PSSACHAR

ISSACHAR

des

'99-Appendices 305

K.

Budde,

Bucher

Richter

Samuel,

F.

mente

Gesch.,

H.

Wright

W a s Israel

in Egypt? '95

,

A.

H.

Sayce, The

History

of

the

Hebrews, '97

and the Surround-

ing Nations,

; Fr. Hommel Ancient Hebrew

Illustrated by

the

Monuments)

A. Freiherr von

'98 H.

.

E.

Archinard,

et

la

et

de

de

de

M.

L e

David, '97 H. Winckler,

'98;

W.

Robertson Smith

Israel and

in

'95

Israel

in

A. van

Hoonacker.

de

'96

A: Kuenen,

(from the Dutch

K. Budde,

Ed. Meyer,

des

96

W.

Studien,

B.

der

and

'93

;

H.

Gricchen

der

'95

F. P.

The Empire of

the

:

E. Schiirer.

Bd. 5

A. Bertholet,

Die

der

'96

Chevne.

a f t e r

the

Exile. '08

:

B. Stade.

a'.

K. Budde

t o

the

Actenstuck

jiidischen Rriege

27

;

A. Schlatter,

'

Die

Tage Trajan's und

ed.

by

A. Schlatter and

H.

Cremer,

1

3

heft. See also

P

ROPHECY

,

and other special articles.

G.

ISSACHAR

[BAL], some-

times

;

in Rev.

7 7

some

MSS

;

Jos.

on the name see below,

3,

6

end),

apparently the name borne by the

of the tract

lying between the highlands of Ephraim

on

the

S.

and

those of Naphtali on the

N.

between the lowlands of

Zebulun on the NW. and the deep Jordan valley

on

the

E.

Issachar finds prominent mention in the present text

of the battle-song

i n

5.

It would be natural that

the struggle should fall there.

I t is noteworthy, however, that whilst

21

(

I

Ch.

6 7 2

assigns

Daberath to

Josh.

places it

of Zebulun. Moreover, in the passage where Issachar
is mentioned in Judg.

5

the text is uncertain.

There

is

no quite unambiguous evidence that Deborah or
Daberath (whether

a

person or

a

town) or Barak,

to Issachar (see D

EBORAH

,

2

Can

there have been

a

desire to suppress the name

of

Issachar? I t is not quite impossible. The writer to

whom is due the enumeration of tribes

by

Gideon (Judg.

6

35)

and of tribes that gathered together

to

pursue

if rightly represented by

omits Issachar-the very tribe which, one would sup-
pose, would be most intimately concerned, and (if
we suppose that Purah is

a

corruption of Puah; see

I

may have supplied Gideon with his

attendant.

Similarly, Issachar is allowed no part

in

the

fight described

i n

Judg.

4.

Still more strange, perhaps,

is the omission of the same tribe from the list of those
summarily told of in the latter part of Judg.

More-

over in the

'

Blessing of Jacob

'

the reference to Issachar

is rather disparaging, and in both the

'

Blessings

char yields precedence to Zebulun, although in Gen.

30

Issachar is the elder of the brothers.

this acci-

dental ?

Issachar's being

a

Leah-tribe associates it with

Zebulun (cp the

of the two

Dt.

and they are mentioned together in the
Song of Deborah (Judg.

5

)

: their

territories were contiguous.

What is

Or can

a

reason be found ?

Moore Budde and others.
C.

Wi. G I 2

3

Of

course

text may be corrupt see

I

,

where

it is proposed to read Issachar in the Gideon

for

suggests that Issachar may have been included

in Joseph

Bu.

and Moore

49)

suggest that

it was

through accident

or design

in

abridgment.

noteworthy, however, is that the 'Blessing

of

Moses'

connects the tribes not as comrades in war (as in Judg.

5 )

but

as

guardians of a great religious fair (Dt.

33

)

as

if they had formed a northern confederation like that

of Shechem which had its religious centre, according t o
Winckler

( G I

on Shechem's sacred mountain.

On

what mountain such

a

gathering of northern clans may

have been held does not appear

possibly

on

Tabor

(Herder, Graf, Steuernagel

7)

or

(Knohel,

Nor

have we any clue

as

to the deity who

thus honoured,

we can venture to find a veiled

hint in

a

well-known story connected with the birth of

Issachar and Zebulun.

Reuben found

(see M

ANDRAKE

).

These

naturally belonged to Leah, the fruitful mother

Rachel bartered for a share.

Issachar and Zebulun were

born to Leah, Joseph to Rachel. Whatever be the mean-
ing of Reuben's-being assigned to Leah (see R

EUBEN

),

the tribe

mixed

up

with

G

AD

Mesha

tells

us

12)

that when he took Ataroth from Gad h e

carried

off

which implies a cult of some kind.

T h e Gadite cult may have been shared by Reuben : un-
less, indeed, 'Reuben' in Gen.

3 0 1 4

was

originally 'Gad,'

birth has just been told of

: Gad could h e

called

son.

If there underlies the story of the

the fact of an old cult, it

i s

a

little difficult t o

extricate it naturally; but it is noteworthy that the

Issacharite tribal hero Tola, or his clan Puah, is said
to be son of Dodo

;

the text -of the passage,

however,

is

doubtful see 7).

I t seems certain that

etymology connected the

name Issachar with

Hebrew root

'wages (cp

the gloss

6

[BAL] and

Jos.

and in

form of the

theory the hire had to do with the mandrakes (Gen.

30

I t has been thought that religious ideas some-

times led to the omission of certain tribe-names ( c p
G

AD

,

2).

If the omission of Issachar was inten-

tional, the reason may have been political (see below,

but implications involved in the ' D u d a ' story

might be enough. Or if the connection of the name
with

an

Egyptian god Sokar (which

is

in fact one of

the alternatives proposed by C.

Ball,

SBOT

on Gen.

30

; see below,

6)

was held by some in ancient

times, it is barely possible that this

may

have been

advantageous'to the tribe.

T h e first syllable of Issachar may possibly have been taken

by

J

to be the Hebrew word

(so

We. TBS, p.

v

also

and

Ball,

the whole name being

as

of

hire.' Another popular explanation may have been

(cp Jer. 31

16

Ch.

15 7 Eccles. 4

;

perhaps also

T h e theory that the name is compound is not impossible (cp

6). M a n y modern writers, however, incline to the view that

is

Thus Ball compares the

Nestle

13

seems to favour Wellhausen's comparison

of the Nabataan name

and Cheyne thinks

sachar is a popular corruption of

which h e

has suggested a s perhaps the

Israel

and of

(see

JACOB,

6 ) :

lies

the Lorders of

Issachar.

On

the second part of the name see further, below,

In

E

Leah gave

her handmaid to Jacob

(v.

The name appears in the consonantal text invariably a s

This is printed

that is with the

but in

different authorities occur the following five other forms

:

(without

on which

see

(cp Baer-Del. Gen.

3

T h e view that the second was meant to show that the

is

not

is supported by

13

Z X

Or.

2

who, however, believes that the was really

T h e

may however be due to 'Volksetyrnologie.'

4

'Sorrel,'

of horses (cp Lane,.

Wi. G I 2

n.

I

)

cp Gen. 49

and note the

Ass):

The phonetic equivalent of Issachar in Arabic

which

a s a

name (see,

3

14)

cp

in a

inscription from

in

( D H M

no.

xxv.

1.4

;

see further Muller's note, p.

48).

3,

n.

ed.

omits.

ISSACHAR

ISSACHAR

If

we judged by appearances we should conclude that

in historical times Issachar played no im-

portant part.

of the kings of Israel,

however, appear to have been men of

Issachar.

There seems to be no

to

doubt that

o n e of the older sources of Kings called Baasha

‘son

of Ahijah, of the house of Issachar

( I

Of

the origin of Omri nothing is said

;

but that he also was

of Issachar is for several reasons not improbable.

If

then there

is

anything in the notion that there was

a

tendency to avoid mentioning Issachar (see above,

it might be suggested that under the Jehu dynasty it

became the fashion to disparage the ‘house of Issachar.’

It would not be strange if this were

so.

the other

hand Jehu himself may have belonged

to

the house of

Issachar.

That would be the most natural explanation of his being

called in inscriptions of Shalmaneser

‘son of Omri’ (KAT

note also the phrase ‘statutes of

’

(Mic.

;

see

O

M

RI

I

)

.

However that may he Jehu was a trusted general

of

’and Jehoram.

The last ’king of the line was slain

near Ibleam. Jehu’s father’s name is given as Jehoshaphat,

the name (not a common one) of the governor of Issachar in the

but

Paruah

probablyrather be Puah, the Issacharclan.4 j e h u

is oftener, however, called son of Nimshi. This is obscure; hut
i f we may explain it on the analogy of the Punic

to

Nimshi would imply the cult of a god

which might be the

‘same as that referred to in the Issacharite

On

the other hand Jehu may have been a southerner.

There are not lacking features of his policy that would fit in

with such a theory (see

J

EHU

and Nimshi may have been n

southern name (cp Abishai,

; and, for the first part of

the name, Naomi and

[I

Ch. 11

Whether the dynasties of Omri and Jehu were from

Issachar or not-and the saying

in

suggests

that Issachar supplied, rather than
employed, gangs of labourers-there
were not wanting influences that

might have enabled men of that tribe to take a leading

place.

If nature has manifestly set Esdraelon

in

the

a r m s of

it has also assigned it a different

lot. Commenting on the Blessing of Issachar (Gen.

4 9 1 4 )

G.

A.

Smith says (p.

3 8 3 )

‘ T o the highlander

looking down

upon

it, Esdraelon is room to stretch in

and he happy.’ T h e most important point, however,

is

that the plain of Megiddo is the natural route from

Sharon

to

the Jordan.

From the earliest times it

contained the sites of fortress towns (see

E

SD

RAELON

).

Though its connection with Ephraim and with Gilead

was very close, we have no hint how it became connected
with Israel perhaps in self-defence against the inroads
of the still unsettled peoples

of

the east

or in

connec-

tion with some other great struggle.’

indeed, may not he strong evidence

confirmatory of M T ;

not be opposedreally.

may be a dittograph of

a.

due to

. .

.

(the

of

for

w a r

of

looks oddly like the end of

adds

of M T after

of

H e was chief general under the ‘house of Issachar,’ and we

a r e

not

told his origin. I t is plain that Ahab had a palace a t

(although ‘which was in Jezreel’

I

K.

21

I

may be an

insertion

om.]), which continued to be the home of the

family. The original owner of the hill of Samaria may have

been an Issacharite (cp the clan of Shimron). I t should not be

ignored that in the

list of Davidic tribal princes,

i h e prince of Issachar is called Omri (

I

Ch. 27

Naturally

in such a list (cp Gray,

no

stress can be laid

on this; hut traditional names do occur in the

:

see Ephraim,

Benjamin. (By a strange coincidence the plain of Megiddo is

now called Merj ihn

Here might he mentioned also

the Phcenician policy of the house of Omri. Cp Smith,

14876 Guthe

3

his

was called Jerohoam.

4

T h e

may be from

which perhaps stood between

a n d

as

and practically in

V .

5

I f the Jehu dynasty also belonged to the house

of

Issachar

a

reason for the rise of a fashion of disparaging

is hard to find.

GASm.

7

Gnthe

who accepts

I

S.

11

as

it stands, infers from

2291

I t appears that at one time the plain of Megiddo was

pretty completely under the power of the Philistines.’

At least, the

who were associated with them

had firmly established themselves at

in

the 12th

Who the people were who

suffered from these intruders we are not told.

It might

be supposed that they would hardly be Israelites, who
probably settled first in the highlands that the strangers
would be interested merely or mainly in the trade-routes
and the cities lying on them, and that it was from them
that these were won by Israel.

That may be so.

The

struggle, echoes of which we find in Judg.

5 ,

may con-

ceivably have had this very result.

more, however,

can we be sure that the land was found in the un-
disturbed possession of ‘Canaanites.’

W e hear

of

the district first in the time of Thotmes

and it

was thereafter more or less continually in the power
of Egypt or contesting that power.

The Amarna

correspondence, however, shows us not only the open
country but also the towns

Megiddo

threatened by the Habiri. T h e one thing that seems
to be clear is that the population must have been
more than usually

It is not impossible that some Egyptians might remain

when Egypt finally withdrew-. At least, there would
be natives or settlers who had, been attached to them
in

one capacity or another, especially mercenaries.

T h e Egyptian derivation of the name Issachar referred
to

above

3 ) ,

therefore,

is

perhaps not quite impossible.

Issachar is the only name of the ‘twelve tribes (besides
Naphtali) from which no gentilic is formed in the

which makes it not improbable that it is a compound
name.

The Moabites knew

a

people as

Ish-gad

G

AD

,

I

) .

I t may be, then, that there

in the Gilboa district

a

community known to their

neighbours by some such name

as

the

men of the god Sakar-as Ish-gad were the men of
the god Gad

(G

A

D

,

Another theory (Che.

not open in the same way

to the

referred to below, regards

as a

popular

euphonic adaptation of a primitive tribal name Ish-heres

man of the sun’ cp the place-name Beth-shemesh (Josh. 19

hut the author

this theory prefers the explanation

mentioned above

3,

end).

T h e difficulty (referred to above) in the way of snpposing

that

‘

Issachar’ contains a reference to a god Sokar, is that, al-

though, according to the

list, a

of the second

dynasty (the

of

bore a name compounded

with that of this deity and such compounds were
(Erman,

in the old empire (cp

de

no. 1359 and others),

there does not appear to he any evidence that the name of this
god was used in forming proper names outside of Egypt.

Saul’s choosing Bezek a s mustering place

(I

S.

11

8)

that he

counted on

from Issachar and the northern tribes.

Bezek, however, is

opposite Jahesh, and Winckler’s argu-

ment (GI2

etc.), that Saul

was

a Jabeshite

S

AUL

),

is

certainly plausible.

if it were to be held, with Cheyne,

that

is a corruption of some other name,

inference is not conclusive

:

the mention of

be a

consequence of the corruption (see

S

AUL

,

I

,

near end).

This statement may stand even if it should be held that the

people referred to in the original

of the story in Sam.

as

holding Israel in subjection

the Philistines.

4

and

where other related changes in the

of

traditional story are proposed.

WMM,

; cp

D

OR

.

3

Guthe thinks that Issachar and Zebulun came from across

Jordan and probably were pushed into their later seats

Joseph’when it followed

4

In the case of

however, in Judg. 10, it

is

just

possible that a final

,

has been lost before the following

Otherwise we must insert

(Moore), or substitute it for

before

It is difficult, a t

all

events to follow Budde

(ad

in regarding the text as sound.

25

8

which he

cites do not seem to be really parallel, the meaning there is

‘the

: here it is ‘ a n Issacharite.’ See, further, the article

See S

A U L

Cp 8, end.

cited below, next col. n. 3.

Of the Egyptian god Sakar not very much

is

known. His

name

is

met with chiefly in combination, as Ptah-Sokar

or

Ptah-Osiris-Sokar. Originally apparently a sun-god, he

of the Memphite Xecropolis,’ ultimately giving

his name to the modern village

(Wiedemann, Petrie).

cited below next col. n. 3.

Of the

god Sakar not very much

is

known. His

name

is

met with chiefly in combination, as Ptah-Sokar

or

Ptah-Osiris-Sokar. Originally apparently a sun-god, he

nphite Xecropolis,’ ultimatelygiving

Petrie).

ISSACHAR

I t

is

true the letters

occur in several proper names

at

:

a god

in a Maktar inscr., Lidzbarski,

149);

1

267 372

but in each case

is preceded by

and the name

(in a

inscription :

Rev.

3,

p. 76

seems to show that the divine name is not

but

Nor is the name

also at Carthage

decisive. There does

not

seem to he any

higuous case of

preceded

a divine name.

is there-

fore probably, as elsewhere, for

(so

We find a Sacar

in

Ch. 11

as

father of

hero

the

H

ARARITE

(of

Arad? Adoral) but in

23 33

Sacar becomes Sharar.

In

I

Ch. 26 a certain Issachar

seventh son of Obed-edom

but there may he dittography :

Similarly in the

case of Sacar, the fourth son

4)

:

The later historyof Issachar is obscure (cp S

CYTHIANS

).

How few people are expressly said to
have belonged to Issachar has been

For an

interesting case see S

HUNAMITE

,

for

a

tradition regarding

N.

Israel’s great

prophet, see H

OSEA

,

9.

With Belemoth, the name

of his supposed birthplace,

Baithemoth men-

tioned below, §

8.

the representatives of Issachar in the list

(I

K.

4)

of Solomon’s

prefects and in the Chronicler’s list

(I

Ch.

David‘s captains

of

trihes (Omri) see above,

5

4,

with footnote (4).

In

Tola we have

a

typical case of the equivalence of

genealogies

’

and annals.

According to Judg.

10

‘Shamir in Mt. Ephraim’ boasted that it was

place of Tola, son

of

Puah,

son

of Dodo, an Issacharite

‘judge’

of

Israel.

I n

P s

‘genealogy’ of Issachar

part of this story appears

as

a

simple list of

For ‘Tola the son of Puah who dwelt

in Shamir’

we find four sons of Issachar : Tola, Puah,

Shimron.

In

the

lists there

nothing equivalent to the

Dodo’ inserted in Judg. 10

I

after Puah. I t is therefore

not

improbable that

Dodo‘ is to be explained as a marginal

note and ‘Mount Ephraim’ as a (perhaps erroneous) gloss

on

or Shimron

cp Gen. 46

26

I

Ch.

7

I

.

It

is not likely that the genealogy contained

a

name

With regard

to

the Issachar clan names

it is

remark-

able that Shamir is

a

precious stone (D

IAMOND

, §

whilst Tola is

a

dye-producing worm, and

Puah,

apparently,

a

dye-producing plant.

On this coincidence

see, further, Z

EBULUN

.

To the

names given

in

the Chronicler adds eleven de-

scendants of Tola, four of whom are ‘sons’

of

Yizrah-yah (cp

above,

3,

end).

P s

geographical details about Issachar are not clear.

Instead of a ‘boundary’

we find a list of towns (omit

AV ‘toward,’

’unto‘-<.e. the

the ver-

sions),

with a fragment of boundary

8.

boundary.

[‘land of

Tabor’?],

some

MSS

:

see

and two

places

:

S

HAHAZUMAH

and B

ETH

-

SHEMESH

. The (thirteen

:

so

towns in the list are

JEZREEL

on a northern promontory

of

C

HESULLOTH

below the hills of

on

the

SW.

slope of

Dahi H

APHARAIM

perhaps

on the hills between Carmel

perhaps

Sha‘in?) across the plain

NW.

of Neb:

Dahi A

NAHARATH

perhaps

on the lower hills west

of

R

ABBITH

(Kidshon?; Tell abu

E

BEZ

R

EMETH

E

N

-G

ANNIM

E

N

-

HADDAH

(for En-harod?,

and

To these places

is

to be added

JARMUTH

21

(I

Ch. 73

which is the third of the four Levitical cities in

Issachar :

(I

Ch.), Daberath,

En-gannim

(I

See also

noted already

4,

begin.).

On

the Issacharite ‘spy’ (Nu.

13

7)

see

I

n.

ITHIEL

According

to

Josh.

(also

P)

Issachar bordered

on

on the

(S.) W.

(cp

E

PHRAIM

,

6),

whilst

according to

( J )

the most important cities in

Issachar (see

Ibleam,

Megiddo (with

with their districts,’ claimed

by Manasseh and eventually made dependent by Israel

Judg.

I

Ch.

H.

W. H.

On

the question of

relative priority of

list

and Judg.

10

I

,

see the article referred to in

n.

3.

the variants see

J

ASHUB

.

See an article

on the genealogy of Issachar and Tola

in

the

3

where,

for example, it is suggested that

Dodo’ possibly means ‘son of his

gloss

to

the fact that Tola is represented as son of

his

younger brother.

reading

in eight minuscules,

is

probably a fragment of

‘

Issachar

or

(see preceding col.

4).

5

almost

unanimously omits

v.

22

6.

MT

reads sixteen.’

Possibly ‘to Tabor’

was read as a place-name : Beth-

bar(?) ;

cp several

This would give sixteen towns.

I

.

AV

an Issacbarite (

I

Ch.

73,

[Bl,

AV

a

Korahite. one of David’s warriors

Ch.

12

6.

See

D

AVID

,

5

11

iii.).

3.

The head

of

the b’ne Rehabiah

(

I

Ch.

om. B,

in

I

Ch.

his name appears as

4.

AV

b.

(Jahaziel), a Levite (

I

Ch. 23

20

of whose sons Zechariah

alone

(ib

24

and

[A],

5.

RV

one

the b’ue

in list of

those with foreign wives (see

E

ZRA

i.,

end); Ezra 1031

Esd. 9

32,

ISSUE

etc.

ISTALCURUS (

[A]),

I

Esd. 840. See

ISUAH

I

Ch.

7

RV

I

SHVAH

.

ISUI

Gen.

4 6 1 7

RV

I

SHVI

.

H

See C

ORNELIUS

,

I

,

and cp

A

R

MY

,

I

O

.

ITALY (

From the age

of

the word

Italy was used

as

a

geographical term

in

the same sense

in which we use it now.

See further R

OME

R

OMANS

.

I t occurs four times in the N T

Acts

‘the Italian

A

RMY

,

C

ORNELIUS

expulsion

ofthe Jews ‘from Italy

‘from

Acts

27

I

Paul’s voyage

t o

Italy,

to

Heb.

‘those

Italy’ (see

H

EBREWS

,

M

EDICINE

.

2 ,

and cp U

THAI

.

ITCH

Dt.

I

Ch.

derivation uncertain, father

of

being perhaps for

cp A

BIEZER

and

I -E Z E R ; but

is

probably

a

fragment of

a

divine name, see I

CHABOD

, J

EZEBEL

;

[BAFL]),

the name of

a

guild of priests which, to judge from

I

Ch.

was

of less importance than that of E

LEAZAR

See G

ENEALOGIES

,

7

[iv.],

and cp

C .

Niebnhr,

d.

I t

is

in

accordance with this that in the priestly genealogies
Ithamar appears

as

the youngest (4th) son

of

Aaron,

Eleazar being the third (Ex.

23

28

I

3

cp Lev.

In

P s

description of the wanderings

Ithamar is represented as superintending the

ites and Merarites

(Nu.

33

78).

T h e

(to which the high-priestly family belonged) are not
under his charge.

The guild

is

mentioned again in

the list of the returning exiles

I

Esd.

[B]).

It is curious to notice that in this passage

the name occurs in connection with the b’ne
and Gershom. The supposition that Eli

was

a

member

of

this guild

is

manifestly uncritical, and has been

shown to rest upon

a

misunderstanding

see

E

L

I

,

ITHIEL

perhaps ‘ E l

is

with me,’ cp

M

ANUEL

and see N

AMES

,

in list of Benjamite in-

habitants

of

Jerusalem (see E

ZRA

§

[I]

a

dittographed

See D

ISEASES

,

3.

See I

TTAI

.

2.

S. A.

C.

€0.

Although the

name

closely parallel

2

its meaning

equally uncertain-‘ Bel exists,’

he

whom Bel leads

to render ‘Bel

is

with me’

is,

of course, Impos-

sible, since

is

not used in Aramaic.

Quoted by Driver

in connection

with

the

mysterious

ITHIEL AND

UCAL

ITHIEL AND UCAL

in

Prov.

30

I

,

where RV renders The words of Agur the

son of Jakeh

the oracle. T h e man saith

Ithiel

and unto Ucal.' I t is usual to retain 'Agur son of
Yakeb as the name of some unknown Jewish or non-
Jewish sage, but to get rid of Ithiel and Ucal by
changes of points or consonants.

Thus

(Kau.

renders

I

(after the heading), ' T h e man

speaks (saying), I wearied myself about God, I wearied
myself about God, and pined away'

so

Del.,

Frank.

).

This, however, implies an unusual construction

of the verb

with

an

accusative.

Delitzsch,

Frankenberg prefer to make

'God,'

a

vocative

but the context does not suggest an address to God.

'

Agur son of Jakeh is almost equally hard to explain.

Toy owns perplexity.

however,

us

on the

right track.

represents

all of

which can still be traced in MT, except that

stands

for the second (see further

The text prob-

ably is, The words of the man (called)
the guilty one,

to

those who believe

God.' Cp

LETH.

T.

K.

C.

ITRLAH (

Josh.

RV,

AV

ITHMAR

a

Moabite, named in David's

list

(

I

ITHNAN

I

O

) ,

a town in the southern part

of

mentioned along with Kedesh and Hazor in

and Ithnan

[A] for Ithnan, Ziph in v.

24

[L]).

See

E

THNAN

.

I

.

A

Horite clan-name, Gen.

[ADE],

I

Ch. 141

[B],

[AL]).

In a genealogy of

4

I

Ch.

7

37

[A],

om.

L).

I n

I

Ch.

38

name apparently recurs as

6

gives

Ithran?) for

the father of

and

39);

see

i.

,

46,

cp

A

BIATHAR

,

J

ETHRO

,

WITH

], and see below

see

49

[Jos.]), the sixth son

of

David by Eglah,

3 5

3 3

[AL]) see D

AVID

,

The name

I

S

J

ERIMOTH

9 )

in

Ch.

11

where

we should probably read

(see M

AHALATH

),

daughter

of

Ithream and of Abihail daughter

of Saul.'

T h e Chronicler, who draws from an older source, not
knowing Abihail (a name corrupted elsewhere into
M

ICHAL

) as

a

daughter of Saul, has emended

into

(Eliab).

Accepting the old view which

identifies Ithream's mother

E

GLAH

with Michal,

Klostermann suggests that Ithream

residue of

a

kinsfolk') described the child of Michal

as

a

repre-

sentative of the almost extinct family of Saul.

In itself

this view is not unplausible (cp

at least if

explanation of Eglah be in some form

accepted; but it seems to the present writer to be
opposed by the analogy of the names Rehoboam,
boam.

T o

explain Rehoboam as

'

the people

wide,'

and Jeroboam as the people increases' (see N

AMES

,

46)

appears arbitrary; a m in such names (when

genuine) is,

at any

rate

in the

period,

presumably

a

divine title (see A

MMON

,

I

) ,

and Ithream ought to

mean the (divine) kinsman is pre-eminence.'

ITHRITES, THE

o

[L]),

a

family

of

Kirjath-jearim,

I

Ch.

(see S

HOBAL

).

S.

2 3 3 8

I

Ch.

11

40

Iraand Gareb are called Ithrites :

So

Jerome

(OS118

33,

and Eusebius

57,

ITHRAN

'eminent'; cp J

ETHRO

).

See

T.

K

.

C.

S.

[B],

[A],

Ch.

[A],

S.

[B] seems to suggest

a

reading

(Th., Klo., Marq., H.

P.

a native of

J

ATTIR

in the hill country of Judah (Josh.

ITTAH-KAZIN

Josh.

KAZIN.

ITTAI

I

.

A

Gittite, who with 600

Philistines entered into David's service shortly before

Absalom's rebellion

in

So

far

as

the text

is

intelligible, it would appear

that Ittai-his

probably once in

thus pro-

viding a natural introduction to

w.

a

'

stranger

'

who had been exiled from his native place (reading

and David advises him to return and

take back his brethren with him, adding

a

benediction

(see

T

RUTH

).

In the fight against Absalom, he is

a

commander of the third part of the army.

T h e rapidity

with which Ittai, who when we first meet him had only
been a short time with David
springs to the high position

of

commander along with

Joab and Abishai

S.

18

5

is

surprising.

It

is

natural to suppose that he was one of David's well-tried
warriors, perhaps one who had been with him during
his residence at Ziklag.

I t is hardly safe to identify

him with

(below).

Ittai, one of David's heroes, who, probably

to

distinguish him

from

I

(above) is styled

from

of the children of

Benjamin,'

[B],

om.

A,

[A]).

A.

C .

the territory of the

which

should mean especially (see I

SHMAEL

,

4

and cp

GASm.

545)

the southern part of the Antilibanus.

I t is mentioned in AV of

Lk.

where the appear-

ance of the new prophet, John the Baptist, is elabor-
ately dated. The passage which, according to RV, runs,

.

.

.

and his brother Philip (being) tetrarch of the

region of

and Trachonitis,' and according to

AV,

. .

of

and of the region of Trachonitis,' is

in

Greek (Ti.

WH),

Which of the renderings is correct? It is important
to

notice that in Acts

16

6

the AV and the RV differ once

more.

T h e best

MSS

have

(so

Ti. W H ) . This,

as

appears from Acts

(if the text is right), should mean, in

style,

Herod Philip,

then, on this view of

meaning, held a tetrarchy

composed of two districts called respectively
and Trachonitis

here two difficulties arise.

a.

It is at any rate doubtful whether there is a single

Greek writer before

(Her.

and

Eusebius

( O S

268

93)

who

uses

as

the name of a country.

Appian,

in a list of countries, mentions

and though in Jos.

Ant.

xiii. 1 3 Dindorf

reads

Niese's and

reading

is

proved to be

the

words, which refer to the

Phrygia and the region of

people of the

I n

Acts

23

it

is

to

with

Pesh.

This however is the less serious difficulty.

region.

the text see Dr.

ad

[Ti.

3

Ramsay,

4

Ramsay,

pp.

5 2 ,

146.

See Chase,

Expositor, '936, p. 405.

and Chase are on

side, Lightfoot and Ramsay on the other, in the interpreta-

tion of Acts

6.

.

2296

IVAH

which, alike on account of its mass, its fine ‘elastic
quality, and its property

taking a high polish,

has

always had a high commercial value.

The Tyrians, it appears, obtained ivory from

Dedanite or Rhodian merchants (Ezek. 27

I

see

the Israelites, in Solomon’s

time, through

a

ship or ships of their own,

from

O

PHIR

I

K.

cp

It is generally

supposed that part of this ivory came from India,’
though the African elephant has always been the
source of the commodity (this on account of the large
size of the tusks, and because there are tusks in both
the male and the female). Assyria received

a

small

quantity from Egypt through Phcenicia-usually in the
form of skilfully chiselled plaques or ornaments. Gener-
ally, however, it was imported in its rough state; the
Assyrians themselves worked it

This will account

for the different style and character of the actual finds (cp

Art

in

2

The Egyptians

ohtained their ivory partly from Ethiopia, which was
reputed to be very rich in it (cp Pliny,

8

I O

) ,

partly from

Cyprus (Brugsch, Gesch.

322

WMM,

As.

336, n.

2

cp Ohnefalsch Richter,

E

GYPT

,

33). On the coast of Asia Minor

there was an ivory industry of great antiquity (cp

Ivory being

a

hard and durable substance, many

articles, carved and veneered, have survived to our

time both in Egypt and (especially) in

Cant.

5

14

has been quoted as referring

to such objects but

perhaps rather suggests

a

muss

of ivory than an artistic product (see Siegfried,

ad

Vessels of ivory‘ are mentioned only in

Rev.

18

but ivory w a s used by the Israelites as well as

other peoples in the decoration of palaces

(

I

K.

cp Am.

3 1 5

and, if correct, Ps.

458

The Ninevite

palaces were certainly inlaid with ivory (cp Hom.

chambers of

Amos

( 6 4 )

refers in

anger to the ‘beds of ivory’ of the nobles of N.

Israel (the reference to Zion in

6 1

can hardly be

In Taylor’s cylinder inscription it is said

that in the tribute of Hezekiah to Sennacherib

ivory couches, splendid seats of ivory (Schr.

cp B

ED

,

5).

Rather strangely we read in Cant.

7 4

of

a

‘tower of ivory.’ Some particular tower

seems to be meant (cp

j

44)

but where and what was

i t ? Delitzsch thinks that it was panelled with ivory
externally-a difficult supposition (see below). Among
the Phcenicians ivory was used to ornament the ship’s

deck (or rudder[?]

just as, at

an

early age, ivory was used by the

Greeks in the handles of keys or bosses

of shields, etc. I t is prohable, however, that the above
list of references should be shortened.

Thus in Ps. 45

and Cant.

7

4

‘

appears

through a corruption of the text. I n the former passage
should probably be

‘ointments’ (Che.

and in the

latter

should be

(Wi.)

or

(Che.). See Winckler

and more fully Cheyne

Apr.

takes ‘the tower of Lebanon

towards Damascus to

be a variant of

tower of Senir.

Some additions, however, may be made to the list.

Thus

in

I

K.

many read ivory and ebony for

‘

ivory

in Ch. 29 the same reading is possibly right for onyx stone ;
and in Is. 2

of

Tarshish should not improbably be

‘

palaces of ivory.

E

B

O

N

Y

.

A.

E.

K . C .

IVVAH

AV Ivah,

2

K.

1834

19

13

Is.

IVY

2

Macc.

67.

See

See B

ACCHUS

.

IYE-ABARIM

R

V, AV

J.

article ( J R A S , Apr. ’98, pp.

comes

Cheyne would change

(see

to a

different conclusion. See T

RADE

A

N

D

2298

T h e next difficulty

is

geographical. I t is quite

conceivable that

a

wild, semi-nomadic race like the

Ituraeans may, when their -home

on

the Antilibanus

was taken from them, have migrated into Trachonitis
(proper), and that this region was therefore sometimes
spoken of as Iturzean.

G.

A. Smith very aptly refers

to the migration of many Druses from the Lebanon to
the Jebel HaurZn (to the

SE.

of the

on

the

edge of the desert), which has therefore acquired the
second name Jebel ed-Driiz.

There is, however, no

historical proof that the Ituraeans migrated in this way,
and that hence their name attached itself to this new

abode and in view of the extreme care with which Lk.

the date of the Baptist’s appearance, it cannot

be thought likely that

Lk.

would have used this second,

popular name

the Ituraean region

for Trachonitis,

when there were other territorial names which had so

much better a claim to be referred to in connection with

Herod Philip.

For of what did the tetrarchy of Herod Philip consist ?

Josephus tells

I t was

Trachonitis,

Auranitis, and certain parts

of

the ‘house of

(or

Zenodorus) about Paneas

xvii.

11

4,

6

3 ) .

Now even if we grant (for argument’s sake) that the

latter

not (according to the hypothesis just

now rejected) Trachonitis proper,

be intended by

‘ t h e Ituraean (region)’ in Lk.

who can think it

likely that Lk. would mention the region of Paneas in
preference to the names of more important territories
Surely he would rather have selected

Ant.

xvii.

8

I

)

or Auranitis (xvii.

11

4).

Is

it not on the

whole probable that he actually did

so

?

No

names are

more liable to corruption than those of places.

In the

very passage which has occasioned this article

(Lk.

3

I

)

there are traces of the existence of a false reading

for

what if

itself is a

corruption of

Omit

which, after

L

T

,

would be

a

natural transcriptional error, and yon have

a

group of letters which might easily be confounded

with

This is preferable, not only to the

rather improbable conjectures mentioned above, but
also to the suggestion of Holtzmann

157)

that by

a n anachronism the evangelist assigns to Philip the

territory afterwards possessed by Agrippa.

See the discussion between Chase and Ramsay, and between

Ramsay and G. A. Smith in the

Expositor,

‘936,

and

c p Schiirer,

Hist. 2, Appendix

I

.

T.

K.

C.

IVAH

2

K.

18

34,

RV

I

VVAH

.

IVORY

‘tooth,’ implying that the Hebrews

knew that ivory

was

not

a

MT,

and consequently

EV, twice assume that

also means ivory

’).

Apart from such sources

as

the tusks of fossil ele-

phants and allied animals, and of the narwhal, etc.,
which may practically be neglected, ivory is derived
from the incisor teeth or tusks of the E

LEPHANT

I t is the solid dentine or central substance

of

teeth,

See

No stress can be laid on Eus. O S 2G8

for, though Eusebius was a native of Palestine, he

does not escape geographical mistakes, especially

dealing

with the

E.

of the Jordan.

G .

A. Smith argues that ‘if the name [of the

spread down the slopes of Anti-Lebanon

SW.

towards Galilee

Jos.

Ani.

xiii. 11

it is quite possible that it also spread

down the same slopes

upon the district of Paneas’

236).

Schiirer, too, remarks

( H i s t . 2

that this

district formerly belonged to the

state.

[only A

I

has been taken to mean

of the

habbim’

which Schrader

connects with

Ass.

‘tooth of halah

.

but the authority for this sup-

posed Assyrian

for the ’elephant is most insecure (cp

E

LEPHANT

Ivory’in Ass. is

in

the Amarna

tablets,

(cp

Zeit.

13

and, unless

we emend

to

(‘elephant,’ cp

etc.), it is

best either to identify with the Egypt.

Lat.

‘elephant’ (with this we might combine the theory of an
Sanskrit original

cp

or

to read ‘ivory and

ebony’

as

proposed elsewhere (see E

BONY

).

74

IYIM

JABBOK

IYIM

3345 RV, AV

IZLIAH

I

Ch.

8 1 8

RV, AV J

EZLIAH

.

IYOB

Job 1

I

EV

J

OB

.

IZHAR

it

(?)shines'

or

oil,'

54

b.

a

Levitical family name (Nu.

AV

Ex.

[F] Nu.

62

In

I

Ch.

6

the name is less correctly Amminadab

(but

[AL])

see A

MMINADAB

(3).

See G

ENE

-

ALOGIES

§ 7 (iii.

The gentilic is

I

Ch.

[L]

26

23,

AL as 21

29,

AV once

Nu. 3

IZHAR,

R V ; AV J

EZOAR

kt.;

a

son of

of Jndah

I

Ch.

4 7

[L]).

For

see

Z

OHAR

,

3.

IZRAHIAH

'

rises,'

53

b.

an

:

I

Ch.

7 3

[L]), cp Z

ERAHIAH

b.

( I

Ch. 66

etc.). The

identical name appears also in the EV under the form
J

EZRAHIAH

I

Ch.

See Z

ERAH

.

a

man

of

a

Jezerite, see

J

EZER

),

a

son

of Jeduthun

(

I

Ch.

[BA],

[L

In

I

Ch.

his name appears

as

Z

ERI

[BAL]).

IZZIAH

RV, AV

JAAKAN

I

Ch.

JAAROBAH

cp A

SHARELAH

,

a

Simeonite name

( I

[B],

JAALA

[Gi. Ba.], other readings

and

[Gi.]), Neh.

or

Jaalah

(

$-:-

5 3 ,

The b'ne Jaala,

a

group of children of 'Solomon's

servants (see N

ETHINIM

, and cp E

ZRA

[NA],

Ezra 2 56

[A],

J

EELI

JAALAM,

[BADEL],

an

Edomite clan, son' of Esau (see

365

JAANAI,

RV

Janai

also

a

Gadite

.(clan),

I

Ch.

o

RV, AV

JAKAN

9).

The readings are

:

Neh. 58

[B]

1326

JAARE-OREGIM

21

see

E

LHANAN

,

J

ARESIAH

JAASAU,

RV

Jaasai

31,

one of the

list

of those with foreign wives (see

i.,

end),

Ezra

[Vg.],

[Pesh.],

om. L ) , whose name

be

cognisedin the

of

I

Esd. 934

om.

L,

formation analogous

to

David's heroes,

I

Ch.

AV J

ASIEL

[A],

He is called

(6

[BX],

6

[A],

6

D E

[Vg.]).

AV and RV (by a virtual emenda-

tion

of

the text) render this the

The reading is conflate; we must read either

the

or

'from

Mizpah.' The designation was

no

doubt suggested by Igal

Nathan of Mizpah' in

S.

23

36

(see

and

were easily confounded (cp the play on

and

in Gen.

31

49

52).

Probably Mizpah in Benjamin

is meant by the Chronicler who gives the name Jaasiel to a

prince, b.

in

I

Ch.

[B],

the

in

I

Ch.

see

D

AVID

,

XI

(a

JAARESHIAH

I

Ch.

8

27

RV, AV

JAASIEL

31

performs,' one

T.

C.

.

J

32;

hears

or

weighs

cp A

ZANIAH

Jer. 35

3,

Ezek.

11

I

Jer.

408

Jer.

I

.

Son of the Maacathite

.

a captain

K.

25

Jer. 408,

Probably

with Jezaniah h.

Hoshaiah, Jer. 421

432

called

which is read by

[except

in the former passage.

b. Jeremiah a Rechabite head

353;

3.

b.

Shaphan,' head of seventy elders of Israel

a vision of

b.

a

leading

(Ezek. 11

I

;

Cp

JOHANAN

(9).

Ezekiel

(Ezek.

JAAZER

Nu.

etc.

strengthens,' cp J

AAZIEL

See J

AZER

.

(

I

Ch.

JAAZIEL

God strengthens,' cp J

AAZIAH

a

Levite, of the second degree, a temple musician

(

I

For 'Zechariah,

Ben, and

we should, omitting

read

'Zechariah and

Z.

Ki.

SBOT

'

Chron.,'

ad

With

the omission of the initial

the name appears

again

in

as

The proper

vocalisation is undoubtedly

a reading

to

which

the

versions point.

Gen.

See C

AINITES

,

JABBOK

but

in Josh.

122

Judg.

or

[Jos.

Ant.

The

luxuriant

river' is the significant name of the

tortuous stream which divides the hill-country of Gilead
(see G

ILEAD

,

3 ) ,

and finally reaches the Jordan just

above

(see A

DAM

,

about

25

in a

straight line

N.

of the Dead Sea. Like the Arnon it has

a

continuous stream the whole course, not counting the

windings, is over 60

(G. A. Smith).

It

is now called

(from its clear

colour) the

Nahr

It is

famous in Hebrew tradition from its connection with
Jacob's change of name (Gen.

and also

as

the boundary between the kingdoms of Sihon and Og.
In Dt.

Josh. 122 it

is

called ' t h e border of the

the phrase applies to the upper part of

the Jabbok, where, circling round, it passes
A

MMON

, near

are its sources.

Cp

Nu.

Judg.

On the

N.

of the Jabbok are the

ruins of Gerasa (see G

ILEAD

,

7 ) ,

between which place

and Philadelphia, Eusebius

( O S

rightly

2300

places the river.

B.

JABESH

At what precise part of the Jabbok the ford referred

to in Gen.

may be supposed to be, is uncertain.

The story containing the reference
is composite, and the narrators J
and

E

appear to be not quite con-

sistent (see G

ILEAD

, §

3).

The

is

<

always

fordable, except where it breaks between steep rocks
(GASm.

584). That there is any play on the word

Jabbok, as

if

there were ‘some sympathy between the

two tortuous courses

is scarcely probable.

W e have two explanations of names in the narrative
already (Israel and Penuel), and hardly expect a third.
Besides, there

is

the possibility that in the original

narrative the Yarmnk (which is the boundary between
Gilead and Bashan), not the Jabbok, was the river
referred to.

The

word

rendered ‘wrestled’ is another difficulty.

Not

improbably

has become corrupted out of

ty

of

See

JABESH

or

‘ d r y ’

or, more

1.

References.

fully,

J a b e s h gilead

T H C

the scene of Saul’s first warlike exploit

(S

AUL

,

I

) ,

and the place where his bones were for a

time buried

( I

S.

2

S.

I

Ch.

I t is mentioned in the Am. Tab.

The importance of Jabesh was recognised by

David.

By sending presents to its citizens

( 2

S.

2 6 ,

crit. emend. see S

AUL

,

he sought to counteract

the policy of Abner, and to promote his own candidature
as king of all Israel.

Very possibly, too, Jabesh was

the birthplace of

and of Elijah (see

I

I

,

n.

I

).

It is, however, only a late post-

exilic narrative (Judg.

21

8-14)

which asserts that in the

time of the Judges, by a combined effort of all Israel, the
population of

was exterminated, with the

exception of four hundred virgins who were married
to the survivors of Benjamin (see B

ENJAMIN

,

5

J

UDGES

,

13).

How long did the importance

of

Jabesh last?

Does Josephus mean to say, in his

paraphrase of

I

11,

that Jabesh was in his day still

the metropolis

of

the Gileadites

(Ant.

vi.

5

? At

any rate, in the time of Eusebius it was only

a

village

which is described by him

as

on the eastern

tableland, six

from Pella,

on

the road to Gerasa

( O S

cp

and Jer.

Comm.

T h e

great city of Pella had risen beside it and been made
capital of the province; this probably led to the
decline of Jabesh and its final ruin.

Robinson

339)

thought that Jabesh might be on the site of

ed-Deir

the convent

’),

on the

S.

bank of the

about

6

miles from

or Pella but

this place is perched upon an eminence difficult of
access, and quite

o f f

from the road leading from Pella

to

The ruins of Meriamin, however, which

evidently belong to a large and ancient town, are not
exposed to this objection they are at a distance of one
hour forty minutes from Pella.

No

other site, according

to Merrill, conies into competition with this (see, how-
ever,

Meriamin there is plenty of

room for an

to operate.

Robinson did not

actually visit ed-Deir, which cannot be the true site.
At any rate, the old name Jabesh still survives in that
of the

which enters the Jordan valley

See N

AMES

The name doubtless belonged first to

the

then

the town also (Moore,

497).

H e says

but he continues in the historic

The site is a matter of doubtful conjecture.

JABIN

about

I O

m.

SSE.

from

nearly

opposite Ibzik (Bezek).

K.

c.

JABESH

father

of

S

HALLUM

i.

I

],

K.

[BAL] in

IO

[A]).

It is prob-

able, however, that

‘son

of Jabesh means a

of

Jabesh-gilead

(so

We.

ing to the

M T

(

I

Ch.

Jabez is like

‘without father or mother,’ and the place which bears

his name

( I

Ch.

is of ‘unknown site’ (Hastings,

25246)

but the riddle can with some probability

be solved.

in

(

I

Ch.

is a duplication of

is a corruption of

the first letter of

;

fell

out

owing to the following

A misplacement of words followed,

and

in

was

mistaken for

Probably the true reading is

and the families of the inhabitants of

(called Beth-gader

in v.

The names of the

‘families’ referred to alsobecame corrupted.

probably conceals

or

men of

or of Jattirah Shim‘athim should be

men

of

Eshtemoa

and Sucathim

should be

men

of

Socoh or

All the places referred to are to the

SW.

of Hebron, in the neighbourhood of Debir

or

Kirjath-sepher.

The Chronicler adopted the statement

which his authority gave, hut seems to have been
puzzled by the (corrupt) word Jabez.’ He probably
supposed that a person called Jabez was connected
with the early history of Kirjath-sepher, and pro-
duced a new story to account for the ‘enlargement of

the border of Kirjath-sepher in connection with the
supposed derivation of Jabez (from

pain

’).

This

story is a substitute for that in Judg.

(Josh.

there is

no

party feeling in it (C. Niebuhr)

it expresses the Chronicler’s perplexity, and also, in the
prayer of Jabez, his piety.

Probably

should

come after v.

13

the ‘brethren of Jabez’ should be

the sons of Kenaz.

See G

INATH

.

.

Merrill,

the

Jordan,

439; so

Land

On the Roman road referred to, cp Schumacher,

Across

the

Jordan,

Van de Velde

and Porter

(Handbook,

agree with Robinson ;

Riehm, 664

gives

weighty authority to

site.

2301

This view of the passage precludes conjectures a s to the Kenite

‘scribes’ of whom M T speaks (cp Bertholet Die

etc.,

n.

I

)

.

No ‘scribes’

referred to in the

original text.

latter part of

I

Ch. 255 must be taken by

itself. I t alludes to the fact that the Kenites dwelt in the

S.

of

Judah and it is probable that there

is

a lacuna

in

the text (cp

T.

K.

C.

JABIN

53

He

[BKARTFL]), king of Hazor (see

I

) ,

who

warred against Zebulun and Naphtali (Judg.

42

7,

[A]

and

I

S.

only]

[L],

[BA]).

He has really little to do with the narrative

Judg.

4,

which in its present form has been shown

to consist of a combination of the story of Jabin with
that of S

ISERA

against Israel.

By

Sisera

general, the two accounts have been

made to harmonise roughly, and it is difficult t o
say how much of the original history of Jabin has
been omitted in favour of that of Sisera. It may be
conjectured that at

tents of Heber, Jabin

a fate

similar to Sisera’s at the hands of Jael.

In the less original account in Josh.

[BA]), due to

E,

and worked over by D,, the war of

the two tribes against Jabin is characteristically

Cp G

EDER

.

3

[L].

A late editor may have supposed a connection of the

:corrupt) names with terms connected with the religious system

day

cp

Vg.

e t

in

See We.

De gent.

30

and c p

Be.

ad

But

53,

[Bl,

2302

JABNEEL

fied into the conquest of all N. Canaan by Joshua and
all Israel. A preliminary trace of such a scheme

is

seen

in Judg.

where

is already called 'king of

Canaan who reigned in Hazor.'

See Moore,

and J

UDGES

,

7.

JABNEEL

' G o d builds'

I

.

Shortened into

Jabneh

he [God] builds'

Ch.

266

[B],

[A],

the

JAMNIA

and J

EMNAAN

of a later day.

A

Philistian

city between Ekron and the sea (Josh.

1511

cp

the name of a prince of Lachish in

the

tablets

2184).

According to Petrie,

Thotmes

mentions two places called

one

of which is our Jabneel, and the other is the mod.

Yemma, near Megiddo

2

cp

W M M ,

As.

160).

The Priestly Writer includes

Jabneel within the limits of Judah (Josh.

15

but the

earliest evidence of Jewish occupation is in

Ch.

266,

where Uzziah is said to have taken the city and de-
molished its fortifications.

I t is next mentioned in the

time of Judas the Maccabee.

Two accounts have come

down to us-one historical,

that the two generals

Joseph

Azarias made an unsuccessful attempt upon

Jamnia

( I

Macc.

and the other most probably

a

of history,

that Judas made a night

attack

upon

'the Jamnites,' setting fire to the haven

(for there was

a

port also called Jamnia) together with

the fleet,

'so

that the glare of the light was seen a t

Jerusalem, two hundred and forty furlongs [stadia]
distant'

( 2

Macc.

According to Jos.

xiii. G7

i.

Jamnia

was

taken

a t last

Simon the Maccabee. But it can hardly have become

part of the dominions of the

(see

Macc.

until the time of Alexander

who subdued

the cities of the coast from the Egyptian

to Carmel with

the exception of Ashkelon

xiii.

I t became

Roman under Pompey (Jos. Ant. xiv. 4 4 ;

77) and

having apparently

greatly depopulated, was

and repeopled by

84).

I t was given hy Herod

to his sister Salome ( A n t . xvii. S

I

),

who in turn gave it to the

91).

of it

a

village which, along with the district pertaining to it,

had once been able to send

men into the field. In

time its population was principally Jewish (Philo, D e

ad

and when the heathen section of the inhabitants

erected a n altar to the emperor it was immediately destroyed by
the Jews. This, being reported to the emperor by the procurator

was the occasion of the imperial order that

the image of

should be set u p in the temple at Jerusalem

(see

I

SRAEL

,

96).

I n the Jewish war Jamnia was taken by

Vespasian.
after having been, by

a

singular stratagem, conveyed out of thd

doomed capital to

Roman

There he formed a

Sanhedrin, and so

became the religious centre of the

Jewish people down to the collapse of the revolt of Bar Cochba

A

.D.).

I n

the fourth century it was but a

(Onom.

hut its bishop took part in the Council of

I n

the time of the Crusaders a castle called Ibelin stood on the site
of the ruined city, which was supposed to have

been not Jabneel,

but Gath.

The statements of ancient writers respecting the

position of Jamnia

precise (see,

quoted above). I t is represented by the modern
a

considerable village,

m.

S .

from Joppa, and 4 m.

in

a

direct line from the sea.

There are ruins of the

ancient port at the mouth

of

the Nahr Riibin (see

3)

to the NW.

The district

is

fertile, and

traces can still be seen of the plantations which once
adorned the neighbourhood of the haven.

An

unidentified site in the territory of Naphtali

(Josh.

[B]), doubtless the

or

of Jos.

206

in upper Galilee,

which from about 23

B.C.

formed part of the tetrarchy

of Zenodorus, and afterwards of that of Herod Philip

(Jos.

6 3 ;

Ant.

xv.

xvii.

I t must therefore be sought somewhere about Lake
Hiileh

or

in the neighbourhood of

T h e

I t was to this place that Johanan b. Zakkai retired

JACHIN AND BOAZ

For

other references to the seaport see

A n t .

xiii. 1 5 4 ;

Hist. of

3

At Mahoza

there

was

still a convent of

Pliny,

1368

Ptol. v. 16

6.

Stephen in the

of

this

with Kefar

(now the

ruins called

Yemma,

7 m.

S.

of

adopted from

the Talmud by Conder

136j

cp Neubauer,,

seems difficult to reconcile with the true

border of Naphtali (see

T. K.

c.

Jacan

JACHIN AND BOAZ.

Jachin

[BL],

[A],

[Jos.

Ant.

viii.

was the name of the

right-hand

southern) pillar at

before the

porch of the temple,' and Boaz

[L],

[A],

[Jos.]) that of the left-hand

northern) pillar

( I

K.

Ch.

317)

see

P

ILLAR

, and cp the pillars by the posts in Ezek.

40

49

(see Toy's note

SBOT

ad

The names are

we cannot evade

an

effort to explain them.

So much

is

clear at the outset

that, like the names of the walls of Babylon (see
B

ABYLON

,

7 ) ,

they must have

a

religious significance.

T h e walls,

the pillars in question

as

well, have

names because they are sacred objects.

W e can

advance a step further by considering what these
enormous pillars were. They seem originally to have
been symbols of the 'vast mountain of the gods' (see
C

ONGREGATION

, M

OUNT O

F)

in the far N., the

brilliance of which, faintly suggested by the burnished
bronze of the pillars, is described by Ezekiel

(2816

cp

Herod.

and see C

HERUB

, col.

n.

4).

That

mountain had two special features-its firm strength and
the abode of the

on its summit. W e

expect

therefore to find these two points expressed in the
names.

Jachin will therefore express the immovable-

ness of the symbolic pillar

;

c p Ps.

'who establishes the mountains.'

This explanation a t any rate appears certain, whether

or

we

bring Jachin into relation to the name

Erman reads on the so-called Stone of Joh (rather,

of

Rameses

in

(see

E

G

YP

T

,

58,

n.

I

).

Boaz ought to refer

to

the mountain dwelling-

place of the divine beings.

I t is difficult, however, to

verify this assumption.

looks like a mutilation of

a

longer word.

The initial

is a hindrance to our

takmg

y

from the root

to be strong.'

by

the strength of Baal,' is hardly the right form

we

expect

a

statement such as

'strong is Baal.'

This, however, would not give us the

which we

look for such

a

name would be too nearly synonymous

with Jachin, and the initial

cannot be ignored.

We

therefore, that the last letter is a frag-

ment of

a

word; the preceding letters

are surely

a

mutilation of

(cp

text of the

Gospels;

in Mt.

Looking next a t the Psalm

which Solomon is said to have

on the completion of

the temple, we notice that two of the striking phrases in it
are

for the establishment of the

sun

in his glorious

mansion in the sky, and

for the high house

or temple in which

was to dwell for ever (Che.

The word

in

the latter phrase

is

pre-

cisely what we want.

Not impossibly, therefore, the

full name of the pillar on the left hand is Baal-zebu1

Lord of the high house

The idea which it ex-

pressed was familiar to the Phcenicians

;

a

synonymous

title was Baal

-

zaphon (see B

AAL

-

ZEPHON

).

I t was

also not unknown to the Israelites (see B

AAL

-

ZERUL

).

In later times, probably, the name of the second pillar
was deliberately mutilated, because of the new and
inauspicious associations which had gathered round it.
It was after all a

(Hiram) who had given

Westcott

unwillingness to suppose a n accidental

error is surprising.

If

is unknown

except from the N T ,

inscr. of

and Baal-meon are not.

is the

of

I

K.

8

Ass.

ad

See

1 5 5 ;

Sayce,

I

.

JACHIN

the name a later age did not approve

Solomon’s

close connections with heathen peoples.

Subsequently to this pious alteration of the name,

one

of

the supposed ancestors of David (see D

AVID

,

I

,

n.

I

)

was furnished with the name Boaz (only found

late), to indicate that he was

a

pillar of the Davidic

family (cp

on

Ch.

3

A few other conjectures may, in conclusion, be mentioned.

in Chron. renders Jachin

and Boaz

Ephrem, who is followed among

by Thenius, combines

the two words (pointing

into a prayer for the firm establish-

ment of the temple.

explains Jachin

‘

H e shall

and Boaz,

I n it is strength’

.

plausibly WRS,

the former

stahlisher

the latter,

I n

him

is strength.

deals more

with

;

h e adopts

‘ I t shall stand (well),’ from

and emends

into

‘Lord of

strong’ (cp B’s

I n view of the close bond which united Tyre and

erusalem

the time of

and

fact that it was a

hmnician who named the pillars,

S. A. Cook suggests

t h a t

may be a corruption of

‘Baal,’ and that

have been understood to be the

equivalent of

T.

K. C.

JACHIN

‘ h e

[God]

establishes ; cp

achin;

[BKADL];

[A],

I

.

A son of Simeon,

46

IO

Ex. 6

[A]),

Nu.

26

Jachinite

I n the parallel text,

I

Ch.

the name is

occurs

in

Nu.

Head of a priestly family

;

I

Ch.

9

IO

2417 Neh. 11

IO.

JACINTH

is given by

in Ex. 28

39

where AV has

also in E V

of Rev.

and

jacinth

R V ‘of hyacinth’).

I n

gives ‘amber’

Enoch

where the streams of fire

(Dan.

7

IO

)

are likened to ‘hyacinth’ (Di. and Charles).

T h e

of the ancients (mentioned in Rev.

)

was

probably our sapphire (see S

APPHIRE

). I t is now

commonly

(see,

Riehm,

that the

Heb.

is the jacinth, for a description of

which see below.

This, however, appears to be

a

mistake.

It is probable that

is simplya miswritten

(see A

MBER

), or perhaps rather,

(see

T

ARSHISH

, S

TONE OF).

This may enable

us

to account for the superfluous

which comes between

and

in

of

Ezek.

2 8 1 3

(where, apart from this, the fuller catalogue

in

is to be adopted).

in fact understood by

many to mean an alloy

of

and

seems to be

a

gloss on the word

or

(which must have stood in the true text of Ezekiel),

intended to correct the rendering

We are of

not bound to agree with this gloss, but the word

or

(

white sapphire

but see A

MBER

) may

with some confidence be

for

Elsewhere

(see

S

TONE O

F)

it

has

been shown that the

word

also

appears disguised

as

It is no

,objection to this theory that

and

both

in the list of precious stones in Ex.

for

this list comes from

P,

who makes

up

such lists

as

he

best can, and does not mind including variants.

T h e true jacinth is a red-coloured variety of silicate of

zirconium those varieties which are yellow-brown or green

if transparent, by the name of

while the dull-colonred varieties, more or less opaque, are
termed rightly zircon. T h e true jacinth, when polished, is
peculiarly brilliant. It is extremely rare. Probably many of the

antique camei or

reputed to he jacinth are merely

garnets garnets, however, have a lower specific

gravity.

T.

K.

C.

JACKAL.

( I )

tun

(perhaps

howler

is

an interpretation agrees with

E’s

explanation of the

divine name in Ex.

(see N

AMES

The suggestion of Bondi that

may be the Egypt.

is of course possible

:

it is adopted by Hommel

( A H T

but it does not

all the circumstances

of

the case.

JACOB

found only

in

the pl.

fem. form

Mal.

1 3 ,

is probably due to corruption; Stade reads

pastures [cp

perhaps for

bnt

may have connected the word with

l‘csh.

dwellings

AV renders

D

R

A

GO

NS

(but

sea-

monsters’ in

4 3 ) ;

RV

Throughout

Palestine the common jackal is by far the most common
of all the beasts of prey.

It is the same jackal which is so well known elsewhere and

has spread through

SE.

Europe and SW. Asia a s

as

Burmah as well as through N. Africa. As its name (Canis

it is of a

colour, darker

in

the

parts.

Jackals usually hunt in packs, but at times are seen

in pairs or even alone.

They are comparatively harm-

less to man, and, as a rule, feed on carrion

;

hut they

also attack and kill fowls, lambs, kids, etc., and even
weakly sheep and goats.

They do not, however, refuse

fruit, and are especially fond of sugar-cane.

The cry

of

the jackal may he heard every night by the traveller

in Palestine (cp

1 8 ) .

As a rule they are nocturnal,

but not exclusively s o ; they hide during the day in
disused stone-quarries, caves, and especially in deserted
ruins (Is.

13 34

35

7 ) .

Jeremiah’s hearers, therefore,

knew what he meant when he spoke of Jerusalem’s be-
coming

a

‘

place of jackals

’

(Jer.

9

[IO]

;

cp

51

37

I n Judg.154

Lam.518,

‘jackal’

a s a n alternative rendering for E V ‘fox’

See

Fox

and

(3)

Whether the word rendered ‘doleful creatures’

in

always meant the jackal we cannot tell.

well compared Ass.

but whether

this word really means the jackal (so Del.) is not quite certain.
Jenscn pronounces for the leopard Houghton, improbably,
thought of the

(4) Finally the

of Is.

54 14

Jer. 5039,

beasts of the island,’ from a supposed connection with
island’ (cp

and see

I

SL

E

),

R V

W

OL

V

E

S

,

mg.

C

REATURES

, may be compared with the Ar.

‘jackals.’ The eqniv. Syr.

away

is used by Bar Hebr.

in

his commentary on

Cp

H

AZAR

-

SHUAL

,

Cp Del.

34.

A. E. S.-

S.

A.

C.

JACOB

but five times

Son of Isaac and Rebekah, and father of the twelve
reputed ancestors of the tribes of Israel himself also
called Israel.

T h e name is explained in Gen. 25

(J)

the

‘after that, his brother came out and his hand took bold of

Esau’s heel so his

was called Jacob,’ as if

1.

Name.

‘one who takes hold by the heel,’ from

‘a

heel.’ I n Gen.

Jacoh’receives

a

fresh explanation-viz., deceiver (one who slinks after

another) ;

so too

Hos. 12

where render

‘

he deceived his

brother’ (see Now.). These

are only popular etymo-

logies. I t is the prevalent

that Ya‘iikob (Jacob)

is really a shortened form of

a name

analogous to Israel Ishmael

and

several

explanations, such

or

rewards’ (both from

the Arabic cp Lag.

This

is thought to be con-

firmed by the place-name

found in the Palestinian

name-list of Thotmes

which

corresponds to a

Palestinian

see

JOSEPH

and

and cp Gray,

Pinches, ‘too, has found on contract-tablets of the

age of

2285

see

B

ABYLONIA

,

54)

the

personal name

and Hommel (AHT, G

I

,

says that Yakubu (cp Jacob) occurs also. This, if the tablets
are genuine, ‘appears to prove the antiquity of the name. I t
must not, however, prevent us from seeking a n underlying

earlier form.

Ya‘iikob is the name, not of

an

individual, but

of,

the imagin-

ary ancestor of a tribe ; neither

follows nor ‘God

rewards’ is the sort of name that we expect as the condensed
expression of the religious faith of the tribe.

In the month

of

the people the original name would very likely soon be

contracted or distorted.

We may plausibly conjecture that

Ya‘iikob is a t once a contraction and a distortion of Abi-cabod

‘the [divine] father is glory’), the name which was also

distorted into

and

J

OCHEBED

.

I f the god of the tribes

of Israel was

whose ‘glory’ (originally in the storm) so

T h e plural

(once

Lam. 4 3 kt.)

is to

be distinguished

from the sing.

(twice in M T

of whhh the

pl.

is

see D

RAGON

(beg.).

has

Symm.,

Theod.

in

Mal.]

2306

JACOB

hold that

Hebron here is miswritten for

The view, which was most probably that of P (or at

any rate of

P s

authority), that Isaac lived at or near

Rehoboth, and that Jacob started on
his quest

of a

wife from

district of

Rehoboth, is not less probably

ancient one.

W e have now to see where Jacob went.

J and

E

say that it

was

to H a r a n ;

P

that it was to

Paddan-aram (Gen.

5).

So at least the present

text represents but there is strong reason to distrust its
readings, and to change Haran into

and

into 'the uplands of HaurHn

cp Hos.

1 2

below). In Gen.

29

I

.

however. we

learn from E that on leaving Bethel Jacob 'went to the
land of the

Probably

E

really wrote this,

and interpreted

to mean easterns'

the

phrase the land of the

might no doubt be

applied to the

where, according to the earlier

tradition, Laban dwelt.

It is not very probable, how-

ever, that

l

sons of the east

'

was really a n

ethnographical term where the phrase appears to b e

used, it would seem that

(east) has arisen by

an

easy corruption out of

which in turn may he a

very old popular corruption of

(see R

EKEM

, 4).

The most natural inference is that

E

(or

rather perhaps

authority) has preserved

a

phrase from a very early

tradition, according to which Jacob (or Abi-cabod?),

on

leaving his temporary resting-place, directed his steps to
the 'land of the

Jerahmeel.'

If

so,

it is. probable

that his destination was not the HaurHn but Hebron.

Both Haran and Hebron are mentioned in

(2

42

46)

as

descendants of

the brother of Jerahmeel.

Hebron is

probably the name of which we are in search ; among the de-
scendants of Hebron appear three names which may be different
corruptions of the name Jerahmeel (see

JERAHMEEL,

4).

At Hebron (the well-known Hebron) Jacob was,

according to the tradition, in the land of 'the
Jerahmeel.'

The name Jerahmeel' has, it is true, a

fluctuating reference. All that concerns

us

here is the

fact that Hebron could he regarded by the early narrator

(whom we have no occasion to place before the time of
David) as Jerahmeelite. On his way thither the traveller
would naturally halt at the site now called
but in ancient times probably known as

SEPHER

This may very possibly have been

mentioned

as

Jacob's resting-place in the earlier form

of the story.

A glance a t the map will show that

from Rehoboth to Hebron the journey is as straight

as

possible, and that

sheba), and

are convenient resting-places

on the road.

The early narrative must have further

stated that while at Hebron Jacob married wives
called respectively Leah and Rachel.

Rachel (not

less than

Gen.

we

take to be

a

popular corruption of

4).

Leah

We. and Stade have seen) is the name

ethnic

Levi'

the manifold connections

of

the Levites

with the far

have been shown elsewhere (see

T h e meaning of this early story is that the tribe called
Abi-cabod effected a union with the Jerahmeelite tribe
of Levi.

Probably Winckler is right in thinking that

the priestly character of the tribe

of

Levi is earlier than

its entrance into Canaan, and it is not out of place

remark anew (cp

that in Gen.

Jacob seems

to be represented as in priestly attire.

As the text stands, however, it is to Haran, or rather

to Hauran, that Jacob's steps are bent, and on the way

he

halts at the famous sanctuary

of Bethel. The narrator indued repre-

sents him as having consecrated the well-
known

which stood there ; but if

Winckler's explanation of

Luz

be correct

sanctuary'), the narrator unintentionally refutes his

statement.

T h e rocky boulders on the site

of

Thus both Jacob and Esau

took

Jerahmeelite wives.

230%

greatly impressed his worshippers, and who is called in a n
archaistic psalm 'the God

of glory' (Ps.

we can well

understand that the reputed ancestor of the

might have

as

his second name (hut cp 6) Abicahod. I t is quite true that

looks very much like a shortened theophorous name.

We

naturally inclined to regard it as analogous to Yiphtah

Yiphtah-el (Jiphthah-el); but popular imagination

was quite capable of

names on a new model, and

we have perhaps other instances of this close a t hand in

I

SAAC

and

hoth of

as they stand, are formed

analogously to Ishmael hut are more prohahly popular corrup-
tions.

I t may be

that the occurrence of the

names

referred to above does not prove the disappearance of the form
Ahi-cahod. This

name which may have had different

independent personal and local references, and have been by no
means confined

the reputed ancestor of the Israelites) may

have been in use among the Israelites subsequently to the times
of

Hammurabi and Thotmes

III., as indeed the occurrence of

in the story of

Eli

proves that it was.

The story of Jacob is intertwined at the beginning

with that of Isaac and of Esau, and at the close with

that of Joseph.

T o the special articles

I

SAAC

,

and J

OSEPH

we must,

therefore. refer the reader to avoid

repetition. T h e interesting reference of Hosea (if it be

Hosea who writes) to the story of the infant Jacob's

strife with

his

infant brother in the womb, which receives

from him an unfavourable interpretation (Hos.
is referred to under J

ACOB

,

I

.

I t is. to this story and

to the narrative of Jacob's deceit towards his father and
his brother that the Second Isaiah is supposed

to

refer

in

Is.

4327.

The difficulties of the passage, however,

are not slight, and no stress can safely be laid upon it.'
The traditions are given with great vividness in Gen.

(J)

and

27

(JE), and deserve anattentive study.

Here, however, we

only consider the composite

narrative

in

which forms the introduction

to

the story of Jacob's journey in search of a wife.

In 27

42-45

Rebekah is represented as urging Jacob to flee

from his incensed brother for

a

few days to her brother

Laban in Haran. This is, undoubtedly, the work of
JE.

I n

27

46

however, the visit to Laban is

put forward as

a

command of Isaac, who, stirred up by

his wife, desired to prevent Jacob from following the

example of

Esau

in marrying a Canaanitish-or, more

strictly,

a

Hittite-maiden.

There can be no doubt

that

P

(who is the writer of

gave quite a

different representation

of

the early life of Jacob from

that given by JE, and though it is usual to disparage

P,

yet here, as in other cases, he preserves valuable

material.

The danger of

a

Hittite wife at Beersheba

was, it is true, small enough but it has been maintained

elsewhere that the names

of

the non-Israelitish tribes

inhabiting Canaan have suffered much from the errors
inseparable from transcription of texts, and that Hittite'

in this and other passages is an error for

'Rehobothite.'

I t has been argued that 'Rehoboth'

attached its name to

a

larger district than the

Ruhaibeh,

so

that when Isaac, according to popular

tradition, left Rehoboth for Beersheba, he may perhaps

still have been in Rehobothite territory.

I t

is

more

probable, however, that Beersheba was introduced out
of regard for the increased veneration of Israelites for

the sanctuary of Beersheba, and that the original tradition

(preserved by P ) represented Isaac as passing the close
of his life either at Rehoboth or at any rate at

a spot

almost certainlywithin Rehobothite
(better

to

us

as

This view is con-

firmed by the consideration that in

35

27-29

Jacob

is

said

to have come to his father to Mamre, to
that is, Hebron,' where his father Isaac died, and where

Esau

and Jacob buried him.

I t seems plausible to

first father' is usually explained of Jacob,

was not

so

understood by

and is very peculiar

The parallel phrase

'their interpreters,' if correct, does n o t favour

view. Prob-

ably, however, we should read,

' T h y magnates were inclined to sin,

And

thy rulers rebelled against me.'

The next line (see

SBOT

ad

probably

contains a

reference'

t o

'thy princes

.

’JACOB

JACOB

Bethel must indeed inevitably have suggested the
erection of a sacred pillar

B

ETHEL

,

or indeed

of stone circles, in primeval times. Both J and E
express their own genuine piety in the description of
Jacob’s sacred experiences. Whether we should have
been equally pleased with the original story may be
doubted the description of

28

suggests the idea that

the stone which Jacob took for his pillow was a sacred
stone, so that

(as perhaps

Gen.

will have

the sense of sanctuary.’

If this view is correct, it is

E

who gives

a

harmless turn to the old story by converting

the primeval sacred stone into a

(cp I

DOLATRY

,

In Gen.

J and

E

describe Jacob’s arrival at

Haran (or rather

his meeting with Rachel and

then with Laban, and his service of fourteen years for
his two wives.

Whether there was any Laban in the

earlier form of the story we cannot tell.

T h e Laban to

whom we are introduced by

J

and

E

is certainly a

worthy kinsman of Jacob.

The narrators’ object, how-

ever, is not to show that trickiness was

a

family

characteristic, but to throw into relief the divine
protection which Jacob constantly enjoyed, so that
the only result of

craft was

ing prosperity indeed, as Jacob states, the advantages
granted by

to Jacob were shared by Laban, so

that Laban had absolutely no

for his attempts to

overreach his nephew.

This is described

Gen.

I t will be observed that the account

in ch.

31,

which is

differs from the former, which is

almost entirely that of

J.

W e have an external but not independent refer-

ence to the same tradition in Hos.

where a

later writer (see Nowack, Wellhausen) mentions

a

detail in the completed story of Jacob to show the trials
which the ancestor of Israel had undergone of old, and
the faithful guardianship of his God.

And Jacob

to the uplands

of Aram

see

$ 3

on

and Israel served for a woman and kept

sheep.

(MT

‘and for a woman he kept,’

is un-

intelligible, and

in conjunction with v. 13

has suggested to

Wellhausen the strange idea of a conflict between a good prin-
ciple represented

bv

a prophet and an evil principle represented

§

See

-

-

by a woman.

Gen. 30

Read perhaps

[or

cp

This is a specimen

of

the way in which Jewish piety

nourished itself on the legends of the past.

I t has an

interest as such but it supplies no confirmation of the
supposed facts of the story.

It

is

with pure legend

that we have to deal, and it is pure legend which
asserts thgt Jacob had eleven sons (besides daughters)
born to him in Haran (HaurHn), who became the

an-

cestors of as many Israelitish tribes.

All this part of

the

is late; it can have arisen only when the

union of the tribes had, under David, become

an

accom-

plished fact, and when

influence upon Israel

was

so

strong that the Israelites themselves were am-

bitious of being thought to be related to the
race (cp Dt.

265,

‘ a

lost

was my father’).

One of the most interesting points in the narrative is
that four of the sons-Dan and Naphtali, Gad and

Asher--are, said to have been the children of hand-
maids, the two former of Rachel’s handmaid
the two latter of Leah’s handmaid Zilpah. The origin
of the latter name at any rate is transparent Zilpah

Z

ELOPHEHAD

= Salhad.

When the Israelites con-

quered Salhad, they must have become fused with the

population.

There are, indeed, several clear indications that even

such early writers as J and

E

were not unconscious

of

Jacob’s

character.

The clearest are in

31

22-54

(note especially brethren ’=fellow-clansmen,

It is not unworthy of notice, however, that

in

account

of

Jacob’s second name

it is

said, ‘for thou

contended with a god and with

men, and

prevailed,’ where it is impossible to put

the struggle of wits in which Laban and Jacob were
engaged on

a

par with the physical

related in

No

complete justification of the phrase

can be given but

on

the hypothesis that tradition knew

of a struggle between the Laban-clan and the Jacob-
clan in which the latter represented itself as having
been successful.

Here we see the influence of later historical circum-

stances, and still more in the remarkable narrative,

31

18

( J E , but chiefly

E),

to understand which

aright keen textual criticism has to

resorted to.

The results are given under G

ILEAD

, nor have

space to repeat them here, except so far as to remind
the reader that it is there maintained that

a

later editor,

through unfamiliarity with the early importance of
Salhad, has converted it into Sahadutha, Galeed, and
Gilead, and has also seriously iuterfered with the geo-
graphy of the next section

On the

peculiar type of marriage (the so-called beena’) repre-
sented in this part of the legend, we must

also

refer

elsewhere (K

INSHIP

,

8)

on

the wrestling with Elohim

see J

ABBOK

.

Another clan-that of

becomes

dangerous to the Tacobeans.

‘Behold, Esau came

(from-

and with him

hundred

men’ (Gen.

33

I

cp 326

I fear him,

lest he come and smite me. the mother

with the children

( 3 2

It is at present superior

in strength to the Jacob-clan,-‘ thus shall ye speak to

Esau’ ( 3 2 3

Whether this narrative

fits

in

perfectly with the preceding one may

doubted, even

if we assume that J made Jacob cross not the Jabbok
but the Jordan (see G

ILEAD

).

If, however, we may

assume that according to the earlier tradition
sojourn

was

not in

but at Hebron, we can

understand the danger to which he was exposed from
the

It

be added that ‘Succoth’

is

elsewhere (see

S

ALECAH

,

S

UCCOTH

,

P

ENUEL

)

identified

with Salhad.

Evidently there is some great con-

fusion in this part of the record of tradition, and if the
same confusion begins to be visible even earlier, we

need not feel any surprise.

Here is another proof of the tribal reference

of

the

name Jacob. Were he an individual, he would naturally

return at once to his father, at Beersheba
or Rehoboth (contrast

28

Instead

of this he goes to Shechem and purchases

a

piece

of

land from

clan called

( 3 3

18

E

on

4822

see S

HECHEM

).

It is worth noticing

that the words ‘Shechem’s father, for

a

hundred

are corrupt (see K

ESITAH

). Still more clearly marked is

the tribal character of Jacob in the strange narrative of
Shechem’s endeavour to obtain Dinah (Jacobs daughter)
as his

of the amalgamation of the Shechemite

and the Jacobean communities proposed by
and of the vengeance taken by Simeon and Levi on
the whole city for an act of shameless impropriety
see F

OOL

) committed by Shechem. Why does Jacob

acquire rights of property in Shechem? and why are
the

so

strict in their requirement

of

purity

of blood in the civic community? Because Shechem
became the centre of the confederation of the northern
Israelitish tribes.

I t is remarkable, however, that the clan does not

yet receive the name

Israel. According to

E

(see

Dillmann)

name was changed to Israel

3

when

he crossed the Jabbok

( 3 2 2 7

I t is probable

that

as

well

as

P,

represented the change

as

place at Bethel, whither Jacob repaired after leaving

It is very difficult to suppose with Winckler

255,

n.

I

)

that E represented Esau as coming

upon Jacob from

a

place in the

N.,

somewhere near Dan,

Abraham and

I t is strange that Dinah should be

of

marriageable a g e ;

but,

of

course,

story once circulated as an independent tra-

dition.

3

The assignment

to

E

is not undisputed.

saac dwelt, and whence Jacob fled to Laban

in Haran.

2310

JACOB

JAEL

states

27)

that Jacob came to his father Isaac

at

Kirjath-arba (see R

EHOBOTH

,

The remainder of Jacob’s life is inseparable from the

story of Joseph

its events need not be recapitulated

(See J

OSEPH

A

BEL

M I Z R A I M

is natural for

readers, approaching the narrative from

the point

of

view of psychological development, to

find traces of

a

mellowing

Jacob‘s character.

If

there be anything in this supposition it must be

to

the fact that the narrators have put more of themselves
into the latter part of Jacob’s life, where its threads
intertwined with those

of

Joseph‘s, than they could

venture to do in the former.

It is, however, to the

popular

traditions that we must turn for the truest

symbols of Israelitish character

as

it

was in the days of

the two great narrators J and

E.

The elaborate

Blessing ascribed to Jacob cannot be treated as a part
of the biography; it is, apart from later elements,

a

splendid monument of early Hebrew literature (see
POETICAL

L

ITERATURE

),

and historically too is of the

utmost importance. Even though the text has suffered

much corruption,

in

the special articles

the tribes

frequent occasion has

found to utilize its details.

See also I

SRAEL

.

Winckler’s mythological explanation

of

Jacob

as

(originally) the moon in its relation to the year,

Shechem, because from

this

point

in

his narrative he,

like

uses the name Israel instead

of

Jacob (see

How J explained the name ‘Israel

we are not told.

There is nothing to prevent

us from

supposing that he adopted some different explanation
which did not please the redactor

as

well as

It

is possible that, like the marriage of Abraham and

S

ARAH

the supposed change of Jacob’s name

really symbolises a fusion of two tribes, the tribes in

this case

an Israel tribe from the

N. and

a Jacob

(Abicabod) tribe from the

S.

T h e origin of the ethnic name Israel’ has been much

cussed.

occurs several times on the Moabite Stone, and

ethnic

on the monolith of Shalmaneser

(KB

Sayce

2123

cites the name Isarlim

(=Israel) a s king of Khana (E. frontier of Babylonia) in the
time of

least a s old as Jerome is the inter-

pretation rectus

(as if from

cp

JASHER,

$

4;

More attractive philologically,

and yet not plausible on other grounds, is a connection with
Ass.

‘place,’ as

of El.’ The favourite modern

explanation is

‘El

rules’ (from

cp

Is.

but

to

convey this idea we should rather have expected

‘Malchiel

nor is the root

as well established as one could

wish.

(cp Hos.

suggests

‘El strives or as

Driver

(in Hastings’

on grounds of

prefers E l persists or perseveres (in contending).

This view

must be admitted to be ancient but the sense is hardly satis-
factory.

It is perhaps unsafe to

start from the traditional form

there being no early

personal or local names in the

or elsewhere which

confirm it, with the single exception of

which has presum-

ably the same origin (cp S

ARAH

), and must therefore be pro-

visionally set on one side. There are, however, names some-
what resembling ‘Isra’el

’

which may help us

(J

EZKEEL

), whicd is both a personal ahd a local name,

is

found both in the centre and in the

of Palestine

the name of a son of

(3)

Z

ERAH

, which is given a s a Judahite, a

Simeonite and an Edomite name.

names

(3)

is the most

helpful.

(‘ God shines forth ’) is a highly probable clan-

name, and might at a n earlydate be corrupted popularly both into

and into

Turning now to the

story of the change of Jacob’s name to Israel (which has prob-

ably been altered), we notice the statement (Gen. 32
which in such a context cannot be merely picturesque, that
he (Jacob) passed

Penuel, the sun

upon him

A

reference to our explanation of the story of

the dovenant between Jacob and Laban (G

ALEED

,

I

)

will

show that the place from which Jacob came

was

called,

not Galeed (Gilead), but Salhad or S

ALECAH

of this strong fortress in Israelitish legend and

history has been too long overlooked. T o the other illustrations
of this fact we may now add that

not improb-

ably derived its name from the clan, or confederation of clans
which after leaving the

found its way to the ‘land

the

Jerahme’el’ (Gen. 29

I

,

a case of the confusion of

legends, see above,

3)

in the far

of Palestine.

If the

transformations of names that have elsewhere been assumed be

held to be probable it will not he thought improbable that

or

has arisen, partly by transposition,

a n d partly by corruption of letters, from

Jizrah-el.

C p the parallel corruption

for

17

25

(see

I

THRA

). I t need hardly be said that there were in early times

both northern (north-eastern) and southern Israelites.

T h e

.southern Israelites appear to have joined the.
a t Hehron (or rather Rehoboth).

T h e above view

IS

no more

than a hypothesis hut it seems to be more in accordance with
analogies than the rival theories, and what appears to be a n

explanation of a primitive tribal name noun is very likely

Jerome also gives vir

(as if from

;

cp Gen. 33

I

O

).

Let us make a fresh start.

t o

be

Thus in

Jacob’s household give u p all their heathenish objects (cp

31

Josh.

14).

I n

v.

8

Rachel’s nurse Deborah

receives the highest funeral honours ; in reality, however, it is

Dinah, Jacob’s eldest daughter,‘ who dies the text needs

criticism (see above, col.

n. r). This means perhaps that

the Dinah-tribe had perished hence the mourning of the

stem. In

16-19

Rachel dies on the way to

(but

see below).

Several details in chap. 35 deserve attention.

Her child has two

and B

EN

JAMIN

.

The extracts from

J

and E give

us

no very clear

idea where Jacob or Israel settled after the death

of

Rachel J tells

us

indeed

(35

that Jacob encamped

beyond Migdal Eder : but where was Migdal Eder?

Probably it was not far from Beeroth, which name

should probably be substituted for Ephrath in
and for Hebron in

37

(see

E

PHRATH

).

P, however,

2311

.

sponding to Abraham the moon in its
relation to the month, is ingeniously

That there

and plausibly worked out

(

Gesch.

57

).

are somewhat pale mythological elements in some of
the biblical narratives may be admitted

to many

minds Winckler’s proof of his hypothesis will seem
almost too laboured to be convincing.

Cp

also

Winckler,

and cp

Jakob

’),

whose treatment of parallel mythic details

extraordinarily clever.

See further Staerk,

des

A T

2

JACOB’S

WELL.

See S

YCHAR

.

JACUBUS

[A]),

I

Esd.

3).

JADA

[BA]), a name in the Jerah-

meelite genealogy ; his mother was Atarah and one of
his sons was

I

[B],

[A].

om.,

v.

[L]).

JADAU

Kr.

RV

Jaddai.

See

2.

JADDUA

56

or according to Lag.

113,

I.

Signatory

to

the covenant (see E

ZRA

7)

Neh.

om.

b. Jonathan, three

below

was the

last of the high priests mentioned in the O T

[BRA],

and

in

According to Jos.

xi.

;

who adds much that

is doubtful, he was in office a t the time of Alexander’s invasion

of

B.C.].

See N

EHEMIAH

,

I

.

T. K.

C.

3.

See

3.

JADDUS,

[B] etc.),

I

Esd.

B

ARZILLAI

, 3.

JADON

abbreviated form, cp N

AMES

,

53

BKA om.

[L]),

the Meronothite, in the list of

wall-builders (see N

EHEMIAH

,

I

E

ZRA

16

[

I

],

Neh.

37.

JAEL

68

‘mountain-goat’

[BAL]

A Bedouin woman, of whom

Sisera, when flying defeated from the field of battle,
asked water,

and

by whom, as he stood drinking the

refreshing soured milk

(Ar.

he was beaten lifeless

to

the ground.

Upon this deed a high encomium is

prononnced by

a

contemporary Israelitish poet, Judg.

524-27

And rightly, from his point

of

view,

2312

JAGUR

if Jael was

a

Kenite (see below), for by this bold deed

she recognised the sacred bond of friendship between
the Israelites and the Kenites (cp Judg.
Sisera was out of the pale of charity for an Israelite
therefore also for

a

Kenite.

' T h e act by which Jael

gained such renown was not the murder

of

a sleeping

but the use of a daring stratagem which gave her

a momentary chance to deliver a courageous blow'
( W R S

132).

A

later writer, however,

whose version of the story of Sisera appears

on

the

whole to be independent of that in Deborah's Song,
employed all the arts of a graceful style to represent
Jael as having killed Sisera in his sleep (Judg.
Jael invites the tired fugitive into her tent, covers him
up with the tent-rug, and then, when he is sleeping
soundly, takes one of the tent-pegs, and strikes it with

a

hammer into his forehead.

She thus violates the

double sanctity attaching to Sisera

as

a

guest and (see

D

AVID

,

I

,

col.

1023,

n.

I )

as

a

sleeper, and seems

deserving

of

a curse (Doughty,

Arabia

1 5 6 )

rather than

a

blessing. The narrator, it is true, does

not in express terms commend her

but

a

hardly re-

pressed enthusiasm is visible in his description

).

Which tradition has the better claim to be regarded as his-

torical? Obviously not the second.

The refined treachery

which this account assumes is inconceivable in a Bedawi and
the absurdity of transfixing a man's skull with a

so

great that one is compelled to conjecture that the passage of the
song relative to

deed (Judg. 5 26) lay before the narrator

in a corrupt form. Moore and Budde have set forth the present
position of textual criticism, and it is one of baffled per
Yet the remedy is perhaps near a t hand (see

T h e

true text should most probably run thus

:-

Her hand to the coffer she
Her right hand to a flint of the rock;
With the flint she strikes his head,
She smashes-she cleaves his temple.

T h e bowl

in

which Jael presented the soured milk was not ' a

bowl of the mighty'

but 'a bowl of

Ass.

cp C

OPPER

,

The 'nail,' or rather tent-peg'

should be the coffer which, as Doughty says, every Bedawi
housewife has, and which contained among other things flints
for striking fire

or

The workmen's hammer'

impossible rendering-should be a 'flint of

the rock'

I t only

to remark, 'after

Moore, that the words

the days of Jael' (Judg.

and

the wife of Heber the Kenite' (5 24) are glosses which overload

the

in which they occur.

See D

EBORAH

,

I

J

UD

G

E

S,

7

;

c.

JAGUR

a Judahite

city

on

the border of Edom (Josh.

Cp

a well-known Levitical name

which has

with Judah (see

I

,

below) and

Edom see G

ENEALOGIES

,

b. Reaiah b. Sbobal, a Judabite,

I

(om. A*,

[L]).

A comparison with

I

Ch. 2

suggests a possible connec-

tion with Manahath (MT

I n view of the vicissitudes

of

this name

below) it is

that

is

M

AHATH

, N

AHATH

,

7

[v.].

JAHLEEL

JAHAZ,

JAHZAH

Is.

Jer.

4 8 3 4

[Mesha's inscr.

or

2123

Dt.

Josh.

2 1 3 6

Judg.

Jer.

I

Ch.

6 6 3

has

but

in

Nu.

in

Josh. 13

[?]

in Josh. 21 36

[BAL

cp

in

in Is.154,

in Jer. 4821 for

34

see Swete).

Jahaz was the scene of the decisive battle between

the Israelites and Sihon, king of the Amorites
Dt.

Judg.

It was assigned to Reuben (Josh.

18

P ) and to the Levites (Josh.

21

36

Mesha, king

of Moab, refers to it as taken byhimself from the Israelites.

It was near Kedemoth (Josh.

1 3 1 8

21

and 'the

of Kedemoth'

226,

cp

Nu.

21

and it was N. of the Arnon. This points

to the extreme

SE.

of Sihon's territory; Oliphant's

suggested identification with

is therefore out

of the question.

Eusebius

informs

that Jahaz

still existed in his time, and that

it was situated between Medeba and Dibon
There seems to be some mistake here the position thus
assigned to Jahaz appears too central. Possibly

is corrupt. At any rate we may plausibly hold that the
important ruins of

(cp

Jer.

4821)

are on the site either of Jahaz or of Kedemoth.
spot is two hours and

a

half NE. of Dibon, towards

JAHAZIAH,

RV

J

A

H

Z

EI

AH

32

sees'), b.

one of Ezra's opponents (Kosters,

in dealing with the mixed marriages,

I

Esd.

See

God sees,' cp

and

[AL] Pesh. nearly always

I

.

One of David's warriors (

I

Cb.

A priest, temp. David

(I

Ch. 166, om.

3.

b. Hebron a Kehathite Levite

I

Ch. 23

for

whose name we should

possibly read

I

).

4.

Levite, b. Zechariah, introduced

the story

oithe Ammonite invasion; son of Zechariah, who rose up

temp.

Ch. 2014

Cp

a

name, and on the relation of Asaph to

see

G

ENEALOGIES

7

T h e

of the b'ne

(Ezra

8

om. B

so

also

Pesh. and

I

Esd. 832

;

in

'of

sons of

the

of

.

.

. .

The site is uncertain.

the desert (see K

EDEMOTH

).

T.

K.

C.

JAHDAI

or

[Gi.], from

' t o

cp Sab.

the head of a family of

six

abruptly introduced into the

genealogy of Caleb

(

I

Ch.

2 4 7 ) .

The context suggests

that a concubine of Caleb is intended.

Perhaps

should read

Jehudijah' (cp

I

Ch.

the six

sons mentioned would then be half-Jiidahite.

T.

K.

c.

JAHDIEL

El

glad or gladdens,'

J

EHDEIAH

A

and

A

confused],

[AL]), one of the chiefs of Manasseh-beyond-Jordan

( I

Ch.

JAHDO

cp

[A],

a

JAHLEEL

probably

family or clan, of Zebulun

46

ethnic

Jahleelites,

Perhaps, like

a corruption of

'God delivers.'

T.

In Syr. is the preformative of the

Another similar

formation

i s

seen in

for

Jephthah.'

..... .......

ably the parent of the

and

that a variant may plausibly he found (see Jastrow, JBL 19

in the familiar

(Samuel).

A Levitical name,

I

Ch. Gzo

43

(

L

E

I n

back the

Samuel to

Kehathite), the Chronicler introduces the analogous names
Mahath, Nahath, and Tahath (

I

Ch. 23

35

37);

cp with these, the Kehathite Jahath (b.

b.

in

Ch.

But Shelomoth (h. Shimei) is Gershonite in 239 (as

also is Shebuel

I

,

above],

and in agreement with

we find an important Gershonite

Jahath

Further, Jahath the father of Shimei, and Jahath b.

Libni reappear in the genealogies of the Gershonites Ethan
Ethni, and Asaph (

I

Ch. 6 43

and Jeatherai

respectively.

Finally, not only Jahath

Ch. 34

but also Libni and Shimei

(

I

Ch. 6

are used a s

names,

to

which division even Ethan (see

3)

himself

finally

ascribed.

A.

C.

W e may perhaps associate

with the name

which is brought into connection with Jahath,

I

,

I

Ch. 2

4 2 (for another view see G

ENEALOGIES

,

7

1666).

Considering the way in which

are built

up, it is possible that

the same as

(

I

Ch.

Ch

i

JAHMAI

[L],

an Issacharite clan-name

( I

Ch.

7

Analogy suggests that

is an abbreviated theophorous

name (cp

in

C O T

perhaps for

cp Sab.

and

God protects,’ or (since the

does not appear to be used

Heb.) for

which has

actually been found upon a Heb. seal.

A.

C.

JAHZAH

Jer.

4821

RV.

JAHZEEL

‘God halves’?

See J

AHAZ

.

a son of Naphtali. Gen. 4624

Nu.

I

has

or rather

Nu. 2648

has the patronymic

(

.

Rather a corruption of

cp

T.

K.

C.

JAHZEIAH

Ezra

1 0

RV,

AV J

AHAZIAH

.

JAHZERAH

I

Ch.

9

JAIR

‘ H e

[God] enlightens,’

53

[BAFL]).

I.

After the main body of the Israelites had

settled down

W.

of Jordan

Manassite clans

migrated to the

E.,

having dispossessed the

Amorites, founded settlements in Bashan and

N.

Gilead. Among them was (the

of) J a i r :

Nu.

[A], Dt.

I

K.

[om. BL]

[A]).

In the above-mentioned passages Jair is called the son of
Manasseh; but in

I

Ch.

[A];

23,

a

dittograph],

[A]) he is made

to be of mixed descent, namely from Hezron, a
Judahite, on his father’s side, and from Machir
on his mother’s

In Judg.

mention is

made of Jair, a

[A

in

and it is

very probable that Jair may have been placed by

one

tradition in the age of Moses and by another in the age
of the Judges.

He is said to have had thirty

sons,

who rode on thirty asses and had thirty cities called
H

AVVOTH

-

JAIR

The notice of the thirty colts

may be a gloss based

on

1214 and facilitated by the

similarity of the words for cities and colts (the
masia in

[cities] and

[colts] is retained also in

. .

.

and

The expression in Judg.

105 ‘ a n d Jair died, and was buried

leads one to suppose that the seat of the clan was at
that place. See

JEPHTHAH,

The father of Mordecai, Esth. 2 5

. . .

[AI).

In

the Apocrypha (Esth.

112)

his name appears

as

He (God) awakens,’

so

and Pesh.

Kt., however,

Jer. filius

with

defect.),

the clan-name or the name of an ancestor of

I n the parallel passage

S.

we find the form

JAARE-(OREGIM).

See E

LHANAN

,

See A

HASAI

.

JAIRITE

S.

J A I R U S

[Ti. W H ] probably

Jair of

OT), a

ruler of the synagogue, whose daughter

Jesns restored to life just after her death

(Mk.

Lk. 841

The narrative

is

specially important,

because the restoration to life to which it refers is the
best attested of the three marvels of this class related
in the Gospels, being given in

Mk., and

not, however, without differences.

Of

these differences, which are outweighed by the points

agreement, one is the non-mention of the name

‘ruler

(not ‘ruler of the synagogue’) in

account. Indeed the

Codex

(D)

is without the name in Mk., and

in

Lk.

also.

See I

RA

,

3.

JAIRUS

That the narrative in some form belongs to the earliest

stratum of the Gospel tradition is further supported

(

I

)

by the profound saying ‘ T h e damsel is not dead, but
sleepeth,’ which occupies a central position and is quite
in the manner of Jesus, and

by the interweaving of

another narrative which expresses

one

of the popular

superstitions

so

forcibly that it must be

as

old as any

in the Gospels.

The earliest form of the story of the ruler is that

given in Mt.

23-26.

As Weiss has pointed out,

the earliest traditional narratives were not much con-
cerned about details, but aimed at connecting the
remembered sayings of Jesus with the facts which
formed (or, it was thought, must have formed) their
true setting.

Whether Weiss is right in ascribing all

the picturesque details in Mk. to a

tradition, is

at best doubtful he is at

rate most probably quite

wrong in adopting Mk. report of the ruler’s appeal to

My little daughter is at the point of death’

For

this evangelist represents the feeling

of

a

later time that it was too much to believe that the

ruler could at once have risen to the height of faith
implied in Mt.

he assumes that the ruler must

at first have been afraid of such a bold request as that

Jesus would raise the dead.

account, however,

rightly understood, makes this assumption unnecessary.
The ruler’s faith, though great, is not heroic.

He has

the superstitious idea that the soul is still hovering about
its former receptacle, and craves of Jesus that

a

magic touch of his hand the scarcely parted soul and
body may be organically reunited.

Another point in

which

account is certainly inferior to

is the

injunction to secrecy (Mk. 543). This is in place in the
story of the blind men which follows in Mt.
but not in the story of the ruler, according to which

much people had heard the unhappy father’s appeal

to the Master. Whether even the words

C

U

MI

may be accepted from Mk. is doubtful.

Certainly the name Jairus is the spontaneous invention
of a pious and poetic imagination. Tradition (except

in

Mk.) does not record the names of persons in the

crowd who were cured by Jesus,’ and the origin of the
name is manifest, viz. not

enlightens,’ but

(Nestle, Chajes)

‘ h e will awaken’ (from the sleep

of death).

Whether the raising of the dead maiden is historical

is another question. That

was regarded even in

the older period as the lord of life and death, and there-
fore

as

one who might on special occasions raise the

dead, is undeniable. But how could any special occasion
arise, now that the belief in the resurrection had become

so

general? For by this belief the conception of death

was transformed

men could not sorrow

as

those who

had no hope.’ Nor did Jesus himself consider it to be
within his ordinary province to raise the dead.

I t has

indeed been said

by Weiss) that Mt.

11

(Lk.

proves that more instances of the raising of the dead
occurred than are reported in the Gospels.

But this

implies

a

misinterpretation of the message to John the

Baptist, which is certainly allegorical the words, the
dead are raised up,’ are explained by the next clause,

‘ a n d the poor have the glad tidings brought to

That

misunderstood the words (Lk.

7

cp N

AIN

)

renders it not improbable that Mk. did

so

too, and that

all three evangelists (whose idea of

Jesus

was marred by

recollections of Elijah and

misunderstood that

deep saying of Jesus, ‘She is not dead, but sleepeth.’

Even

is

perhaps not really

a

personal

name;

may

possibly be a Greek substitute for the

Aram.

‘blind.

Son of the blind’ would mean one of the

company

of

the blind-a numerous company in Palestine. Cp

Mary Magdalene is of course altogether excep-

tional.

See the forcible argument

I

(small

type

paragraph).

Just

as

the idea of

Francis

soon

became blurred

minds of his biographers.

Pesh.

reading

on

which see

E

LHANAN

,

Cited in Ges.

3

This post-exilic representation probably means that there

was

a clan made up partly of the tribe of Judah and partly of

which occupied the region where the ‘Havvoth.

were situated (cp

Be.

ad

is hardly a safe support in favour of the

JAKAN

JAMES

Mk.

Lk.

Acts

The former

of

this pair was a brother of John their father-a Galilean
fisherman, probably a resident of Capernaum-is re-
presented in the first two Gospels (Mt.

4

Mk.

as

having been present when his two sons were called by
Jesus to be his disciples, although in the legendary
account of this event in the third gospel the presence
of Zebedee is not implied, their call being made inci-
dental to that of Peter, who is said to have been a partner
of theirs.

It is a usual inference from Mt.

and

that Salome was their mother, although this

cannot be proved. The call of James to be
was followed some months afterwards by his appointment
as one of the twelve apostles.

His prominence in this

band is indicated by the fact that, in all the four lists
referred

to

above, his name is mentioned among the

first, along with Peter, Andrew, and John, who are
distinguished, together with him, not only by the
position which is accorded to them in the lists (cp
A

POSTLE

,

I,

table), but also in the record of several

important events (Mk.

5 3 7 1 3 3

Mt.

2 6 3 7 ,

and

parallels).

Mk. [very enigmatically] relates that the brothers,

James and John, were designated by Jesus,
which is explained

‘

sons of thunder.’

That this name was bestowed upon them

Jesus prior

to

a

manifestation of certain qualities of character is as improbable

as

that it was given without a reason. Besides the part which

tradition may have had

attributing to them h e name and to

Jesus the

of it is indeterminable. We may conjecture

that they earned the name, either from Jesus or from some

other source on account of a certain impetuosity manifested
perhaps, in

incidentreferred to as mentioned

Lk., and

their rash answer to Jesus’ question: ‘Are ye able

t o

drink the

cup that I

or to be

with the baptism that I

baptized with?

The request which called forth this solemn

question may

also

regarded as indicating qualities of char-

acter which might have given rise to the designation in question.

[Further than this on the track marked out by the older criticism
we cannot go. I t is time, perhaps, to strike out a new path,
calling in the aid of philological and textual criticism.

right?]

T h e last appearance of James the son of

in

the gospel-history is in Gethsemane at the agony of
Jesus (Mt.

2 6 3 7

Mk.

He is mentioned in Acts

among the apostles who, after the resurrection,

remained in Jerusalem continuing steadfastly in prayer.’
T h e cup which he had

so

impetuously professed himself

able to drink was early prepared for him.

At the

of the year

44

he was distinguished as the first

martyr among the apostles by Herod

I.

acting, perhaps, in the interest of Pharisaic
undertook a persecution of the Christians.

In the

language of the writer of Acts

Herod the king

put forth his hands to afflict certain of the church. And
he killed James the brother of John with the sword.’

prominent position of James in the church is

perhaps indicated by his selection for this baptism of
blood.

T h e legend that be went as

a

missionary to Spain, where in

829

his wonder-working bones were found and where his

apparition in luminous

struck with

the infidel

hosts in the war with the Saracens, was reconciled with the
history in Acts by the supposition that, returning from Spain
t o

Jerusalem, he was

by Herod, and his body carried

hack and buried by his Spanish travelling-companions.

Of James the son of

called in

James the less

younger) little is re-

corded in the

NT.

According to the same

passage, his mother was a certain Mary who
is there mentioned as a witness of the cruci-

fixion. T h e translation of ‘Judas of James’

;

616

Acts

as ‘Judas the

brother

of

James’ is of doubtful propriety.

T h e auostle

They have at any rate preserved the saying

for

even

if

the setting which they have produced is not the right one.

See Keim,

Weiss,

de-Nazareth,

Plummer

Luke (International Comm.),

None of these writer:

gives complete satisfaction

;

even Dr. Plummer thinks that

may he content, with Hase, to admit that certainty is
able a s to whether the maiden was dead or in a trance.’ On
the originality of

narrative

Mark’s Indebted-

Matthew

excellent

it is a mistake

to admit that ‘the name Jairus

looks

original.

See, further,

T. K.

C.

JAKAN

RV

JAAKAN),

a name in the

Horite genealogy

( I

Ch.

I n the

list in Gen. 3627 it appears a s ‘and

A

KAN

’

for

of

which

reading

w v a v )

in

I

Ch.

a

corruption.

combines the readings (Gen.

Ch.

the latter being perhaps the original form in both cases; see

text is conflate

has

I

Ch.

JAKEH

some MSS

according to Delitzsch

scrupulously pious

e . ,

cp Ar.

viii.

)

father of

Prov.

30

I

.

The Midrash

(ad

and elsewhere) does not,

as

we might

have supposed identify Jakeh with David but takes hen-Jakeh
to

he a

of the poet called

Solomon), as ‘one

who is free from all sin and iniquity.’

T.

K.

C.

86,

5 3 ;

‘ h e [El] raises’; cp

E

LIAKIM

,

[BAL]).

I

.

The name of one of the twenty-four post-exilic priestly

courses

:

I

Ch. 2412

[A]).

b.

Shimei

13

in a genealogy

of

B

EN

JAMIN

g,

I

3.

I n

of

Mt.

1

represents the

inter-

polated

some late

Gk.

and Syr.

MSS

(apparently also

and Epiphanius; see

WH) between the names of

Josiah

the genealogy of Jesus.

See

G

ENEA

-

L

OGIE

S

and cp

I

.

JALAM

Gen.

36 RV AV

J

AALAM

.

JALON

[B],

b.

(cp

I

),

one of the b‘ne H

U R

I

Ch.

4 7 .

suggests

I

,

and note readings

there cited). This, however, seems too far

N.,

and

considering the positions of the other places mentioned,
we should possibly read

(on the form

cp Driver,

241).

JAMBRES

[Ti.

WH]),

Tim. 38.

See

J

ANNES

.

JAMBRI

(rather

JAMRI),

CHILDREN

OF.

An Arab clan or tribe, residing in M

EDEBA

which attacked John the brother of Jonathan (the
Maccabee) as he was

on

his way to the

and carried him

o f f

with all that he had

( I

Macc.

:

[A],

. . .

[ K ] ,

D.

37

[A],

From

38 42

it appears that John was slain

what

happened to the women and children of the Jews is

not

stated. T o avenge his brother’s death, Jonathan

and his brother Simon crossed the Jordan, and sur-
prised and discomfited the b’ne Jamri (Amri) as they
were escorting a bride with a great train from

D.

37.

Josephus

(Ant.

xiii.

tells

the same story he calls the hostile tribe

ol

like

in Jos.

Ant.

viii. 12

j ,

seems to represent

Omri (for the

readings of

which name see O

MRI

). Since, however, the name

has been found in an Aramaic inscription at

about

SSE.

from Medeba (see

no.

3),

it seems best to retain the form

JAMES

the name of three

persons prominently mentioned in the

the

Jamri.

T. K.

C.

son of Zebedee, James the son of
and James the brother of Jesus. The first
two of these are

in the lists of the

apostles given in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts (Mt.

was probably t h e son

a

otherwise unknown (see

7).

The

question whether James the son of
Alphaeus was identical with James the

[The name is evidently a compound and

as

it stands can-

a con.

not be explained with certainty (see
jecture see

JAMES

JAMES

brother

of

Jesus must be discussed before proceeding to

the consideration of the latter.

Doubtless in early times, and perhaps latterly,

a

pre-

possession in favour of the perpetual virginity of Mary
the mother of Jesus has had an

in determining

some scholars to maintain the affirmative of this
question.

n.

the

inference may he drawn that Mary the mother of

had a

sister Mary who was the wife of Clopas, and that she was the
mother of two sons, James the little

and Joses. More-

over, since James,

Joseph), Judas, and Simon are men-

tioned in

13

and Mk. 6 3 a s brothers of Jesus, and since in

Lk.

6

and Acts

a James and a Jude are included among

the anostles. it has been

that these latter were identical

It

is argued that from Mt. 2756 Mk.

and

with ‘the

and Judas mentioned among the brothers of

Jesus, yet

they were not his brothers, but his cousins. In

support of this hypothesis it is maintained that the James called
the brother of Jesus, mentioned explicitly by Paul in Gal.
as

such and frequently elsewhere a s simply ‘James,’ and always

a s holding a prominent place in the church a t

was no other than James the son of Alphreus who

by the hypothesis with the Clopas of Jn.

T h u s he would be shown to have been a cousin of Jesus, being
the son of a sister of Mary, Jesus’s mother, and

of the

original apostles.

This argumentation

is,

however, beset with insuper-

able

If the apostle

(Mt.

but

R V

and

WH

Thaddzus) who is called Thaddzus

in

and who by the hypothesis was identical

with the ‘Judas of James’ of

and Acts, was by

the first evangelist known to have been a brother
of

James the son of Alphreus, it

is

improbable that

this writer would not have’ indicated this fact after
the analogy of ‘Simon and Andrew his brother’
and ‘James and John his brother.’ It

is

no less im-

probable that, if Judas and Simon were

sons

of

and the Mary

in

question, they would not have been

mentioned along with Joses in Mt.

and Mk.

I t is also evident from the attitude of Jesus’s brothers toward

according to Mk.

that they could not have belonged

to the friendly apostolic group. For they are here represented
as

standing without,’ and were probably of the his friends

rap’

who ‘went out to lay hold

him’ because he

was, they thought, beside himself.

Jn. 75.) In this con-

nection the fact is important that wherever they are mentioned
in the N T they are distinguished from the apostles (Mt. 12

46

Jn. 7 3 Acts

other apostles [besides

Paul] and the brothers of the Lord’). Besides, there is nowhere
an intimation that any one of the apostles was either a brother
or

a cousin of Jesus. T h e attempt to show from Jn.

that

Mary, the so-called ‘wife’ of Clopas (identified by the
with Alphreus), was the sister of the mother of Jesus and that
hence James the son of Alphaeus was his cousin is hazardous.
For it is

whether Clopas and Alphaeus are the Aramaic

and Greek forms of the same name, since the Syriac version
uniformly transliterates them differently (Cleopha and Halpai)
and whether

‘

Mary of Clopas’ (Ma

is

in apposition with

sister of

mother’

The opinion that four women instead of three

are mentioned here has the support

of

the Syriac version and

of many of the highest authorities (see

on the passage,

and Wieseler in

’40,

650).

Besides, the position is

quite tenable that according to the prevailing

usus

‘Mary of Clopas’

means Mary the

daughter of Clopas, in which case Clopas would be known only
a s the father of the Mary mentioned in

(see

Thus in any case the improbable supposition that in the same
family there were two sisters of the same name is obviated.
Still, even if it could be shown that James the son of
was a cousin of Jesus it would not follow that another James
was not his brother, since better reasons than those given by
Lange and Meyrick are required to justify the abandonment of
the natural meaning of

Nor is

necessary to resort

to

the supposition of step-brothers; for, according to the obvious

sense of first-born’

Lk.

Mt.

Sin.

Mary was the mother of other sons

Jesus.

It

is

questioned whether in Gal.

other of the

apostles saw

I

none, save James the Lord’s brother’

James

is

included among the

apostles.

T h e

is

thought to carry with it

the identification of the apostle James the

son

of Alphreus

with the brother of Jesus. The passage, however, may
be

rendered, ‘Another of the apostles [save

Peter]

I

did not see, but only James the brother of the

Lord.

save ’) finding

exception in the negative

(‘saw not

a.

(‘other

of

the apostles’) referring to

Peter

For

a

similar construction see Rom. 14

I

Cor.

Gal. 2

16

Mt.124 2436

interpret

Credner,

Bleek,

Holtzmann, and others.

It is not necessary to suppose with Meyer and

(who object to such a n exception to Paul’s use of

elsewhere) that James is here includedamong the apostles

in the wider sense.

The conclusion

is

legitimate that

whenever Paul refers to James he has in mind the one
mentioned in this passage, not the

son

of Alphzeus.

A

James who

is

not called the brother of Jesus, and

is

not specifically designated,

is

conspicuous in Acts

his identification must be controlled by the prominence
given by Paul to the brother of the Lord

T

O

O

Gal.

cp

2 9 1 2 ) .

For want of space, dis-

cussion of the patristic and other early testimony on
this point must be omitted.

Suffice it to say that the

view that there were three

is supported by

Hegesippus, the pseudo- Clementine literature

11

35,

4 3 5 )

and the

Apostolic

Constitutions

whilst Chrysostom, Jerome, and

Theodoret are quoted for the opposite opinion.

James, surnamed the Just, although sharing with the

brothers, of whom he was probably the oldest, in their

opposition-to Jesus during his public
ministry, appears to have been con-

verted to his cause soon

the

resurrection. According to

I

Cor.

he was a witness

to one of the manifestations of the risen Christ.
indeed, to two, if he may be included

‘ a l l the

apostles

An Ebionite ideal picture of ‘James the brother of the

Lord’ is given

Hegesippus (Eus. H E

who after

saying that he received the, government of the church

the

apostles, continues thus : This apostle

was

consecrated from

his mother’s womb. H e drank neither wine nor strong drink
and abstained from animal food. A razor never came upon
head, he never anointed with oil, and never used a bath.

. .

.

H e was in the habit of entering the

le alone, and was often

found upon his hended knees,

. .

.

so

his knees became a s

a camel‘s in consequence of his habitual supplication.’

T h e

position assigned

to

him in the church by Hegesippus accords

with the statement in the pseudo-Clementine writings that he
was the bishop of the holy church, the bishop of Jerusalem,

princeps, and

According to Gal.

1 1 8

Paul finds James (see

C

HRONOL

O

G

Y

,

)

holding

a

prominent place in the

Christian community

Jerusalem along with Peter and

John, and with these three, ‘reputed to be pillars,’ he
came to an arrangement respecting his mission to the
Gentiles.

great was the influence or the authority

of James that Peter was controlled by him a t Antioch
in the matter

of

eating with the Gentiles.

For when

certain from James came, he drew back and separated

himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision

(Gal.

2 1 2 ) .

From this fact and from Paul’s statement

that, yielding to the emissaries from James, the rest of
the Jews dissembled,’ and even

was carried

away with their dissimulation,’ the inference is obvious
that this brother of Jesus was the acknowledged head
of the Jewish-Christian party in the church of Jerusalem
and

a

zealot for the strict observance of the Jewish law.

Paul’s vehement argument with Peter at Antioch reveals

no

less clearly the attitude

of

James and his faction, than

the position of Paul himself. The question was that
of the validity

of

the Jewish law for Christiaris, and Paul

exposes the kernel of the matter when he says :

I

do

not make void the grace of God : for if righteousness

is

through the law, then Christ died for nought’ (Gal.
This is the historical account of the affair. The writer
of Acts, however, whose aim it was to present the
original apostles and James

a

favourable light with

reference to Paulinism, records events which would
render the occurrences at Antioch improbable

(I

21

see, however, A

CTS

,

3).

The testimony of antiquity leaves no doubt that James

died a violent death a t the hands of Jewish zealots about
the year 63.

For

the dramatic account of his martyr-

dom given by Hegesippus see

H E

223.

Josephus

relates that, during the

between Festus

2320

JAMES (EPISTLE)

JAMES (EPISTLE)

and Albinus,

the high priest (see

[end])

called the Sanhedrin together, and having summoned
James, secured his condemnation to death by

an

act for which he suffered the censure of the influential

Jews, and was deprived of his office by Albinus.

Important discussions of this

may be found in Mayor

The

James;

Alford Greeh

Davidson,

Zntr. ; Arnaud,

etc., 51

Lightfoot,

Essay

on tke Brethren

Lord;

art. James in

; Hilgenfeld,

Meyer’s Commentary, 15

;

Holtzmann,

Z W T ,

3

; Wieseler

.

Keim in

Briider Jesu,’ ’69;

in

art.

56;

Immer in

N T

282

and Credner,

JAMES

(EPISTLE).

The object of this writing,

which is with doubtful propriety called a n epistle (see,

E

PISTOLARY

L

ITERATURE

,

to emphasize the importance

of

practical Christianity and to encourage and

strengthen its readers in their trials.

T h e writer exhorts his readers to receive trials with joy,

letting patience have its perfect work, and asking in faith for
wisdom of God who giveth liberally (1

External conditions

are without real significance.

man is blessed who endures

temptation ; hut temptations are from within, and God tempts
no

man

Every man should be swift to hear and slow

to sueak

:

the

of the word

is of

0.

c.

should be kept, and men should speak and act as they who are

‘be judged by a law of

’(2

1-13).

Faith without works

is

‘dead’ and can ‘save no one, and by the examples of

Abraham and Rahah those are shown to be in error who
to the contrary (2

Inquisitive conceit of wisdom,

unbridled tongue, jealousy and faction are severely rebuked,
and ‘ t h e wisdom that is

above’

commended (3). T h e

‘pleasures that war

the members’ are condemned a s the

source of contention in the churches, together with adultery,
worldliness, and envy (4

Calumny and censoriousness

are rebuked, and the eager pursuit of gain is shown to be folly
in view of the brevity and uncertainty of life, which should he
lived in a constant sense of dependence upon God

T h e rich are threatened who have heaped

corrupted’ riches,

while the cry of the poor whom they have oppressed
entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth’

T h e

brethren are exhorted to patience in view of the ‘coming of the
Lord

which is ‘at hand

’

(5

Swear-

ing is

and prayer is recommended which if offered

‘in faith,’ will

the sick (5

he is’felicitated

who

‘

converts a sinner from the error of his way’ (5

T h e different parts of the writing are without logical

connection, and it has been well characterised

as

‘for

the most part a loose joining of sayings which are not
thought in this connection, but brought into it ready
made’ (Wcizsacker).

T h e address, ‘ t o the twelve tribes who are

of

the

disuersion

I

Pet.

1

be a t least regarded as in

accord with the general Jewish-Christian
character of the epistle, although its

meaning and purpose are indeterminable.

T h e

twelve tribes’ qualified by ‘of the dispersion’

can literally mean only the Jews living out-

side Palestine

;

but that the writer had Christians, not

Jews, in mind

is

evident

( 2

I

5

7).

Some expositors

have sought to resolve this incongruity between the
address and the contents of the epistle by assnming
that the persons addressed were Jewish Christians, since
Jewish Christians are called Jews in Gal.

213

and

Hebrews in the superscription of the Epistle to the
Hebrews and in patristic literature, just as Paul (Rom.

11

13)

designates the Gentile Christians

as

Whilst,

however, the Jewish-Christian tendency of the epistle
unmistakable, it is difficult to find in it

evidence

that it was addressed

to

Christians.

.

faction of the believers in general. T h e citation of
from the O T and the

of Abraham a s ‘our father

(2

nothing in view of Paul‘s usage (Rom.

4

I

16

Gal. 3

16

29 ; see also Clem. Rom. 31 4). The use of

for a Christian assembly (22) was not confined to the Jewish
Christians who according to

30

employed

it

Here it may mean no more than

in Heh.

1025 (see Harnack,

‘76,

2321

It

is

very improbable, moreover, that a writer

addressing Jewish Christians should not only ignore the
Mosaic Law and ritual, but also give prominence

the perfect law of liberty,’ evidently contrasting it with

the former, and to the implanted word

2

without any attempt to show the relation of these
conceptions to the ancient economy

von Soden.

iii.

Another incongruity between the address and the

contents appears in the fact that whilst the former is
general, there is in the latter constant reference to local
and special conditions, as if the writer really had in
mind a particular Christian

assembly

with whose errors and needs he

was

personally ac-

quainted.

T h e circumstances which h e

detail cannot b e

supposed to have existed

extended territory, such

a s is indicated in the

(1

2

3

4

13

5

If,

on account of these incongruities the address b e

not judged to be fictitious and without significance in
relation to the contents, it must be regarded as including
Christians

general

as

the ‘true Israel,‘ as ‘the new,

greater people of God, who have

the place of the

old’ (Gal.

6 1 6 ;

cp Barn. 46

2

Clem.

T h e

words of the dispersion’ may be,

as

Pfleiderer con-

jectures, a n imitation

of

I

Pet.

with the omission

of

the local limitation.

The relation of the epistle to the other

N T

writings

to early patristic literature is instructive with

reference to the question of its date and

a.

The epistle contains many

scences of the

of

princi-

authorship.

pally

of

those collected in

the

Sermon

on

the Mount.‘

T h e

of contact with the

Gosuels do

not indicate

a

literary dependence upon them or an

accurate knowledge of the words of Jesus.

If the author was acquainted with our written Gospels, h e

cannot he said to have quoted from them, and he never refers to

them or to Jesus as the source of the moral apophthegms in which
his

abounds.

I t is certainly a very vague and limited

knowledge of ‘ t h e evangelic tradition’ that can be affirmed
(with Holtzmann) on the

of

1 6

compared with Mk.

11 22-24,

and 5 14 compared with

Mk.

The most that can

be said in this relation is that the moral teachings contained in
this tradition bad made a n indistinct impression upon the mind
of the writer.

That the writer of James was acquainted with

Rorn.,

I

Cor., and Gal., there is little reason to doubt,

though he makes no

of

these writings, and

does not directly quote from them.

Acquaintance with them is shown in faint reminiscences

of

their terminology and forms of expression and in declarations
which are

in

apparently intentional opposition to teachings

contained in them (1

Rom. 5

;

1 13

I

Cor. 10

13

1

Rom.

1

Rom. 2

2

Gal. 5 3 ; 2

I

Cor. 8 4 ;

Gal. 36

Rom. 4 3 ; 2 24 Rom.

216;

Rom.

4 4

Rom. 8 7 ’

4

5

Gal. 5

;

4

Rom. 2

The writer shows no

prehension of the leading doctrines of Paul, and it is probable
that the subtleties of the apostle were so foreign to his thought,
that he could not understand them. Of the Pauline conception
of the Messiahship of Jesus, his atoning sacrifice, and his resur-
rection (in which was the hope of the resurrection of believers
a t the Parousia), and of the profound Pauline mysticism, there
is no trace of even a reminiscence in the epistle. There is
only a reference to the Parousia which shows a merely external
apprehension of it (5

Acquaintance with the Epistle to the Hebrews

i s

not improbable.

This

he argued

the ground of 2

17

compared

with Heb. 6

I

9

14

‘dead’ applied in the one case to

faith and in the other to works), of 3

18,

compared with Heb.

12

‘the fruit of righteousness

.

. .

in

and

‘the peaceable

fruit

.

.

of righteousness’), and of 2

the example of Rahah,

compared with Heb. 11

Other points of contact with Heb.

are found in 1

(cp Heh. 12

g),

3

I

(cp Heh. 5

4

15

(cp

Heb. 3), 5

(cp Heb. 13 7).

The relation of James to

I

Pet. necessitates the

hypothesis of a literary dependence, and it is

a

disputed

question to which the priority should be accorded.

2322

JAMES (EPISTLE)

JAMES (EPISTLE)

Cp

1

I

with

I

Pet. 1

I

,

1

with

I

Pet.

1

IO

with

I

Pet.

124,

with

I

Pet. 123,

with

I

Pet. 2

I

2

7

with

I

Pet. 4

14-16,

46-10

with

Pet. 5

5

with

I

Pet. 4 7 ,

5

with

I

Pet. 4

Expositors have 'generally maintained the

dependence of

I

Pet. upon James

;

but

Briickner has shown

with probability the priority of the former, by a careful study of
the parallel

'74,

533

and has been

followed by Holtzmann, Pfleiderer, and von Soden. (See

also

Grimm,

'72,

e. Dependence on the Apocalypse

is

at least probable.

Cp 2 5 with Rev.

2

9,

1

with Rev. 2

IO,

5

9

with Rev. 3

Pfleiderer decidesfor the priorityof the portion of the Apocalypse
(dating from the time of

which contains these passages

and thinks that the writer of James in appealing to the divind
promise (1

must have had Rev. 2

IO

in mind

857).

however, reverses the relation

(Die

d.

183).

The contacts with

I

Clem. do

not

show 'incon-

testably' the use of James by the author of that epistle.

The two most important passages are found in

I

Pet. which

may have been a common source for the writers of James and

I

Clem. (cp Clem.

30

with

I

Pet.

5 5

Jas.

4

6,

Clem. 49

5

with

I

Pet. 4 8 Jas. 5

I

Clem.

(cp Jas. 2

is explicable

from Rom. 4 3

;

and

6

and

17

do not necessarily presuppose

a n acquaintance of the writer with

223

and

5

If,

however, the use of James in this case be conceded, the
indeterminable date of

I

Clem. (probably

excludes any

conclusion for the early composition of the former.

g.

The points of agreement between the Shepherd of

and James necessitate the conclusion that one

of them is dependent upon the other

but it is not

clear to which the priority should be assigned.

Pfleiderer is perhaps too positive that it probably

to

Herm. (cp 4

7

with Herm.

12

5

;

4

with Herm.

12

6

9

23).

h.

The author of James was acquainted with the

LXX,

hut

not with the Heh. text of the

OT.

Theile has shown him

to have been familiar with Ecclns. and Wisdom, and probable
points of contact with Philo have been pointed out.

T h e acquaintance of the author with some of the

Pauline

the

of which have alreadv

given, must be regarded as in-

contestably established by the criticism
of this writing. in

to which so

many disputed questions still remain unsettled.

The

most indisputable point of contact with
occurs in the short section in which the writer discusses
the doctrine of justification

(2

14-26).

The twofold

prepossession against admitting that the canon of the

N T

contains pseudonymous writings and contradictory

teachings has led to the confusion of

a

problem which

would otherwise have found an easy solution.

For

if

the same critical method

be applied here that is

employed in similar cases from the consideration of

which such prepossessions are absent, there can be no
doubt that

a

general agreement among scholars would

result. The case in question is not

a

vague allusion to

faith and works in general, which might be accounted
for

on

the ground of Jewish ideas and terms known by

the writer of the epistle without dependence upon Paul,
but a pointed reference to

a

distinctly Pauline doctrine

and the employment of the apostle's terminology and
very words. Paul declares explicitly : ' W e reckon
therefore that a

is justified

by faith

apart from the works of the law' (Rom.

and ' a

man is not justified by the works of the law

. . .

even

we believed

on

Christ Jesus, that we might be justified

by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the
law' (Gal.

cites the case of Abraham, and

affirms that this patriarch was justified not by works,

by faith (Rom.

4 1

Gal. 3 6 ) . On the contrary, the

writer of James declares that ' a man is justified

by works, and not by faith only'

and

as

if to reply to the advocates of Paulinism by employing

the very example adduced by their master he affirms
that Abraham was justified by works

H e

also turns to his purpose the case of Rahab employed
in an opposite sense by the Pauline writer of Heb.
I n the declaration that a man is not justified by faith
only

is implied the doctrine of the co-operation

of faith and works in justification, which is expressed in
the words regarding Abraham

Faith wrought with

his works, and by works was faith made perfect

(2

This is essentially

a

justification

in opposition

to

the Pauline

according to the declaration

concluding this section

For as the body apart from

the spirit is dead, even

so

faith apart from works

the Pauline terminology) is dead.'

To

Paul, however, the Gospel was ' t h e power of God
unto salvation to every one that believeth,'

faith in

itself or

had a saving efficacy (Rom.

an affirmation which

pointedly denied in James

Paul could

never, like

author,

as

Kern has pointed out, have

made salvation depend upon faith and works, because
faith in his sense included

a

new life.

T h e difference of the two points

of

view has been well stated

by Schwegler : With Paul faith because it justifies is the
source of good works ; with James faith because it

is

the source

of good works and shows itself alive in them has a justifying
efficacy. With Paul justification is conditional upon faith or
better, justification and faith are present a t the same time
the man, and works proceed out of the justification in faith.
with James justification proceeds from the works in which
shows itself to be alive. With

justification comes between

faith and works ; with James works come between faith and
justification'

Nothing could have been further from Paul's thought

than to depreciate good works; but he did not think
that the justifying judgment of God was determined by
them, for as Luther, rightly apprehending the Pauline
thought, says, 'faith lies at the bottom of the heart,
and God looks to the bottom of the heart.'

(Cp

W.

Grimm,

W T ,

p. 379.) However, the different

views of faith and justification entertained by the two
men are not of special importance for our purpose.
(An admirable statement of them has been

by

von Soden in

'84.)

Whether the author of

James wrote for readers who,

as

he supposes, misunder-

stood Paul's teachings, or whether,

as

is more probable,

he did not himself correctly apprehend them, the
important fact is that he betrays unmistakably

a

dependence upon Rom. and Gal.

Holtzmann

is

not

too positive in saying that there is no more direct sort
of polemics than the verbal citation of

a

formula

supplied with

a

definite negation

If the expedient of

Weiss, adopted from Neander, be allowed, that the
writer of James was in this section combating

a

Jewish-

Christian prejudice rather than a Pauline doctrine (the
epistle being assumed to have been written before the
time

of

Paul), the conflict of teaching would still remain.

There is, however, scarcely a probability in favour

of

this supposition in view of the employment in James of
the unique Pauline terminology.

T h e composition

of

the epistle in the apostolic age,

md, as is generally supposed

those

who

assign it to

.

- -

Date a

i

d

this period, by- James, the

of

Jesus, is rendered very improbable by
several internal features, which have been

pointed out.

The legalistic point of view of

one of the pillars of the church in Jerusalem,

not indicated.

The question of the relation of Jews

and Gentiles, which agitated the early church, is not re-

to.

'

The Judaistic controversy seems accordingly

have died out and the

6

perfect law of freedom

(1

25)

to have been actoally

with the new and transformed law of a

Jhristianity already becoming Catholic.

The

condition of the churches which is depicted-too

nuch teaching, the unbridled tongue, worldliness,
leference to the rich and scorn 'of the poor,

an

for trade and gain,

'

jealousy and faction,'

'

wars

fightings,' and the absence of the wisdom that is

rom above-is not by any means that

of

primitive

An indication of

a

late date is found in

5

where

healing of the sick is effected through

'

the

that

is,

the official body of presbyters

(

I

Tim.

JAMES (EPISTLE)

JAMLECH

In the earlier church the power to effect 'healings' and 'the

working of miracles pertained to believers indiscriminately

Cor.

embodiment of

function in an official

class indicates a considerable development of ecclesiastical

organisation. Cp S

PIRITUAL

G

IFTS

.

The writer was not, moreover, familiar with primitive

Christianity on its doctrinal side. He mentions, indeed,

as

before remarked, the Parousia, and calls Christ the

Lord of Glory'

(21).

The Christological question, how-

ever, included much more than this in the early Church

-the life, the atoning death, the resurrection of

Jesus,

a n d the testimony of the

O T

to his Messiahship. That

the 'brother of Jesus,' living at the time when these

,doctrines were taking form, should not have referred to

them even in

a

hortatory epistle is

Moreover, the good Greek style of the epistle, despite
Schleiermacher's strictures upon it, is hardly such

as

could be expected of the son of Joseph and Mary.

Spitta has recently undertaken to show that the epistle is not

a Christian,

a Jewish, work

( D e r

des

T h e only specifically Christian passages,

('and of the Lord Jesus Christ 1

I

) and

our [Lord] Jesus Christ,' 2

I

),

regarded as inter-

and the interpretation of the entire book is conducted

with reference to parallels drawn from the Jewish literature.

'The hypothesis of interpolations, however, is

arbitrary.

the section on faith and works

presupposes the

doctrine and an acquaintance with Paul's writings, as has been

shown in the course of this article; and the relation of the

epistle to the N T literature is adverse to the early date assigned

to it

Spitta.

Moreover the terminology

,eschatology is unmistakably

See

('until the coming of the Lord,' 57) and

the coming of the Lord

a t hand,'

58).

T h e parallels referred to in Enoch do not contain this terminology.

hypothesis, though defended with great learning and

acumen can hardly be regarded as established.

Von Soden (in

rejecting Spitta's hypothesis,

sents a new one of his own. T h e two sections, complete in them-

selves,

31-18

and

show no sort of accord with Christian

writings or ideas. T h e former might he regarded as an essay of

.an Alexandrian scribe and the latter

fragment from a

Jewish apocalypse. Although they may have come from the
same pen, they betray a different mind in tone, language, and
manner of apprehending things. Other parts of the epistle give
the impressiou that sayings elsewhere formulated are grouped

on

the ground of a general relationship of their contents or

of

their reference to that with which the author

was

occupied.

Whilst Christian tones are wanting in the sections referred to,

in the others notes of accord with Paul and

I

Pet. are frequent

(cp

21

5

8

14-26

IO).

the forty words

in James foreign to the N T there are outside

six

and

in

in chap.

2.

It

is probable there-

fore, that in combating the impro

in

known to him the writer called to

aid reminiscences out of

his Jewish

while h e contributed

of

his own only some

thoughts chiefly found in chaps.

1

and 2, showing here, how-

ever, the influence of

his

Jewish materials in choice of words,

tone, and style. Parallels to this procedure are found in the

the epistle of Barnahas, the reception of apocalyptic

Rev., and the Pauline anthologies from the OT.

From this point of view it is believed that justice will more easily

he done to the epistle, the loose connection and the defective

arrangement will

less censured, and the absence of specifically

Christian expressions, as well a s the retirement of the book a s

soon a s Greek influence prevailed

in Christendom, will be better

understood.

The

author, indeed, does not conceal his repugnance to

doctrinal disputations, and the judgment is well grounded

which finds that the episode regarding faith and works

was

written not so much with a doctrinal purpose,

as

t o

enforce the fundamental practical object of the writing

-to recommend the wisdom that is from above as more

desirable than riches and earthly knowledge. If the

Christianity which the author defends has, as Hilgenfeld

maintains, an Essene colouring in such teachings

as

those regarding mercy

the oath

riches

(1

trade

(4

and governing

tongue

an Ebionite tendency

is

more certainly shown

in his predilection for the poor and his opposition to the

rich, and in his disinclination to teaching, worldly
wisdom, and theories of faith. (See the Ebionite

of

agreement with the Clem.

in Immer,

428). Whether his points of contact with the

Shepherd of Hermas prove his use

of

that writing or

not, the similarities of the two works, which Pfleiderer

The epistle is

poor

in doctrinal expressions.

has pointed out, give great weight to this scholar's
opinion that 'certain it is that both writings presuppose
like historical circumstances, and, from a similar point
of view, direct their admonitions to their contemporaries,

among whom

a

lax worldly-mindedness and unfruitful

theological wrangling threatened to destroy the religious
life

868). Holtzmann characterises this

as

the right visual angle for the judgment

of

the

epistle

W T ,

'92,

p.

66).

The latter scholar concludes

that in his formulation both of the conception of the
law and of that of Christology the writer's thought
reaches in its objective points into Catholic Christianity.

It

may be regarded

as

far more probable that the

epistle is a product of the second century, perhaps later
than

I

Peter, than that it was written in the apostolic

age by the brother of Jesus.

Perhaps in his polemic

against faith the writer had in mind an 'ultra-Pauline
Gnosis which he may or may not have discriminated
from genuine Paulinism.

T h e place from which the epistle

was

written is

indeterminable

but the opinion that it originated in

Rome has great probability

in

its favour on account of

the contacts with Heb., Clem.

and Herm.

The epistle did not fare well

as

to recognition in the

early Church.

The Canon of Muratori omits it. The

earliest trace of

an

acquaintance with

it is found in

who refers to

Abraham as the friend of God (Jas.

2

23)

but he does

not mention the epistle.

From Tertullian's silence

regarding the epistle it must be concluded that he either
was unacquainted with it, or knowing it, regarded it

as

spurious. Eusebius, in writing of it as an historian,
classifies it among the controverted books, and says
that it

is

reckoned spurious, and that not many of the

ancients have mentioned

it.

Yet in his commentary on

the Psalms he quotes it as

'

the holy apostle's.'

Doubt-

ful

traces of its use by

are found in his

writings, although he

is

said by Eusebius to have

written commentaries on all the Catholic epistles.
Good reasons, however, for doubting his acquaintance
with it are given by Salmon

N T

449).

Origen knew and quoted an epistle of which he spoke
doubtfully

as

said to be James's

Jerome, while acknowledging its genuine-

ness, remarks that it was said to have been published
by another in the name of James, though it gradually
acquired authority.

It is contained in the Pesh., and

Ephrem accepted it

as

the work of James, the brother

of Jesus.

T h e most important commentaries

on the epistle are those of

Schneckenburger

Theile ('33)

Kern ('38) Ewald

Soden

and Mayor

7.

Literature.

Special

are contained

in the

of Credner, D e Wette, Holtz-

mann, Hilgenfeld, Zahn, and in the

of Salmon

and Davidson.

articles on the epistle are those of

Kern

35

also

separately), Grimm

Hilgenfeld

Briickner

'74)

mann

'85)

Haupt

Usteri

(i6

and

C. van

Th.

T

28 478-496

on

the

of

on name cp BENJAMIN only in

P

and post-exilic writings

I

.

b. Ram, a Jerahmeelite

Ch.

See

h.

(Gen.

IO

Ex.

G

Nu.

3.

A

present a t the reading of the law under

Neh. 8 7 (om.

JAMLECH

gives dominion,'

53,

but

cp J

ERAHMEEL

,

4

a Simeonite chieftain, temp.

finds a place-name

'

Jamin' in Josh. 177

where M T has

and inserts it as a proper-name be-

tween Abner and

in

I

S.

cp the

question arising out of Saul's genealogy in

I

S.

I

).

Cp also

reading for

in

Gen.

3624

(see

3).

epistle.

0.

c.

2.

I

Ch. 424);

Jaminites,

Nu.

2326

JAMNIA

AND JAMBRES

aids pronunciation as in the case of

(see

Buxtorff Lex.

e t

col. 945.

can be readily

as Hebrew, for

or

would correspond

with Johanan

I n

the Hebrew sources, however,

the

names are not always so spelt. I n Bab. Talm.

we

find the forms

; but in the

the names a r e

more similar to those in Timothy. There are several spellings
even within the

itself. Ex.

Nu. 22

22,

(These spellings are cited

from the editio prince s Venice

1695

and they are all confirmed

by the valuable

'Brit.

Add.

In other

Jewish works the

of the names is even less uniform,

so that we even find Joannes and Ambrosius

and also three names instead of two Jonos

Juchne, and Mamhre (see

on

3

There

.is

another tenable theory as to the origin of

the names.

Lauth

(Moses

der

7 7 )

held that

they

are

Egyptian, Jannes meaning 'Scribe' and

Mambres 'Gift of the Sun God (Heliodorus).'

J.

Freudenthal

also regards

the names

as

Graecised-Egyptian.

Freudenthal

traces the whole story to

a

Hellenistic Egyptian source,

though one of the names occurs (perhaps) in Pliny
xxx.

and in

c.

ed.

The fullest citation in a pagan source is from

Numenius (Eus.

Ev. 9

8 ) .

Freudenthal considers.

it probable that Numenius derived his statement from
Artapanos,

a

Hellenist who wrote in Alexandria in the

second century

B

.

C.

(Schiirer, however, contests this,

but on inconclusive grounds).

Ewald

n.

I

)

also treats the names as ancient, and

well compares the Hebrew

(see M

AGIC

,

2 )

with Numenius's

Ewald would thus.

agree with Lauth in holding that the names are t h e
Egyptian equivalents for Scribes in general.

explanation of the names, apart from their

etymology, has given rise to many conjectures, some of

them quite worthless.

Iselin, who

agrees with Freudenthal as to t h e

origination of the story with Artapanos, thinks that the
names were due to

a

mistaken reading

in

Gen.

(see M

AMRE

).

H e cites also

I

Macc.

Medeba being situate

the old land of

the Amorites

'94,

p.

See J

AMBRI

.

(Iselin gives

a

useful collection of the Syriac occur-

rences of the names.) Geiger

using

the same passage in

I

Macc., regards

names

as

Maccabaean,

Jambres alluding to the

sons

of

Jambri (but the reading thus assumed is very doubtful),
and Jannes the inhabitants of Jamnia.

These

enemies gave the names to the opponents of Moses.

Levy

suggests that John the

Baptist and Jesus were meant.

Corn-

s . ~ .

and

compares the Persian demons,

Janaya and Vyambura.

Jastrow suggests Januarius

and Janus. Such suggestions are mere guesses. Levy's
theory that

was chosen because of its meaning

Apostate,' has, however, found considerable accept-

ance.

So

too, it is easy to connect

with the Rab-

binical

to vex or mislead.'

Of the Jewish statements about Jannes and Jambres,

the

features that seem ancient are the bare names.

4 3 4 :

I

precedes];

Judith

[see

Jos.; cp

Jamnites,

Macc. 128

the Greek name of

Jabneh,

is

derived from the form

found in the

Jerusalem Talm. (Frankel,

der

108).

See

I

.

JANAI

I

Ch.

RV,

AV J

AANAI

.

JANIM

Josh.

R V ; AV, following

JANNA,

RV

JANNAI

[Ti.

an

See

ancestor

of

Joseph, Mary's husband

(Lk.

324).

G

ENEALOGIES

ii.

and

bilingual coins

showing that

is a

contraction of

Jonathan

T h e

first

king of

recognised on the coins,

third son of John

and successor of Aristobulus

I.

Jos.

Ant.

12-15,

H e has

been supposed by some to be referred to in

Pss.

2 and

110

but the general impression produced on theancients

by his character cannot surely have been very different
from that which modern students receive from it.

H e

was

not

a

sovereign like Simon the Maccabee or John

either of whom might conceivably have

a

religious poet's encominm.

H e was during

his reign of twenty-six or twenty-seven years almost
constantly involved in foreign or in civil wars, which for
the most part were provoked by his own wilfulness,
and resulted by no means invariably in his

It could only be with deep-seated resentment that pions

Jews could look

and see a wild warrior

Alexander

discharging the duties of high priest in the holy

place, certainly not with the conscientious and pains-
taking observance of the ordinances regarded by the
Pharisees as divine.

The bitter spirit of Is.

25

may seem to belong to

a n adherent of Alexander

here

again

Duhm's tendency t o throw everything that he can

a

very late period may lead him astray (cp Smend,

'84,

209,

212).

Much more plausible is the

view that there are veiled references to Jannaeus in parts
of the book of Ecclesiastes (see E

CCLESIASTES

,

T h e king spoken of was at any rate not unlike Jannaeus
(who was called

'for his extreme cruelty,'

Jos.

Ant.

xiii.

and the difficulty of placing Ecclesi-

astes in the Persian period

is

becoming more generally

felt.

[Ti.

W H ; var.

In

38 two

ALEXANDER

also

AND JAMBRES

Egyptian magicians, who

withstood

Moses' (Ex.

are named, though

elsewhere the opponents of Moses are

anonymous.

The author of

2

Tim. may,

as

Theodoret

held, have derived the names from oral tradition but it

is

not improbable that there existed

a

small apocryphal

narrative with

a

title corresponding to the Jannes et

Mambres liber' mentioned by Origen (Mt.

and

the

Liber,

appellatur

Jamnis et

Mambre, apocryphus' cited in the Decree of Gelasius
(cp Schiirer,

Fabricius, Cod.

2

I t

will be noted that the names given in these Latin titles

differ from the accepted reading in Tim. T h e Codices, how-
ever, sometimes offer the reading

for the second name.

modern authorities accept this reading and regard the

name as equivalent to the Hebrew

(see M

AMRE

) the

has

for 'Persia'

in

Judith 1

Cp

85

6;

on Eccles.

IO.

Schiir.

300.

the Talmud

and Mamre, thinking that Moses is

a

magician like themselves

(so

Koran

retort,

thou bring corn or straw to

(evidently a city where corn abounded

perhaps a

in Samaria; Neub.

155).

The Jer. Targ.

makes Jannes and Jamhres sons of Balaam, who advised
the prevention of the birth of Moses (Ex.

1

opposed

On the other hand

is a contraction of

Jonathan.

[est et alia

factio a Mose et Janne et

pendens.]

[Carinondas vel Damigeron, vel is Moses, vel

vel

Apollonius vel ipse Dardanus, vel

.

. .

inter

magos celebratus est.]

[For

a similar proverb cp

F

I

S

H

,

2328

JANOAH

him in Egypt

and

Balaam on his

journey to

(Nu. 2222).

These statements are

not real traditions; they are built up from words in
the text, after the manner of Midrash.

According to

some

Jannes and Jambres perished in the

Red Sea (Mid.

according to others they

joined the Israelites among the

multitude

(

to Ex.

and died in the tumult after

the incident of the golden calf

(

The

Zohar (13th cent.) has several references to Jannes and
Jambres,

they are of

no

antiquity.

The fullest

consecutive narrative is to be found in the

or

cent.).

See I.

The Rod of Moses,' in 'Papers of Jews'

College Lit.

1887.

For further Christian references,

which, like the Jewish, add nothing authentic to Timothy, cp

Schiirer,

A.

JANOAH

resting-place' ?-but see below).

Janohah. A point on the eastern border of

Ephraim (Josh.

Josh. 167

t a r w

[A],

[L]).

According to the

(26759

it lay

12

E. of Neapolis,

in A

KRABATTINE

the definition is almost exact

(E.

should be SE.). It is mod.

(see

Sum.

26

Rob.

On a

rocky hill to the

NE. is the praying-place of

I t was not

uncommon to give the ancient names of ruined towns

to

supposed Moslem saints; in the present instance,

however,

has become the prophet

Here,

no

doubt, was the chief high place of Janoah.

2.

A

town in N. Israel, depopulated by

pileser

( 2

K.

[B],

[AL]). It is men-

tioned between Abel-beth-maacah and Kedesh,

has

been identified by

2371

with Hunin

(famous for its old fortress and for its view), and with
more plausibility by Conder with

a

village

6

m.

E.

of

Tyre

Apparently

was a

frontier city towards the Tyrian territory.

The present

writer has conjectured

July

6,

'96) that it is

the city of Yenu'amn, which is mentioned in the Israel-

inscription of

and elsewhere in the Egyptian

records, and appears in one of the Amarna letters

as

Yinuamma (Wi. 1428). I n the letter referred to

some one reports to the king of Egypt that this city has
fallen away and barred the gate behind

Yenu-

'amp must have been

a

rich town, for Thotmes

endowed the temple

of

at Thehes with

an

annual

sum

to be paid by this and two other cities (Brugsch,

G A 329).

There is an Egyptian picture given, by

and

W.

M. Muller which shows its position.

I t lay by

a

small lake, and was surrounded by forests

in which the conquered enemies took refuge.

I t is

difficult to think that such an important place-name

as

Yenu'amu or Yinuamma has not (like other equally
ancient

survived.

According to the theory here adopted,

is not a

compound

of

Hommel; cp Yinnamma), hut is

equivalent to

In Kings this name was shortened into

(Janoah), just as

(Jepthah) is shortened from

That

before

is not reproduced in the Egyptian form Yenu-

need not surely surprise

us; it would have been very

troublesome to an Egyptian to pronounce the name accurately.
T h e alternative explanation

(E.

Meyer,

is

philologically less

lermont-Ganneau's identification

of

with the southern town of Naamah of Josh. 15 41

Arch.

29

127)

is also linguistically improbable.

de

20

seeks for the site near Gezer and

would even identify it with Jahneel

but this, too, seem's

likely.

T. K.

C .

JANUM,

RV

J a n i m

Kt.,

Kr.

Josh.

an unidentified

locality in the hill-country of Judah, in the
hood of B

ETH

-

TAPPUAH

.

Read perhaps

Jamin.'

JAPHETH

[BADEL]), son of Noah

'to dwell,'

is

doubtful.

Hab. 2 5 and

Ps.

68

13

are

corrupt.

JAPHIA

(Gen.

etc. see H

AM

) , and ancestor of the peoples

N.

and

W.

of Palestine

P).

That he was generally regarded

as

Noah's

youngest son is shown by the constant order

of the three brothers, and is in harmony with
where

is not to

be

followed (see

SBOT,

and cp Bu.

It is true that in

his youngest

son'

means Ham, or rather Canaan (see

H

A

M

and that the narrative

belongs no doubt to an

earlier stratum of narrative than the other passages;
but the narrow sense in which Shem. Japheth, and

are used here was' abandoned by later writers,

who made Japheth the youngest son, and the ancestor
of

remote northern peoples.

In the early narrative

Japheth (if we suppose that he was really mentioned in it)
may represent the Phcenicians (so Bu.), who are to
be distinguished from the Canaanites, though they
dwelt in the land of Canaan. Wellhausen

15)

less plausibly suggests the Philistines. It is very prob-
able, however, that the mention of Japheth

(u. 23)

and

the accompanying blessing

27)

are later insertions.

T h e words he shall

in the

of Shem' may

conceivably allude to the conquests of the Greeks,

Shem' being taken in the later enlarged sense (Duhm's

suggestion, adopted by Bertholet,

Die

der

76

,

The narrative gains consider-

ably by the omission of Japheth.

The division of the

world into three parts caused the troublesome insertion.

In explaining the name it is well to follow the analogy

of Shem, which was doubtless a personal, not

an

ethnic,

name.

is usually

explained in accordance with Gen.

God enlarge

Japheth.'

I t seems unlikely, however, that

so

unusual in

this sense as

would have been chosen.

the names Shem, Canaan, Japheth, are doubt-

less older than the poetic oracles, and there are other
cases in which we may hold that old names have become
mutilated (cp S

HEM

,

H

A

M

, N

O

A

H

),

it is not too bold to

suppose that

is a fragmentary form of

'God opens' (cp the old name

Am. Tub.).

is

a

word well adapted for

legendary heroes (see J

EPHTHAH

), and 'enlargement' is a

blessing equallyfit for the Phcenicians and for the father of

so

many races

as

Japheth, one of which was the conquer-

ing Javan.

Fiirst's and Budde's explanation,

'

beauty,'

from

accepted by

D. S.

Margoliouth

(Hastings'

is not in accordance with analogy,

and is rightly rejected by Dillmann.

Of quite another order is the theory of

E.

Meyer, who

connects Japheth with the name

in hieroglyphic

is a

deity; see

and cp C

APHTOR

,

3, 4.

Kaft

the western

quarter of the world to the Egyptians. But the mutilation of
Kaft into Yaft is improbable and we expect a purely personal
name. Sanskrit comparisons
are nowadays discredited.

JAPHIA

a

border city of Zebulun, mentioned

between Daberath

and Gath-hepher

Josh.

readings are

Eus.

(Onom.)

gives

with an

in

Jer.

(Vg.

The pretty village of

m. SW.

of

Nazareth,

is its representative the phrase 'goeth up to Japhia'
is sufficiently explained by the position of

on two

connected ridges, to which

a

ravine leads up.

The

one historical association to which this city can lay
claim is its siege and capture by the Romans. The
name which Josephus gives it

is

Japha

he calls

it

' a

very great village, well secured with walls and

full of people

(

45).

He also says that he fortified

it with

a

double wall, and for some time made it his

T.

K.

C .

headquarters.

That in one passage Josephus diminishes the distance between

JAPHIA

Japha, (Japhia) and

is as much or as little of an

to

Robinson's identification as his patent

of the number of the inhabitants of Japha

(BJ

7

bius

cp 13332) appears to hesitate

claims of a n 'ascent (still) called Joppa'and those of Sycaminon

Perhaps the village of

had almost dis-

appeared

his day.

It was in Robinson's time but a small

village of about thirty houses

zoo).

T.

K. C.

JAPHIA

64, tall of stature

[A]).

I

.

King of Lachish, defeated by Joshua Josh. 10

[

B]

C p the name of Japahi, prince of Gezer, A m .

also that of

(see

also in

Tad.

A

son of

David :

S.

Ch. 3 7 146

[A in

;

L,

(

I

S.),

I

Ch.

146).

JAPHLET

5 3 ;

'[God] delivers'

cp

[A],

[L]). A

clan in a genealogy of

ii.

I

Ch.

cp J

APHLETI

.

JAPHLETI,

RV

The Japhletites

district was

on

the

border of Ephraim (Josh.

There is thus

no

geographical objection to connecting

the name with that of

b. Raphu, the Benjamite.

T h e

clan called Japhlet was, of course, distinct.

JAPHO

Ch.

EV

J

OPPA

.

JAR

Jer.

13

48

See

B

OTTLE

,

I

Ch.

the name of a n Assyrian

(7)

king men-

tioned twice

in

Hosea

(5

13

106) as

receiving tribute from

Israel.

Unfortunately there is

no

Assyrian king con-

temporary with Hosea whose name bears even a distant

resemblance to Jareb. Hence most critics take Jareb to
be a nickname

the contentious (cp Aq.

Aq., Theod.,

Symm.

106).

This would be plausible only if Jareb resembled some
Assyrian name,

so

that its reference might at once be

caught. Hence the present writer proposed

3

to change

into

the Great King (cp

Ps. 482

or

'the High King' (cp

But since it

has been shown by Winckler that references to the

N.

Arabian land of

(see M

IZRAIM

,

underlie the

traditional text

of

many passages in OT, and that

has probably sometimes (by corruption) taken the place
of

we

cannot rest satisfied with this theory. Prob-

ably we should read in

Hos.

5 1 3

and

106

When Ephraim saw his sickness and Israel his wound
Then went Ephraim

to

and [Israel] sent to

That too

shall

men bring to

as

a

present to the Arabian

T h e substitution of 'Israel' for Jndah need not he just;-

fied here (cp

H

OSEA

,

$ 4).

should probably be

in

Palestine, like m a t

in Assyria, was

coming into use a s a term for

Arabia

Schr. KA

=COT

439

C O T

2

136

may also be consulted though it

necessarily

incomplete.

DAVID,

See

JEHOADAH.

king.

king.

T h e treatment of

'

Jareb

For quite recent views see note

3 below.

JARED,

or,

as

AV

I

Ch., J

ERED

Gen.

515-20

T.

C.

I

Ch.

Lk.

337.

See C

AINITES

,

7

S

ETHITES

.

T h e

readings are

:

[BAD],

5

E,

18

A E Lk. 337

Ti.

cod. Am.

On

the meaning of the name see

Bu.

His words in

iii.

are

T h e order of

places

in

37,

BJ

is

closer accordance with geographical

facts.

976,

364,

and, virtually, M'Curdy,

Hist.

and

('94).

Independently

M.

Muller

gives the same view

;

prefers, however,

the phrase

being treated as a proper name

etc., 32

with great ingenuity, proposes to read

'to the King of Jathrih

mod. Medina, which

seems to have been

on the southern border of

(cp

A H T

An alternative

is

to

read

'Nimrod

see

SBOT

So

826

followed

Ges.

Che. Expos.

JARMUTH

JARESIAH,

RV

Jaareshiah

39 ; meaning

obscure;

K.

[A],

Jeroham in

a

genealogy of

B

EN

J

AMIN

I

Ch.

and 8

MSS.

i n

[Pesh.],

[Vg.

the servant of

a

Jerahmeelite.

who afterwards became his master's son-in-law and the
head of a long genealogical line

(

I

Ch.

2 3 4

see

J

ERAHMEEL

,

3.

He is generally regarded as an

Egyptian (EV)

Rabbins, indeed, represent him

as a proselyte. This view is of course legitimate, but
considering the probable early

sent

of the clan Jerah-

it is perhaps more natural to treat

as

meaning

rather

an

inhabitant of the N. Arabian

or

(see M

IZRAIM

,

would he plausible to read

or

(the latter a

name), or, better still,

(after

A

with moon-worship need not he insisted upon: perhaps
name was considered to be identical with Jerahmeel (as an
abbreviated form). This would account for the presence of the
ancestral list,

I

Ch. 2

in

genealogy of Jerahmeel, since

it is probable that

himself was not originally Jerah-

meelite. His inclusion in

v.

31

(the details of which do not

agree

with

v.

34a)

may be later. The

of the

(Jerahmeel?) and Sheshan (cp the Hebronite

suggestive.

See

J

ERAHMEEL

,

S

HESHAN

.

JARIB

53

he [God] contends'

cp

We cannot retain the present spelling

of

the name

S. A.

C.

[AL]).

I

.

A son of Simeon, elsewhere called

I

Ch.

2.

Ezra816

Esh.

844

om.

Ll).

3.

3.

A

priest in list of those with foreign wives (see

E

ZRA

end);

Esd. Qrg

4.

I

Macc.

JARIMOTH

[BAL]),

I

Esd.

RIB.

Ezra

1 0 2 7 ,

J

EREMOTH

,

JARMUTH

JEREMOTH,

[AFL],

[B]).

I

.

city, in the

(Josh.

cp Neh.

where BNA om.,

whose king

joined the coalition under A

DONI

-

ZEDEK

, and was de-

feated by Joshua (Josh.

5

1211).

I t is represented

by the modern

which is 16 m.

W.

by

S.

of Jerusalem, and about 8 m. N. of

The distance from Eleutheropolis, which the

2 6 6 3 8 )

assigns

to

or

( I O

N E . ) , being

so

nearly that of

from

Beit-Jibrin, we are justified in identifying the places.
I t is remarkable that the closing letter of the modern
name should agree with that of the name in the

Such a form, however, a s Jarmuk cannot

well be ancient

Micah already (it may be) attests

the final

(see M

AROTH

).

The same prophet, too,

in

1 1 2 ,

if

we may read

for

(see

indicates that Jarmuth was in the neighbourhood of
Mareshah, or, at any rate, the assumption that a city
called Jarmuth stood there enables us to attain a better
text for the passage than we can secure in any other
way.

We

have certainly no reason to

suppose

that

the Jarmuth of the

O T

narratives was the Yarimuta of

the

Tablets

(5516,

and often), the position

which is disputed (see Niebuhr,

:

Flinders Petrie,

Syria and

Egypt,

In

Josh.

Jarmuth is mentioned with

and the other

notices accord with this. There were possibly several
Jarmuths. Can we thus account for the discrepant notice

WMM

Feb.

col.

n.

4)

takes the name to

be

The same view has

proposed also by

correct Egyptian

'great.'

JAROAH

of

(?)

Jarmuth in

OS

266

I

132

Cp

See

JAROAH

JASHER

ah.,

in

a

genealogy of G

AD

Ch.

5

14).

JASAEL

RV

Jasaelus

I

S

HEAL

.

JASHEN

In

in the list of David’s

thirty heroes we read (RV), Eliahba the Shaalbonite,
the sons of Jashen, Jonathan

[BA],

6

[L],

6

in Field])

in

the parallel

text

( I

Ch.

.

.

.

the

sons

of Hashem the

Gizonite’

[cp

of

6

( M T

‘sons of

is obviously

wrong.

I t is simply dittographed from the preceding

word

(so

Driver and most), or should

be viewed

as a

corruption of

a

proper name

(so

H. P.

Smith)?

I n the former case we might read,

.

.

.

Jashen (or

Hashem) the G

UNITE

’ (see G

UNI

) ; in the latter

would he

a

plausible restoration.

Jonathan is generally

taken

as a

separate hero, and connected with

33)

by

(inserted from Ch.)

as

H.

P.

Smith

points out,

may

be the corruption of

a

gentilic.

JASHER

RV

Jashar,

Book

of

book

of

the upright

c p

the

title of a n ancient

book twice quoted in the O T (Josh.

:

om.,

TOY

[L],

[Pesh.];

S.

T

O

Y

. .

.

[L]

[Pesh., similarly

Ar.

Vg. id.).

In the account of the battle of Gibeon and its sequel

there occurs

a

memorable passage (Josh.

with

C p

T. K.

C.

a

fragment of song quoted (most prob-

ably by

E)

from the Book of

T h e speaker is said to be Joshua, and by a late scribe’s
interpblation the song is invested with the character of

a

prayer.

I n reality, the address to the sun and moon

(see below) is rather

a

command, or perhaps

a

spell,

than

a

prayer.

T h e writer of the song no

thought

of

the sun and moon

as

Joshua’s side

against his (and

But the interpolator

had

a

good

expressed the devout feeling

of the later

T h e passage containing the song

was evidently inserted by D,, who at the same time
introduced the explanatory words,

the day when

. . .

in the sight of Israel’

and the

‘So

the sun rested

.

.

.

for

fought for Israel’

In

the circles to which

D,

belonged the

primitive feeling for nature had died

its original form, therefore, the passage ran thus

:-

Then spoke Joshua,

0

sun rest over Gibeon ;

0

moon ! stand still over Aijalon.

See

Hist.

We.

Sta. Gesch.

Bu.

Z A

T W

See

and cp

With

a

of primitive feeling ”Syrian

still cry in song to the

sun

to hasten his

down that they

may rest.

Cp this passage from

of

Bishop

(‘88).

‘As soon as the

sun

showed a fresh and powerful

hand of warriors came at once and

. . .

How

often

I

looked at the sun!

stood still in the heavens,

nor

would go down. I

in prayer, and each time trouble

seemed to be averted.

4

This is partly admitted by Kittel (Hist.

who neverthe-

less thinks that

fact of a striking

of

daylight

remains though we may not know the natural law through

which

was brought about,’ and that ‘the

itself.

. .

proves Israel’s

that a miracle was wrought. The former

view may be defended

Ecclns.

464,

Jos.

Ant.

v.

hut seems hardly critical the latter

(with

hut not with Di.) that

the

sun

forms part

of the songfragment, which can scarcely

be

admitted.

2333

So

the

sun

rested, and the moon stood still

had taken vengeance on his

Behold it is written in the Book of Jashar.’

third line. however. is

the insertion of

earlv

narrator from

passage

taken by

so

that

from the old song in the Book

Jashar

of

the first second, and fourth of the above lines, and

for

‘had taken

on,‘ we should substitute ‘takes venge-

ance.’

T h e second quotation is the lamentation for Saul

and Jonathan, ascribed to David

S.

and prob-

ably early, though, it is to be feared, not
Davidic (see, however, D

AVID

,

According to a revised

the passage runs thus

:-

‘Of David. For the sons of Jeduthun. For the Ezrahite.

*

0

!

hy thy death have I been slain;

Alas that the heroes have fallen
Report it not in Rehoboth

Declare it not in

I

Lest the daughters of

Zarepbathites rejoice,

Lest the daughters of the Jerahmeelites triumph.

Be thou parched,

0

Jeralnneel ! descend not

Dew or rain upon thee

!

Become desolate, ye lofty mountains !

Let the bushes fade, deprived of fatness
The shield of Saul has been defiled

With the

of those slain

the sword :

Broken is the bow of bronze,

Shivered is the well-sharpened sword.
The beloved the longed-for in life-

I n

death

were (still) unparted;

They (who were swifter than eagles,

They (who] were stronger

than

lions.

Women of Israel, shed tears

For Saul

. .

.

Who gave you linen garments

Who decked your raiment with gold.
Alas that the heroes have fallen,

And the strong of heart lie stiff!

Jonathan

!

thy death have I been slain ;

For thee, 0 my brother, I am smitten to death
Thou wast very pleasant to me, my comrade !

More was thy love to me than women’s love.

Alas that the heroes have fallen

And the strong of heart lie stiff!

The four-lined stanzas are well marked (as in the Book of Job).

A third quotation is to be found in a passage ascribed

T h e poetical

words assigned to Solomon

( I

K.

8

immediately before

a

speech in more

prosaic style, are given

in

another place with some

variations, and in fuller form by

53

;

gives

another version before

which expressly state that

the words are written

or

If this title

(

Book of Song,’

or of Songs were correct, it would suggest that the
source of the quotation was

a

Psalter but the words

are almost certainly

a

slip for

(note that Pesh.

makes

a

similar mistakein Josh.

10).

For this fragment

as

emended, see C

REATION

,

T h e

Book

of Jashar was,

so

far as we know,

a

product

of the post-Solomonic age (cp

I t was

a

national song-book-

the book of the

righteous (or, possibly, brave)

(as

if

cp

Its contents

were partly secular (in

S.

there is

a

total

In

read

suggested

Bu.

the first correction of

I

in

which also has the simple intro-

to

Solomon, and a t any rate pre-exilic.

duction

.

again the quotation is probably due to E (or

Cook ‘Notes

on

the Analysis

of

Sam

details of the restoration see

Che.

Cp We. Dr.

Bu

and GASm.

The title is

of

late ; hut

does not involve the lateness of the

poem.

For

text cp

;

WRS,

We.

269 ;

Ch.

Dr.

a

shorter form for

;

cp

Other

theories, for instance, that

was

a

law-book (Targ.,

Kim., etc.)

or

that

was the name of the author,

or

the

opening word

‘and

.

. .

sang’), may be mentioned.

JASHOBEAM

lack of religious feeling), partly religious

(

I

K.

8

)

it refers,

to the battle at Gibeon and

the prowess of Saul and Jonathan, but also to the
temple.

Indeed, we may presume that the third of the

extant passages belonged to a hymn to

Nor

could we venture to say that the Rook of Jashar contained

no pre-Davidic songs. Not impossibly it was
in the width of its range to the Arabian collections of

or the

Probably the songs of

which it was composed had short historical introductions,

that altogether it may have almost served as an

Iliad of the Israelites.

Can we form a reasonable

conjecture as to its other contents?

Surely such a

collection must have contained David’s (?) lament over

Abner

and among earlier passages, the Song

Deborah (Judg.

5 ) ,

of the Well (Nu.

21

see B

EER

), and the Song of Triumph over Sihon

One might even perhaps add the songs of the primitive

history, such as we find in Gen.
etc.). Franke (who ascribes the book to the time

of

Hezekiah

includes also Ex.

15

and Hab.

3

see E

XODUS

6

M

OSES

, H

ABAKKUK

,

In later Christian times ‘the Book of Jashar is the title of a

ritualistic treatise

Jacob

b.

(died

and of one or two

forgeries which are only remarkable for the undeserved success
they obtained; for a more detailed account of them see
Bib.

L

ITERATURE

,

and

P

OETICAL

L

ITERATURE

,

JASHOBEAM

but see WARS

O F

THE

L

ORD

,

B

OOK OF).

S.A.C.,

I,

3,

4 ;

C.,

$ 2 .

I.

The name, not indeed

i n itself impossible but certainly corrupt, borne by one

of David‘s chief warriors in

I

Ch.

(where he is

called ben Hachmoni

see H

ACHMONITE

) and

(where he is styled ben

T h e former pas-

sage occurs again with variations in

2

238, where the

name of the warrior is represented in the Hebrew text by

the letters

the appended letters

probably represent

which should be connected

with the following word

(corrupt

RV ‘ a

JASON

Bertheau, Kautzsch (doubtfully); Kittel read

.‘and they returned to Bethlehem’; but the whole passage
obscure a s the ‘records’ themselves are said to be ‘ancient.’

Provisionally we might read a t the

of

the

.

. .

has

; and

translates ‘et qui reversi sunt in

[Bethlehem],’

taking the words a s applying to those named in the preceding
clause.

A.

C.

JASIEL

I

Ch.

RV J

AASIEL

.

JASON

[AKV],

a name of Grecian

origin in frequent use among the Jews, by whom it was
regarded as equivalent to Joshua, Jeshua, Jesus; cp
the parallel Alcimus from

Menelaus from

Simon from Simeon, and see N

AMES

,

86).

I.

Of Cyrene, a Hellenistic Jew, author of

a

history

of the times of the Maccabees down to the victory over

Our so-called second book of

Maccabees is

of this larger work, which

is

said to have consisted of five books

Macc.

cp

26).

T h e writer probablylived in the second half of the second
century

B.C.

See further M

ACCABEES

, SECO

ND

,

6 ;

and cp H

ISTORICAL

L

ITERATURE

,

18.

2.

Second

of Simon I I . , and brother of Onias

I I I . , the high priest, whose original name was, as
Josephus

5

I

)

relates, Jesus.

He represented

the Hellenizing section, and was opposed to the
policy of an alliance with Rome.

By

of a bribe

(helped also doubtless by the sons of Tobias) he
managed in

B

.C.

to obtain the high-priesthood in

place of his brother from Antiochus

(see

A

NTIOCHUS

,

2 )

and proceeded to introduce various

practices which were an ‘abomination’ to the Pharisaism
of the

Another bribe procured him permission

to set

a

gymnasium and

below the

Acropolis and hard by Mt. Zion,

consequence of

which was the adoption of Greek games (see D

ISCUS

),

Greek caps (see C

AP

), etc.

T h e priests themselves

betook themselves eagerly to the

and being

ashamed of their Jewish singularity did all they could
to conceal it

(

I

Macc.

cp Schiir.

G

n.

24,

and see C

IRCU

M

CISION

,

8).

At the same time, Jason

obtained permission to register

the in-

habitants of Jerusalem among the citizens of Antioch

Macc.

and sent a contribution to Tyre on the

occasion of the festival to H

ERCULES

This,

however, was

so

repugnant to the bearers that they

used the money for the equipment of the

Macc.

An

obscure account of

a

visit of Antiochus to

Jerusalem

is all that

is

told us for the next

three years, at the expiration of which time Jason was
suddenly supplanted in the priesthood by

and forced to flee.

Menelaus, however, failed to

win popularity, and the appearance of certain dread
portents as well as a baseless

of the death of

Antiochns encouraged Jason to emerge from his asylum
in Ammanitis (cp

426).

Helped by the populace, he

captured the city

1 7 0

Menelaus was com-

pelled to take refuge in the citadel. But his success was
of short duration he missed his great object-the priest-
hood-and, having alienated his supporters by his
vindictiveness, was forced to flee before Antiochus.
From the Ammonites, he passed to Aretas, and then to
Egypt

finally he crossed over to the

relying, we are told, on the kinship

them and

the Jews (see

S

PARTA

).

An effective rhetorical period

( 5

)

closes-his story.

Son of Eleazar (cp ‘Jesus son of Sirach

50

sent by Judas to

(

I

Macc.

He

is probably

Tahchemonite

’).

For the

of

‘that sat in the

seat’), derived from the pointed text, nothing can he said,

except that it justifies the warning in

that ‘ t h e verse is

probably corrupt.’

Tahchemonite

’).

For the

of

‘that sat in the

seat’), derived from the pointed text, nothing can he said,

except that it justifies the warning in

that ‘ t h e verse is

probably corrupt.’

seems

to

be incompletely written for

originally there may have been a mark of abbreviation
after the

This may be read either Jashibbosheth

Bosheth brings back

’),

or, better, if the second

B

be

regarded as an error, Ishbosheth

of Bosheth

’),

where Bosheth

(

shame

is the well-known substitute

for Baal. T h e final

in

is either a corruption

from

(which

is

possible), or, as

Marqnart (Fund.

n.

I

)

supposes, an intentional

alteration due to religious scruple (he compares
altered perhaps from

see J

EROBOAM

).

See

I

SHBAAL

,

and cp Gray,

46,

note

I

.

readings are

:

S.

238

in

I

Ch. 11

I T

[A],

Another of David’s warriors, a Korhite (

I

Ch.

see

JASHUB

‘ h e returns,’

5 4 ;

cp

;

I

. One of the sons of Issachar (Nu. 2624

but

I

Ch.

7

I

Kt.,

in Gen. 46

(by omission

of

a letter) J

OB

,

[A],

see

4.

Gentilic

Nu. 26 24

[BAFL]).

One of the b’ne Bani in the list of those with

wives

E

ZRA I,

end) Ezra 10

I

Esd. 9

in

I

Ch. 27

[A],

[L].

3,

and

DAVID,

(iii.).

T. IC. C.

J

ASHUBI-LEHEM

a name

ous

formation which appears in

I

Ch.

among the

descendants of the Judahite

S

HELAH

des

’87.

According to Jos.

xii. 5

he was the natural successor,

He is probably referred to in Dan. 9 26 11

where see

3

Cp the similar case of Ptolemais (Akko), and see Schiir.

Other explanations of this verse have been offered

4

Warlike

were seen in the sky

Macc. 5

cp

K.

Onias having died, and left only an infant son.

ad

Zoc.

and

cp

We.

n.

I

.

281.

see Bertholet

208.

6

17,

BJ vi. 5 and

Hist.

5

13.

JASPER

It is plain that Jattir must be the modern

(Rob.

which is situated on two knolls

in an

amphitheatre of brown rocky hills, studded with
natural caves (Tristram,

and

is

13 m.

S.

by W . from Hebron.

The change of into y

in the name is not incapable of explanation

may first

have passed into

and then

into y (Kampffmeyer,

No doubt this is the place intended

( O S

133

3

1 3 4

255

78

268

87)

by the

‘very large village Jethira,

R. m.

SE.

of

in the interior of the Daroma hard by Malatha

(see M

OLADAH

). In two passages

(OS

119

27

2 5 5 7 8 )

it is assigned to Simeon, perhaps by a confusion with

E

THER

JAVAN

the Ionians, or the Greeks.

In the Table of Peoples Javan appears as one of the sons

of Japheth, and father of Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and

Dodanim or Rodanim, Gen.

10

Ch. 1 5 7

[BADE],

Gen.

Ch.

[L]).

This statement comes from P

.

it is

not pre-exilic. There is in fact no pre-exilic refer!

ence to the Greeks, though see on the other side

(Hist.

who refers

t o

and

even, for a ‘not

allusion

t o

T h e

of

Hos.

however, is not quite

in

instead of the obscure

‘from the sea,’ we should probably read

‘from

Aram (cp

c).

(6) I n Joel 3

6

‘

the sons

of

the Javanites

(EV

Grecians,

are spoken of a s purchasing

ewish captives from the Phcenicians and Philistines, but the

E ’

date of

JOEL

is not often disputed.

( c )

In Zech. 9 13 Judah and Ephraim are represented a s

instrument of

vengeance against the ‘sons of Javan

who are contrasted with thy

sons,

0

Zion.

It

is

hard, however, to believe that the author of

the prophetic composition to which Zech. 9

belongs

(which, apart from its references to Hadrach,

etc., would at once appear to be post-exilic) would have
mentioned the Greeks

this view seems hardly

sistent with the archaising references.

Clearly the

writer wishes to produce the illusion of antiquity, and
the name Javan would at any rate not be conducive
to this. The textual phenomena suggest that

is either

a

corrupt or a mutilated name, or both the author can

scarcely have written

and then, jnst after,

T h e scribe who wrote the latter group

of

letters must

have made a slip of the pen, and the true reading
probably is

the sons

of

Aram (cp

I

,

and

the Jason who is mentioned as the father of

( I

Macc.

14

4.

Jason of Thessalonica, who for his hospitality

t o

Paul and

Silas, was attacked

the

mob, brought

the

magistrates, and bound over to he loyal (Acts

17

For

less probable view of the object of the demand of the ‘security

see

H e may

ossibly he identified with the Jason of Rom.

21,

one of Paul’s

‘kinsmen

a

fellow-Jew ; cp R

OMANS

,

I

O

.

T h e tradition in

makes Jason bishop of

Tarsus.

S . A. C.

JASPER

(

borrcwed from

Ass.

In Rev.

21

(cp

the New

Jerusalem is said to be irradiated by a luminary ‘like

a

stone most precious, as

if

a

jasper-stone, clear as

The description is suggested by

rendering of Is. 54

(see

below),

‘I

will make thy battlements jasper

and thy

gates stones of crystal

and thy rampart

choice stones’

the writer of Rev. seems

to have supposed that both the phrases ‘stones of crystal’ and

‘choice stones’ were synonymous with and explanatory

of

‘jasper’ (see, however,

T

OPAZ

).

In Ex.

39

.is

rendered in

by

(but see below)

hut the onyx, not being a clear stone, cannot be
in Rev. 21

Nor can our jasper be intended, as it is

not sparkling nor translucent, but ‘ a n opaque, close-
grained variety of quartz, variously tinted, but generally
either red or brown.’ I t is probable, however, that the

jasper of the ancients included the opal, which, by its

brilliance and play of colour, has always been one of
the most attractive

of

precious stones, and in its choicest

variety (see

deserves in the highest

degree the description in Rev.

21

This

is

the view of

0.

who states that the modern

condeption of the jasper first became general in the seventeenth

‘century, and that i n the

the jasper is represented

a s clear, and as greener than grass.

The choice opal is said to occur frequently in ancient

Egyptian tombs in particular,

a

splendid statuette

of

made of opal, is referred

This view is also

favoured by the description of the divine king on his

throne in Rev. 43

as

‘like a jasper stone and

a

and by the combination of ‘jasper’ with pure gold
and clear glass in Rev.

2 1

(With the reference to

‘jasper’ as garnishing the foundation in

cp

Sargon’s description

of the foundation of

his palace on gold, silver, and

stones, etc.) See

PRECIOUS

STONES.

T h e

occurs in

Ex.

Ezek.

It is not impossible that the order ofthe precious stones

in

text was different, and that

was intended as the

equivalent of

and

of

Thus

rendering will become consistent.

I n

Is.

54

(Symm.

seems to he a version of

(so Aq., Ezek. 27

it may be merely a guess; for elsewhere

(Ezek. 27

does not recognise this word (see C

HALCEDONY

,

I

,

end).

T. K.

C.

or

crystal

[BA]),

I

JATAL

[A]),

I

Esd.

2

42,

(

13

RV.

JATHNIEL

cp N

ATHANAEL

[BA],

a

Korahite doorkeeper

( I

Ch.

JATTIR

[BAL]), a

country of Judah, assigned in

P

and Ch. to the Levites

(Josh.

1 5 4 8

[L],

21

14

[B],

I

Ch.

6 4 2

in

[B],

[A],

om. L ? ) , and

historically connected in

I

S. 3027

with the period of

David’s outlawry

[B])

cp

I

RA

,

3 ;

I

THRITES

,

A

TER

,

2.

See Riehm

3356;

Calwer

158 a.

But see
The ye0 in

I

S. 3029

appears

t o

be

a

duplicate

of

this

corruption (cp

S

IPHMOTH

).

see H

ADRACH

).

( d )

[BAQ];

Symm.

Javan

described (as in

as

engaged in slave-traffic

in the market of

the

stands between

Tarshish and Tubal, the latter in Gen.

Javan’s next

brother, the former in Gen.

4

his second son.

( e ) I n

Is. 66

Javan’

[BKAQ]) occurs in a

gloss enumerating the

far-off countries which will

hear of

future glorious manifestation.

In Dan.

8

we hear of the ‘king,’

the prince,’ and the kingdom of Javan
[Theod.

the reference is to the

empire-an expansion of the original conception, which
identified Javan with the important Ionian colonies in

Asia Minor.

T h e only remaining reference (not counting the

imaginary one in

Ps. 1234) is

in Ezek.

[BAQ

Q

also

has

whilst Aq. has

where

Javan, with Dan [AV] or Vedan [RV], appears a second
time among Tyre’s traffickers.

Dan’ and Javan,’

however, are both corrupt.

For

ingeniously reads

and the passage becomes,

‘wine of

and

and Arnaban they

furnished for thy traffic.’ But more probably we should
read, not and Simin and Arnaban,’ but and wool of
Hauran (see W

OOL

).

The scantiness of the extant pre-exilic literature does

not permit

us

to deny that the Israelites may have

heard

of

t h e Ionians from the Phcenicians or the

Syrians in pre-exilic times.

W e may even

this

2337