eaten in a natural state," the husks being 
rubbed off by the hand (Lev. xxiii. 14; Deut. 
xxiii. 25 ; 2 K. iv. 42 ; Matt. xii. 1 ; Luke vi. 1); 
more frequently, however, the grains, after 

» This custom is still practlBed in Palestine (Robin- 
son's Eesearches, i. 493). 



being carefully picked, were roasted in a pan 
over a fire (Lev. ii. 14), and eaten as " parched 
corn," in which form it was an ordinary article 
of diet, particularly among labourers, or others 
who had not the means of dressing food (Lev. 
xxiii. 14; Ruth ii. 14; 1 Sam. xvii. 17, xxv. 18; 
2 Sam. xvii. 28): this practice is still very 
usual in the East (cp. Lane, i. 251 ; Robinson, 
Researches, ii. 350). Sometimes the grain was 
bruised (like the Greek polenta, Plin. xviii. 14), 
in which state it was termed either H^'^i (ipiKrd, 
LXX. ; A. V. " beaten," R. V. " bruised ; " Lev. 
ii. 14, 16), or niQ"'"! (Tniffivai, ko^., Symm. ; 
A. V. " ground corn," R. V. " bruised corn ; " 
2 Sam. xvii. 19 ; cp. Prov. xxvii. 22), and then 
dried in the sun ; it was eaten either mixed with 
oil (Lev. ii. 15), or made into a soft cake named 
nonu (A. V. «' dough," R. V. marg. coarse 
tneal";' Num. xv. 20 ; Neh. x. 37 ; Ezek. xliv. 30). 
The Hebrews used a great variety of articles 
(John xxi. 5) to give a relish to bread. Some- 
times salt was so used (Job vi. 6), as we learn 
from the passage just quoted; sometimes the 
bread was dipped into the sour wine (A. V. and 
R. V. "vinegar") which the labourers drank 
(Ruth ii. 14); or, where meat was eaten, into 
the gravy, which was either served up separately 
for the purpose, as by Gideon (Judg. vi. 19), or 
placed in the middle of the meat dish, as done 
by the Arabs (Burckhardt, N'otcs, i. 63), whose 
practice of dipping bread in the broth, or melted 
fat of the animal, strongly illustrates the 
reference to the sop in John xiii. 26 sq. The 
modern Egyptians season their bread with a 
sauce'' composed of various stimulants, such as 
salt, mint, sesame, and chickpeas (Lane, i. 180). 
The Syrians, on the other hand, use a mixture 
of savory and salt for the same purpose (Rus- 
sell, i. 93). Where the above-mentioned acces- 
sories were wanting, fruit, vegetables, fish, or 
honev, were used. In short it may be said that 
all the articles of food, which we are about to 
mention, were mainly viewed as subordinates to 
the staple commodity of bread. The various 
kinds of bread and cakes are described under 
the head of Bread. 

Milk and its preparations hold a conspicuous 
place in Eastern diet, as affording substantial 
nourishment ; sometimes it was produced in a 

fresh state (HTTI; Gen. xviii. 8), but more gene- 
rally in the form of the modern leban, i.e. sour 
milk (nXpn ; A. V. " butter ; " Gen. xviii. 8 ; 
Judg. v.^ 25; 2 Sam. xvii. 29). The latter is 
universally used by the Bedouins, not only as 
their ordinary beverage (Burckhardt, Notes, i. 
240), but mixed with rice, flour, meat, and even 
salad (Burckhardt, i. 58, 63 ; Russell, Aleppo, 
i. 118). It is constantly offered to travellers, 
and in some parts of Arabia it is deemed scan- 
dalous to take any money in return for it 
(Burckhardt, Ai-abia, i. 120). For a certain 
season of the year, leban makes up a great part of 
the food of the poor in Syria (Russell, I. c). Butter 
(Prov. XXX. 33) and various forms of coagulated 
milk, of the consistency of the modern kaimak 

* The later Jews named this sauce nDTlH (Mishn. 
Pes. 2, 5 8) : it consisted of vinegar, almonds, and spice, 
thickened with flour. It was used at the celebration of 
the Passover {Pes. 10, $ 3). 


(Job X. 10 ; 1 Sam. xvii. 18 ; 2 Sam. xvii. 29), 
were also used. [Butter ; Cheese ; Milk.] 

Fruit was another source of subsistence : figs 
stand first in point of importance ; the early 
sorts described as the " summer fruit " (f ^j? ; 
Amos viii. 1, 2) and the " first ripe fruit " 
(mi33 ; Hos. ix. 10 ; Mic. vii. 1) were esteemed 
a great luxury, and were eaten as fresh fruit ; 
but they were generally dried and pressed into 
cakes, similar to the date-cakes of the Arabians 
(Burckhardt, Arabia, i. 57), in which form they 

were termed Dv^l'l (TraXdOai, A. V. " cakes of 
figs ;" 1 Sam. xxv. 18, xxx. 12 ; 1 Ch. xii. 40), 
and occasionally y^p simply (2 Sam. xvi. 1 ; 
A.V. " summer fruit "). Grapes were generally 
eaten in a dried state as raisins (D''i5©V; lyaturae 
uvac passae,'V u\g.; 1 Sam. xxv. 18, xxx. 12; 
2 Sam. xvi. 1 ; 1 Ch. xii. 40), but sometimes, as 
before, pressed into cakes, named nK'''£J'X (2 Sam. 
vi. 19 ; 1 Ch. xvi. 3 ; Cant. ii. 5 ; Hos. iii. 1), 
understood by the LXX, as a sort of cake, \aya- 
vov a.Tvh rrjydvov, and by the A. V. as a " flagon 
of u-ine," and by the R. V. as " a cake of raisins." 
Fruit-cake forms a part of the daily food of the 
Arabians, and is particularly adapted to the 
wants of travellers ; dissolved in water, it affords 
a sweet and refreshing drink (Niebuhr, Arabia, 
p. 57 ; Russell, Aleppo, i. 82) ; an instance of its 
stimulating effect is recorded in 1 Sam. xxx. 12. 
Apples (probably citrons) are occasionally noticed, 
but rather in reference to their fragrance (Cant, 
ii. 5, vi. 8) and colour (Prov. xxv. 11) than as 
an article of food. Dates are not noticed in 
Scripture, unless we accept the rendering of j'^p 
in the LXX. (2 Sam. xvi. l)as = <|)oiVtK€s ; it can 
hardly be doubted, however, that where the 
palm-tree flourished, as in the neighbourhood of 
Jericho, its fruit was consumed; in Joel i. 12 it 
is reckoned among other trees valuable for their 
fruit. The pomegranate tree is also noticed by 
Joel ; it yields a luscious fruit, from which a 
species of wine was expressed (Cant. viii. 2 ; 
Hag. ii. 19). Melons were grown in Egypt 
(Num. xi. 5), but not in Palestine. The mul- 
berry is undoubtedly mentioned in Luke xvii. 6 
under the name avKo-fjuvos : the Hebrew D''N33 
so translated (2 Sam. v. 23 [R. V. marg. balsam 
tree"] ; 1 Ch. xiv. 14) is rather doubtful ; the 
Vulg. takes it to mean pears. The avKo/j^opea 
(" sycomore," A. V. ; Luke xix. 4) differed from 
the tree last mentioned ; it was the Egyptian 
fig, which abounded in Palestine (1 K. x. 27), and 
was much valued for its fruit (1 Ch. xxvii. 28 ; 
Amos vii. 14). [Apple ; Citron ; Figs ; Mul- 


Of vegetables we have most frequent notice of 
lentils (Gen. xxv. 34; 2 Sam. xvii. 28, xxiii. 11; 
Ezek. iv. 9), which are still largely used by the 
Bedouins in travell i ng (Burckhardt, ^ra6!a, i . 65) ; 
beans (2 Sam. xvii. 28 ; Ezek. iv. 9), which still 
foi-m a favourite dish in Egypt and Arabia for 
breakfast, boiled in water and eaten with butter 
and pepper ; from 2 Sam. xvii. 28 it might be 
inferred that beans and other kinds of pulse 

were roasted, as barley was, but the second ""/p 
in that verse is interpolated, not appearing in 
the LXX. and other Versions (see QFB.% and, 
even if it were not so, the reference to pulse in 




the A. v., as of ciccr in the Vulg., is wholly 
unwarranted ; cucumbers (Num. xi. 5 ; Is. i. H ; 
Bar. vi. 70 ; cp. 2 K. iv. 39, where wild ijourds, 
Cucumcrcs asinini, were jiicked in mistake for 
cucumbers); leeks, onions, and garlic, which 
were and still are of a superior quality 
in Egypt (Num. xi. 5; cp. Wilkinson, Anc. 
Egi/pt. i. 169 [1878]; Lane, i. 251); lettuce, 
of which the wild species, Zactuca a<jrcstis, is 
identified with the Greek iriKpls by Pliny (xxi. 
65), and formed, according to the LXX. and the 
Vulg., the " bitter herbs " (D^'^^P) eaten with 
the Paschal lamb (Ex. xii. 8; Num. ix. 11); 
endive, which is still well known in the PLast 
(Russell, i. 91), may have been included under 
the same class. In addition to the above we 
have notice of cei'tain " herbs " (nillK ; 2 K, iv. 
39) eaten in times of scarcity, which were 
mallows according to the Syriac and Arabic 
Versions, but, according to the Talmud, a veget- 
able resembling the Brassica cruca of Linnaeus ; 
and again of sea-purslain (n-"l?D ; &\tfia ; A. V. 
" mallows," R. V. " salt-wort ") and broom-root 
(D''pn-), A. V. and R. V. "juniper ; " Job xxx. 4), 
as eaten by the poor in time of famine, unless the 
latter were gathered as fuel. An insipid plant, 
probably purslain, used in salad, appears to be 
referred to in Job vi. 6, under the expression 

niD^n in C? white of egg," A. v., R. V. marg. 
the juice of purslahi). The usual method of 
eating vegetables was in the form of pottage 
(T'T3 ; e\pTjij.a ; puhnentum ; Gen. xxv. 29 ; 2 K. 
iv. 38; Hag. ii. 12); a meal wholly of veget- 
ables was deemed very poor fare (Prov. sv. 17 ; 
Dan. i. 12 ; Rom. xiv. 2). The modern Arabians 
consume but few vegetables ; radishes and leeks 
are most in use, and are eaten raw with bread 
(Burckhardt, Ai-ahia, i. 56). [Beans; Cu- 
cumber ; Garlic ; Gourd ; Leek ; Lentil ; 

The spices or condiments known to the 
Hebrews were numerous : cummin (Is. xxviii. 
25; Matt, xxiii. 23), dill (Matt, xxiii. 23; 
"anise," A. V.), coriander (Ex. xvi. 31 ; Num. 
xi. 7), mint (Matt, xxiii. 13), rue (Luke xi. 42), 
mustard (Jlatt. xiii. 31, xvii. 20), and salt (Job 
vi. 6), which is reckoned among " the principal 
things for the whole use of man's life " (Ecclus. 
xxxix. 26). Nuts (pistachios) and almonds (Gen. 
xliii. 11) were also used as lohets to the appetite. 
[Almond-tree ; Anise ; Coriander ; Cummin ; 
Mint; Mustard; Nuts; Spices.] 

In addition to these classes, we have to notice 
some other important articles of food : in the 
first place, honey, whether the natural product 
of the bee (1 Sam. xiv. 25 ; Matt. iii. 4), which 
abounds in most parts of Arabia (Burckhardt, 
Arabia, i. 54), or the other natural and artificial 
productions included under that head, especially 
the dibs of the Syrians and the Arabians, 
i.e. grape-juice boiled down to the state of 
the Roman defrutum, which is still exten- 
sively used in the East (Russell, i. 82) ; the 
latter is supposed to be referred to in Gen. xliii, 
11 and Ezek. xxvii. 17. The importance of 
honey as a substitute for sugar is obvious ; it 
was both used in certain kinds of cake (though 
prohibited in the case of meat offerings, Lev. ii. 
11), as in the pastry of the Arabs (Burckhardt, 
Arabia, i. 54), and was also eaten in its natural 

state either by itself (1 Sam. xiv. 27 ; 2 Sam. 
xvii. 29 ; 1 K. xiv. 3), or in conjunction with 
otlinr things, even with fish (Luke xxiv. 42). 
" Butter and honey " is an exjiression for rich 
diet (Is. vii. 15, 22) ; such a mixture is popular 
among the Arabs (Burckhardt, Arabia, i. 54). 
" Jlilk and honey" are similarly coupled to- 
gether, not only frequently by the sacred 
writers, as expressive of the richness of the 
promised land, but also by the Greek poets (cp. 
Callim. Iltjmn. in Jov. 48 ; Horn. <Jd. xx. 68). 
Too much honey was deemed unwholesome 
(Prov. xxv. 27). With regard to oil, it does not 
appear to have been used to the extent we might 
have anticipated ; some modern Arabs only 
employ it in frying fish (Burckhardt, Arabia, i. 
54), substituting butter for all other purposes; 
others make it a prominent article of f(Joil ; 
while other Orientals eat it universally in place 
of butter and fat during Lent. Among the 
Hebrews oil was deemed an expensive luxury 
(Prov. xxi. 17), to be reserved for festive 
occasions (1 Ch. xii. 40) ; it was chiefly used in 
certain kinds of cake (Lev. ii. 5 sq. ;'.l K. xvii. 
12). " Oil and honey " ai-e mentioned in con- 
junction with bread in Ezek. xvi. 13, 19. The 
Syrians, especially the Jews, eat oil and honey 
(dibs) mixed together (Russell, i. 80). Eggs are 
not often noticed, but were evidently known as 
articles of food (Is. x. 14, lix. 5; Luke xi. 12), 
and are reckoned by Jerome (In Epitaph. Paul. 
i. 176) among the delicacies of the table. The 
Orientals of to-day fry them in twice their bulk 
of fat or butter or oil. [Honey ; Oil.] 

The Orientals are, as a rule, sparing in the use 
of animal food ° : not only does the excessive heat 
of the climate render it both unwholesome to 
eat much meat (Niebuhr, Descript. p. 46), and 
expensive from the necessity of immediately con- 
suming a whole animal ; but beyond this the 
ritual regulations of the Mosaic law in ancient, 
as of the Koran in modern times, have tended to 
the same result. It has been inferred from Gen. 
ix. 3, 4, that animal food was not permitted 
before the Flood : but the notices of the flock of 
Abel (Gen. iv. 2) and of the herds of Jabal (Gen. 
iv. 20), as well as the distinction between clean 
and unclean animals (Gen. vii. 2), favour the 
opposite opinion ; and the permission in Gen. ix. 
3 does not so much constitute a considerable 
difference (Dillmann^ in loco) as (cp. Delitzsch 
[1887] in loco) a more explicit declaration of a 
condition implied in the grant of universal 
dominion previously given (Gen. i. 28). The 
prohibition then expressed against consuming 
the blood of any animal (Gen. ix. 4) was more 
fully developed in the Levitical Law, and enforced 
by the penalty of death (Lev. iii. 17, vii. 26, 
xix. 26 ; Deut. xii. 16 ; 1 Sam. xiv. 32 sq. ; Ezek. 
xliv. 7, 15), on the ground, as stated in Lev. 
xvii. 11 and Deut. xii. 23, that the blood con- 
tained the principle of life, and, as such, was to 
be offered on the Altar ; probably there was an 

"^ Dr. Post (S. D. Amer. ed., s. v. "Food," note at 
end) points out, however, that dyspepsia is very common 
among the people, and arises partly from their heavy 
and unwholesome food, and partly from the fact that 
their heavy meal is taken just before retiring for the 
night. He describes a stow as consisting of meat and 
vegetables fried in butter or fat, and the cater as drink- 
ing 03 much of the fatty matter as possible. 



additional reason in the heathen practice of con- 
sumino- blood in their sacrifices (Ps. xvi. 4 ; Ezek. 
ssxiii. 25). The prohibition applied to strangers 
as well as Israelites, and to all kinds of beast or 
fowl (Lev. vii. 26 ; xvii. 12, lo). So strong was 
the feeling of the Jews on this point, that the 
Gentile converts to Christianity were laid under 
similar restrictions (Acts xv. 20, 29 ; xxi. 25). 
As a necessary deduction from the above principle, 
all animals which had died a natural death 

(n?53, Deut. xiv. 21), or had been torn of beasts 
(nQ"lp, Ex. xxii. 31), were also prohibited (Lev. 
xvii. 15 ; cp. Ezek. iv. 14), and were to be thrown 
to the dogs (Ex. xxii. 31) : this prohibition did not 
extend to strangers (Deut. xiv. 21). Any person 
infringing this rule was held unclean until the 
evening, and was obliged to wash his clothes (Lev. 
xvii. 15). In the N. T. these cases are described 
under the term TrPLKT6v (Acts xv. 20), applying 
not only to what was strangled (as in A. V.), but 
to any animal from which the blood was not 
regularly poured forth. Similar prohibitions 
are contained in the Koran (ii. 175, v. 4, xvi. 
116), the result of which is that at the present 
day the Arabians eat no meat except what has 
been bought at the shambles. Certain portions 
of the fat of sacrifices were also forbidden (Lev. 
iii. 9, 10), as being set apart for the Altar (Lev. 
iii. 16, vii. 25 : cp. 1 Sam. ii. 16 sq. ; 2 Ch. vii. 
7) : it should be observed that the term in Neh. 

viii. 10, translated fat, is not 37n, but D*30p'D 
= the fatty pieces of meat, delicacies. In addi- 
tion to the above. Christians were forbidden to 
eat the flesh of animals, portions of which had 
been offered to idols (eidci>\6dvra), whether at 
private feasts, or as bought in the market (Acts 
XV. 29, xxi. 25; 1 Cor. viii. 1 sq.). All beasts 
and birds classed as unclean (Lev. xi. 1 sq. ; 
Deut. xiv. 4 sq.) were also prohibited [Unclean 
Beasts and Birds] : and in addition to these 
general precepts there was a special prohibition 
against '• seething a kid in his mother's milk " 
(Ex. xxiii. 19, xxxiv. 26 ; Deut. xiv. 21), which 
has been variously understood, by Talmudical 
writers as a general prohibition against the joint 
use of meat and milk (Mishna, Cholin, cap. 8, 
§ 1); by Michaelis QIos. Recht, iv. 210) as pro- 
hibiting the use of fat or milk, as compared 
with oil, in cooking; by Luther and Calvin as 
prohibiting the slaughter of young animals ; and 
by Bochart and others as discountenancing cruelty 
in any way. These interpretations, however, all 
fail in establishing any connexion between the 
precept and the offering of the first-fruits, as 
implied in the three passages quoted. More 
probably it has reference to certain heathen 
usages at their harvest festivals (Maimonides, 
More Nehoch. 3, 48 ; Spencer, de Legg. Hehr. 
Mitt. 535 sq. Cp. Knobel-Dillmann on Exod. 
xxiii. 19): and there is a remarkable addition in 
the Samaritan Version and in some copies of the 
LXX. in Deut. xiv. 21, which supports this 
view ; &s yap voie7 toCto, oocrel affiraXaKa Ovaet, 
OTi fj.ia(T/xd iffTi Tip Qicf 'laKci^ (cp. Knobel, Com- 
ment, in Ex. xxiii. 19). The Hebrews further 
abstained from eating the sinew of the hip (T"-! 
ny'an, Gen. xxxli. 32 [Heb. v. 33]), in memory 
of the struggle between Jacob and the Angel 
(cp. V. 25). The LXX., the Vulg., and the 
A. V. interpret the 07ra| \ey6/jievov word nasheh 


of the shrinking or benumbing of the muscle (h 
ivdpKriffiP ; qui emarcuit ; " which shrank ") : 
Josephus (^Ant. i. 20, § 2) more correctly ex- 
plains it, t5 v€vpov rh ttKoltv ; and there is 
little doubt that the nerve he refers to is the 
nervus ischiadiciis, which attains its greatest 
thickness at the hip. There is no further 
reference to this custom in the Bible ; but the 
Talmudists (^Cholin, 7) enforced its observance 
by penalties. 

Under these restrictions the Hebrews were 
permitted the free use of animal food : generally 
speaking, they only availed themselves of it in 
the exercise of hospitality (Gen. xviii. 7), or at 
festivals of a religious (Ex. xii. 8), public (1 K, 
i. 9 ; 1 Ch. xii. 40), or private character (Geu. 
xxvii. 4 ; Luke xv. 23) : it was only in royal 
households that there was a daily consumption 
of meat (1 K. iv. 23 ; Neh. v. 18). Tlie use of 
meat is reserved for similar occasions among the 
Bedouins (Burckhardt's Notes, i. 63). The 
animals killed for meat were — calves (Gen. xviii. 
7 ; 1 Sam. xxviii. 24 ; Amos vi. 4), which are 
farther described by the term fatling (Xnp = 
fji.6(TXos airiVT6s, Luke xv. 23, and ffiriaray 
Matt. xxii. 4; 2 Sam. vl. 13; 1 K. i. 9 sq. ; 
A.V. " fat cattle ") ; lambs (2 Sam. xii. 4 ; Amos 
vi. 4) ; oxen, not above three years of age (1 K. 
i. 9 ; Prov. xv. 17 ; Is. xxii. 13 ; ]\Iatt. xxii. 4), 
which were either stall-fed (D''X"!^ ; fi.6crxoi 
6/cAeKTof), or taken up from the pastures (^1?") ; 
ySo'es voixdSes ; 1 K. iv. 23) ; kids (Gen. xxvii. 
9; Judg. vi. 19; 1 Sam. xvi. 20); harts, roe- 
bucks, and fallow-deer (1 K. iv. 23), which 
are also brought into close connexion with 
ordinary cattle in Deut. xiv. 5, as though hold- 
ing an intermediate place between tame and 
wild animals; birds of various kinds (D'''}SV> 
A. V. " fowls ; " Neh. v. 18 ; the LXX., how- 
ever, gives x'M^pos, as though the reading 
were D'1''SV) ; quail in certain parts of Arabia 
(Ex. xvi.' 13; Num. si. 32); poultry (Qn3-|3 ; 
1 K. iv. 23 ; understood generally by the LXX., 
opviQwv eKXeKTccu fftrevTa ; by Kimchi and the 
A. V, and R. V. as " fatted fowl ; " by Gesenius, 
Thesaur. p. 246, as geese, from the whiteness of 
their plumage ; by Thenius, Comm. in I. c, as 
guinea-fowls, as though the word represented 
the call of that bird) ; partridges (1 Sam. xxvi. 
20) ; fish, with the exception of such as were 
without scales and fins (Lev. xi. 9 ; Deut. xiv. 
9), both salted, as was probably the case with 
the sea-fish brought to Jerusalem (Neh. xiii. 16), 
and fresh (Matt. xiv. 19, xv. 36 ; Luke xxiv. 42). 
This in our Saviour's time appears to have been 
the usual food about the Sea of Galilee (Matt, 
vii. 10) ; the term oipdpiov is applied to it by 
St. John (vi. 9 ; xxi. 9 sq.) in the restricted 
sense which the word obtained among the later 
Greeks, as = fish. Locusts, of which certain 
species only were esteemed clean (Lev. xi. 22), 
were occasionally eaten (Matt. iii. 4^, but con- 
sidered as poor fare. They are at the present 
day largely consumed by the poor both in Persia 
(Morier's Second Journey, p. 44) and in Arabia 
(Niebuhr, Voyage, i. 319); they are salted and 
dried, and roasted, when required, on a frying- 
pan with butter (Burckhardt's Notes, ii. 92 ; 
Niebuhr, I.e.). 

Meat does not appear ever to have been eaten 


by itself; various accompaniments are noticed 
in Scripture, as bread, milk, and sour milk 
(Gen. xviii. 8); broad and broth (Judg. vi. 19); 
and with fish either bread (Matt. xiv. 19, xv. 
36 ; John xxi. 9) or honeycomb (Luke xxiv. 
42) : the instance in 2 Sam. vi. 19 cannot be 
relied on, as the meaning of the term "iSt^X, 
rendered in the A. V. " a good piece o/ flesh" 
after the Vulg., assatura bibulae car-nis, is quite 
unknown (see Driver, A'otes on the Heb. Text of 
the BB. of Sam., in loco. Tlie R. V. renders in 
text a portion of flesh, and in niarg. of loine). 
For the modes of preparing meat, see CoOKiNG ; 
and for the times and manner of eating, MEALS : 
see also Fisii, J'owl, &c. 

To pass from ordinary to occasional sources 
of subsistence : prison diet consisted of bread 
and water administered in small quantities 
(1 K. xxii. 27 ; Jer. xxxvii. 21) : pulse and 
water was considered but little better (Dan. i. 
12) : in time of sorrow or fasting it was usual 
to abstain either altogether from food (2 Sam. 
xii. 17, 20), or from meat, wine, and other 

delicacies, which were described as n'nwn Dn?, 
lit. bread of desires (Dan. x. 3). In time of 
extreme famine the most loathsome food was 
swallowed ; such as an ass's head (2 K. vi. 25), 
the ass, it must be remembered, being an un- 
clean animal (for a parallel case cp. Plutarch, 
Artaxerx. 24), and dove's dung (see the article 
on that subject), the dung of cattle (Joseph. 
B. J. V. 13, § 7), and even possibly their own 
dung (2 K. xviii. 27). The consumption of 
human flesh was not altogether unknown 
(2 K. vi. 28 ; cp. Joseph. B. J. vi. 3, § 4), the 
passages quoted supplying instances of the exact 
fulfilment of the prediction in Deut. xxviii. 
56, 57 : cp. also Lam. ii. 20, iv. 10 ; Ezek. 
V. 10. 

With regard to the beverages used by the 
Hebrews, we have already mentioned milk, and 
the probable use of barley-water, and of a mix- 
ture resembling the modern sherbet, formed of 
fig-cake and water. The Hebrews probably 
resembled the Arabs in not drinking much 
during their meals, but concluding them with 
a long draught of water. It is almost needless 
to say that water was most generally drunk. 
In addition to these the Hebrews were ac- 
quainted with various intoxicating liquors, the 
most valued of which was the juice of the 
grape, while others were described under the 
general term of shechar or strong drink (Lev. x. 
9; Xum. vi. 3; Judg. xiii. 4, 7), if indeed the 
latter does not sometimes include the former 
(Num. xxviii. 7): these were reserved for the 
wealthy or for festive occasions. The poor con- 
sumed a sour wine (A. V. " vinegar ; " Euth ii. 
14; Matt, xxvii. 48), calculated to quench 
thirst, but not agreeable to the taste (Prov. x. 
26). [Drink, Strong ; Vinegar ; Water ; 
Wine.] [W. L. B.] [F.] 

FOOT, watering with the (Deut. xi. 10). 

FOOTMAN, a word employed in the A. V. 
in two senses. 1. Generally, to distinguish 
those of the people or of the fighting-men who 
went on foot from those who were on horseback 
or in chariots. The Hebrew word for this is 


v31, ragli, from rcgcl, a foot. The LXX. 
commonly express it by irefof, or occasionally 

But, 2. The woi'd occurs in a more special 
sense (in 1 Sam. xxii. 17 only ; K. V. " guard ;" 
both A. V. and K. V. have in marg. Heb. i-unners), 
and as the translation of a diliurent term from 
tlie above — ]^n, rootz. This passage alVords the 
first mention of the existence of a body of swift 
runners in attendance on the king, though such 
a thing had been foretold by Samuel (1 Sam. 
viii. 11). This body appears to have been after- 
wards kept up, and to liave been distinct from 
the body-guard — the six hundred, and the thirty 
— who were originated by David. See 1 K. 
xiv. 27, 28; 2 Ch. xii. 10, 11; 2 K. xi. 4, 6, 
11, 13, 19. In each of these cases the word is 
the same as the above, and is rendered "guard:" 
but the translators and revisers were evidently 
aware of its signification, for they have put 
the woi"d "runners" in the margin (1 K. xiv. 
27, A. V. and R. V, ; 2 K. xi. 4 ; 2 Ch. xii. 10, 
R. v.). This indeed was the force of the term 
" footman " at the time the A. V. was made, as 
is plain not only from the references just 
quoted, but amongst others from the title of a 
well-known tract of Bunyan's — The Heavenly 
Footman, or a Description of the Mmi that gets 
to Heaven, on 1 Cor. ix. 24 (St. Paul's figure of 
the race). Swift running was evidently a 
valued accomplishment of a perfect warrior — a 
gibbor, as the Hebrew word is — among the 
Israelites. There are constant allusions to this 
in the Bible, though obscured in the E. V., 
from the translators not recognising or not 
adopting the technical sense of the word gibbor. 
Among others see Ps. xix. 5 ; Job xvi. 14 ; Joel 
ii, 7, where " strong man," " giant," and 
" mighty man " are all gibbor, used in connexion 
with running. David was famed for his powers 
of running ; they are so mentioned as to seem 
characteristic of him (1 Sam. xvii. 22, 48, 51 ; 
XX. 6), and he makes them a special subject of 
thanksgiving to God (2 Sam. xxii. 30; Ps. 
xviii. 29). The cases of Cushi and Ahimaaz 
(2 Sam. xviii.) will occur to every one. It is 
not impossible that the former — "the Ethio- 
pian," as his name most likely is— had some 
peculiar mode of running. [Cusiii.] Asahel 
also was "swift on his feet," and the Gadite 
heroes who came across to David in his diffi- 
culties were "swift as the roes upon the 
mountains : " but in neither of these last cases is 
the word rootz employed. The word probably 
derives its modern sense from the custom of 
domestic servants running by the carriage of 
their master. [Guard.] ' [G.] [W.] 

FORDS. [See Jordan.] 

FOREHEAD (n^O, from n^», rad. inus. 
to'shine, Gesen. p. 815 ; fxeTonvov ; frons). The 
practice for women of the higher classes, espe- 
cially married women, in the East, to veil their 
faces in public, sufficiently stigi-^atizes with re- 
proach the unveiled face of women of bad cha- 
racter (Gen. XXV. 65 ; Jer. iii. 3 ; Niebuhr, Voy. 
i. 1 32, 149, 150 ; Shaw, Travels, pp. 228, 240 ; 
Hasselquist, Travels, p. 58 ; Buckingham, Arab 
Tribes, p. 312 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 72, 77, 225- 
248 ; Burckhardt, Travels, i. 233). An especial 
force is thus given to the term " hard of fore- 



head," as descriptive of audacity in general 
(Ezek. iii. 7-9 ; comp. Juv. Sat. xiv. 242 — 
" Ejectum attrita de fronte ruborem "). 

The custom among many Oriental nations 
both of colouring the face and forehead, and of 
impressing on the body marks indicative of 
devotion to some special deity or religious sect, 
is mentioned elsewhere [Cuttings in Flesh]. 
(Burckhardt, Notes on Bed. i. 51 ; Niebuhr, 
Voy. ii. 57 ; Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, ii. 342 
[1878]; Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 66.) It is doubtless 
alluded to in Rev. (.xiii. 16, 17 ; xiv. 9 ; xvii. 5 ; 
XX. 4), and in the opposite direction by Ezekiel 
(ix. 4—6) and in Rev. (vii. 3 ; ix. 4 ; xiv. 1 ; 
xxii. 4). The mark mentioned by Ezekiel with 
approval has been supposed to be the figure of 
the cross, said to be denoted by the word here 
used, ID, in the ancient Semitic language 
(Gesen. p. 1495 ; Spencer, de Leg. Hehr. ii. 20. 
3, pp. 409, 413 ; MV.'>)- 

It may have been by way of contradiction to 
heathen practice that the high-priest wore on 
the front of his mitre the golden plate inscribed 
" Holiness to the Lord " (Ex. xxviii. 36, xxxix. 
30 ; Spencer, I. c). 

The "jewel for the forehead" mentioned by 
Ezekiel (xvi. 12), and in margin of A. V. Gen. 
xxiv. 22, was in all probability nose-rings (so 
R. V. Cp. Is. iii. 21 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. iii. 225, 
226; Harmer, 06s. iv. 311, 312; Gesen. p. 870; 
Winer, s. v. Nasenring'). The Persian and also 
Egyptian women wear jewels and strings of 
coins across their foreheads (Olearius, Travels, 
p. 317 ; Lane, Mod. Eg. ii. 228). [Nose-jewel.] 

For the use of frontlets between the eyes, see 
Frontlets; and for symptoms of leprosy ap- 
parent in the forehead, Leprosy. [H. W. P.] 

FOKESKIN. [Circumcision.] 

FOREST. The corresponding Hebrew terms 
are "li;^, t^nh, and D'llS). The first of these 
most truly expresses the idea of a forest, the 
etymological force of the word being abundance, 
and its use being restricted (with the exception 
of 1 Sam. xiv. 26, and Cant. v. 1, in which it 
refers to honey) to an abundance of trees. The 
second is seldom used, the word itself involving 
the idea of what is being cut down (silva a 
caedendo dicta, Gesen. Thesaur. p. 530): it is 
only twice (1 Sam. xxiii. 15 sq. ; 2 Ch. xxvii. 4) 
applied to woods' properly so called, and there 
probably to woods on hills as distinguished from 
woods on the plain ; its sense, however, is illus- 
trated in the other passages in which it occurs, 
viz. Is. xvii. 2 (A. V. "bough," R. V. "wood." 
The verse is difficult, and the readings various. 
See Delitzsch ■» and Dillmann ^ in loco), where 
the comparison is to the " forsaken places " 
(R. V.) of worship in the forest, and Ezek. 
xxxi._ 3, where it applies to trees or foliage 
sufficient to afford shelter (frondibus nemorosus, 
Vulg. ; A. V. and R. V. "with a shadowing 
shroud "). The third, pardes (a word of foreign 
origin [see MV."], meaning an enclosed place, 
whether garden or park, whence also comes the 
Greek irap(iSei<ros), refers perhaps to forest trees 
(Neh. ii. 8), the forests of Palestine being care- 
fully preserved under the Persian rule, a regular 
warden being appointed, without whose sanction 
no tree could be felled. Elsewhere the word 


describes a garden or orchard (Eccles. ii. 5 ; Cant, 
iv. 13). 

Although Palestine has never been in his- 
torical times a woodland country, yet there can 
be no doubt that there was much more wood 
formerly than there is at present. It is not 
improbable that the highlands were once covered 
with a primeval forest, of which the celebrated 
oaks and terebinths scattered here and there are 
the relics. The woods and forests mentioned 
in the Bible appear to have been situated, 
where they are usually found in cultivated 
countries, in the valleys and defiles that lead 
down from the high- to the lowlands and in the 
adjacent plains. They were therefore of no 
great size, and correspond rather with the idea 
of the Latin saltus than with our forest. 

(1.) The wood of Ephraim was the most 
extensive. It clothed the slopes of the hills 
that bordered the plain of Jezreel, and the plain 
itself in the neighbourhood of Bethshan (Josh, 
xvii. 15 sq.), extending, perhaps, at one time to 
Taboi', which is translated Spv/xhs by Theodotion 
(Hos. V. 1), and which is still well covered with 
forest trees (Stanley, p. 350). (2.) The wood 
of Bethel (2 K. ii. 23, 24) was situated in the 
ravine which descends to the plain of Jericho. 
(3.) The forest of Hareth (1 Sam. xxii. 5) was 
somewhere on the border of the Philistine plain, 
in the southern part of Judah. (4.) The wood 
through which the Israelites passed in their 
pursuit of the Philistines (1 Sam. xiv. 25) was 
probably near Aijalon (cp. v. 31), in one of the 
valleys leading down to the plain of Philistia. 
(5.) The " wood " (Ps. cxxxii. 6) implied in the 
name of Kirjath-jearim (1 Sam. vii. 2) must 
have been similarly situated, as also (6) were 
the "forests" (ChoresJi) in which Jotham placed 
his forts (2 Ch. xxvii. 4). (7.) The plain of 
Sharon was partly covered with wood (Strab. 
xvii. p. 578), whence the LXX. gives Spvfj.hs as 
an equivalent (Is. Ixv. 10). It has still a fair 
amount of wood (Stanley, p. 260). (8.) The 
wood (Choresh) in the wilderness of Ziph, in 
which David concealed himself (1 Sam. xxiii. 
15 sq.), lay S.E. of Hebron. 

The greater portion of Peraea was, and still is, 
covered with forests of oak and terebinth (Is. ii. 
13 ; Ezek. xxvii. 6 ; Zech. xi. 2 : cp. Bucking- 
ham's Palestine, pp. 103 sq., 240 sq. ; Stanley, 
p. 324). A portion of this near Mahanaim was 
known as the " wood of Ephraim " (2 Sam. 
xviii. 6), in which the battle between David and 
Absalom took place. Winer (art. Wdlder') 
places it on the west side of the Jordan, but a 
comparison of 2 Sam. xvii. 26, xviii. 3, 23, 
j)roves the reverse. The statement in xviii. 23, 
in particular, marks its position as on the high- 
lands, at some little distance from the valley of 
the Jordan (cp. Joseph. Ant. vii. 10, §§ 1, 2). 

" The house of the forest of Lebanon " (1 K. 
vii. 2, X. 17, 21 ; 2 Ch. ix. 16, 20) was so called 
probably from being fitted up with cedar. It 
has also been explained as referring to the 
forest-like rows of cedar pillars. The number 
and magnificence of the cedars of Lebanon is 
frequently noticed in the poetical portions of 
the Bible. The forest generally supplied Hebrew 
writers with an image of pride and exaltation 
doomed to destruction (2 K. xix. 23 ; Is. x. 18, 
xxxii. 19, xxxvii. 24; Jer. xxi. 14, xxii. 7, 
xlvi. 23 ; Zech. xi. 2), as well as of unfruitful- 




ness as contrasted with a cultivated field or 
vineyard (Is. xxix. 17, xxxii. 15; Jer. xxvi. 18; 
Hos. ii. 12). [W. L. B.] [F.] 

FORNICATION. [Adultery.] 

FORTIFICATIONS. [Fenced Cities.] 

FORTUNATUS (^oprovvaros ; Fortunatus), 
mentioued in 1 Cor. xvi. 17, and in Clem. Kom. 
Ej^ lix., where Bishoj) Liglitl'oot has the follow- 
ing note: — "The form of the expression {crhv 
Koi 4>.) seems to sepai'ate Fortunatus from 
' Ephebus and Bito ; and, if so, he was perhaps 
not a Roman who accompanied the letter, but 
a Corinthian from whom Clement was expecting 
a visit. In this case there is no improbability 
in identifying him with the Fortunatus of 
1 Cor. xvi. 17, for he seems to be mentioned 
by St. Paul (a.d. 57) as a younger member 
of the household of Stephanas, and might well 
be alive less than forty years after, when 
Clement wrote. It must be remembered, how- 
ever, that Fortunatus is a very common 
name." [E. E. B.] 

FOUNTAIN. 1. \% from jT, to flow ; also 
signifies an " eye," Gesen. p. 1017. 2. pUD 
(from 1), a well-watered place ; sometimes in 
A. V. "well," or "spring." 3. D*D N\'iO. 
from XVV to go forth, Gesen. p. 613 ; a gushing 
forth of waters. 4. I'lpD, from "l-lp, to dig, 
Gesen. p. 1209. 5. i;-12D, from 1733. to bubble 

forth, Gesen. p. 845. 6. hi, or nVjl, from 77i> 
to roll, Gesen. p. 288 ; all usually rendered ■KT^yf}, 
or irrjyr] vSaros ; fons and fans aquarum. The 
special use of these various terms will be found 
examined in the Appendix to Stanley's Sinai 
and Palestine. 

Among the attractive features presented by 
the Land of Promise to the nation migrating 
from Egypt by way of the desert, none would 
be more striking than the natural gush of 
waters from the ground. Instead of watering 
his field or garden, as in Egypt, " with his 
foot " (Shaw, Travels, p. 408), the Hebrew culti- 
vator was taught to look forward to a land that 
" drinketh water of the rain of heaven, a land 
of brooks of water, of fountains and depths 
springing forth in valleys and hills " (Deut. viii. 
7 ; xi. 11, R. v.). In the desert of Sinai, " the 
few living, perhaps perennial springs," by the 
fact of their rarity assume an importance 
hardly to be understood in moister climates, 
and more than justify a poetical expression of 
national rejoicing over the discovery of one 
(Num. xxi. 17). But the springs of Palestine, 
though short-lived, are remarkable for their 
abundance and beauty, especially those which 
fall into the Jordan and its lakes throughout its 
whole course (Stanley, -S'. ^ P. pp. 17, 122, 
123, 295, 373, 509; Burckhardt, Syria, p. 344). 
The spring or fountain of living water, the 
"eye" of the landscape (see No. 1), is distin- 
puished in all Oriental languages from the 
artificially sunk and enclosed well (Stanley, 
p, 509). Its importance is implied by the 
number of topographical names compounded 
with En, or Ain (Arab.): En-gedi, Ain-jidy, 
" spring of the gazelle," may serve as a striking 

instance (1 Sam. xxiii. 29 ; Reland, p. 703 ; 
Robinson, i. 504 ; Stanley, App. § 50), 

Tlie volcanic agency whicli has operated so 
powurfully in I'alestiui', has fi'om very early 
tinuis given tokens of its working in the warm 
springs which are found near the Sea of Galilee 
and the Dead Sea. One of them, En-eglaim, 
the " si>ring of calves," at the N.E. end of the 
latter, is jjrobably identical with Callirrhoij, 
mentioned by Josephus as a ])lace resorted to by 
Herod in his last illness (.josejih. B. J. i. 33, 
§ 5 ; Kitto, I'hys. Gcogi: of Pal. pp. 120, 121 ; 
Stanley, S. ^ P. p. 285). His son Philip built 
the town, which he named Tiberias, at the 
suljihureous hot-springs at the S. of the Sea of 
Galilee (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 2, § 3 ; Hasselquist, 
T/are/s, App. 283 ; Kitto, p. 114; Burckhardt, 
Syria, pp. 328, 330 ; Oliphant, J/uifa, p. 127). 
Other hot-springs are found at seven miles' 
distance from Tiberias, and at Omkeis (Gadara) 
(Reland, p. 775; Burckhardt, pp. 276, 277; 
Kitto, pp. 116, 118). 

Jerusalem, though mainly dependent for its 
supply of water upon its rain-water cisterns, 
appeal's from recent inquiries to have possessed 
either more than one perennial spring, or one 
issuing by more than one outlet. To this agree 
the " fons perennis aquae " of Tacitus (^Hist. v. 
12), and the i/Sdrccv aveKKenrro's avaracns of 
Aristeas (Joseph, ii. 112, ed. Havercamp; 
Robinson, i. 343, 345 ; Williams, Holy City, ii. 
458, 468 ; Eaumer, p. 298 ; Ezek. xlvii. 1, 12 ; 
Kitto, Phys. Geogr. pp. 412, 415). [Cisterns; 


In the towers built by Herod, Josephus says 
there were cisterns with x'''^'^ovpyi)iJi.aTa 
through which water was poured forth : these 
may have been statues or figures containing 
spouts for water after Roman models (Plin. 
E2nst. V. 6 ; iV. H. xxxvi. 15, 151 ; Joseph. B. J. 
V. 4, § 4). 

No Eastern city is so well supplied with water 
as Damascus (Early Trav. p. 294). In Oriental 

Fountain at Nazareth. (Boberta.) 

cities generally public fountains are frequent 
(Poole, Englishw. in Egypt, i. 180). Traces of 
such fountains at Jerusalem may perhaps be 
found in the names En-rogel (2 Sam. xvii. 17), 
the " Dragon-well " or fountain, and the " gate 
of the fountain " (Neh. ii. 13, 14). The water 
which sujjplied Solomon's pools near Bethlehem 




was conveyed to them by subterranean channels. 
In these may also be found " the sealed fountain" 
•of Cant. iv. 12 (Hasselquist, p. 145; Maundrell, 
Early Trav. p. 467). The fountain of Nazareth 


M - 

Arabs ca 

,jO hcni imhcal, "sons of 
', as commonly as 

howling," or 


In all the passages where the Hebrew shu'al 
occurs, excepting possibly Cant. ii. 15, Ezek. xiii.4, 
jackals rather than foxes are intended. The 

bu-calleU " i'uuuiai^ 

bears a traditional antiquity, to which it has 
probably good derivative, if not actual, claim 
(Roberts, Views in Palestine, i. 21, 29, 33 ; Col. 
Ch. Chron. No. cx.\x. 147 : Fisher's Views in 

Syria, i. 31, iii. 44). 

[H. W. P.] 

FOUNTAIN GATE, Neh. iii. 15 ; sii. 37. 
A gate in the city walls on the south side of 
Jerusalem, near, and probably leading to, Siloam. 

FOWL, FATTED (D''p"inN nnaia, har- 
herim avoostm ; upvides crtTevral ; aves amies'). 
The word only occurs in 1 K. iv. 23, in the list 
of supplies for the daily provision of Solomon's 
table. There is no other clue to the meaning 
of the term than the rendering of the LXX. 
Gesenius proposes " fatted geese " or swans, 
from "1"I3, "to be white." But the goose is not 
an inhabitant of Syria, which is much too warm 
for it, and the swan is only a rare visitor in 
winter. Others have suggested guinea-fowls. 
But we have no evidence that this tropical 
African bird was ever introduced by Solomon or 
the Phoenicians. But there seems no difficulty 
in accepting the ordinary rendering of our 
domestic fowl ; for although we have no proof 
of the Jews having possessed poultry before the 
Captivity, yet when Solomon introduced pea- 
cocks from India, it is most probable he would 
also import the common fowl, which has been 
from time immemorial domesticated in that its 
native country. [H. B. T.] 

FOWL, FOWLER. [Sparrow.] 

FOX (WlK', shU'al; dAw7r^|; vulpes). The 

Turkish (j\Ji>-, jakdl, French chacal, German 

schakal, R. V. marg. jackals, are evidently 
related to the Hebrew word, and refer to the 
jackal {Canis aureus, L.). The various passages 
where the word occurs, show that the Hebrews, 
like the Arabs at the present day, used the same 
name for both fox and jackal. At the same 
time, there is another word — D^*N, lyitn, lit. 
"howlers" — which occurs in Is. xiii. 22, 
xxxiv. 14, Jer 1. 39, rendered in A. V. " wild 
beasts of the islands," and K. V. " wolves," which 
more probably represents the jackal, whom the 

CaniB aMveiis (Jaclial). 

passage in Ps. Ixiii. 10, " they shall be a portion for 
shu^dlim," evidently refers to "jackals," which 
are ever ready to prey on the dead bodies of the 
slain, follow caravans for the chance of the animals 
that fall, and attack graves for the carrion. 
The fondness of the fox for grapes is well known 
in the East ; but not more so than that of the 
jackal, which, going in packs, often commits great 
devastation in the vineyards. Both animals are, 
like the dog, omnivorous. Thus in many parts 
of North Africa, where the jackals swarm, there 
is no possibility of obtaining flesh or carrion, and 
they subsist on the fruit of the dwarf palmetto, 
with which the plains are covered. 

The shu'dlim of Judg. xv. 4 are evidently 
"jackals," and not "foxes," for the former 
animal is gregarious, whereas the latter is 
solitary in its habits ; and it is in the highest 
degree improbable that Samson should ever have 
succeeded in catching so many as 300 foxes, 
whereas he could readily have " taken in snares," 

as the Hebrew verb 037) properly means, so 
many jackals, which go together for the most part 
in large groups. The whole passage, which de- 
scribes the manner in which Samson avenged him- 
self on the Philistines by tying the tails of two 
jackals together, with a firebrand between them, 
and then sending them into the standing corn and 
orchards of his enemies, has, it is well known, 
been the subject of much dispute. Dr. Kennicott 
{Remarks on Select Passages in the 0. T., Oxford, 
1787, p. 100) proposed, on the authority of 

seven Hebrew MSS., to read shSdlim (Dv^'P')? 

"sheaves" (?), instead of shii'dltm (D^/ 
leaving out the letter 1 : the meaning then 
being, simply, that Samson took 300 sheaves of 
corn, and put them end to end (" tail to tail "), 
and then set a burning torch between them (see 
also what an anonymous French author has 
written under the title of Renards de Samson, 
and his arguments refuted in a treatise, " De 
Vulpibus Simsonaeis," by B. H. Gebhard, in 
Thes. Nov. Theol. Phil. i. 553 sq.). The 
proposed reading of Kennicott has deservedly 
found little favour with commentators. Not to 
mention the authority of the important old 




Versions which are opposed to this view, it is 
pretty certain that shSdlhn cannot mean 
" sheaves." The word, which occurs only three 
times, denotes in Is. xl. 12 " the hollow of the 
hand," and in 1 K. x.x. 10, EzeJc. xiii. 19, 
" handfuls." 

The dilliculty of the whole passage consists in 
understanding how two animals tied together 
by their tails would run far in the same 
direction. Col. H. Smith (in Kitto's Q/c, art. 
"Shual ") observes, " they would assuredly i)ull 
counter to each other, and ultimately fight most 
fiercely." Probably they would ; but it is only 
fair to remember, in reply to the objections 
which critics have advanced to this transaction 
of the Hebrew judge, that it has yet to be 
demousti-ated that two jackals united by their 
tails looidd run counter, and thus defeat the 
intended purpose ; in so important a matter as 
the verification of a Scripture narrative the 
proper course is experimental where it can be 
resorted to. Again, we know nothing as to the 
length of the cord which attached the animals, 
a consideration which is obviously of much 
importance in the question at issue ; for, as 
jackals are gregarious, the couples would 
naturally run together if we allow a length of 
cord of two or three yards, especially when we 
reflect that the terrified animals would endeavour 
to escape as far as possible out of the reach of 
their captor, and make the best of their way 
out of his sight. The translation of the A. V. 
is unquestionably the correct rendering of the 
Hebrew, and has the authority of the LXX. and 
Vulg. in its favour. But if the above remarks 
are deemed inadequate to a satisfactory solution 
of Samson's exploit, we are at liberty to suppose 
that he had men to help him, both in the 
capture of the jackals and in the use to which 
he put them, and it is not necessary to conclude 
that the animals were all caught at, and let 
\o(isQ from, the same place : some might have been 
taken in one portion of the Philistines' territory, 
and some in another, and let loose in different 
parts of the country. This view would obviate 

different centres, so to speak, of conflagration 
throughout the country of the Philistines must 
have burnt u]) nearly all their corn; and, from 
the whole context, it is evident that the injury 
done was one of almost unlimited extent. 

With respect to the jackals and foxes of 
Palestine, the common jackal of the country is 
the Canis aureus, L., so named fi-om its tawny 
yellow colour, and which may be heard every 
night in tlie villages. The fox of the southern 
and central regions of Palestine, extremely abund- 
ant in Judaea and the east of Jordan, is Vulpes 
Nilotica, Rii)>p, wliich differs vei-y slightly from 
our own, being a little smaller, more tawny 
above, and of a greyer hue below. In its habits 
it is very distinct from the jackal, being solitary, 
and often hunting in the daytime. It is found 
through Egypt, Arabia, and the Syrian desert. 

Another species is common in the wooded 
districts of Galilee and the north, Vulpes 
flavescens, Gray, the Canis Syriacus of Col. H. 
Smith, known to the natives as l \ *^. tha'lab. 

It is considerably larger than the last species, 
and differs from the English fox, of which we 
believe it to be only a local race, by its peculiarly 
bright light yellowish colour throughout, and 
finer and longer fur. It has black ears, and 
a splendid brush. It ranges from Syria to 
Central Asia, and the north side of tlie Hima- 

the alleged difficulty alluded to above ; for 
there would be no necessity for the jackals to 
run any great distance in order to insure the 
greatest amount of damage to the cro^js: 150 

layas (cp. Hemp, and Ehr. Symh. Phys. pt. i. ; 
Hasselquist, Trav. p. 184). That jackals and 
foxes were formerly, as now, common in Palestine 
is evident from the names of places derived from 
these animals, a^ Hazar-Shual (Josh. xv. 28), 
Shaalbira (Judg. i. 35). 

The Rabbinical writers make frequent mention 
of the fox and his habits. In the Talmud it is 
said, "The fox does not die from being under 
the earth : he is used to it, and it does not hurt 
him." Again : " He has gained as much as a 
fox in a })loughed field," i.e. nothing. Another 
proverb relating to him is : 

" If the fox be at the rudder, 
Speak him fairly—' Mv dear brother.' " 

[\V. H.] [H. B. T.] 

(H^h^, lebOnah, from 

\l$auos ; thus ; Arab. 

34, &c.; 1 Ch, is. 29; 

Pvev. viii. 3]), the fragrant gum of 


P?, "to be white"; 
,..Lk5) luhdn [Ex. xss. 
Matt. ii. 11 ; 



an Indian tree, procured through Arabia. " All 
thev from Sheba shall come. They shall bring 
golil and incense " (Is. Ix. 6) ; " Incense from 
Sheba " (Jer. vi. 20). Frankincense is the gum 
or resin of the tree Bosivellia serrata of botanists, 
which grows abundantly in the hilly districts of 
Central and Southern India, and is known as 
'• Salai " by the natives. It belongs to the 
natural order Aimjridaceae, or the Myrrh family. 
All the trees of the order, which is tropical, 
abound in balsamic resin. Among the genera 
which it includes are Amyris and Idea, yielding 
elemi and incense-wood, and Balsamodendron, or 
balsam tree, from some species of which the 
mor of the Hebrews, the myrrh of commerce, is 
procured. Bosioellia serrata, and to a more 
limited extent Bosuellia glabra, are the sources of 
the Olibanum, the Hebrew Lebonah, and Greek 
XiPufos, the frankincense of the Scriptures and 

of modern commerce. The Hindoos call the 
gum " Cundur." It is abundant especially 
about Nagpur, whence large quantities are 
exported to Europe. It requires no preparation, 
and is procured by cutting slits in the bark, 
whence it copiously exudes. The best gum is of 
a white colour, brittle and bitter to the taste, 
and is reserved for the Mohammedan markets. 
That which is yellowish in colour is considered 
less pure, but is in large demand in Southern 
and Central Europe for use in the ceremonial of 
the Greek and Roman Churches. Previous to 
the English occupation of India there was great 
uncertainty as to the origin of frankincense ; 
the greater part of that supplied to Europe 
reaching us by caravan through Pessia to Aleppo. 
Nor do the ancients, as may be seen from Theo- 
phrastus and Pliny, appear to have been much 
better informed (Theophr. Hist. Plant, is. 4 ; 
Plin. Jlist. xii. 31). No tree yielding such a 
gum has ever been found in Palestine (Cels. 
Microb. i. 231 sqq.). [H. B. T.] 

FREEDOM, Acts xxii. 28. [Citizenship.] 

FRET (A.-S. fretan), used in the sense of 
"devour." In Lev. xiii. 55 the word, as a noun 
(R. V. "afret"), is the translation of nrHlS, 
and signifies the leprosy spot which has eaten 
into a garment. [F.] 

FRINGES. [Dress.] 

FROG (y'1"lS^, tzepharde'a; fidrpaxos; 
rana). Gesenius derives the Hebrew word from 
"IBV, "to leap," and the Arabic c^tio reda', 


" marsh," i.e. " the marsh - leaper ; " but 
Dietrich's derivation of the word from the root 
*IQV, " to swell," is now more generally accepted 
(see MV.*'). The frog was selected by God 
as an instrument for humbling the pride of 
Pharaoh (Ex. viii. 2-14; Ps. Ixxviii. 45, cv. 
30 ; Wisd. xix. 10) : frogs came in prodigious 
numbers from the canals, the rivers, and the 
marshes ; they filled the houses, and even 
entered the ovens and kneading troughs. When 
;it the command of Moses the frogs died, the 
people gathered them in heaps, and " the land 
stank " from the corruption of the bodies. 
There can be no doubt that the whole trans- 
action was miraculous : frogs, it is true, if 
allowed to increase, can easily be imagined 
to occur in such multitudes as marked the 
second plague of Egypt — indeed, similar plagues 
are on record as having occurred in various 
places, as at Paeonia and Dardania, where 
frogs suddenly appeared in such numbers as to 
cause the inhabitants to leave that region — 
(see Eustathius on Horn. II. i., and other quo- 
tations cited by Bochart, Hieroz. iii. 575) — but 
that the transaction was miraculous appears 
further from the fact that the frogs would not 
naturally have died, in such prodigious numbers 
as is recorded, in a single day. 

It is stated (Ex. viii. 7) that the Egyptian 
" magicians brought up frogs." Some writers 
have denied that they could have had any such 
power, and think that they must have practised 
some deceit. It is worthy of remark, that 
though they may have been permitted by God 
to increase the plagues, they were quite unable 
to remove them. 

Amongst the Egyptians the frog was con- 
sidered a symbol of an imperfect man, and was 
supposed to be generated from the slime of the 
river — sk t^s toC iroTa/xov iXvos (see Hor- 
apollo, i. 26). A frog sitting upon a lotus 
(^Nelumbium) was also regarded by the ancient 
Egyptians as symbolical of the return of the 
Nile to its bed after the inundations. The 
symbol was probably suggested by the habit of 
the tree frog (ffyla arborea, L.), which sits on 
the foliage for the greater part of the year, but 
returns to the water for three months in spring 
for the spawning season. Some have connected 
the Egyptian.word Hkrur, used to denote the Nile 
descending, with Chrur, the Coptic name of a 
frog (Jablonski, Panth. Aegyiot. iv. 1, § 9) ; but 
the connexion suggested is more than doubtful. 

The only known species of frog which occur at 
present in Egypt are the Sana cscidenta, Schinz, 
of which two varieties are described, which difler 
from Spallauzani's species ^in some slight pecu- 
liarities (Descripf. de FEgypte, Hist. Natur. 
tom. i. p. 181, fol. ed.), and the little tree frog 
(Hyla arborea), mentioned above, which in spring 
lives in the water in vast myriads. Its croak, 
when there are many together, may be heard at 
a distance of more than a mile. The Eana 
esculenta, the well-known edible frog of the 
Continent, has a wide geographical range, being 
found all over Europe (though scarce in the 
British Isles) ; through Northern Asia and Japan ; 
in North Africa and Egypt ; in Syria, Mesopota- 
mia, and Northern Persia. [W. H.] [H. B. T.] 


(DisniD, Ex. xiii. 16 ; Deut. vi. 8, xi. 18 ; the 

Frontlets or Phylacteries. 


•nly throe passasjcs of the O. T. in wliich the 
word occurs; LXX. CKraKevra; N. 'I'. (pv\aK- 
T^pia, Matt, xxiii. 5 ; the modern Jews called 

them Tcphillin, p?^3ri, a word not found in the 
Bible, Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. s. v.). These 
■" fr:>ntlets " or "phylacteries" were strips of 
parchment, on which were written four passages 
of Scripture (H\. xiii. 2-10, 11-17; Dout. vi. 
4-0, Ij-22) in an ink pre])ared for the purpose. 
They were then rolled up in a case (0^3) of 
black calfskin, which was attached to a stiffer 
piece of leatlior, having a thong one finger 
broad, and one and 
a half cubits long. 
"They were placed at 
the bend of the left 
arm ; and after the 
thong had made a 
little knot in the siiape 
of the letter *, it was 
■wound about the arm 
in a sidral lino, which 
ended at the top of 
the middle finger." 
This was called ''the 
TephiUnh on the arm," 
and the leatlier case 
contained only one cell, 
the passages being 
written on a single 
piece of parchment, 
with thin lines ruled 
between (Godwin, il/(s. 
<J- Am: 1, ch. x. 2159). Those worn on the 
forehead were written on four strips of parch- 
ment (which might not be of any hide except 
cow's hide, Xork. Bramm. unci Jiabb. p. 211 ; cp. 
Hesych. s. v. ^.kvtikt] iirtKovpla), and jiut into 
four little cells within a square case, on which 
the letter ^ was written ; the three points of 
the C* being "an emblem of the heavenly 
Father's, Jehovah, our Lord Jehovah " (Zohar, 
fol. 5-4-, col. 2). The square had two thongs 
(niU*^"1), on which Hebrew letters were in- 
scribed ; these were passed round the head, and 
after making a knot in the shape- of "l passed 
over the breast. This phylactery was called 
" the Tephillah on the head," and was worn in 
the centre of the forehead (Leo of Modena, 
Ceremonies of the Jews, i. 11, n. 4 ; Calmet, s. v. 
Fht/lacteri/ ; Otho, Lcjc. Rabbin, p. 656). 

The derivation of mQtp'lD is uncertain. Ge- 
senius derives it by contraction from niStSBtO 
(77i(?s. p. .548). The Rabbinic name p^i^Sn corners 
from n?Dri, " a prayer," because they were 
worn during prayer, and were supposed to 
typify the sincerity of the worshipper; hence 
they were bound on the left wrist (Gem. Eruvin. 
^5, 2 ; Otho, /. c. ; Buxt. 'Lex. Talm. s. v.). In 
Matt, xxiii. 5, only, they are called (pvKaKrripta, 
either because they tended to promote obser- 
vance of the Law (as! M-vrjfJ.V" ex*'" toD Qtov, 
Just. Mart. Dial. c. Tryph. p. 205, for which 
reason Luther happily renders the word by 
Denkzettel), or from the use of them as amu- 
lets (Lat. pw/ji'a, Gk. TrepiairTa, Grotius ad 
Matt, xxiii. 5). ^vKaKT^pwv is the ordinary 
Greek word for an amulet (Plut. ii. 378 B, where 
<pv\. = t\\e Roman bulla), and is used apparcntbj 
with this meaning by a Greek translator (Ezek. 




xiii. 18) for HiDDS, cushions (Rosenmiiller, 
Hchol. ad loc. i. ; Schleusner, Lex. in N. T.). 
That ])iiylacteries vvrc used as amulets is 
certain, and was very natural (Targ. nd Cant. 
viii. ;); V.avUAuw. Bib'.. Jlah. i. 576; Winer, s, 
yy. Amulete, I'linUikterien). Jerome (on Matt, 
x.xiii. 5) says that they were thus used in his day 
by the Babylonians, Persians, and Indians, and 
condemns certain Christian " mulierculae " for 
simil.'irly using the Gospels (" parvula evan- 
gelia," ^i$\ta fxiKpa, Chrys.) as irepiapijxaTa, 
especially the Proem, to St. John (cp. Chrvsost. 
Hum. in Matt. 1?>). Tlio Koran and other sacred 
books are applied to the same purpose to this 
day (Ilottinger, Hist. Orient, i. 8, p. .'jol ; </,■ 
nnmrnis Orient, xvii. sq, "The esteemed 
of all Hhegabs is a Mooshaf, or copy of the 
Koran," Lane, Mod. Ej. i. 338). Scaliger even 
sujiposes that phylacteries were desj.^ned to 
supersede those amulets, the use of which had 
been already learnt by the Israelites in Egypt. 
[Amulets.] There was a spurious book called 
Bhijlact. Angelwum, where Pope Golasius evi- 
dently understood the word to mean " amulets," 
for he remarks that Phylacteria ought rather 
to be ascribed to devils. In this sense they 
were expressly forbidden by Pope Gregory (" Si 
quis . . . phylacteriis usus fuerit, anathema 
sit," Sixt. Senensis, Bibl. Sand. p. 92 ; cp. Can. 
36, Concil. Laod.). 

The LXX. rendering aa-dKevra (Aquil. ari- 
vaKTo) must allude to their being tightly bound 
on the forehead and wrist during prayer. Petit 
(Tar. Lectt. ii. 3) would read ofaAeura (h. e. 
appoisa, alSoTa 4irl diroTpoir^ ? Schleusner, 
Thes. s. v. do-oA.), but he is' amply refuted 
by Spencer {de Legg. Bit. iv. 2, p. 1210) 
and Witsius {Aegypt. ii. 9, § 11). Jerome calls 
tiiem PittacioU (al. Pictat.), a name which 
tolerably expresses their purjjose (Forcellini, 
Lex. s. v.). 

The expression " they make broad their phy- 
lacteries " (irXarwovai to (pv\. avriiv, Matt, 
xxiii. 5) refers not so much to the phylactery 
itself, which seems to have been of a prescribed 
breadth, as to the case (HV^Vp) in which the 
parchment was kept, which the Pharisees 
(among their other pretentious customs, Mark 
vii. 3, 4 ; Luke v. 33, &c.) made as conspicuous 
as they could (Reland, Antiq. ii. 9, 15). Misled 
probably by the term -nXarvvovffi, and by the 
mention of the OV^V or fringe (Xuni. xv. 38, 
K\a}<Tfxa vaKivQivov iirX to. KpacrireSa Ttiiu irrepv- 
ylci>v,LXX.) in connexion with them, Epiphanius 
says that they were TrKarta ari/xaTa iroppvpas, 
like the Roman laticlave, or the stripes on a 
dalmatic (ra Se arjuara ttjj ■n-op<(>vpas (pv\aK- 
rripia fiudacrtf ol ■rjKpi^aip.tvoi /J-erovofxa^fiv, c. 
Ilacr. i. 33 ; Sixt. Sen. /. c). He says that 
these purple stripes were worn by the Pharisees 
with fringes, and four pomegranates, that no 
one might touch tiiem, and hence he derives 
their name (Reland, Ant. ii. 9, 15). But that 
this is an error is clearly shown by Scaliger 
(Elcnr/i. Trihaer. viii. p. QQ sq.). It is said that 
tlie Pharisees wore them always, whereas the 
common people only used them at ]irayers, be- 
cause they were considered to be even holier 
than the )*'V, or golden plate, on the priest's 
tiara (Ex. xxviii. 36), since that had the sacred 
name once engraved, but in each of theTeiihillin 

4 A 



the tetragrammaton recurred twenty-three 
times (Carpzov, App. Critic, p. 196). Again the 
Pharisees wore the 'fcphiltah above the elbow, 
but the Sadducees on the palm of the hand 
(Godwin, /. c). The modern Jews only wear 
them at morning prayers, and sometimes at 
noon (Leo of Modena, /. c). 

In our Lord's time they were worn by all 
Jews, except the Karaites, women, and slaves. 
Boys, when (at the age of thirteen years and a 
day) they became DIVD ^J3 (sons of the com- 
mandments), were bound to wear them (^Baba 
Dcrac. fol. 22, 1, in Glossa), and therefore they 
may have been used even by our Lord, as 
He merely discountenanced their abuse. The 
suggestion was made by Scaliger (/. c), and led 
to a somewhat idle controversy. Lightfoot 
(Hor. Ilebr. ad Matt, xxiji. o) and Otho (Zex. 
Hub. p. 656) agree with Scaliger, but Carpzov 
(/. c.) and others strongly deny it, from a belief 
that the entire use of phylacteries arose from 
an error. 

The Karaites explained Deut. vi. 8, Ex. xiii. 
9, &c.,as a, figurative command to remember the 
Law (Reland, Ant. p. 132), as is certainly the 
case in similar passages (Prov. iii. o, vi. 21, vii. 
3; Cant. viii. 6, &c.). It seems clear to us that 
the scope of these injunctions favours the 
Karaite interpretation, and in Ex. xiii. 9 the 
word is not niDDitO, but P"l3T, " a memorial " 
(Gerhardus on Deut. vi. 8 ; Eduardus on Bera- 
choth, i. 209 ; Heidanus, de Orig. Erroris, viii. 
B. 6; Schottgen, Hor. Hebr. i. 199; Rosen- 
miiller, ad loc. ; Hengstenberg, Pent. i. 458). 
Considering too the nature of the passages 
inscribed on the phylacteries (by no means the 
most important in the Pentateuch — for the 
Fathers are mistaken in saying that the Deca- 
logue was used in this way, Jer. I. c. ; Chrysost. 
I. c. ; Theophyl. ad Matt, xxiii. 5), and the fact 
that we have no trace whatever of their use 
before the Exile (during which time the Jews 
probably learnt the practice of wearing them 
from the Babylonians), we have no doubt that 
the object of the precepts (Deut. vi. 8 ; Ex. xii. 
9) was to impress on the minds of the people 
the necessity of remembering the Law. But 
the figurative language in which this duty was 
urged upon them was mistaken for a literal 
command. An additional argument against 
the literal interpretation of the direction is the 
dangerous abuse to which it was immediately 
liable. Indeed such an observance would defeat 
the supposed intention of it, by substituting an 
outward ceremony for an inward remembrance. 
We have a specimen of this in the curious 
literalism of Kimchi's Comment on Ps. i. 2. 
Starting the objection that it is impossible to 
meditate in God's law day and night, because of 
sleep, domestic cares, &c., he answers that for 
the fulfilment of the text it is sufficient to wear 

In spite of these considerations, Justin (Dial. 
c. Tryph. 1. c), Chrysostom, Euthymius, Theo- 
phylact, and many moderns (Baumgarten, 
Comtn. i. 479 ; Winer, s. v. Bhylact.) prefer the 
literal meaning. It rests therefore with them 
to account for the entire absence of all allusion 
to phylacteries in the 0. T. The passages in 
Proverbs (v. supra) contain no such reference, 
and in Ezek. xxiv. 17 "IXQ means not a Phylactery 


(as Rashi savs), but a turban. [CROWNS.^ 
(Gesen. '//(«. p. 1089.) 

The Rabbis have many rules .nbout their use. 
Thev were not worn on .Sabbaths or other sacreJ 
days, because those Jays were themselves a sign 
or pledge (niN), and required no further* 
memorial (Zohar, f. 23G ; Reland, /. c). They 
must be read standing in the m.orning (whea 
blue can be distinguished from green), but in 
the evening (at sunset) they might be read 
sittmg. In times of persecution a red thread 
was worn instead (JIunster, dc Praec. njfinn. ■ 
cp. Josh. ii. 18). Both hands were to be 
used, if possible, in writing them. The leather 
must have no hole in it. A single blot did not 
signify if an uneducated boy could read the 
word. At the top of the parchment no more 
room must be left than would suffice for the 

letter 7, but at the bottom there