Encyclodaedia biblica; a critical dictionary of the literaty, political and religious hisrory, the archaeology, geography, and natural history of the Bible

ACUA

ADAM AND

EVE

Kt. is to be preferred see

note is mentioned once,

if not twice.

In Josh.

316

it is the name of the place

beside or near which the descending waters of the Jordan

stood and rose up in one heap

here it is followed by

the words (which may possibly be a  gloss)  the  city that
is  beside  Zarethan.’  An  echo  of  this  name  may very
plausibly  be  found  in

and

names of

hill and bridge at the confluence of

the Jabhok

with the Jordan, some 16

direct line above the ford opposite Jericho. Indeed it
is’possible that for

(Adam) we should read

the

having dropped out owing to the

circumstance that the following word begins with

(so

Kampffmeyer,

14).

In this, case the resem-

blance of the ancient and the modern name will be
closer.

The same spot seems to be referred to in

46,

where, for in the thickness of the ground

(AV

we should probably read,

the crossing of

the name of

definite locality, not

description of the soil, being plainly required by the

context

(so

Moore and Clermont-Ganneau).

This

gives

definition of the site of Adam or Adamah.

was at aford of the Jordan

and Zarethan.

Putting all the evidence together, we may hold that the
Succoth of

was

of the Jordan on or near

the Jabbok while Zarethan was W . of the river,

the

valley opposite Succoth. Beside

at the cross-

ing’ or ford, was a town called

or Adamah (cp

UCCOTH

ARETHAN

The second mention

a place of this name is in

6 7

where, for

(RV

‘like Adam,’ RV mg.

‘like men’

[BAQ]), we must

any

rate read

at Adam’-to suit ‘there in the

next clause, and

correspond to the localisation of

Israel’s sin in

(so

in the main We.).

‘ T h e r e ’ the

Israelites

were traitors to

and ’broke his

covenant.’

course there may be

doubt which of the

places called Adam or Adamah is meant, and it may
even be surmised that the letters

(ADM)

are

The fact, however, that the ford of

is on

the direct route

(so

we must believe) to the place called

Gilead in

v . 8,

suggests that the city Adam of Josh.

is intended.

The confluence of two important streams

may well have been marked by a sanctuary.

The use of Adam and

Eve

proper names within the Reformed Churches symbolises

ADAM AND

narrowness of sympathy

(10

)

and the con-

ception of God in

1728,

which cannot be attributed to

Paul,  is  really  much  more  apt,  and  is  more  closely
in  accord  with  the  results  of  philosophically  purified
thought,  than  that  apostle’s, still hampered as it was by

Jewish modes of thinking.

Lastly, sayings such as we

find in

2 4

1 4

are of the deepest

that can be said about the inner Christian life.

As Lightfoot remarks, the literature which has gathered

round Acts is too large to catalogue profitably.

T o

his own

list (Smith’s

may be added

comm.

the

ed. 1892).

I n thecriticismofthe hook the most

important landmarks are as follows : Schneckenhurger

whilst maintaining its absolute trustworthi-

ness credited’ it with tendency to vindicate

Paul against

Baur

1845) and Zeller

1854)

regarded its tendency as ‘reconciling

its scope,

and its contents as untrustworthy. Bruno Bauer

whilst holding the same view as to its tendency, went

much  further as regarded  its  contents,  taking  them  to  he  free
and  often even purposeless invention.  Overbeck,  in his revised
4th  edition  of  D e   Wette’s

propounded a

modification of the tendency theory substantially identical with
that which has been set forth in the present article.

ed.

sacker

1886,

and ed.

E T ,

and

N T ,

1894)

urge,

that the

author wrote in simple faith, and has much that is trustworthy.
The most

thorough-going apologist shaveheen

Mich. Baumgarten

1852,

ed.

Karl Schmidt

1882).

The most promising new

phase of the

of the hook is that which has for its task a

separation of the sources (see above,

this connection

mention must be made of a very remarkable return to tendency-
criticism in a

University Program of Johannes Weiss

(which appeared after the present article was in type) entitled

die

den

Char. d e r

(1897).

Weiss re

Acts as

apology for the Christian religion

(against

accusation of the Jews) addressed to pagans, showing

how it has come about

Christianity has taken over from

Judaism its world-mission.

ACUA,

Esd.

ACUB

AKBUK

ACUD,

see above, A

CUA

Josh.

probably (We., Di.

)

corrupt reading for

Aroer

;

see

ROER

, 3.

;

implying

28,

Wife of Lamech (Gen.

[L]).

See

Daughter of Elon the Hittite, and wife of Esau

(Gen.

[R?])

called

Gen. 2634

See B

ASHEMATH

ADAIAFI

35,

once

[No.

;

passes by,’ cp. A

DIEL

[BAL]).

Grandfather of king Josiah,

221

[A],

the name of Josiah‘s mother ;

Ch.

see

of B

AMIN

ii.

Ch.

in list of inhabitants of

(see

ZRA

ahara

in Neh.

Ch.

name should perhaps be read instead of

and 6.”

members of the

ANI

in list

those with foreign wives

ZRA

end) Ezra

Esd.

and

Esd. 934

om.

in list of

inhabitants of Jerusalem (see

ZRA

a),

Neh. 11 5

The father of

Ch. 23

ADALIA

son

Haman, Est.

ADAM

to which

prefixes

Kr.

[so

Symm. Targ.

Vg., and many MSS and editions]

theory of the Paradise story which

distinctively modern and western.

‘ T h e Reformers, always hostile to

allegory, and in this

especially

influenced by the

anthropology,

strictly to the  literal interpretation,  which has  continued
to  be  generally  identified  with  Protestant  orthodoxy.’
This  was  a  necessary  reaction  against  that  Hellenistic
allegorising. which  transmuted  everything  that  seemed
low or trivial in the early narratives into some spiritual or
theological truth.  The reaction had begun  no doubt  in
pre-reformation  days.

Bonaventura, for instance, says

that ‘under the rind of the letter

deep and mystic

The

may he safely neglected, though

is wanting in A) be correct, it testifies to the

antiquity of the inferior reading

Symm., according

t o

Field’s restoration from the

Hex., gives

(interpolated)’ Vg.

Bennett in

regards the name ‘Adam

and the description of it as ‘the city,’

suspicious. But ‘Adam’

should perhaps rather he ‘Adamah and the city,’ etc. looks
like a gloss. The text on the

correct.

Moore,

77-79

;

Clermont-

Ganneau

PEF Qu.

Jan.

80.

One

read

the Ednma of the

O S

119

2 2 ,

is described

ahout

R. m. E. from

and is

the modern

(see

This is

not

the ‘city’ intended in Josh.

3 16.

It is

also not very likely

to be meant

Hosea.

the

see below, 3.

ADAM AND

EVE

meaning  is  hidden,’  but  states  also  that  ‘ h e   who
despises the Ietter  of  sacred  Scripture will  never rise to
its  spiritual  meanings.’  Still  the  completion

the

movement  (within  certain  limits)  was  reserved  for  the
great exegetesof the Reformation-Luther, Melanchthon,
and  Calvin.  Thus  Luther  explicitly  says-‘ It  were
better to read  mere poetic fables than attach one’s self to
the so-called spiritual  and  living  sense  to  the  exclusion
of  the  literal

and again, ‘ W e should stay by the dry

clear words, except where the Scripture itself, by the
absurdity of the simple meaning, compels

to under-

stand

sayings figuratively

‘

(quoted by

des

A T

i n der

This predilection

for

grammatical and historical interpretation was

closely connected with the revival of classical studies,

had its primary justification in the endorsement

which the

appeared to give

the historical accuracy

of the story of Paradise.

I t is the correctness

the

historical acceptation of that

story

which criticism denies,

and before proceeding to consider the results of criticism

(see C

REATION

and

ARADISE

Protestant students

ask whether Jesus Christ and the

N T

writers really

attached importance to the story

Eden as a piece

history.

Our conclusion will

course have a direct

bearing

the interpretation of the other early

narratives.

Let us turn

(i.) passages spoken or written from

point of view.

I n Mk.

106-8

(Mt.

ADAM AND

EVE

the favourite typical view already referred to.

(g)

Cor.

113

there is a mere casual illustration.

( h ) In Lk.

Adam is the

last human link in the genealogy of the Saviour. The

suggests a contrast between the first and the

second

(see Lk.

scholasticism apart, what

he  really values is, not the historical character  of  Adam,
but  the  universal  Saviourship  of  Jesus.
contains  a  reference  to  Satan  which  presupposes  the
reality of  the  temptation  and  fall  of  the  first  man,  but

simply and solely dogmatic, and belongs to the

peculiar dualism of the Fourth Gospel.

( R )

Tim.

the social doctrine of the subordination of women

inferred from the story

the first woman’s

temptation.

The conclusion to which these phenomena point could

be fully confirmed by a similar examination of (iv.)

passages-even, the references in

Esd.,

which imply so much brooding over the Paradise
story, being in close connection with the typical theory
of

the early narratives, and the whole system of thought

being quite as much based o n the imaginative book of

Enoch as on the sober narrative in Gen.2-3.

a  final  proof  that  a  historical  character  could  not  be
assigned  to  the  latter  in  the  early  Christian  age,  it  is
enough  to  refer  to  the  Book

Jubilees (first cent.

but before

which, at any rate in its view of

the biblical narratives, represents the mental attitude

the times.

Here the biblical stories are freely

intermixed with legendary and interpretative matter (see
Charles’s translation).

W e conclude, therefore, that the

N T

writers, whether

purely Jewish or touched by Greek influences, regard
traditional facts

from a didactic point of view,

as furnishing either plausible evidence for theories
derived from other sources or at any rate homiletical
illustrations.

T h e literal and historical acceptation of the story

in Gen.

which strong church authority still

Other

N T

writers.

we have

combined quotation from

Jesus passes over the facts

Gcn.

1 2 7

224.

of the Paradise story altogether, and fastens attention
on the statement that man was from the beginning

differentiated sexually, and that, by divine ordinance

(so

no doubt

interprets Gen.

the marriage union

was to be complete. His silence about the facts may no
doubt be explained by the circumstances

elsewhere

Jesus appears to

to accept the historical character

of the deluge story (Mt.

Lk.

one must be cautious the reference to the deluge story
presupposes the typical character of the early narratives,

theory which is inconsistent with

strictly historical

point of view.

(6) I n Rev.

a literalistic view

of the tree of life is presupposed.

But these passages

are undeniably based, not so much on Gen. 2, as on the
apocalyptic description in Enoch

In Rev.

we have a description of

ATAN

the ancient serpent,’ alluding to Gen.

it is also

said that he will deceive the world

he deceived the

first man.

I t is certain, however, that the writer also

draws from a well of popular belief, enriched from a
wider Oriental source,

which he gives

implicit

belief as to the biblical statement.

Passing to

the

writings, we find ( d ) and

( e ) in Rom.

and

Cor.

references to detail:

in the

story

Adam but the reference

made

didactic interest.

Paul accepts

(as

also probably

does Luke) the Alexandrian idea of  the typical character
of  the  early  narratives,  and  of  the  double  creation
of  a  heavenly  and  an  earthly  Adam.

The latter doc.

trine, which the Alexandrian theology founded or
the two separate accounts of creation in Gen.

ant

2,  Paul  professes  to  base  on  the  language  of
There  are  also  other  anthropological  ideas  which  ht
supports  by  reference  to  the  fall  of  Adam.

His

rea

interest is in these ideas, not

the story of Paradise.

He  did  not  deduce  them  from  the  Eden  story,
only  resorts  to  that  narrative  as  containing  materia
which  may,  by  the  methods  of  Christian  Gnosis,
made  to  furnish  arguments  for  his  ideas.
Phil. 26 we  have  probably

contrast between the firs!

Adam who thought equality with God an

(an object

grasping) and the second Adam who,

thinking  far  otherwise,  humbled  himself  even  to
death  of  the cross, and  thereby actually reached
with God  (Hilgenfeld).

Here the story of Eden is

illustrative of an idea, though the illustration

siders ‘nearer to the truth than any
otherinterpretationas yet
may be supposed to be required by the

the narrative itself. I s

this the case? First, are the proper names Adam and
Eve found in the original story of Eden ? T h e facts are
these.

Adam

as a quasi proper name for the

first man (cp

NOSH

belongs with certainty only

(Gen.

who has used it just before generically,

in the sense of ‘ m a n ’ or ’ m e n ’ (Gen.

followed by

(cp

1 2 6 2 7 ) .

The

Yahwist (J) habitually uses the term

the man.

Once, however, if the text be

we find

used generically for man or

and once in

lieu of a proper name subsequently to the birth of Cain
and Abel

if we should not rather refer

an editor.

conclusion is obvious.

It is a true

insight which is expressed

the quaint old couplet in

Exeter Cathedral,

Primns Adam sic

Adam,

Deus

Is qui venit Adam

factus

Adam.

Adam can be used only in one of two senses

(

)

man-

kind,

the first man (apart from all historical refer-

ence), and to compare

supposed proper name Adam

Bp. John Wordsworth,

The

Lectures for

138.

Bp.

the

and

Dr. Leathes in Smith‘s

I n

has

rightly ‘the man

‘Adam’; s o i n D t . 3 2 8 ‘childrenofmen for

‘sons of Adam’: so

E V

mg. in

‘after the manner

men’ for

‘as

[like] Adam’

otherwise

I n

the

article

omitted in Gen. 2 196

Dt.

Ch.

also in the last two passages).

In 2

read

‘for the man’

with Schr

and Kau.

T h e

can

see no probability in the view

Hommel

7th March

pp.

Gen

ADAM AND EVE

ADAMAH

to that of the Babylonian divine hero Adapa (Sayce,

or, stranger still, to the Egyptian

Atum

TSBA

9 1 )

are specimens of equal

audacity. The word

is of course earlier than

any developed creation-myth

(sit

though

(cp Ass.

child

one made by

the existence of the central element of all such

mythic stories (see C

REATION

( b )

We must now proceed to consider the name Eve

(Hawwah

Gen.

AV mg. C

HAVAH

. RV mg.

AVVAH

[AL], Aq.

Aua,

Symm.

else-

where

[BAL]

;

This undoubtedly

proper name

( 3 4

)

but it is most probable

that

3 2 0

formed no part of the original story, and that in

the name Eve is a later

Can its meaning

be recovered? According to

Eve was

called

‘because she was the mother of all living

This

suggests the meaning

living being,’ or, less probably,

because an abstract conception,

‘

life

(

I t

is also possible, no doubt, to compare

and render mother of every kindred,’ in which

case Eve

will mean

kinship,’ or more strictly

mother-kinship,’ the primitive type of marriage being

supposed to be based on mother-kinship (cp Gen.

I t  is  best,  however, to  adhere  to  the  first  explanation,
if  we  qualify this with  the  admission that  Hawwah  may
possibly  be  a  Hebraised  form

name in

Hebraic story.

Next, did the writer of the Eden story understand

There are at least three points which

must be regarded as decisive against this

(I)

T h e

of the

The same writer

Nu.

2228,

ascribes the speaking of Balaam‘s ass to a special
divine

but the speaking serpent and the

enchanted trees in

appear as if altogether

natural.

W h y ? Because the author has no fear of

being misunderstood.  H e  knows, and his readers know,
that  he  is  not  dealing  with  the  everyday  world,  but
with a world in which  the natural  and  the  supernatural
are one.

The idealism of the narratives.

T h e writer

chiefly values certain ideas which the narrative is

arranged  as  to  suggest.  ‘ ( 3 )  The  total  disregard  of
the contents of  these stories in the subsequent narratives
of  the Yahwist.

these most critics will add

( 4 )

the

licence which the Yahwist appears to have taken of

adding certain features to the primitive story,

any rate the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

I t

not safe to add

( 5 )

the poetical

of the story in

Gen.246-3  (Briggs),  for  all  that  seems  probable  is
that  this  story  is  ultimately  based  to  some  extent  on
lost poetical  traditions.

It is equally certain, however, that the writer

our

Eden story did not explain it

Reverence

for tradition must have assured

that the kernel of it

at any rate was trustworthy.

After

the

traditional story by the criticism of his religious sense,
he must have supposed it to give an adequate impression
of what actually took place once upon a time.

Kant,

among his other services in refutation of the nnhistorical

is altered from Adon

Yahu or Ea. We have no right

to take our critical startink-point in a list given to us only in

apart from this, the theory that the lists of the patriarchs
Gen.

and 5 are derived as they stand, from Babylodian lists is

scarcely tenable (see

T o the proposal of Wi.

344,

following

to connect

with Ar.

‘skin,’

note

Gen. 2 7

77)

will

answer.

Cp Bu.

141

Z A

T W

pp.

however

We.

now

and

thinks that

properly meant ‘serpent’ (Aram.

The

par.

on Gen. 3

actually

compares the same Aram. word, explaining the name thus,

was given to Adam to glorify his life,

she connselled

a serpent.’

WRS Kin.

But note that

and

are

standing Hebrew phrases (see BDB Lex.).

This

favours

suggestion.

rationalism of the last century, has the merit

having forcibly. recalled attention

the fact that the

narrative of Genesis, even if we do not, take it literally,
must be regarded

presenting

view of the beginnings

of the history of the human race

der

1786).

It is a

problem which there is a growing disposition to solve
by adopting, in one form or another, what is called the

theory. The story cannot indeed be called

myth in the strict sense of the word, unless we are pre-
pared to place it

one line with the myths of

heathenism, produced by the unconscious play of plastic
fancy, giving shape to the impressions of natural
phenomena

primitive observers.

course is

to be deprecated.

The story of Gen.246-3 has been

too much affected by conscious art and reflection to be
combined with truly popular myths.

Hermann Schultz

has coined the expression revelation-myth

but this is

cumbrous,  and  may  suggest  to  some  an  entirely
erroneous  view of  the  pre-Deuteronomic  conception  of
revelation  (cp Smend,

A T

86,

292).

T h e

truth is that the story of Eden cannot be described by
single phrase.

The mythic elements which it contains

have been moralised far enough for practical needs, but
not

far as to rob it

its primeval colouring. T h e

parallel story in the Zoroastrian Scripture called Vendi-
dad (Fargard ii.

)

is dry and pale by comparison. I n

its union of primitive concreteness with a nascent sense
of spiritual realities

our

Eden story stands alone.

There is therefore no reason for shutting our eyes to

plain results of historical cr

when, as was the case when the late George Smith
made his great discoveries (see his

Genesis),

Babylonian myths are adduced

proofs of the his-

toricity of Gen.

1-11,

that they may truly be called

I t is not the mythic basis, but the infused

of the Eden story, that constitutes its abiding

interest for religious men and it was owing to

sense

this, quite

much as to

to harmonise Greek

philosophy with Scripture, that the allegoric spiritualism
of Alexandria found so much favour in Greek Christen-
dom.

From the point of view of the pre-critical period

this system could not but commend itself to earnest and
devout thinkers. Who, said Philo, could take the
story

the creation of Eve, or of the trees of life and

knowledge literally? The ideas, however, which the sage
derives from the stories are Greek, not early Jewish.

For instance, his interpretation of the creation of Eve

plainly suggested by a Platonic myth.

The longing for

reunion which love implants in the divided halves of the
original dual

is the source of sensual pleasure

(symbolised by the serpent), which in turn is the begin-
ning of all transgression.

Eve represents the sensuous

or  perceptive  part  of  man’s  nature,  Adam  the reason.
T h e  serpent therefore  does  not  venture  to  attack
directly.  I t   is  sense  which  yields  to  pleasure,  and  in

turn enslaves the reason and destroys its immortal virtue.
These ideas are not precisely those which advocates of

mystical interpretation would put forward to-day.  There
is an equal  danger,  however, of  arbitrariness  in modern
allegorising, even though  it be partly veiled by reverence
for  exegetical  tradition.

I t is only by applying critical

methods  to  the  story,  a n d   distinguishing  the  different
elements of  which it is  composed, that we  can do justice
to the ideas which  the  later  editor  or editors

have

sought to convey.

For

a discussion of ‘Biblical

see Schultz,

and cp Smend A T

113,

WRS

446. On

Avesta parallels, see

L e

Zendavesta,

tome

3 ,

pp.

Kohut, ‘The Zendavesta and

Gen.

On apocryphal romance of

One of the fenced cities of

What, then, is the Eden story to be called?

Adam and Eve, see below,

ADAMAH

The above article is written on the lines and

the words of

WRS.

ADAMANT

Apart from its being mentioned along with Chinnereth
and Ramah and

we have no clue to its site (cp

Di. ad

see A

DAM

, i.

ADAMANT

adamas;

see below,

4).

I n

modern English poetry and rhetorical prose-for the

is now not otherwise used- adamant

simply

term for ‘ t h e embodiment of

surpassing hardness.’

I n the

O T

it can be retained only if understood in the sense in
which it is employed by

in the

sense of corundum (see

This is crystallised

alumina

excessively tough and difficultly

frangible mineral transparent or translucent vitreous,
but pearly to metallic on basal face. Emery is

com-

pact,  crystalline,  granular variety-grey to  indigo-blue.
I n  a purer  state corundum occurs in transparent  crystals
of  various tints  of  colour-red (Ruby), blue  (Sapphire),
green  (Oriental  Emerald),  yellow  (Oriental  Topaz),
purple (Oriental Amethyst), colourless

Sapphire)

.inferior to the diamond in brilliancy, though

they do not disperse rays of light to the same extent.

T h e term

which is not known to Homer, was

applied by

Greeks to that substance which from

time to time was the hardest known.

I n

it means hardened iron or steel,

and the adamantine bonds by which

Prometheus was fastened to

peak of the Caucasus

64) must have been of this material, for

the manufacture of which the tribes near the Caucasus,
such

the Colchians and the Chalybes, were famous.

T h e

of Theophrastus, however, though it is not

included in his list of twelve stones used for engraving
on, nor mentioned

employed in the art of engraving

-was

(I)

stone and

probably the white sapphire

corundum). This is probable from the fact that a

particular kind of carbuncle

found near

and described as hexagonal

was compared to it.

For noble corundums

(sapphires, rubies, oriental topaz, and oriental emerald)
are, as

matter of fact, found as hexagonal prisms.

I t is most unlikely that Theophrastus meant the true
diamond (see D

IAMOND

) ,

though Pliny

415) confuses with this his adamas, which-being
hexagonal (whereas the diamond would be rather de-
scribed

or a double pyramid)-was, like

that of Theophrastns, the white sapphire. As, however,
Manilius

cent.

knows the real

he says ‘sic adamas, punctum

pretiosior

est’

iv.

is quite possible that

Jerome (in

)

meant by adamas the actual diamond;

though in that case he was almost certainly wrong (see

IAMOND

I n the three places

uses adamas,

it is to render the Hebrew

word which

may mean either sharp-pointed

‘tenacious.’

I n each passage the

reference is not to a brilliant

but

something extremely hard : harder than

(Ezek.

3 9 )

parallel to ‘ a pen of iron’ (Jer.

171)

similarly

I n the Pesh.

appears in the Syr.

form

Although the Arabic forms

and

are identified by the native lexicographers

with

‘diamond,’ the

is used

not only of

the hardest stone’-employed

in cutting others (Bar

Lex.

col. 39

col.

863

or in similes, for something hard (Isaac of

Antioch, ed. G. Bickell,

62,

also definitely

(Duval-Berthelot,

L a

a u moyen

5).

There is some

probability, therefore, in Bochart’s suggested connection
of

with

(whence the English emery), which

meant

corundum itself and granulated corundum,

emery.

(v. 166) says

is a stone

with which gem-engravers polish gems,’ and Hesychius

ADASA

‘ a

kind of sand with which hard stones

are polished.‘ T h e

(Job

[BKC]

[A]

of M T =

close seal of

EV,

15) is the same

the

by which he meant corundum in mass.

Hesychius

plainly means cotundum in grains

e. emery.

T h e

latter, called

Romans (Pliny,

IO)

from the island of Naxos, where it is still produced

in great quantities, was much used by the Greek
engravers of the fourth century

.C.

Indeed corundum

and emery were the only means of cutting gems known
to them up to that time.

For Theophrastus ( L a p .

writing in

.c.,

speaks of it alone

used by the

engravers.

H e identifies it with the stone from which

whetstones were made, and says that the best came
from Armenia.

Both corundum and emery are found

in many places in Asia Minor,

well

in several of

the Greek islands.

renders

by adamant only in Ezek.

and

Zech.

I n the remaining passage,

171,

it less

happily renders it diamond.

The

word adamant occurs

also

in Ecclus.

AV; but RV, following

omits the passage.

Ezek.

and Zech.

represents another reading, while

in the case of Jer.

it omits

the whole passage

(though the verses appear in the

Compl. Polygl. and, following Orig. and Theod., on the mg.
of

where

is rendered by

W i d

Zech.

16 13.

renders

in Am.

E V

I n

the

identified

with

(see

although the Talm. regards it as a

worm, abont which extraordinary legends are told (see reff. in

Buxt. Lex. or Levy

and Paul Cassel in a

monograph

(‘56)

tried to show that

was an excessively

Vg. and Pesh. have been already dealt with

fine, dust-like substance.

R .

See below,

RV, or more correctly,

ANNEKEB

the pass Adami, on the

frontier of Naphtali, Josh.

cp Vg.

est

AV makes two names,

Talm.

also

divides the expression, Adami

being represented as

and Hannekeb as

Neub.

( L a

T a l m .

and

GASm.

(ZIG

396) identify Adami with

of Tiberias, the site which the

Survey proposes

for the ‘fenced city’ Adamah of

1384).

This, however, seems much too far

when we con-

sider that the

‘

tree of Bezaanim

’

(see

was close to Kedesh, while J

ABNEEL

appears

to have been

north

fortress. These are the

two localities between which Adami-nekeb is mentioned
in Josh.

I t is probable that the name

the Karnak list of

547) means

the pass Adami.

ADAR, RV, more correctly, A

DDAR

[B],

[AL]), an unknown site men-

tioned after H

EZRON

)

one of the points on the

southern frontier of

(Josh.

ADAR

[Heb.]),

Esth.

3 7

Macc.

743 49

Macc.

36).

See M

ONTH

ADASA

[AKV]), the scene of the victory of

Judas the Maccabee over

(

Macc.

lay,

is implied in the narrative, not very far from

horon.

Josephus

(Ant.

105) makes its distance from

Beth-horon 30 stadia, and Jer. and

Eus.

call it a village

near Gophna

(OS,

220

6).

Gophna being obviously

the modern

between Jerusalem and Shechem, it

is reasonable to identify Adasa with the ruin
on a bare shapeless down, 8 m.

of that

‘

Graphische

den Juden’

the

Institut

Forderung d.

Literatur.

ADBEEL

The remark of Eus. that Adasa belonged

to Judah, at which Jer. expresses

much surprise,

rests on a confusion between

the

reading

in Josh.

and the place of

like name in the passage before us.

ADBEEL

[AEL in Gen., A in

Ch.];

in Gen., B in Ch.];

Ch.];

[Jos.

cp Sab.

see

Ges.

one of the twelve sons of Ishmael

(Gen. 25

Ch.

Doubtless the Arabian tribe

mentioned by Tiglath-pileser

56)

with

Sheba, and Ephah, but distinct from the

named in inscriptions of the same king, who

was a

not ‘warden of the marches

‘governor’ (of the

Arabian land of

See

Cp Wi.

For

slightly different view, see ISHMAEL,

( 3 ) .

57,

connected with the

name

Addu see

DONIRAM

), the name, or part of

the name, of

unidentified town or district

Baby-

lonia, mentioned in the great post-exilic list (see

where

represented by

of AV

RV C

HARAATHALAN

. .

[B], [AS]

[A],

. .

[L]).

Cp C

HERUB

, ii.

ADDAR

Josh.

RV, AV A

DAR

ADDAR

Ch.

ADDER. T h e details are given

ERPENT

nos.

7).

(Ps.

generally believed

to be a kind of adder.

(Ps. 584

AV mg. ‘asp,’ like

AV elsewhere), also believed to be some species of adder
or viper.

(Pr.2332 mg. like text elsewhere,

AV cockatrice,’ RV ‘basilisk,’

also

Is.

EV mg.

likewise some kind of viper.

See

(Is.

mg.).

See SERPENT,

no. 6.

AV mg.

snake,’ RV mg.

‘

horned snake’), the

cerastes.

See

ERPENT

( 2 ) .

The sons of Addi

Esd.

[B],

[A],

[L])

appear to take the place of

the b’ne Pahath Moab

the name

probably represents A

DNA

no.

the first in the

group.

the missing name

restored, but

withont

usual

(see P

AHATH

-M

OAB

.Twenty-fourth in the ascending genealogical series, which

begins with Joseph, Mary’s husband, in

Lk.

3 23-38

[Ti. W H

following

See A

The Hebrew names are

See S

ERPENT

(4).

See

(5).

SERPENT,

(7).

ADDI.

See G

ENEALOGIES

See

(

[A], etc.

Esd.

61.

Neh.

The sons of

one of the groups

added in

Esd.

see Swete; perhaps

corresponding to

[L]) to the sons of the servants

of Solomon’ (see

in the great post-exilic list,

Esd. 5 see

ZRA

Esd.

See B

ARZILLAI

ADER

Ch.

RV E

DER

ADIDA

[A]),

See

ADIEL

38, God passes by’?-cp Adaiah).

One of the Simeonite chieftains who dispossessed

the

(see RV),

Ch.

[A],

perhaps

[B]). See G

EDOR

, 2, and H

and

A priest in the genealogy of Maasai

( I

Ch. 9

ADMAH

Ancestor of

Ch.

57,

perhaps shortened from

is pleasant,’ cp J

EHOADDAN

The b’ne

a family in the great post-exilic list (see

ZRA

ii.

Ezra2

[B]

[A],

Esd.

5 14

[B]

[A],

band of fifty males of this family

up with Ezra

;

Ezra8 6

Esd.

and Ebed, the name

of their head). The family was

among the signa-

tories to the covenant, Neh. 10
See E

ZRA

ADINA

‘blissful,’ cp under

[BAL]

chieftain in David’s service

(

Ch.

See D

AVID

a ,

ADINO, ‘ t h e

is appended unexpectedly

238 to the description of David’s principal hero.

The readings of

are :

[B],

with the doublet

though not in A] from

Ch. 11

where

has

. . .

however, gives the single

[of a different

text],

A comparison of

shows that what

required to

make sense is brandished his spear,’

and

these words are actually given in

Ch.

in lieu of

the words out of which

M T

(reading

and

its followers including EV vainly attempt to extract sense.
Modern critics (except

correct

M T

in accordance

with

correction,

‘He

is our pride, he is our terrible one’

(after which he

render

‘because

words which are supposed to be a quotation from a

warlike song referring

t o

this hero is too ingenious. The words

might, it is true, be viewed as a

marginal quotation

relative

but then we should still have

supply some

verb

as a predicate to complete the account of David‘s warrior.

See

JASHOBEAM.

R V ; AV, R V m g .

Esd.

ADITHAIM

on form of name see NAMES,

1 0 7

[L]

BA om., but in o. 34 A has

and

unknown site in the

apparently

somewhere in its NE. portion (Josh.

ADLAI

Ch. 27

see S

HAPHAT

ADMAH

[BAL]) and Zeboim

EV, Gen.

AV, Dt.

AV), or,

Gen.

EV and everywhere RV except

Zeboiim (Hos.

Kt.

probably=

[see

below];

Kt.

all

Kt.

Kr. everywhere

[BAL]

Samar. text om. both names in Gkn.

[E] in

Gen.

arementioned together in passagesof

teuch and in Hos.

In Gen.

they are stated to

have had kings of their

joined in the

revolt of certain southern peoples against Chedorlaomer
king of

Dt.

[AF]) to have

shared the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah.

I n Gen.

[A]) they are mentioned in the definition

of the boundaries of Canaan

e . , the land

of the Jordan.

Except in

Hos.

the names

and Zeboim are always preceded by those of Sodom and
Gomorrah.

Of the Pentateuch passages all except

Gen.

are certainly post-exilic, and it is very possible

that Kautzsch and

are right in regarding the

mention of Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim in Gen.

interpolated.

In this case’ we have no right to

assume it

certain that Admah and Zeboim were

among the cities which an early Hebrew tradition stated
to have been destroyed by brimstone

fire out of

ADMATHA

ADONIJAH

is entirely anomalous. I n similar compounds

Adoni with proper name) the second

egularly the name of

god, never of a place (there

.re, in fact, no Hebrew or Canaanite proper names of

in the O T thus compounded with the name of

. locality) nor is

used of the sovereign of a city

country.

Jos.

which, in spite of radical

lifferences, is based on a source closely akin to that of

if not identical with it, the head of the native

who first made front against the Israelite invasion

the

is Adoni-zedelc, king of Jerusalem (see

and it is to Jerusalem that Adoni-bezelc is

aken (? by his own servants) to die (Judg.

1 7 ) .

he conjecture offered under

appears very

z S . 3 4 ;

Neh.

elsewhere

is lord,'

see also

266

8).

Son

of B

AKZILLAI

the Meholathite, to whom Saul

married his daughter

)

(om.

[A],

[B],

J. W.

great grandfather of

(Toh.

form of A

DIEL

Mi.;

S.],

[A,

Josh.

variants

Adullamite,

[E]),

town in the Shephelah (Josh.

with

changeful history.

For a considerable time it seems

to have remained Canaanitish.

W e still have

legend

in Gen. 38

( J ) which describes the fusion of Judahite

clans with a Canaanitish clan whose centre was Adullam.
This  fusion  had  apparently  not  been  accomplished  in
David's time,  for Adullam  was still outside the  land  of
Judah  when  David  took  refuge  there

(

221 cp

5).

We cannot therefore accept the editorial statement

in Josh. 12 (cp

that Joshua smote' the king of

Adnllam.

The Chronicler speaks of Rehoboam

having fortified Adullam

Ch. 117).

H e names the

place in conjunction with Soco (Shuweikeh), which

. harmonises geographically with Micah's

it (Mic.

if the text be correct) with Mareshah

I t is included in the list of cities which are

stated to have been occupied by the Jews in the time of
Nehemiah or Zeruhbahel (Neh.

BHA om.

)

but the list in Neh. 1125-36 appears to be

fiction of the Chronicler. Judas the

Maccahee, at any rate, in a raid into

occupied

Adullam and kept the sabbath

Macc. 1238).

The chief interest of Adullam, however, lies in its con-

nection with D

AVID

§ 3). Here, not in some

enormous cave (such as that fixed upon by tradition at

hut in the stronghold' of the town, David

on two occasions found

safe retreat

Where was Adullam? T h e authority of the

The word is found both with d a n d with on Aramaic seals ;

no.

Horus

a help

The

enters history, not with David

but with an ascetic named Chariton, who, after having
taken

the way to Jerusalem, founded one of his

two

here, and died in the

about

.D.

doubt another

AGABUS

tine Survey has led many recent writers to adopt the
identification of Adullam with

proposed in

1871

by M. Clermont-Ganneau.

This

the name of

a steep hill on which are ruins of indeterminate date,'

with  an  ancient  well  at  the foot, and, near  the  top,  on
both  sides,  caves  of  moderate  size.  The site  is  in  the
east  of  the

about

SE.

of Soco, and

from Mareshah; and, though it is much more from

Bethlehem, the journey would be nothing for the
footed mountaineers who surrounded David

(Clermont-

Ganneau, PEFQ

The identification, how-

ever, is only conjectural. T h e caves are unimportant

(

I )

because the M T (cp

Jos.

vi.

speaks of a single

cave, and

because with We., Ki., Bu., and Kau.

we should correct

cave,' in

221

Ch.

into

'stronghold'

2314.

Nor does the position of

exactly

agree with that assigned to Adullam in the

On the very slight resemblance of the name

to Adullam no reliance can be placed. Other sites

are

quite possible.

H G 229

See M

ICAH

ADULTERY.

See M

ARRIAGE

ADUMMIM, The Ascent

of (

; Josh.

a point marking the frontier between Judah

and Benjamin. The sharp rise near the middle of the
road from Jericho to Jerusalem appears

he intended

the name (connected with

' r e d ' ) was pel-haps

suggested  by  the  ruddy  hue  of  the  chalk  rocks in that
neighhonrhood,  to which  appears  to  be  due  the  name
of  the

el-Ahmar

(

the red

'),

the traditional inn

of the Good Samaritan, and that of

ed-Dam

the hill of blood

'),

NE. of the

With the

latter spot the ascent of Adummim has been plausibly
identified

172).

The

translated in

'rival,'

cp Lev.

[BAL]) is the technical term for a fellow-wife, answer-
ing to Ass.

Ar.

Syr.

All these forms are dialectal variations of

single

Old-Semitic word. Similarly, in Lev.

the words

to vex her' are better rendered

to he a rival

t o

T h e words that follow may he rendered, in-

terpreting the metaphor,

marrying the second sister, in

addition to the first, in the lifetime of the latter.'

The sense of the metaphor is given by the

See

Dr.

TBS, ad

and especially

ADVOCATE

Jn.

see

AEDIAS

[B]),

Esd.

[BHA]),

paralytic at Lydda

T h e form of the name,

I t is

K. C .

ADVERSARY.

1882,

no.

13).

CLETE.

LIJAH

healed by Peter

not as in Homer

is noteworthy.

met with in Thucydides, Xenophon, and Pindar.

X N O N

Jn.

XSORA

[RA], etc.),

AFFINITY.

See

AMILY

INSHIP

AGABA,

RV A

CCABA

Esd.

See

ALIM

AGABUS

[Ti.

WH];

one of the

prophets who came from Jerusalem to Antioch at the

the dispersion from

upon the tribula-

tion that rose about Stephen (Acts

predicted a great famine over all the world, which came
to pass in the days of Claudius' (Acts

The

reference, doubtless, is

the great dearth which visited

and the surrounding districts-especially

lem-between

and 48

A.D.

xx.

2 6 ; 52

The text of

differs.

AGAG

3).

For

other famines in the reign

Claudius, see Suet. Claud.

Ann.

43.

T h e next mention of Agabus is in Acts 21

where

it is said that he came down from

when

Paul

was there, and, taking Paul's girdle, bound

his own feet and hands with it to symbolise the captivity
of the apostle.

this reference looks like a first

mention of Agabus, those who ascribe the whole of

Acts

to one writer regard it

an indication that the

second half of the book was written first. By others
the passage is naturally regarded

one of the indications

that the author of Acts did not himself write the we'
passages, but adopted them from an earlier source.

the other hand, Overbeck and Van

tegard

interpolation, and suppose that the

' w e ' was introduced by the last redactor.

thinks  that  the  prophecy  cannot  originally  have  been
ascribed  to Agabus, but must  have been  assigned to one
of  Philip's  prophesying  daughters,

these would not

have been mentioned. At all events, it is to be noted
that from

(21

I O)

does not harmonise with

for.

belonged to

Agabus is included in the lists of the 'seventy disciples of our

Lord'

pseudo-Dorotheus and pseudo-Hippolytus and

commemorated in the great Greek

(Apr.

with

Rufus,

Herodion,

and

Asyncritus.

AGAG

cp Ass.

' b e powerful,

vehement, angry'

the spirits friendly to man,

Maspero,

D a w n

634

[BAL],), a king of the

Amalekites, so celebrated

early tradition that the

Yahwist makes

say, by an obvious anachronism,

of the future Israelitish kingdom,

His king shall be

higher than Agag'

(Nu.

[BAL], following

Samar. text).  Saul, after his successful campaign against
the Amalekites, exempted Agag from the general doom of
devotion  to  the  deity by  slaughter, and brought  him  to
Gilgal,  where Samuel hewed him in pieces before

at the great sanctuary where festal sacrifices

were offered

(

allowance

for the endeavour of the narrator to harmonise an old
tradition with later ideas (see S

AUL

3), and throwing

ourselves back  into  the  barbarous  period  which  begins
to  pass  away  under  David,  we  cannot  doubt  that  the
slaughter  of  Agag  was

eucharistic sacrifice (see

ACRIFICE

), akin to that of the

(lit. 'victim

rent in pieces'), which was in use among the Arabs
after

successful fray, and which might be

human

sacrifice ( W R S

cp 363 We.

Ar.

AGAGITE

for

Greek readings see below),

member of the family of Agag a title applied

ana-

chronistically to Haman (Esth.

I O

Haman,

is opposed to Mordecai, the descendant

(Esth.

description is to be taken

literally (see E

STHER

end).

T h e meaning is

that there is an internecine struggle between the Jews
and their enemies, like that between Saul and Agag of
old.

Similarly, Haman is called a 'Macedonian' in

the Greek parts of Esther; 126

but

[BXALP]

AV Agagite

RV B

UGEAN

)

( E V Macedonian

[BKALP]

but

and the name has made its way back into

cp E

STHER

Elsewhere

the

reading is

(only in

3 1

8 5

perhaps a corruption of

(in

the same version has

for

Ayay).

The sons

Agar, Bar.

RV AV Agarenes.

See

AGAR

[BA]).

Gal.

end).

AGATE

[A].

etc.

[BAL]) occurs four times in AV,

twice for Heb.

RV 'rubies' and twice

for

On the identification of these stones,

see C

HALCEDONY

On the question whether the

AGRICULTURE

agate, which

variegated chalcedony (translucent

quartz) with layers or spots of jasper, was known to
Israel, see P

RECIOUS

TONES

AGEE

[gen.];

A G

E ) ,

father of S

HAMMAH

His name should doubtless be cor-

rected to

(so

Marq.

;

and

the older character were very similar. H e is mentioned
again in

18.

AGGABA

Ezra

Aggeus

[ed. Bensly]),

Esd.

6173,

Esd.

AGIA

[BA]),

Esd.

AGRICULTURE.-Agriculture is here considered

(

)

as conditioned by the land

conditioned

by the people

( 3 ) as a factor

the life of the

people

concluding paragraph

16) will

contain some notes on historical points.

The great variety of the conditions in the different

natural divisions of Palestine

must be

See

See H

AGGAI

The various local

natural and industrial, of these dis-
tricts. so often alluded to bv the

Old  Testament  writers,  the  most  important  of
are wheat and  barley, olive and vine and  fig, will be de-
scribed  in  special  articles

On the seasons see

AIN

W e simply note here-First, the long

dry season

including all the harvests, the

dates of which vary slightly in the different districts
(cp F

EASTS

I O ) :

the

in spring, when rain

seemed miraculous

(

and the steady

wind  every  evening  made  it  possible  to  winnow  with
ease,  barley  beginning  in  April,  wheat  about  a  fort-
night  later;  the

y ~ ) ,

summer fruits and vegetables,

in summer

olives in autumn

the

vines, from

August  onwards.  Second,  the  wet  season
the earlier part  of  which saw the preparation  of  the  soil
by  the early rain

for the winter crops, to be

brought to maturity by the succeeding showers, especially
those in March-April

before which was the

time for sowing the summer crops.

With such stable conditions, all that seems to be

needed

fair amount of intelligent industry and the

lack  of  this, rather than  any great  change  of  climate,  is
probably the cause of  the retrogression of  modern
T h e  productivity, however, was not  uniform  (cp parable
of  sower), and  there seems to  be

somewhat periodic

diminution in the amount of rainfall. Agriculture is
also exposed to pests the easterly wind

drought,

ILDEW

and

OCUSTS

: see also A

W e consider now, more in detail, agriculture

dependent

the energy, skill, and general condition

4).

of the

Our account must

naturally be

The minute

prescriptions of the Mishna must

course be used with

W e begin with-

(For

the most part we shall deal only with the raising

grain

crops.

For

other departments see V

INES

, G

ARDEN

CATTLE, etc.

)

Incidentally the biblical records de-

scribe many agricultural processes, and mention by name
some of the implements used.

Of these implements,

however, they give no description and the only speci-
mens found, up to the present time, are of sickles (see

For Egypt however we have fuller sources-many pictures

processes

and some actual specimens. And

See

for

details on Geology

Physical

divisions

Hydrography

Climate

and Vegetation

See however

Aus

Orient

There is no Hebrew word corresponding to our term

Tilling the soil

husbandman is

etc. field

Technical details of agricultural procedure.

below,

AGRICULTURE

since modern Egypt and modern Palestine are very similar

these ancient Egyptian remains may he used to illustrate ancien;
Palestine.

Further, since modern implements and methods

are, in Egypt, very like those of antiquity the same is probably
true of Palestine. Hence it is reasonable

hold that, in Pales-

tine also, modern may he taken to illustrate ancient.

Our main

therefore, are modern Palestine

and ancient Egypt and they are best used in this order,
subordinated always to the actual data of the O T itself.

W e shall take the processes in natural order.
Sometimes land had to be

of wood or shrub

(

Josh.

or of stone

chiefly in vineyards.

For loosening or otherwise moving the

soil many words are used, such

din,

which the first group denotes ploughing, the second,
breaking np the soil

clods

Joel

117)

with the mattock or hoe, while the third

clearly

means levelling

off

the surface with something serving

for

harrow. Of the names of the instruments we have

of which the first pair probably

representsthe plough( N T

the last,

of mat-

tock

;

while

must remain undetermined, ploughshare

or hoe.

It is clear, therefore, that we have a t least three

processes-ploughing, hoeing,

harrowing.

cannot be sure that there was of old in different parts
of the country any more uniformity than

is now.

I t is not likely that the shallow soil would ever be much

more deeply ploughed
than now, when a depth
of

5-6

inches

consid-

ered sufficient. Perhaps
ploughing

some-

times (as now), after
Sufficient rain, be dis-
pensed

Hoeing

would probably take the
place of ploughing in
steep places (Is.

now in stony
I n modern

there

ploughing

sowing except where
manure is used.

I n

Galilee,

the other

H o e

For

picture of

use see fig. 3, and cp

GYPT

districts more than one.

34,

When ground has been

left

with grain and

overgrown with weed,

this is ploughed in.

Turning now to the implements used for these

purposes, and beginning with the less important, we

AGRICULTURE

modern Egypt.

modern Syrian hoe may be seen

1891,

pp.

as also mattock, spade, etc.

T h e

harrow

does not seem to have been used by the

ancient Egyptians, although their modern representatives
use a weighted plank or a toothed roller.

In modern

Palestine

bush of thorns is sometimes used.

T h e

writer of Job

however, seems to have known of

some implement drawn by beasts following the labourer
but this throws little light on general usage.

T h e

plough,

although it is probably, strictly speaking,

an inferior substitute for the spade, is in common
practice a very important implement, and merits more
detailed treatment.

Of the Israelitish plough we know only that it had, at

least sometimes, an iron share that needed sharpening

editorial comment in corrupt text).

That the Syrian plough was light we have the testimony
of Theophrastus.

The modern Syrian plough, which is

light enough to be carried by the ploughman on his
shoulder, and

simpler than the usual ancient

plough (fig.

in having only one handle and therefore

Implements

note that the Egyptian

(fig.

), of

importance in ancient Egypt as to

e the natural svmbol of agriculture, as

the

is in modern

has no

representative in

Syria; but

has it in

Babylonia,

well as Egypt, no doubt presented points of

contact with Palestine; but in the department of agriculture our
direct knowledge of Babylonia is very slight. See

and

See

partial list of Talmudic names

Hamburger and

Ugolinus, and now also a very full collection in Vogelstein's
work (see below,

In Egypt two ploughs seem generally to

been used

the one

the

perhaps

turned up

soil between the furrows made by the first (cp however next
note). On the other hand at least in later time;, the
sometimes used a lighter

drawn

men or

If we could regard the

agricultural pictures as

representations of actual

we should have to conclude that

in Egypt the hoe was used sometimes before (so always

the Old Empire), sometimes after, or both before

after the

plough, to

up the great clods of earth. T h e depicting of

'the various operations side by side, however, is very likely a mere

convention designed to represent

one view all kinds of

work.

Prof.

Max

in a private communication

the present writer.

The illustration (fig.

needs only the explanation that

the twisted cord adjusts the acuteness of the angle of the

two

other parts.

Cp Wetzstein's note

Judg. 331

17).

Babylonian Plough (from cylinder seal,

.c.,

belonging to Dr. Hays Ward).

Syrian Plough and

Goad (after

PEFQ, 1891).

(Post).

en-nir.

(Post).

13.

(Post),

(Post).

16.

not needing two men to manage it, may safely be taken
to illustrate that used by the Israelites. There is

uniformity  in  its  construction  than  in  any other
relating  to agriculture,  and  it  would  seem  to  be at  its
simplest  in'  Southern  Palestine.

The woodcut

(fig.

2 )

illustrates its general form. It is of wood, often oak. The
stalieon to which the pointed metal sheath that serves for

thrust,

through

in the pole, to end

in a cross handle piece. T h e pole is of two pieces, joined
end to end. The

more rarely sin,

is repeatedly mentioned in the

OT.

I t varied in weight according to circumstances

(

124). It

is now made

light as possible, often

willow.

Two pegs, joined below by thongs or by hair

string,  form  a  collar  for  each  of  the  oxen,  and  two
smaller  pegs  in  the  middle  keep  in  position  the  ring
or  other  arrangement  for  attaching  the  plough  pole.
Repairs  are  attended  to  once  a  year  by

travelling

T h e simplest plough would be made of one piece of

tree,

bent while growing. See Verg.

1 169,

illustration

Graevius,

Ronz.

11,

T h e ancient Egyptian plough, which underwent little

modification in the course of millenniums, was

all

of wood,

although, perhaps, the share was of a wood (harder?) different
from the rest of

plough and may sometimes have been

sheathed in metal

Of the Assyrian plough we

from an embossed relief found

that it (some-

times) had a hoard

for

turning over the

just

in front

of it a drill that let the seed down,

covered

the soil

as it

over.

Where

two

forms of the Arabic name are given, the first

from

Schumacher, and the second

Post

below,

17).

T h e Hebrew names are from Vogelstein

below,

17).

AGRICULTURE

Heb. text), and perhaps sometimes of asses (Is.

Dt. 2210). Even camels and

may now

be seen occasionally.

In Armenia many pairs of oxen

draw one plough, the driver sitting on the
this

hardly the meaning of

T h e

were called

They

are now sometimes very carefully drawn (cp

Ps.

and are some nine to ten inches apart.

Irrigation

see

RDEN

)

must have been

of the processes used by

Pales-

tine,
on which see

YPT

34, n.)

having

copious supply of rain and in having natural springs

expert.

T h e ploughman holds in his left hand a

goad

some eight or nine feet

in length, having at one end a

point, and at the

other

metal blade to clean the

The team

would, as now, oftenest

consist of oxen (Am.

but sometimes

cows

(Job

is,

whether the land has been already ploughed or not,

to plough in the

This protects it from ants and

from dryness due to intermission of the early

to protection from man and beast, see H

Two names of implements have

beenpreserved

onlyin Dt.

only

in Jer.

mg.

and Joel

but whether they

refer to the

thing or to varieties, we do not

know.

Perhaps the commonest method was to pull

up by the root (see fig.

practice confined in

ancient Egypt to certain crops, but still followed
both

Egypt and in Palestine.

The use of sickles in

T o reap is

yards (Is.

Ecclus.

where hedges

Is..

were also in use and there was sometimes a border,

(see

(Is.

Between

grain-fields, however, the commonest practice was to
set up stones to

the line of partition

Hos.

)

on the strong sentiment that prevailed as to the

unrighteousness of tampering with these,

see below

14).

Whether the various words used for

sowing the seed were technical terms we

cannot tell.

word

of general significance.

Is.

three words are used in one

verse :

and

of scattering

(see

)

and cummin with the hand

7 )

hence

c t

especially

would

bear

crops

without being
watered

arti-

ficially.

But

later practice
shows

that

e v e n t h e s e
would

yield

better harvests

Canaan

e a r l y   t i m e s
is,  h o w e v e r ,
proved  by  the
f i n d i n g

sickle flints a t
Tell

el Hesy

in  the  earliest
and  all  suc-
ceeding layers,
while  the  use
of  iron  sickles

by the Jews in
a t least

trampling in the seed. From the

of Ti. After Baedeker.

artificial

irri-

times is oroved

gation,  and  there may  have been  districts  under  culti-
vation which wereentirely dependent on it.  I t  would not
be safe to assign  an early date to the elaborate methods
and  regulations ,of  Mishna  times  and  it

difficult to

determine whether by the streams, that were

highly

prized (Dt.

8 7

Nu.

246, Cant.

and without which

a garden could not live

(Is.

artificial canals are

meant, and whether,

the bucket

Is.

247)

was used in irrigation.

T h e Mishna has

regulations concerning

(

and there

be a reference to it

such passages as

Ps.

Is.

I n

N T

times, a t least,

manure was used for trees (Lk.
as now for figs, olives, etc.

it' was worked in a t the

last yearly ploughing, which was after the first winter
rain.

For

grain crops the use of manure is exceptional

Hebron).

show that in the hilly

country

Cant.

was used

even more than now, especially for vine cultivation
but the wider terraces are still

for grain, the

clearing

the soil being called

Fences

were employed, perhaps only in

Vogelstein argues from

9 6

that this is the name of

Cp, however, Del. on Ps.

voc.

See now the account in

Cp
T h e prophets delight to speak of the copious supplies of

water that will refresh even the most unlikelyplaces in the ideal
future (see Cheyne on Is. 30

the metal head.

by the finding of the specimen represented in fig. 7.

the various steps.

By putting together different allusions,'

can follow

T h e reaper

filled his hand

up grain. After Erman.

In Am. 9

is used of the process of sowing.

I t is not unlikely that

is to be dropped, with We. Che.

and Do. (against

According to Strabo this was done also in Babylon

above, col. 78 n.

and

Egypt the seed was sometimes,

especially

Empire trodden in by sheep (Erman

Life

Egypt,

not goats), in the time

Herodotus

swine.

On the stages and accidents of growth cp Vogelstein,

IO.

which AV

thrice

'scythe,' E V has,

The method of setting the

flints

is shown by the

specimens found by

Dr. Petrie

Egypt

etc.

no.

see above, fig. 6).

8 0

AGRICULTURE

(see

I.)

is an entirely distinct word meaning

hay.

Wellhausen.

AGRICULTURE

(Is.

2827)

to heat out cummin and

)

with rods

and

respectively). The

other processes were probably more common in later
times. For these was needed a

for which was selected some spot freely exposed

to the wind, often

well-known place

Beating the floor hard for use may be alluded to
Jer.

5 1 3 3

(Heb. Text

Sometimes the wheat

heads may have been struck off the straws by the sickle
onto the threshing-floor (Job 24

as Tristram

describes

(East.

125);

usually the bundles

would be first piled in

heap

on the floor, and

then from this

convenient quantity

from time

to time spread over the floor.

The threshing then seems to have been done in two

ways : either (6) by driving

round the floor on the

loosely scattered stalks till their hoofs gradually trampled

out the

for which purpose oxen were

used (Hos.

or (c) by special

The instruments mentioned, which were drawn usually

by oxen, are ( a )
with

(wheel) prefixed

(Is.

and perhaps

alone (Am.

see, however, We.

These

two sets of expressions probably correspond pretty
closely to two instruments still in use in Palestine, and

description of them and their use will be the nearest

we can come to an account of their ancient representa-
tives.

The Syrian

is a wooden

(see

fig.

with a rough under-surface, which when drawn

over the stalks chops them up.

T h e illustration

needs few explanations. T h e roughness

produced by

the skilful insertion in holes, a cubic inch in size,

blocks of basalt

Is.

which protrude (when

new) some inch and

half.

T h e sledge is weighted by

heavy stones, or by the weight

the driver, who, when

tired, lies down and

sleeps, or sits

legged stool.

the existence in modern Egyptian Arabic

a word

a s

the name of a thorny plant. See

RIER

wheel, Prov.

with ears

of the standing corn

and

with his arm

reaped them

T h e stalks

(nip)

were, in Egypt,

still are, in Palestine, cut pretty

high np (Anderlind; knee high). They must some-

times have been cut,

whether at this or at
a

later stage, very

near the ear

Job

T h e armfuls
would

fall

(Jer.

heap

behind

the

reaper, to be ga-

thered

the

flints found a t

After

and

tied.

into sheaves

and set in heaps

In Egypt the sheaf consisted of two bundles, with

their heads in opposite directions.

modern Syria fre-

quently the sheaves

tied at all.

I t has been

with cutting

sickle found a t Tell el Hesi. After

PEFQ.

supposed

that already in Amos's time the bundles

may sometimes have been heaped into a heavy

n n

8.-Sickling

bundling.

After Lepsius.

load on a cart

Am.

but the reference

very well be to the threshing

I n Egypt they

were conveyed in baskets or bags, by men or on donkeys,
to the threshing-floor.

Threshing was called

which the first describes beating with a rod, the second

is indefinite (to break up fine), and the

( a )

T h e

first  of  these  evidently  represents  the  most  primitive
practice,  still  followed  sometimes- in  both  Palestine
and  Egypt.  Naturally,  gleaners

and apparently

others in certain'

Gideon in time

of danger-beat out the grain and in much later times

third is literally

The

of Northern Syria, called in Egypt by

Barn-floor,'

27 AV.

But in

is probably dittography for

So written without dagesh

Baer.

I t is not hear how the

Is.

28 28 are

supposed

be used.

I n Egypt in later times oxen

used, three in a line,

with their heads hound together a t the horns hy a beam

fip.

in the ancient empire, donkeys, ten in a line; so

proposes to read

a verb.

modern Syria, the line being called a

Just as

rods are used together in method (a), so

there could h e

or of

mixtures of

(6)

used

Ch. 20

E V 'harrow,' Hoffm.

'pick.

'Threshing-wain Job 41

RV.

Clearly some

of sharp instrument of iron

AGRICULTURE

the name of the unused

(see fig.

I I

and known to

the Romans as

has in place of sharp

stones revolving metal discs, which, when pressed down
by the weight of the driver seated in a rude arm-chair,
effectually cut up the straw

T h e process of winnowing

often mentioned.

Two names of instruments are preserved, the

(EV

' f a n ' ) in Is.

Jer.

and

the

(EV

shovel

in Is. alone

(30

They seem to refer to different things

perhaps to

9.-Carrying from harvest-field, and threshing. After

The work is done sometimes by horses, but most

commonly, as of old, by oxen, either singly or (oftener)

pairs, sometimes muzzled, contrary

ancient Egyptian

usage and Hebrew

T h e modern floor is a circle some fifty feet in diameter,

threshing-sledge. After Benzinger.

with the heap

in the centre, from which

supply

is from time to time spread all round in ring

form, some two feet deep and seven or eight feet broad.
When one

has been thoroughly threshed-to

insure which, it is from time to time stirred up with the

11.-Modern Egyptian threshing-machine

After Wilkinson.

handle of the winnowing instrument, or even with a
special two-pronged fork

mixed

mass

grain

chopped straw

and

chaff etc.

is formed into

heap

(

make room for

new

The Mishna seems to assume the practice in

16 7

I t is doubtful whether the preceding

phrase

refers to a practice, reported by some

the eyes of the oxen in threshing.

Philological considerations would give the preference to

explanation :

triticum

the implements still called by similar names in Palestine

and the shovel. 'Ihe products are grain

(in),

and

T h e first is heaped up in round heaps

Cant.

73,

Heb. Text). The second is kept for 'pro-

vender (Is.

1 1 7 ) .

T h e third is blown away by the

wind (Ps.

modern

Syria

the

(see fig. given in Wetzstein,

below:

is a wooden fork almost

ft.

with some at least of

its five or six prongs separate-
ly inserted,

that they are

easily repaired.

prongs

are bound tngether by fresh
hide, which on shrinking forms
a

tight band.

The

kind of wooden shovel (see
fig. in Wetzstein,

with

handle

ft. long.

used chiefly for piling the
grain, but also for winnowing
leguminous plants and certain

of the

that have

had to be re-threshed.

T h e

winnowers stand to the

E. of

the

heap, and

times first with a two-pronged
fork called

and then),

with the

either toss

the

against the

straight

up,

or simply

let it fall from the inverted fork, according to the
strength of the evening

breeze. While the chaff

blown away some

I O

ft.  or  more,  the  straw
falls  at  a  shorter  distance,
and  is  preserved  for  fodder

the  heavy  grain,  unbruised
ears, and  joints  of  stems,  fall
almost  where they were, ready
for sifting.

Strange to say, in the case

of sifting it is the names of
the implement that are best

sifting, etc.

The sieve is

called

Am.

Lepsius.

and

(am,

Is.

I n the former case

probably the good grain, in the latter probably the
refuse, passes through.

I n modem Syria there are

omits these words ; but

occurs repeatedly in the

Fleischer denies any philological connection between Ar.

and

regarding the former as a Persian word, borrowed

in the sense

After Erman.

AGBICULTURE

AGRICULTURE

two main kinds of sieve used on the threshing-floor.
They are made of a hoop of wood with a mesh-work
of

of camel-hide put on fresh, and become

tight in drying. The coarser meshed

is like the

of Amos.

When the winnowed heap is sifted

with it, the grains of wheat pass through, while the
unbruised ears etc. remain in the

and are flung

back

the

to be re-threshed. T h e finer meshed

is like the

Is.

3028

all dust, bruised

grains, etc. pass through, but none of the good wheat.

When the grain has been finally separated, it is

heaped with the

in hemispherical piles

which probably represent the

of the

metaphor in Cant.

(Heb.

By this

Boaz

slept (Ru.

as do the -owners still, while (as a further pre-

caution) private

are made on the surface, and a

scarecrow is set up.

Storage.-In Jer., Dt., Joel,

Ps.,

Ch., there are

names of places for keeping stores of grain

but we do

not know anything about

I n the

days of

Gedaliah corn and other stores were hidden in the ground
(Jer.

dry cisterns hewn out of the

are still

used.

For a representation of an ancient cistern see

ZDPV

opp.

69. T h e mouth is just wide enough

to admit a man's body, and can be carefully covered
over. Grain will keep in these cisterns for years.

Next falls to be considered the dependence of

agriculture  on  the  general  condition  of  the  people,  a
dependence  that  is very  obvious from  the  present  state
of  agriculture in  Palestine.

In the days of Israel's greatness, when agriculture

was the chief occupation of the people, the population,

whatever  may  have  been  its  numerical
strength,  was  certainly  enough  to  bring
the  country, even in  places  that  are now

quite barren, into a state of cultivation.

The land

would be full of husbandmen tilling their fields by day,
and returning to their villages at night.

Yet, down to

the end of the monarchy, the old nomadic life still had its
admirers (Jer.

who, like the Bedouin of to-day,

would despise the settled tiller of the soil. At the
other extreme also, in such a society as is described,

by Amos and Isaiah, there was an aristocracy that

had little immediate connection with the land it owned.

Slave  labour would  doubtless,  as  elsewhere, be  a  weak
point  in  the  agricultural  system,  tending  to  lower  its
status  (Zech. 1 3 5   Ecclus.

though this would

not preclude the existence, at some period or other, of
honourable offices such as those attributed by the

Chronicler to the age of David

(

Ch.

25-31).

After

making allowance for homiletic colonring, we are bound
to suppose that agricultural enterprise must have suffered

grievously  from  a  sense  of  insecurity in  regard  to  the
claims of  property, and from the accumulation  of  debts,
with  their  attendant  horrors.

Civil disturbances (such

as  those  abounding  in  the  later  years  of  Hosea)  and
foreign  wars  would,  in  later  times,  take  t h e   place  of
exposure to the inroads of  nomadic tribes.

The burden

of taxation and forced labour

(

would, a s now

in many eastern lands, foster the feelings that find ex-
pression in the narrative of the great schism

(

124)

and in some of the accounts

the rise of the kingdom

(on the 'king's mowings,' Am.71, see

and

The existence of an effort to ameliorate evils of the

kind to which allusion has just been made, and of

consciousness of their inconsistency with
the true national life, is attested by the

inclusion in the Pentateuchal codes of a considerable
number of dicta on

matters, in which we see

OVERNMENT

For

most likely stones.

Egypt corn was stored' in buildings with a flat roof

reached by an outside stair. There were two openings, or sets
of openings, near the top, for pouring in the grain,

and

the

bottom, for withdrawing it

(see

model in Brit.

Mus.).

religious sanctions became attached to traditional

practices.

Already in the Book

the Covenant

fallow year

Ex.

once in seven, is prescribed for the sake of

he poor and the beast, and

day of rest

(v.

once

seven, for the sake of the cattle and the slave while

he principle is laid down that for damage done to a

field reparation must be made (Ex.

I n the

Code,

if there is already

he precept against sowing in a vineyard two kinds of

eed

ploughing with an ox and an ass together

and the requirement of

tithe

(14

there are

such maxims as the sacredness of property

(19

[cp

and, in

he form of a curse, Dt. 27

17)

on the one hand, and,

the other, generous regard for the needs of

2325

plucking ears

sheaf;

olive

grapes), even of beasts

muzzle), with

provision against abuse of the privilege

sickle

no vessel)

while an effort is

nade to moderate the damage done to agriculture

war

(20

exemption from conscription

trees).

In the

there is still,

n the remarkable collection preceding the last chapter

Leviticus, a further development

the provision

o r

the poor at harvest time

a repetition of the charitable maxims

but

here is

the whole an

of such

.ions as non-mixture of seeds

(19

defilement of seed

uncircumcision of fruit-trees

strict

of dates of agricultural year (23

while

:he Jubile year makes its appearance.

Here we are

nearer the details of such discussions as

hose in

etc. Of course, the question how far

maxims made themselves felt in actual practice, or

as a moral directive force, is not answered by

pointing out their existence in literary form.

111. W e pass now to the consideration

agriculture

as a

factor

the life of the people.

That agriculture was an important element

popular

Life is very evident. Land was measured by yokes

( I

Is.

and valued by the

amount of seed it needed (Lev. 27

16).

Time was measured by harvests (Judith

and places were identified by the crops growing

on them

( z

2311, lentils;

Ch.

barley). Tilling

the soil was proverbially the source of wealth (Pr. 12

implements not needed for other purposes would

a matter of course be turned to agricultural use

(Is.

on. That work in the fields was not

confined  to  slaves and  people of  no  culture  is evident,
not  only  from  the  existence  of  such narratives  as that
of  Joseph's  dream,  but  also  from what  is  told  of  Saul

(

S. 11

and

(

and Amos

before they appeared  on, the stage  of  history.  On  the
other  hand,  the  narrator  of  the  story  of  Ruth  seems
to  represent  neither  Boaz  himself  nor  his  deputy  as
doing  more  than  overseeing  and  encouraging  the
labourers

(Ru.

25) and in the time of the writer of

( R V ) a tiller of the soil seemed to be most

naturally a purchased slave, while the ideal of the writer
of Is.

is that ploughmen and vine-dressers should

aliens.

At all times, however, even the rich owner entered

naturally into the spirit

the agricultural life. If it

was  perhaps  only in  the  earlier  times  that  he  actually
ploughed  or  even  followed  t h e  oxen,  he  would  at  all
times  be present  on the  cheerful  harvest  field

visit

his vineyard tb see the work of the labourers (Mt.
his sons included (Mt.

and give directions about

the work (Lk.

when he would listen respectfully

to the counsel of his men

I t was not

derogatory, in the mind of the Chronicler, to kingly
dignity to interest one's self in agriculture

T h e text of

very

doubtful. cp

Dr.

T h e meaning

Eccles.

is obscdre.

AGRICULTURE

and a proverb-writer points out the superiority of the
quiet prosperity of the husbandman to

insecure

diadem (Prov.

Not unnaturally it is the life of harvest-time that has

been most fully preserved to us.

W e can see the men,

especially the younger men (Ru.

cutting the

grain, the young

going out to their fathers

in the field, the jealousies that might spring

between the reapers (Gen. 37

7),

and the dangers that

young

and

might be exposed to (Ru.

perh.

Hos.

the simple fare of the reapers (Ru. 2

and the unrestrained joviality of the evening

(Ru.

7 )

after the hot day's work

( 2

the poor women

and girls gleaning behind  the reapers and  usually finding
more  than  they  seem  sometimes  to  find  nowadays,
beating  out  the  grain

(Ru.

217) in the evening and

carrying it away in a mantle to the older ones at home
(Ru. 3

not only the labourers but

also

the owners

sleeping by the corn heaps at night (Ru.

that

the villages would, as now in Palestine and Egypt, be
largely emptied of inhabitants.

The Egyptian monu-

ments could be drawn

for further illustrations.

Such a mode of life had naturally

profound effect

the popular sentiment, the religions conscience, and,

AGRICULTURE

authority.

I n the public consciousness, however, there

lived on much of the old Canaanitish popular belief, in
which the

hold the place here assigned to

Yahwb, so that,

the fertile spot is the

plot of

land, who waters it from unseen sources, underground or
in the heavens (see B

AAL

mode of expression

that lived on into Mishna times, although its original
meaning had been long forgotten.

The influence on Hebrew literature was very deep.

The most cursory reader must have observed how much

in time, the literary thought of the

and. to

our

the subject, a

words must be

here on

matters.

That the agricultural mode of life was regarded

originating in the earliest ages is evident from Gen.

and

but it was sometimes regarded as a curse

or at least as inferior to pastoral life

while at other times nomadic life was a curse
instead of being a natural stage

These two

sides are perhaps reflected in the glowing descriptions
in which certain writers

Dt.

tilled

land of  corn and wine and  oil (Dt. 87-9), a pasture land
flowing  with  milk  and  honey (Ezek. 206).  This land,
which  is  lovingly  contrasted  with  other  lands  (Ezek.
206

was felt to be a gift of

his

people, and specially under his watchful care (Dt.

The agricultural life was, therefore, also of his

appointment

Ecclus.

715

and indeed

lay

the basis of his Torah.

From him the husband-

man received the principles of his practice

(Is.

also, he depended absolutely

for the bringing

into operation of the natural forces (Dt.

without

which all his labour would be in vain

17).

This, how-

ever, was only a ground of special security (Dt.

for

no other god could give such blessings as rain (Jer.

1 4

and Yahwb did give them (Jer.

If they were not

forthcoming, therefore, it was because Yahwb had with-
held them (Am.

and this

because of his people's

sins (Jer.

which also brought more special curses

(Dt.

The recognition of

had, therefore,

a prominent place in connection with the stages of
agricultural industry (see

EASTS

4),

the success of

which was felt to depend

the nation's rendering him

in general loyal obedience (Dt.

3-17)

the land itself

was

the people were but tenants (Lev. 25

23)

and the moving of the ancient landmarks, though not
unknown, was a great wrong (Job 24

Some of the

moral aspects of agricultural life have been already
sufficiently touched

on.

I t is probable that many of the

maxims referred to were widely observed, being congruent
with the better spirit of  the people.  Thus Amos records
it as an outrage on the ordinary  sentiments  of  common
charity, that  even the refuse  of  the wheat should be sold
for  gain  (Am.

86).

Other maxims, again, can be little

traced in practice.

I n this description of Hebrew ideas we have taken no

note of the differences between earlier and later times.
Deuteronomy and the prophets have been the main

Several children

may

sometimes

now

be seen weighting and

also

Gen.

and WRS

driving

the

threshing-sledge.

the modes of expression reflect the

life.

Prouhetic

tions of an ideal future abound in scenes conceived in
agricultural

Great joy is likened to the joy

of harvest

(Is.

)

what

evanescent is like chaff

that is burned

or blown away something unexpected

is like cold (Pr. 25

or rain (Pr.

in barvest-and

on.

Lack of space prevents proof in detail of how,

on the one hand, figures and modes of  speech are drawn
from all the operations  and natural  phenomena  of  agri-
culture,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  every  conceivable
subject  is  didactically  or  artistically illustrated  by  ideas
and  expressions from the  same  source.  I t   is a natural
carrying  forward in the

mode of thought, to

find Jesus publishing his epoch-making doctrines of the

kingdom'

largely through the help of the same

imagery.

doubt the commonest general expression

is kingdom

but

this often becomes a vineyard,

field, or a tree, or a seed and it is extended by

sowing etc. I t is unnecessary to pursue the subject
farther.

The whole mode of thought has passed

into historical Christianity, and thus into all the
languages of the world.

W e shall now

closing give some

fragmentary notes towards

historical

outline of the subject.

The traditional account

the mode of life of the

ancestors  of  Israel  in  the  earliest  times introduces agri-
cultural activity only as an exceptional  incident.  Agri-
culture  must  be  rudimentary  in  the  case of  a  nomadic
people.  That  Canaan,  on

other hand, was for the

most part well under

when the Israelites

settled in the highlands, there can be no doubt. The
Egyptian Mohar found

garden at

and of the

agricultural produce claimed by Thotmes

at the

hands of the

some at least

have been

grown in Palestine.

Israel doubtless learned from the

Canaanite

not

only the art of war (Judg.

but also

the more peaceful arts  of  tilling  the  soil,  which, as the
narratives  of  Judges  and  Samuel prove,  were  practised
with  success, while  it  is  even  stated  that Solomon sent
to  Hiram  yearly

Kor

wheat and

20,000

Bath of oil

(

Var. Bible). Later, Ezekiel

(27

see Cornill) tells

how Judah bartered wheat

with

as well

honey, oil,

and

(see

which illustrates the tradition in

(see

COT)

that there were bazaars (see

RADE

TRANGER

for Israelitish merchants in Damascus,

and for those of Damascus in Samaria. I t is strange,
but true, that in the very period to which this last notice
refers, there arose

popular reaction against the precious

legacies of Canaanitish civilisation (see R

ECHABITES

T h e Assyrian conquest of Samaria naturally checked
for a time the cultivation of the soil

25,

lions),

the colonists introduced by Sargon and
being imperfectly adapted to their new home.

I n

under Gedaliah the Jews gathered wine and summer

Even

the English

version

which

sometimes

hides

metaphors

as,

evil '-translated 'deviseth,

Prov.

Am. 9

; Hos.

Mic. 44 Jer. 31

;

Zech.

; Mal.

The implements found at Tell-el-Hesy appear to carry us

back

the earliest days.

R P

ser.

and

Brugsch,

under

the

Pharaohs

167.

similar relation in

time

AGRIPPA

fruits very much (Jer.

and had stores of wheat,

barley, oil,

honey, carefully hidden in the ground

(Jer.

8).

Is.

mention is for the first time

explicitly made of

threshing instrument with teeth

but whether this was of recent introduction it is

impossible to determine. On the

of the Babylonian

power the old relations with Tyre were doubtless renewed

cp Is. 23

1518).

The imperial tribute, however,

regarded as heavierthan the agricultural resourcesof the

country could then well bear (Neh.

3f.

This tribute

may have been partly in money

4),

but

also

apparently

to a considerable extent in produce (Neh.

In Joel, of course, there is a description of agricultural
distress, but in such a way as to

that agriculture

was in

receiving full attention. In Eccles. ( 2

)

there is acquaintance,

in other things,

in agri-

culture, with several artificial contrivances.

T o

go into

the detailed accounts of the Mishna is beyond the
present purpose.

For complete bibliographies see the larger Cyclopaedias,

and

Of special treatises may he mentioned

that in vol. 29 of the

of Ugolinus;

17.

Literature.

ofspecial articles, on agriculture in general,
in Mod. Palestine Anderlind,

Klein,

hut

Post

;

on thk plough, Schumacher,

;

on sickles,

no. 193, 1892, p.

and Plate I., fig.

;

on threshing

Wetzstein,

1873,

Wetzstein in Del.

on the sieve, Wetzstein, Z D P V

;

place in

literature,

Ungewitter, Die land

wirthschaftlichen Bilder

poet.

1885)

;

on later usage, Hermann Vogelstein

Die

deer

(Berlin,

dissertation that did not reach the writer 'till

this article had been written.

AGRIPPA

See

AMILY

AGUR

Pesh.;

but

and Vg.,

translating,

an author of moral verses (Prov.

301).

His

name is variously explained as hireling of wisdom
(Bar

and collector of words of Torah (Midr.

par..

6).

Such theories assume that Solomon

the author of the verses, which (see P

ROVERBS

)

impossible. All the description given of him in the
heading

the author of wise poems (read, not

but

with

Cheyne, Bickell). Very possibly

the name is a pseudonym. The poet who takes up
his parable' in

expresses sentiments very different

from those of Agur

he seeks to counteract the bold

and scarcely Israelitish sentiments of his predecessor.

See

Ew.,

;

Che.,

and Solomon

A T

; and, with cautio:,

the

O T

131

AHAB

'father's brother,' cp Ahiam

and the Assyr. woman's name,

and see Wi.

1898,

Heft

also

[for

an inscrip-

tion from Safa

[BAL],

once]

Assyr.

)

Son

of Omri, and Icing of Israel

B.C.

HRONOLOGY

32, and table in

37).

The im-

portance of this king's reign

shown by the large

space devoted to it in the Book of
T o obtain a just idea of his character,

however, is not easy, the Israelitish traditions being

derived from two very different sources, in one of
which the main interest was the glorification of, the

while the other was coloured by patriotic

ngs, and showed a strong partiality for the brave and

bold king. T o the former belong

and

the latter, chaps. 20 and

Both groups of narratives

are very old

;

but the former is more difficult than the

latter to understand historically.

chaps. 20 and 22

Cp Noldeke, 'Verwandtschaftsnamen

Personennamen

(

See

NGS

$ 8 , and cp Ki. Gesch. 2

[ET.

Cp also

ROVERBS

EMUEL

. K.

AHAB

seem to get nearer to the facts of history than

chaps,

17-19,

21 at the same time we must remember that

even  here  we  have  to deal,  not  with  extracts  from  the
royal  annals,  but  with  popular  traditions  which  are
liable  to  exaggeration,  especially at  the  hands  of  well-
meaning  interpolators.'

The story of Ahab in his

relation to Elijah has been considered elsewhere (see

W e can hardly deny that the writer

exalts the prophet to the disadvantage of the king. Ahab

was not an irreligious

but his interests

He wished to see

Israel free and prosperous, and he did

not

believe that  the  road  to  political salvation and  physical
ease  lay  through  the  isolation  of  his  people  from  all
foreign  nations.

The most pressing danger to Israel

seemed to him to lie in its being slowly but surely
Aramaised, which would involve the depression and per-
haps the ultimate extinction of its national peculiarities.

Both under Baasha and under Omri, districts of Israelitish
territory had been annexed to the kingdom of

Damas-

cus, and it seemed to Ahab to be his life's

to guide

himself, not by the requirements of

prophets,

but by those of political prudence.

Hence he not only

maintained a firm hold on Moab, bnt also made himself
indispensable as an ally to the king

Judah, if he did

not even become, in a qualified sense, his suzerain (see

) .

Besides this, he formed a close

alliance with

king of Tyre (Jos.

viii.

whose daughter Jezebel

he married.

The

object of this alliance

was

doubtless the improvement of

Israel's commerce.

T h e drawback of it was that it

required on Ahab's part an official recognition of the

(commonly known

Melkart), which

was the more offensive because the contrast  between the
cultus  even  of  the  Canaanitish  Baalim and  that of  the
God of  Israel was becoming stronger and stronger, owing
to the prophetic reaction against the earlier fusion of  wor-
ships.  Ahab  himself  had  no  thought  of  apostatising
from

nor did he destroy the altars

and slay his prophets.

Indeed, four hundred prophets

are said to have prophesied before him when

he set out on his fatal journey to Ramath Gilead. His
children, too, receive the significant names

Athaliah,

Ahaziah, and Jehoram.

But for

its moral dangers, we might call it thoroughly
able.

I t

was

of urgent importance to recover the

lost Israelitish territory and to secure the kingdom of

Israel against foreign invasion. If Israel were absorbed
by Damascus, what would become of the worship of

T o this question Elijah would have given the

answer which

MOS

18)

gave after him

'Perish

Israel, rather than that the commandments of
should be

Jezebel's judicial murder of

tame acquiescence showed Elijahwhat

might be expected from the continued combination of
two heterogeneous religions. I t was for the murder

Naboth that Elijah threatened king

with

We must begin, however, with a n analysis of the narratives.

Van Doorninck

pp.

has made it highly

probable that the narrative of the siege of Samaria and the

of Aphek in

K. 20 has received many interpolations tending to

make the deliverance of the Israelites more wonderful, in addition
to those already pointed out

We.

and Kue.

25, n.

io).

Of Baalath, the female counterpart of Baal the Hebrew

tradition makes n o mention.

who has

introduced into 1 K. 18

the words

the prophets of the

which are wanting in the M T of

though

supplied

omits

(cp

We.

Klo.

Sa.

367; Ki. in Kau.

HS).

course. Baalath mav have had her cultus bv the side of Baal.

were mainly secular.

W e can understand Ahab's point of view.

hut

in such a

to strike

observers.

could either Baalath or

father had been

priest of Astarte, Jos.

have

been called the

contemporary writer.

Note that

K. 21

which

(

)

the whole house of

is threatened and

the punishment is connected with

Ahab's religious

no part of the

old

narrative (see

AHAB

Ahab took advantage of the blow dealt to the power

Damascus at Karkar to shake

off

the suzerainty

Benhadad:

far, at least, it seems reasonable to

follow Wellhausen.

But it is not likely that, consider-

ing

the threatening attitude of Assyria, Benhadad

would  have  thought  it  prudent  to  fritter  away  his
strength  on  those  furious  attacks  on  Israel  to which
Wellhausen  refers

it is not likely, in short, that the

siege of Samaria and the battle of Aphek are to
be placed after 854

B.c.

It may be asked, if they

are not placed thus, where are we to find room for
them ?

IC.

23-34,

Ahab is represented as gaining

the mastery over Benhadad, who has to make most
humiliating concessions to him. After such

success,

how can we account for Ahab's enforced presence

Karkar as vassal of Benhadad? The answer is that
tradition selects its facts, and that the facts which

it  selects  it  idealises  as  an  artist  would  idealise  them.
W e  may admit  that  Ahab, in his obstinate  and  patriotic
resistance  to  Damascus,  was  not  unvisited  by  gleams
of  good  fortune;  but  the  fact,  which  tradition  itself
records,  that  he  was  once  actually  besieged  in  his
capital,  cannot  have  stood  alone.

other

misfortunes in war  tradition  is silent  but we can  easily
imagine that the  power  which  was  too  strong  for  Omri
was  at  last  able to  force  his

son

to send a large con-

tingent to the army which was to meet Shalmaneser at

Karkar.

That the siege of Samaria, at any rate, was

854

.C.

is rendered probable by the criticism given

elsewhere (see

of the narrative in

I n particular, the kings of the Hittites and of

who are referred to in

are just those with

whom Benhadad would have to deal before

854

while Shalmaneser was still occupied at a distance.

T h e above solution of the historical problem is that

of Winckler, which unites elements of Wellhausen's
view and of that of Kittel.

The last-named critic deserves credit for aningenious explana-

tion (Gescli.2232) of the magnanimity attributed to Ahab in

K. 20

will be remembered that, according to Kittel,

Ahab sent forces to

of his own accord, not as a vassal of

Benhadad. This enables him to suggest that the king of Israel

may have spared his rival's life in order to enlist him in a
coalition against Assyria, the idea of which (according to this

hypothesis) was Ahah's.

must he confessed, however, that

this

view

ascribes more foresight to Ahab than, according to

MOS

was possessed

the Israelites even at a later

day, and it was certainly unknown to the compiler of our

traditions, who makes no mention of the battle of

W e may regard it, then, as highly probable that the

battle of

was fought at some time in the three

years without war between Syria and Israel mentioned
in

T h e numbers of the force assigned by

in his inscription to Ahab

chariots,

and it was probably for this,

for other unrecorded

moral offences of Ahab and the partizans of Baal, that
the uncourtly prophet

never prophesied good

concerning Ahab, but evil

( I

T o what precise period of Ahab's reign his encounters

with Elijah belong, we are not told.

Nor

is it at all

certain to which years the events recorded in

K. 20 are to

be referred.

the popular traditions further reference

is made elsewhere (see I

SRAEL

, H

ISTORY OF,

Suffice it to say here that they show us Ahab's better
side we can understand from them that to such a king

much could be  forgiven.  Our remaining
space will be devoted  to  the  two inscrip-
tions  relative  to  episodes  in  the  life  of

T h e earliest record comes from M

OAB

King Mesha informs us in his

inscription

8 )

that Moab had  been  made  tributary to  Israel  by Omri,
and  that  this  subjection  had  continued  during  Omri's
days and half of  his son's  days, forty years,:  after  which
took  place the  great  revolt

How this state-

ment is to be reconciled with that in K.

need not

be here considered.  I t  is, at any rate, clear that the loss of
the large Moabitish tribute, and  of  the contingent which
Moab would have to furnish  to  Israelitish  armies,  must

have been felt by  Ahab severely.  The
second  mention  of  this  king  occurs in
the  Monolith  Inscription  of

NESER

I n the list there

given of the allied kings of Syria whose forces were
defeated by

at the battle of

(near

the river Orontes) in

854

occurs the name of

which, as most scholars are now agreed,

can only mean Ahab of Israel (or, as Hommel thinks,
of Jezreel). Two important questions arise out of this

(

)

Did Ahab join Bir'idri

I . ) of Damascus of his

own accord, jealousies being
ised by dread of a common foe?

or was he a vassal of

bound to accept the

foreign  policy  of  his  suzerain  and  to  support  it  with
(or  at  any  rate  through)  his  warriors  on  the  field  of
battle?  The  former  alternative  is  adopted  by
and M'Curdy  the latter by  Wellhausen  and  Winckler.
T o   discuss  this  here  at  length  is  impossible.

The

remarks of Wellhausen will seem to most students very
cogent.

If feelings of hostility existed at all between

Ahab and Benhahad, then Ahab could not do otherwise
than congratulate himself that in the person of

11.

there had arisen against Benhadad

enemy

who would be able to keep him effectually in check.
That Shalmaneser might prove dangerous to himself
probably

not at that time occur to him but if it

had, he would still have chosen the remote

preference

to the immediately threatening evil.

For

it was the

political existence of Israel that was at stake in the
struggle with Damascus.'

Cp B

HADAD

does

not

follow, however, that we must give Well-

answer to the second question, which is

( z )

Are

the events related

20 22,

with

the exception of the contest for Ramath
Gilead, to be placed before or after the
battle

Karkar

(854

B . C . ) ?

It is, no

doubt, highly plausible

suppose that

For a somewhat different view, see

RONOL

Against

view, that Ahab is mentioned

mis-

take of the Assyrian scribe instead of Joram, cp Schr. K G F

T h e form

may' he illustrated

the vocalisation

Ch.

which Lag.

thinks may

represent the original pronunciation rather than

however after adopting this view of the course of events

in his narrative,

round, and with some hesitation indicates

his preference for the view of Kamph.

der

held also formerly by We., according to which the As-

syrian

confounds Ahah with his son Jehoram

(Hist.

On the whole question cp Schr. K G F

the conservative critic

3379).

On the other side, see M'Curdy,

Hist.

61.

as compared with those assigned

other

deserve attention.

is possible,

doubt,

Winckler suggests, that

contingents from Judah and Moab were reckoned
among the warriors of Ahab.

This does not, however,

greatly diminish the significance of  the numbers.  After
all,  the  men  of  Judah  were  southern  Israelites.  Even
if  Moabitish warriors  were  untrustworthy  against  a foe
such

Benhadad, there is no reason to doubt that the

men of Judah would sooner see Israel free from Benhadad
than swallowed up by its deadly foe.

Ahab was

certainly no contemptible antagonist in
respect to the number of warriors he

could bring into the field.

He himself, like David

was 'worth ten thousand,' and the dread

with which he inspired the Syrians is strikingly shown
in the account of his last campaign.

W e read that

50 ;

and 3rd ed. p. 71.

Bir'idri (Benhadad) has

chariots,

horsemen,

men (Schrader,

C O T

1186).

That Jehoshaphat's military support of Ahab was not

altogether voluntary is surmised by We. and positively asserted
by Wi.

That it only hegan a t the expedition to Ramath

Gilead is too hastily supposed by Ki.

232

[ET, 2

AHARAH

Benhadad  charged  the captains of  his  chariots  to  fight
neither  with  small  nor  great,  save  only  with  the  king
of  Israel,’ and  that  when  they thought  they had
him  they  ‘surrounded  him

to fight against him’

(

I t was not, however, by a device of

human craft that the great warrior was to die.

A chance

shot from

bow pierced

Ahab‘s

T h e grievous

wound prompted the wish to withdraw

but for the

king in his disguise

(v.

30)

withdrawal was impossible,

for the battle became hot and the

pressed on

from behind.

The dying king stood the whole day

through, upright and armed as he was, in his chariot.
At sunset he died, and when the news spread

‘

The king

dead’

the whole Israelitish army

melted away.

it became scat-

tered abroad, as sheep that had no shepherd

’

17).

The dead body of the king was carried to Samaria and

AHASUERUS

A brief reference is made in

to Ahab‘s

luxury, which confirms the reading of

Jer. 2215 :

Art thou a true king because

with Ahab

M T

an indignant protest addressed by Jeremiah

Jehoiachin

(so

Cornill

in SBOT,

who enters into the

text-critical points more thoroughly than Giesebrecht).

[BKAQ], perhaps the

most

correct form

see N

AMES

In Jer.

is clearly a scribe’s

error Eastern MSS have

) Son

and fellow-exile of Jehoiachin (Jer. 29

He and

another exile (Zedekiah) fed the fanaticism of the Jews
with false hopes of a speedy return.

They were

denounced by Jeremiah, who predicted for them a
violent death at the hands of Nebuchadrezzar.

W e

learn more about them from the writer (probably the
editor of the

of Jeremiah) who inserted

It was in his time, perhaps, a matter of notoriety

that Ahab and

had suffered the

punish-

ment of being burned alive (cp Saulmugina’s fate,
177).

Therefore, he makes Jeremiah refer to this, and

at the same time accuse the false prophets of having
led a profligate life, in accordance with the idea
which underlies Gen.

Lev.

Cp Cornill,

AHARAH

Ahrah

[Ginsb.]),

third son of B

AMIN

Ch.

See

HIRAM

name

an obscure part

the genealogy of J

UDAH

( I

Ch.

AHASAI,

or rather as RV,

some

MSS

and edd.

shortened form of Ahaziah

om. BA,

a priest-

lyname in a list of inhabitants of Jerusalem (see

ZRA

ii.

Neh.

iszpioy

[A],

which

is probably a corruption of Jahzeiah (see J

AHAZIAH

AHASBAI

See E

LIPHELET

AHASUERUS

in Kt. of Esth.

the

following the Palestinian reading, have

An Ahasuerus is mentioned in

in Ezra

4 6

and

Dan. 9

and in Esther he is one

leading

Heb. text).

of Esther he is mentioned

T h e

readings of

are :

22 38,

the words

washed his chariot in the pool of

Samaria and the dogs licked his blood,’

etc.,

are an interpolation

intended to explain how the dogs could lick

blood (which

must

have heen dried

in the long journey from Ramah) and

fulfil the prediction of 2119. But this was to happen at

Jezreel, not at Samaria (We.

360).

The

indicate that

omits the proper name,

which is sometimes inserted by

The

indicate that the editions following the Palestinian reading omit
the second

;

Dan.

[Theod hut

also Syr.

;

in Esther

[ a

text of

the L X X

which see

below] but

text of

and

once],

I n Ezra

6 ,

where he is a king of Persia whose

reign fell between that of Koresh (Cyrus) and that
of

(Artaxerxes

he can hardly

be any other than the king called

in the

Persian inscriptions (Persep.,

Van),

an Aramaic inscription

.c.]

from Egypt

(CIS

and

by the Greeks (cp above, readings

of Dan. 91). This name, which to Semites presented
difficulties

pronunciation, was distorted likewise

by the Babylonians in a variety of ways.

As Prof.

Bezold has informed the writer of the present article,
we find on Babylonian tablets not only

forms

but also

and

with the substitution of w fory, as in

I n other oases also the O T uses

to represent the

Persian

at the beginning of words. The inser-

tion of

before the final

rendered the pronunciation

easier to the Hebrews

but whether the vowel was

contained in the original form of the Hebrew texts we
cannot

T h e Ahasuerns of the Book of Esther is

king

Persia

Media

( 1 3

whose kingdom extends

from India to Ethiopia and consists of 127 satrapies

has

his capital at Shushan in Elam.

H e

fond of splendour and display, entertaining

his nobles and princes for 180 days, and afterwards

the people of his capital for seven

six) days

He keeps an extensive harem

his

wives being chosen from

all the ‘fair young

virgins’ of the empire

12-14).

a ruler he

arbitrary and unscrupulous

( 3

and

All

this agrees well  enough with  what  is  related  of  Xerxes
by  classical  authors,  according  to  whom  he  was  an
effeminate and  extravagant,  cruel and  capricious despot
(see

STHER

) .

This is the prince, son of Darius

Hystaspis

whom the author of Esther

seems to have had in mind.

There has been

attempt

to show, from the chronological data which he gives, that
he knew the history of Xerxes accurately. H e tells

that Esther was raised to the throne in the tenth month
of the seventh year

Ahasuerus

after having

spent twelve months in the ‘house of the women’
( 2

The command to assemble all the fair

virgins in his palace ( 2

must, therefore, have been

promulgated in his sixth year.

But, in what is usually

as the sixth year of his

480

he was still in Greece.

could not, therefore, issue a

decree from Shushan till the following year.

This can

be regarded

the sixth

his reign only by not counting

the year of his accession, and taking 484 as the first of

reign.

I t

not impossible that the Persians

have taken over from the Babylonians the practice (see

HRONOLOGY

of reckoning the whole of the year,

the

of which

change of ruler occurred, to

the  late  king  but  it  is not  known  as a  fact.  I n   this
uncertainty  we  shall  do well  to suppose that  the author
of  Esther has arbitrarily assumed his chronological data,

and that his occasional coincidences with history are
accidental merely.

For the Ahasuerus who

called the father of

Darius the Mede in Dan. 9

see D

ARIUS

heard, (Tob.

of the destruction of

Nineveh by

and Ahasuerus

RV,

[B],

[A],

but ‘Achiacharus, king of Media’

2).

See

OBIT

OOK O

-W.

H. K.

Cp Strassmaier,

des

sect.

for a form corresponding to

warsh?) found on Babylonian contract tablets.

See further

where

is proposed as

original

form.

AHAVA

AHAZ

One man, Isaiah ben

had kept his head cool

amid this excitement.

He assured Ahaz on the

authority  of  the  God  of  prophecy  that
the  attempt  of  Rezin  and  Pekah  would
be  abortive  and  that  Damascus  and

Samaria themselves would almost immediately become
a

prey to the Assyrian soldiery (Is.

4-9

168

H e hade Ahaz be wary and preserve his composure

take no rash step, but quietly perform

his regal duties, trusting in

When the

news came that Ahaz had hurriedly offered himself as

humble vassal to Assyria in return for protection

from Rezin, Isaiah changed his tone.

H e declared

that Judah itself, having despised the one means of
safety (faith in

and obedience to his commands),

could  not  escape  punishment  at  the  hands  of  the
Assyrians.  Under  a  variety  of  figures he described the
havoc  which  those  dreaded warriors would  produce  in

description to which a much later writer has

added some touches of his own

(vv.

see

SBOT).

Was Ahaz right or wrong in seeking the protection

of Assyria

Stade has remarked that he acted as any

AHAVA

place

[AL]) or, as in the parallel

Esd.

841

HERAS

;

om. B

[A]

[L]) and Ezra

82131

aoys

Esd. 8

for the young men,'

[BAL],

apparently

for

861

(Theras,

his  caravan  before  its  departure  for  Jerusalem.  The
site and  the  river  remain  unidentified.  W e  know that
both were  in  the  Euphrates  basin,  and  that C

ASIPHIA

Jos.

Ant.

xi.

see Be-Rys,

was not very far

off.

T h e form Theras (see above)

seems to have arisen from

)

for

which is the

reading of some

MSS

for

shortened form of

the

of the inscriptions : see

220).

see

also

below,

end, Jos.

[Vg.

and

Mt.

1 9

Son of

and

eleventh king of Judah

RONOLOGY

and table in

37).

He was young, perhaps

only twenty years of age

K. 16

when he ascended

the throne, and appears already to have struck
observers such as Isaiah bya want of manliness which was
quite consistent with tyranny

(Is. 3

T h e event

seems to have been regarded by Rezin (or rather Rezon)
of Damascus

favourable to his plan for uniting Syria

and Palestine in a league against Assyria.

Pekah, who

had just become king of Israel by rebellion and
assassination,

only too glad to place himself at the

disposal  of  Rezin, who  alone  could  defend  him  from
Tiglath-pileser's  wrath  at  the  murder  of  an  Assyrian
vassal.  Rezin and Pekah, therefore, marched southward,
-being safe for  the moment  from an Assyrian invasion

-with the object of forcing Judah to join their league

( 2

Is.

cp I

SAIAH

, i.

They could

feel no confidence, however, in any promise which they
might extort from Ahaz.

For Ahaz, who, unlike Rezin,

had no personal motive for closing his eyes to the
truth,

was

conscious of the danger of provoking Assyria.

Let

us,

then, said Rezin and Pekah, place a creature

of our own, who can be trusted to serve us, on the
throne of Judah (Is.

76).

Their nominee is called

(see

whom the language ascribed to

the allies hardly

us to identify with

H e

was probably one of

courtiers, and thus (what a

disgrace to Judah!) a mere Syrian governor with the
title of king.

The attempt to

Jerusalem was a

failure. The fortress proved too strong to he taken by

and to have prolonged the siege, in view of the

provocation

to Assyria and the terrible

ness of Assyrian vengeance, would have been imprudent.
Ahaz, too, in his alarm (which was fully shared by the

had already made this vengeance doubly

certain  by sending  an  embassy  to  Tiglath-pileser  with
the message,  I am thy slave and  thy son : come up and
deliver  me'

( 2

this verse should be read

mediately after

Ch. 28

,some

MSS

and Pesh. read 'twenty.

five' for 'twenty.

is more natural in view of the age

assigned to

a t his accession. The)' five' may, however,

have crept in from 27

A T

73-75

cp, however, I

SRAEL

OF,

See

Is.

86.

The latter passage is partly corrupt; but

a t least, that the people of Judah are reproved

power to save his people, and 'desponding

because of Rezin and hen-Remaliah.' The 'waters of
are a symbol

Yahwb (cp Ps. 46 4

Is. 33

See Che.

Isaiah'

The interpretation of

which paraphrases

(AV

and

RV,

ungrammatically, 'rejoice in

is certainly wrong though supported

some eminent names

Ew., Kne.,

Si.),

for it is opposed

to Is.

Even were the supposition that there was a

large party

in the capital favourable to Rezin and Pekah more

plausible than it is it would still be unwise tb base the sup-
position on a

strangely expressed and of such question-

able accuracy as Is. 8

If the statement of the compiler in

that Ahaz

reads 'twenty.'

other king would have acted in his

the other hand,

Robertson Smith

that the advice of Isaiah

displayed no less political sagacity than elevation

faith.'

If Ahaz had

not

called in the aid

pileser, his own interests would soon have compelled
the Assyrian to strike at Damascus; and

so,

if the

king had had faith to accept the prophet's

assurance  that  the  immediate  danger  could  not  prove
fatal,  he  would  have  reaped  all  the  advantages  of  the
Assyrian alliance without finding himself  in  the perilous
position of

vassal to the robber empire. As yet the

schemes of Assyria hardly reached as far

Southern

Palestine.'

There is some force in this. T h e sending

of tribute to Assyria was justifiable only as a last
resource.

T o take such a step prematurely would

show

disregard of the interests of the poorer class,

which would suffer from Assyrian exactions severely.
I t is doubtful, however, whether the plans of Assyria
were as narrowly limited as is supposed.
did not, even after receiving the petition of Ahaz,

Damascus instantly. First of all he invaded

and

Northern Arabia.

W e

shall

have occasion to refer again to the important

chapter of Isaiah which describes the great
between the

and the prophet (see I

SAIAH

b).

Suffice it to say that we misunderstand Isaiah if
we connect his threat of captivity in chap.

too closely

with the foreign policy of Ahaz.

It was not the foreign

policy  but  the  moral weakness of  Ahaz and  his  nobles
which  had  in  the  first  instance drawn  forth this  threat
from  Isaiah

(Is.

58-16). Nor can we venture to doubt

that, if  Ahaz had satisfied  the moral standards of  Isaiah,
this would have had some effect on the prophet's  picture
of  the future.

Visions and tidings of men of God

such as Isaiah are not merely political forecasts

they

are adjusted to the

and mental state both of

him who speaks and of those who hear.

It is not to Isaiah or to a disciple of Isaiah, but to

the royal annalist, that we owe the notice that the

tribute of Ahaz was derived from
the treasury of the palace and of

the temple, and that Ahaz did not spare even the sacred
furniture

I t would be interesting to

know  whether  he  sent  the  brazen  oxen  on  which  the
brazen  sea'  had  hitherto  rested  (they  were  copies  of
Babylonian  sacred  objects,  and  properly  symbolised
Marduk) to

or whether he melted

offered up his son

and Symm. say 'his sons,' with

Ch. 28

is correct, we may perhaps assign the fearful act to

this

W R S

265 ;

cp Kittel

2 346

(near foot).

the text of

is corrupt, see

Z A T W

6 163.

AHAZIAH

down  for  himself.  I t   is  more  important,  however, to
notice that  this time,  apparently, the tribute for Assyria
was  provided  without  any  increase  in  the  taxation.

Isaiah, we may suppose, would have approved of this.

Isaiah’s forecasts were verified, not, indeed, to such

much modern speculation about the prophetic

books demands, but as far as his own generation required.
Damascus fell

Samaria had a breathing

till

722

and, according to Sennacherib, there was a

partial captivity of Judah in the next reign.

It was after

the first of these events that Ahaz first came

contact

with an Assyrian king.

734

the name of

Judah occurs among the names

the kings who had

paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser but we have no reason
to suppose that he paid it

person.

I t

was

after the fall of Damascus, that he paid homage

person

to his suzerain.

this occasion he saw the altar that

was at Damascus’

and, on aesthetic grounds,

liked it better than the bronze altar which had hitherto
been used at Jerusalem for burnt offerings.

I t was

probably an Assyrian altar, for the Assyrians on
principle

their own cultus into conquered

cities. So Ahaz sent a model of the altar to the chief
priest Uriah (cp Is.

who at once

an altar

upon the pattern, and transferred the old altar to a new
position. This was, doubtless, against the will of Isaiah,
who in his earliest extant prophecy

strongly denounces

the love of foreign fashions.

Possibly at the same

time Ahaz borrowed the sun-dial (if EV rightly para-
phrases the expression,

‘

the steps of Ahaz’ ; see, how-

ever, D

IAL

). Nor

likely that Ahaz paused

suggestive allusion to the addiction of Ahaz to foreign

worship is traceable in

but there is

textual

difficulty in the passage (see Kaniphausen’s note in Kau.

The reign of Ahaz was inglorious, but

the whole

peaceful.

was a severe blow to the commerce of

Judah when Rezin,

the accession of Ahaz, attacked

and captured

(on the Arabian Gulf), and restored

it  to  its  former  possessors,  the  Edomites  ; but  at  the
close  of  Ahaz’s  reign  Isaiah  was  able  to  contrast  the
peace  enjoyed  by

‘

the poor of

people’ with

the chastisement inflicted by Assyria on the restless

Philistines.

Document Outline