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
Document Outline
- Title
- Key to Signatures in Volume II
- Maps in Volume II
- Contributors to Volume II
- Eagle - Eglath-Shelishiyah
- Eglon - Egypt
- Egypt, River of - Enos
- En-Rimmon - Essau
- Eschatology
- Esdraelon - Evil-Merodach
- Exact - Ezra-Nehemiah
- Ezra, the Greek - Flint
- Flock, Tower of the - Gaius
- Galatia - Gallery
- Galley - Geography
- Geography - Gilgal
- Giloh - Goshen
- Gospels part 1
- Gospels part 2
- Gospels part 3
- Gotholias - Hamu or Hami, names with
- Hamuel - Heath
- Heathen - Hermon
- Hermonites - Hippopotamus
- Hirah - Horonaim
- Horonite - Inn
- Inscriptions - Isle, Island
- Israel
- Issachar - Javan
- Javelin - Jeremiah (book)
- Jeremiah, Epistle of - Jerusalem
- Jerusalem - Job (book)
- Jobab - John, Son of Zebedee
- Joiada - Jotham
- Jozabad - Kedesh
- Kedeshah - Kushaiah