BETH-BIREI
term, and therefore probably an echo of
an
ancient
BETH-BIREI, RV
I
Ch.
See B
ETH
-
LEBAOTH
.
BETH-CAR
Jos.
Ant.
vi.
22
[Targ.]), a
place, presumably in the district of
to which
the Israelites pursued the defeated Philistines
(
I
7
[Dt.]). The phrase under Beth-car is remarkable.
Does it mean under the gates of Beth-car (so We.
68)
?
or does it mean to the foot of the hill on
some part of which Beth-car stood
No such name
as
Beth-car is mentioned elsewhere hence it is at first
sight too bold to identify it
(as
P E F , not disapproved by
GASm.
224)
with ‘Ain
the name of a flourish-
ing village a good way to the
of
Nebi Samwil, and
W.
of Jerusalem.
The name Beth-car, however, is
self-evidently corrupt, and if we may emend it into
Beth-haccerem the identification with
becomes probable (see B
ETH
-
HACCEREM
). Only
m.
to the N. of
KHrim is
not improbably
to be identified with the
or Jeshanah of
40.
(see
S
HEN
), which
not be the same
as
the Jeshanah of
Ch.
13
The alternative
is
to read Beth-horon
;
and
from phonetic causes easily confounded.
would
a very
expression: hut
is
certainly too
north.
The reading Beth-jashan
quoted
from Pesh.
G.
A. Smith
( H G
is no
at
all,
but
a
cor
of the text of
I
S.
as We. has pointed
out.
T. K.
C.
name.’
T. K. C.
Under Beth-horon
BETH-DAGON
95,
of
Dagon,’
[AL]).
I
.
A
city of Judah, enumerated
in the third group of ‘lowland‘ towns (Josh.
[B]).
The list is
so
scattered and irregular
that nothing can with certainty be inferred from it as to
the site of Beth-dagon but
which
is
mentioned in the same verse, must have lain off the
mouth of Aijalon (Josh.
Here we find,
6
m.
SE.
from
a
and,
m. farther
Each of these has been identified with Beth-dagon (see
3298,
Clermont Ganneau, P E F Q ,
and one of them (the former, according to Friedr. Del.)
is
probably the Bit-daganna mentioned in Sennacherib‘s
prism-inscription (col.
2
65
2
It must be
remembered, however, that the name occurred in several
places through Palestine-Beit Dejan nearly 7 m.
E.
of
and, according to Jos.
(Ant.
xiii.
8
I
2
3),
Dagon near Jericho, each
on
an important
trade route from Philistia to the Jordan Valley.
There
may, then; have been more than one Beth-dagon on
the borders of Philistia, and it ought not to be over-
looked that neither
nor Beit Dejan lies in the
proper.
On
the doubtful phrase ‘land of
Dagon’ in
inscription, and on the god
Dagon, see D
AGON
,
I
.
see especially
Ganneau,
Arch.
Res. in
A
locality not
identified (but cp Conder
to
268)
on the border of Asher (Josh. 19
27
.
3.
of
Dagon in Ashdod
(I
1083,
G.
A.
S.
BETH-DIBLATHAIM
foundation
but see N
AMES
,
a town in Moab
mentioned along with Dibon
[
I
]
and
[iii.] (Jer.
[KA]), evidently the same as
which also occurs in connection with Dibon
(Nu.
This place (called
and
are stated by Mesha
on
his stele to
have been fortified by himself
30).
BETH-EDEN,
EV house of Eden’
an
city or land, with a ruler of its
own,
but presumably
allied to Damascus
(Am.
15).
No
satisfactory identifi-
cation of this place has been made.
The
BETHEL
tion
not
forbids us to see
in
it the
of Strabo
and equally forbids us to regard
it with Wetzstein (Del.
702
;
cp Vg. de
as a
poetical name of Damascus. The view,
however, adopted
and favoured
by
(see above), that Beth-eden is the
of the inscriptions (see
E
DEN
),
is not less inadmissible,
for this is too far to the N.
of
Damascus, and had,
in the time
of
Amos,
long been subject to Assyria
AT
183
cp Nold.
33326
N o
doubt there were
called
E
DEN
There is equal uncertainty
as
to the name Bikath-aven
(see
3),
which corresponds to Beth-eden in the
BETH-EKED
EV ‘shearing house’;
house of gathering
where Jehu met
brethren, is either a place-name or (more probably)
the designation of an isolated house used on certain
occasions by the shepherds of the district
K.
10
but
21.
[AL] Pesh. has and he was overthrowing the
altars that were on the way
and
40.14
cp Cod. Vind. of Vet. Lat.
BETHEL
I,
always one word
on Gen. 128 Josh.
RV
wrongly with
a
hyphen
‘house of
2,
[BADEL]
hut Gen.
357,
gentilic Bethelite, see
I.
A
town
on
the border between Benjamin and Ephraim,
W.
of
the wilderness of Beth-aven (Josh.
18
on
12
16,
where
the clause, and
has
for Bethel or
Makkedah, see
T
APPUAH
,
without doubt the present
(from Beitil, by the common interchange of
and
a
small village (said to have 400 inhabitants),
with ruins of early Christian and Crusaders’ buildings,
about
IO
m. N. of Jerusalem.
It lies on the
bone of the central range, a little
E.
of the watershed,
and 2890 ft. above the sea. From the village itself
the view is confined to the plateau, which, like most
of the territory of Benjamin, presents a bleak prospect
of gray rocks and very stony fields, relieved by few
trees and a struggling cultivation. A few minutes SE.,
however, lies one of the great view-points
of
Palestine,
the Burj-Beitin or Tower of Bethel (probably the
of an early Christian monastery), supposed to mark
a
traditional site of the tent and altar of Abraham
to the
E.
of Bethel’ (Gen.
and of Lot’s view
of the Circle of Jordan
(13
3-10).
Four
good springs
parallel line.
T. K. C.
B
ETHULIA
); see
I
DOLATRY
,
and a great reservoir
certify the
present village
as
the site of the city,
which was called Luz at
first (Gen.
28
[ADEL]).
The sanctuary, ‘God‘s house,’ the
place
(as
it is called in Gen.
28
where it is distinct
from the city) which grew famous enough to absorb
the city’s name in its own, may have lain either on
site of the
or on one of the neigh-
bouring slopes, where there is a natural stone circle
1881,
and the curious formation of
the rocks in terraces and ramparts has been taken
as
the material suggestion of the ‘flight of steps’ (see
L
ADDER
)
which Jacob
saw
in his dream (Gen.
There he raised
a
pillar, or
to
and afterwards is said (Gen.
by the
same narrator,
E
(it is J who gives the previous story of
Abraham’s altar), to have built
an
altar and called the
‘place’ (not yet ‘city’) ‘God of Bethel’
Pesh., and Vg. read ‘Bethel’). Here Deborah, Rebecca’s
Cp the Targ.
‘place of the gathering
together of the
For
however, we should
perhaps read
and omit the next word (in
v.
not in
14)
as a
gloss
was a less
common word for shepherds’ than
Schlatter
236)
infers from Gen.
12
8
Jos.
7
(om.
that the sanctuary lay
E.
of the
town,
in Deir
BETHEL
foster-mother, died. She was buried
the town,
beneath
an
oak called the
of weeping (see
BACUTH,
M
ULBERRY
)
:
trees, it is probable, would not
be found
on
the stony plateau above. The next notice
of Bethel is in the J E narrative of Joshua’s conquests
(Jos.
[om. BAF
L]),
in which Bethel is
not yet the name of
a
city (so also the
in
Jos.
[A] in
16
Bethel’ is with
to be
omitted), but is still distinct from
does
not distinguish them, reading
in
v.
I
,
A
in
after
The later priestly writer, however,
makes them the same
(1813,
cp
[B],
in Judg.
the parenthesis is probably a
gloss).‘
In Judg.
45
the prophetess Deborah is said to have sat
under the palm-tree
of
Deborah between
and
Bethel-a statement which the critics who understand
the song of Deborah to imply that she belonged to the
tribe of Issachar suppose tn have arisen from confusion
with the other Deborah (see D
EBORAH
). There is
no
cogent reason, however, for their inference from the song,
and while a palm is an unusual, it is not an impossible,
tree at the altitude of Bethel : there is one at Jerusalem.
In the story of the crime of the Benjamites the priestly
writing tells of a national gathering before God at Bethel
(Judg. 21
In
the records
of
the period after the Judges
name
does not occur we may suppose it by this
to
have been absorbed in that of
ethel, which was still a sanctuary
( I
S.
a
new opportunity : its ancient sanctity was taken ad-
vantage of by Jeroboam for political ends, and he made
it one of the two national shrines which he established
in North Israel in order that his people might not go
over to Jerusalem.
In these shrines he set up the golden
calves--‘ Thy God,
0
Israel, which brought thee up out
of the land of Egypt’
(
I
K.
A priesthood, not
Levitical, was established, and a
new
altar, pilgrimages,
and feasts were ordained
(
I
In the words
of Amaziah to Amos, Bethel became a royal and national
temple sanctuary of the king,’ house of the kingdom,’
Am.
7
A later (perhaps post-exilic) narrative records
a
prophecy
as
made by a prophet from Judah, by which
Jeroboam was judged according to the Deuteronomic
standard,
overthrow of Bethel was predicted
( I
13
cp
K.
There was no such feeling of
guilt or foreboding of doom, however, among the
prophets of the
kingdom, for we find
a
company of them settled
in
Bethel, and the place
visited by
and
23).
For a national sanctuary the position was convenient.
The present village lies about a furlong off the most
easterly of the three parallel branches
into which the great north road here
divides, very near its junction with the
road by Michmash to Jericho, and not many miles from
the heads
of
those two other roads which come up
from the coast by the Beth-horons, and by Goplina,
respectively, to meet the north road just mentioned.
That
is
to say, the main lines of traffic
N.
to
and
E.
to W. crossed at the
of Bethel.
Like other
ancient sanctuaries, it must have had a market its mer-
cenariness and wealth are implied by Amos
(84,
etc.).
Moreover, Bethel lay upon the natural frontier between
the two kingdoms on the plateau ‘between the passes of
Beth-horon and Michmash (on the Chronicler’s story of
its capture by
of Judah, see A
BI
JAH
,
I
).
The
prophets Hosea and Amos appear in opposition to
Bethel, not
on
the ground (taken by the later
nomists) that it was the seat of
a
schism, but because of
In
Judg.
I
a
Bethel ought probably to be read for
AV for it is the king’s
chapel, and it is the king’s court’;
‘for it is the king’s
sanctuary, and it is
a
royal house.’
The
of the kingdoms brought Bethel
553
BETHER
the superstitious and immoral nature
of
its cult, even
though the object
of
this was Yahwk himself.
They
regard it as apostasy from Yahwk (Am.
44,
to
Bethel and revolt
5
5
‘Seek not
Bethel, seek Yahwk
’),
and its crimes culminate
7
in the silencing of his prophet Amos by its priest Amazixh
[see A
MOS
,
It shall, therefore, bear the brunt of
the impending
(Am.
3
Hos.
10
BAQ]).
In
scorn Amos had said Bethel shall
become A
VEN
vanity, falseness, false worship,
idolatry
( 5
5)
Hosea calls it Beth-aven (415
58
oftener than he calls it Bethel. The nickname was the
readier because of the actual B
ETH
-A
VEN
.
which
once stood, and perhaps in the eighth century still stood,
in the neighbourhood. After the fall of the northern
kingdom the heathen colonists naturally adopted the
cult of the ‘god of the land,’ and Bethel retained its
importance as a religious centre
Isaiah
and Micah do not mention Bethel it is very doubtful if
Jeremiah does
so
(Giesebrecht on Jer.
4813).
The frontier
of Judah, however, must have been gradually pushed
N.
so
as to enclose it, for when Josiah put down the high
places in the cities of Judah’ he destroyed the altar in
Bethel and desecrated the site
The city
itself must have been inhabited by Jews, for its families
are
reckoned in the great post-exilic list [see
E
ZRA
,
ii.
9,
Ezra228
[B])
Neh.
7 3 2
I
Esd.
[B],
[A])].
It was the
most northerly site repeopled by Jews (Neh.
31
W e hear nothing more of
Bethel till it is described as one of the strong places
of
Judah which Bacchides refortified in 161
(
I
Macc.
Jos.
Ant.
xiii.
and then it disappears from
OT
history.
In
A
.D.
garrisoned Bethel before his advance
on Jerusalem (Jos.
9
and
132
Hadrian placed a
post there to intercept Jewish fugitives
6.
3
Neub.
T h e
deaux
(333)
gives it as Betthar
m.
from Jerusalem.
Robinson’s theory
(LBR,
that Bethel is therefore the Bether of Hadrian’s war, is un-
founded.
Jerome call it a village: the latter
adds (under Aggai) that where Jacob dreamed there was
a
church-perha s part of the ruins a t Burj-Beitin. T h e
Crusaders exhibited
rock under the Dome of the
Rock
in
Jerusalem as Jacob‘s
hut the
‘
Cartulary of the Church
of
the Holy Sepulchre’ gives Bethel as a
ceded
to
that
church in
and the site of a tower and chapel built hy
Hugues
(Key, 378). See
chap.
2
;
Stanley,
GASm.
chap.
and
298.
A place to which David sent part
of
the spoil
of
the Amalekites
(
I
S.
: probably the same
as
if we are not with
(and Budde) to read
BETH-EMEK
99,
‘house in the
om.
B
ETH
-
ZUR
.
valley’),
a
place on the boundary of Asher (Josh. 1927).
Before Beth-emek some words appear to have dropped out
perhaps the are represented by
(After
continues
where
seems to
he a corruption of
prefixed wrongly
to
[
.
[L] Symm.
The
v.
not
clear there would seem to be two
of the northern
boundary (if ‘on the left hand,’ v. 28 means ‘northward,’ and
if the equivalent of
’is
to be inserted before
‘
northward in
v.
27).
Robinson was struck
by
the resemblance of the name
to
that of ‘Amka,
69
m.
NE.
of ‘Akka (Acre) but, as
he himself points out
4
the situation of
‘Amka is too far
N.
of
(Jiphtah-el?), and, even if
this objection be waived, ‘Amka is at
rate too far
N.
of
(which must be the ancient
G.
A.
T.
K. C.
BETHER
additional cities of Judah m Josh. 1559
(cp
mentioned after Karem (‘Ain
and Gallim (cp
G
IBBAR
).
No
doubt it is the modern
(7
m. SW.
On this
list see
E
ZR
A
55
a.
also
occurs
’
I
Ch. 659 [A], a s a substitute for
554
BETHER
of
Jerusalem), which” stands on the slope of a steep
projecting hill between the WZdy Bittir and a smaller
valley.
If we ascend higher we shall reach
a
site
admirably adapted for
a
fortress, where there are still
some ruins connected by popular legend with the Jews.
On
the
E.
side are chambers in the rock and old cisterns.
Neubauer
cp
90)
and
2387-395)
had all but demonstrated that this was
the Bether
or
rather Beth-ter
within whose
walls Bar Cochba so obstinately resisted the Romans
under Julius
(A.D.
The proof has now
been completed by the discovery of an inscription stating
which divisions of the Roman army were stationed
It is, therefore,
no
longer possible to maintain
with Gratz
that the Beth-ter of Bar Cochba
was identical with the Bettbar
of
the itineraries, which
was situated between Antipatris
or
Diospolis and
(see A
NTIPATRIS
,
end). See G
IBBAR
.
Only two ancient statements respecting the position of Bether
need be here quoted.
Eus. (HE
56)
describes
in
these terms :
and the Talm. of Jerus.
‘ I f
thou thinkest that Beth-ter [spelt with two
n
almost
always
in
this section] was near
sea, thou art in error:
truly it was
m.
away from the sea.
T. K.
C.
BETHER, The mountains
of
Cant.
EV, following Vg.
The word Bether, how-
ever, all recent critics agree,
is
not a proper name : it
qualifies t e preceding words. Putting aside the old,
forced exp
of
the phrase, such as mountains
of ravines’
cp
B
ITHRON
), and mountains of separation’ (between the
lovers), one might conjecture that
Bether was the
Syrian plant malobathron, from which a costly oil was
procured, used in the toilet of banqueters (Hor. Od. ii.
and also
medicine
So
Symm. (Field,
Hex.
on Cant.
Wellh.
399
ET
Others emend
into
‘spices,’ in conformity with
(so
Pesh., Theod.,
Meier, Gratz). The best solution, however, has yet to
be mentioned :
is
for
‘cypresses’
cp
1
17
(Che.
).
Mountains of cypresses
is
appro-
priate term for Lebanon ; cp
‘
mountains of panthers
’
(48).
and cp C
ANTICLES
,
n.
BETHESDA
--‘house of mercy’
[Ti. WH]), the reading
of T R in Jn.52, for which the best authorities
B
ETHZATHA
or
B
ETHSAIDA
.
On the topographical
question, see J
ERUSALEM
.
‘near her’), an unidentified place in the
mentioned by Micah
(1
who foresees the
captivity of its noble ones
emended
from
reading
where
M T
has
:
so
’98).
It is scarcely the same as Azel (cp
A
ZAL
).
BETH-GADER
a
town, whose
father Hareph was of Calebite origin
(
I
Ch.
the genealogy
to represent post-exilic relations.
On the analogy of the other great divisions Shobal
and Salma abi Bethlehem, Beth-gader
was perhaps no unimportant place, and we may possibly
identify it with
It is noticeable that the further
divisions of Hareph are not enumerated, as they are in
the cases of Shobal and Salma.
BETH-GAMUL
place
recompense
[A],
om.
In Moab on
the table-land
E.
of the Jordan
48
identified by
CI.
Gan.
Acad.
des
The position of
G
EDER
,
which
it
otherwise be
connected, is unknown.
555
BETH-HARAM
with
which lies to the east
of
the well-
known
;
according to others, it
its modern
representative in
about five hours
S.
of
Neh.
R V ; see
G
ILGAL
,
6
AV Beth-Haccherem
‘vineyard place’), is expressly called, not
a
but a district
near Jerusalem, Neh.
3
14
[L]).
From Jer.
61
it appears to have included
a conspicuous height to
S.
of Jerusalem which was
used as a beacon-station
[B],
[K],
Jerome (in
comment on the latter passage) says that it was
one of the villages which he could see every day with his own eyes
from Bethlehem, that it was called Bethacharma, and that it
on a
mountain.
many since Pococke have placed it on
the so-called
or
‘Frank
Mountain’ (2487 ft.
the
sea-level), between Bethlehem and Tekoa, and very near the
latter (so even Giesebrecht). Jerome’s statement we are unable
t o
criticise but there
is now no name near the Frank Mountain’
which confirms this theory, and the special fertility which the
name Beth-haccerem implies to have characterised the district
suggests lookingelsewhere. After all, it was rather hasty
t o
infer
from Jer. 6
I
that
Beth-haccerem was bound
t o
be near Tekoa.
Since we have found reason elsewhere (B
ETH
-
CAR
)
to correct Beth-car’ in
into Beth-haccerem,
and
to
identify this with the beautiful village of
about an hour and a half
of Jerusalem,
it becomes difficult to resist the conclusion that the hill
referred to by Jeremiah was the
at the foot of
which lies the village in question. The fruitful
groves and vineyards of ‘Ain KHrim are watered from a
superb fountain, and would justify the name Beth-
haccerem. The summit of the Jebel
commands
a
view
of
the Mediterranean, the Mount of Olives, and
part of Jerusalem
Conder mentions that
there are still cairns on the ridge above ‘Ain
which
may have served
beacons
1881,
p. 271).
One is
40
ft. high and
130
ft. in diameter, with a flat
top measuring
40
ft. across.
Two more references to Beth-haccerem may be indi-
cated.
the Mishna treatise,
3
4,
it is
stated that the stones for the great altar
the second
temple came from the valley of Beth-cerem, which Adler
8390)
identifies with
and ‘Ain
and among the eleven towns which
has
(but not MT)
Josh.
occurs Karem
which, from the context, can only be ‘Ain
Cp
T
AHCHEMONITE
.
For
another (probable) Beth-carem
see B
ATH
-
KABBIM
.
T.
C.
BETH-HAGGAN
EV
the garden-
in
as a proper name,
Beth-horon [L]), a place, apparently to the
S.
,of Jezreel,
on the road to which Ahaziah fled in his chariot when
he saw Jehoram slain by Jehu
( z
K.
Jenin, the
first village which one ,travelling southwards would
encounter, may very well be
(
place of gardens‘),
E
N
-
GANNIM
If,
however, we hold with Conder that Megiddo, which
Ahaziah reached at last-to die-was
at the
foot of Gilboa, a little to the
S.
of
it will become
natural to identify
with a northern
Beit
between Mt. Tabor and the
S.
end of the Lake
of Gennesaret (Beit Jenn is, in Arabic nomenclature,
a
favourite name).
Against this view of the flight
of
Ahaziah, see GASm.
HG 387,
n.
I.
T.
K. C.
BETH-HANAN. See
BETH
AV incorrectly B
ETH
-
ARAM
For
the true form of the name
[AL]),
Josh.
(P).
see B
ETH
-
HARAN
.
BETH-HARAN
BETH-HARAN
probably ‘house
of
[E]), the correct and original pronunciation of
the name of the place also called B
ETH
-HARAM (Cp
for G
ERSHON
). The place thus designated
was an ancient Amorite city, fortified by the conquering
Gadites.
.
The site is occupied by the modern
which stands
up
in a
of the same name,
between
and the Jordan, at no great distance
from the river.
The objection to this raised by
n.
I)
is not decisive.
does indeed imply
a
form,
but this
form is vouched for by the existence of the
Aramaic
Beth-ramtha
(see below).
It
arose out
of
B
ETH
-
HARAM
(a
phonetic modifica-
tion
of
Beth-haran) when the older and correct
form
of the
name had passed out
of use,
and
so
the later form, Beth-haram,
came to
he
misinterpreted. Moreover Tristram’s discovery
of
a
conspicuous mound called Beit
has not
been
verified by subsequent travellers though
it
is
still
recognised in
(map of
and
the identification
(which
stands
in
comm.) is retained
von
in
on
the assumption that
Beit
Harran
(or
is
nearer
to
the
outlet
of the
than
Tell
The really conspicuous mound is surely that
of
Tell
which is
673
ft. above the sea-level, and
certainly marks the site of an ancient town of importance
(Conder,
E. Pal.
1238).
Such a town
was the Beth-ramtha of the Talmud (Neubauer,
the name of which
is
attested by Josephus,
Eusebius, and Jero
here
Ant.
xvii.
10
6
.
4
;
Herod Antipas
3’
it
and called it Julias
the wife of
at
the same time that Herod Philip rebuilt Bethsaida
and gave
it
the same
name after
the emperor’s
daughter
(Jos.
Ant.
xviii. 2
I
;
I
)
.
Jerome, however, enables
us
to correct
this statement
(OS
103
The older
name
of the city
was
Livias ;
the
name
was changed
to
Julias when
was
received into
the
gens
by
the
emperor’s
testament
(see Schiirer,
Eus.
(OS
23488) and Theodosius
also
call
it
Livias
.
the latter
(De
Situ
65)
describes
it
as
R.
from
Jericho, near warm springs
that
were efficacious
against leprosy.
T. K. C .
Herod had
a
BETH-HOGLAR,
once (Josh.
156)
AV
Beth-hogla
104,
‘place of partridge,’ cp
a
Benjamite city on the border of Judah (Jos.
156,
[A];
1 8 1 9 2 1 ,
and
in
is the modern
(and
Hajla,
a
fine
ruin situated be-
tween Jericho and the Jordan
S.
of Gilgal (cp Di. on
Gen.
and
Under the form Beth-
alaga it is, according to Jos.
(Ant.
xiii.
the place
to which Jonathan fled before Bacchides,
I
Macc.
(but see B
ETHBASI
).
The
erroneously identifies
Beth-hoglah with
(see A
BEL
-
MIZRAIM
, end). The
interpretation
gyri’
of Jer., according
to W R S
191,
n.
I
),
may rest upon a local
tradition
of
a
ritual procession around some sacred
object there (cp Ar.
hobble, hop ‘)-similar
perhaps to the Ar. ceremonial
(for which see We.
The form
survives also in
Hajla (see B
ETH
-
ARABAH
,
a
noted
place for pilgrims at the mouth of the WHdy el-Kelt
(Baed.
169).
BETH-HORON
also
and
and in Ch.
or
the modern form Beit
probably ‘ t h e
place of the hollow’ or ‘hollow way’) was the name
two neighbouring villages,
Beth-horon
Josh.
[L]) and lower Beth-horon
Josh. 163 ; but in
Ch.
85
and
See
Schick
cp p.
the
as
and
;
once
106)
the
text
gives
with a
fragmentary reference to
the
(OS 25
11
;
domus
vel
,
The in Hoglah
is
supported, and
all
the evidence points
t o
the reading Haglah.
For another explanation
see
E
N
-
EGLAIM
.
quae
a
dicitur
5 57
BETH-HORON
the dual form preserved
by
[B
but
AL], Josh.
near the head and the
Coot,
of the ascent from the Maritime Plain
to
the
Benjamin, and represented to-day by
Beit
and
Beit
(large
Surv.
Sheet xvii.
The road leaves Beit Sira fin which
see
:
840
ft. above sea-level, on the high
of Aiialon : climbs
the
of
the Benjamite
in about
minutes to
horon,
1240
ft. ; and thence, dropping
at
first for
a
ascends the ridge, with the gorges of
to the
S.,
and WHdy
and
el-
‘Imeish to the
N.,
to the upper Beth-horon,
m.
from its fellow and
ft. above the sea ; and thence,
still following the ridge, comes out on the Benjamite
plateau about
m. farther on, to the
N.
of el-Jib
(Gibeon),
at
a
height of about
2300
ft.
The
or
ascent to Beth-horon (Josh.
may be the road
towards the upper Beth-horon from Gibeon
:
it does
rise at first from the plateau before descending; the
or descent to the two Beth-horons (Josh.
is the whole road from the edge
of
the plateau.
More
probably, the two are the same taken from opposite
ends.
This Beth-horon road is now no longer the high
road from Jerusalem and the watershed to the Maritime
Plain but it was used
as
such from the very earliest
to at least the sixteenth century of our era, and
indeed forms the most natural, convenient, and least
exposed of all the possible descents from the neighbour-
hood of Jerusalem to the plain
of
Sharon. The line of
it bears many marks of its age and long use.
Carried
for the most part over the bare rock and rocky debris,
it has had steps cut upon it in its steeper portions, and
has remains of Roman pavement.
Standing as they
do upon mounds, the two Beth-horons command the
most difficult passages of this route and form its double
key.
T h e constancy with which the Beth-horons appear in
history is, therefore, easily explicable (they do not occur,
however, in either the lists of the conquests
of Thotmes 111. or
Amarna letters).
According to
JE,
after Joshua had won
for Israel
a
footing on the Benjamite plateau and made
peace with Gibeon, the latter was threatened by the
Canaanites.
Joshua defeated them at Gibeon, and
pursued them
all
the way down by the Beth-horons
(Josh.
10
I n the days of Saul the Philistines must
have held the pass from their camp a t Michmash
(
I
13
Solomon fortified Beth-horon the nether, along
with Gezer, on the opposite side of Aijalon
(I
K.
[om, BL, Jos.
in
I
K.
A]
2
Ch.
85
adds Beth-horon the upper
B]).
During his son Rehoboam’s
or
of
Egypt invaded Judah by the Beth-horon passage,
it would appear, for both Ai-yu-ru-u (Aijalon) and
(Beth-horon) occur in his lists of the
towns he conquered
(Nos. 26
24 see WMM,
As.
u.
166).
I n the Syro-Maccabean wars, Seron, a Syrian general,
advanced on Judah by Beth-horou ; Judas with a small
force met him on the ascent, defeated him, and pursued
him
upon the plain
(I
Macc.
Jos.
Ant.
xii.
I
).
A few years afterwards,
having retired from Jerusalem upon Beth-
horon, Judas attacked and slew him, and routed his
army
as
far as Gezer
( I
Macc.
;
Jos.
Ant.
Beth-horon was among the places fortified by Bacchides
(I
Macc.
Jos.
Ant.
1 3 ) .
See
also
Judith44
[A]).
1
A
similar dual
to
be read
in
2
S.
13
34
with We.,
Dr.,
and Bu.
following
[Avid],
was
probably by the Beth-horons that the Philistines
were routed by Saul
(
I
S.
13 14) and ‘from Gibeon south
t o
Gezer,’ by David
S.
5
558
BETH-JESHIMOTH
a Roman army under Cestius
ascending
by
had their rear disordered by the Jews, and after a
BETHLEHEM
(Josh.
[B],
[AL]), an unidentified site in
the Negeb of Judah (Josh.
assigned to Simeon
(Josh.
The parallel passage in
I
Ch.
has
B
ETH
-
BIRI
which has probablyarisen from a
corruption of the text.
For 'and at Beth-biri and at
has
[B],
K
.
.
[A],
K
.
[L].
BETHLEHEM
etc.
I
S.
206, etc.
[L
commonly] some codd.
gentilic Bethlehemite,
I
S .
etc.) meant, to the Hebrew,
'house of bread
N
AMES
,
I
O
on
a
less obvious
explanation of H.
G.
see E
LHANAN
,
I,
end.
I.
Beth-lehem-judah
Judg.
etc.),
the modem
Beit
above sea-level,
m.
S.
of Jerusalem (Jos.,
zo
stadia, Ant.
a little
off
the high road to Hebron, on a spur
running
E.
from the watershed, surrounded by valleys
among the most fertile of
The site is without
springs (the nearest being one 800 yards SE. of the
town, and others at
m. away), but receives
water from an aqueduct from the
Pools
of Solomon
(C
ONDUITS
,
3 )
compassing the
SE.
end of the spur,
from many cisterns-of which the greatest are
three in front
of
the great basilica; there are three
others from
to
ft. deep, on the
N.,
called
The immediate neighbourhood is very fertile,
bearing, besides wheat and barley, groves of olive and
almond, and vineyards.
The wine of Bethlehem
('Talhami') is among the best of Palestine.
So great fertility must mean that the site was occupied,
in spite of the want of springs, from the earliest times
but the references to it in Judges-as the
home of the Levite who sojourned in
Micah's house
and of the young
woman whom
Benjamites maltreated
(19
in the Book of Ruth are of uncertain date,
into the
clear light of history Bethlehem first emerges with
It was his home
(I
206
very early), for the waters
of which, when it was occupied by the Philistines, he
expressed
so
great a longing-probably as a pledge of
his fatherland's enfranchisement-that his three captains
broke the enemy's lines, and drewwater from the cistern
in the town's gate
S.
23
from the same
source), which tradition has identified with the
(but
1
following Quaresmius,
prefers those
front of the basilica). Other references
to Bethlehem as David's home are
I
S .
16
I
4
17
15 58
(from later strata).
brother of Joab, was buried
in Bethlehem
his father's grave
( z
232). Thus,
Joab, like his leader, was a Bethlehemite. Except for
a
statement of
Ch.
1 1 6
that
fortified Bethlehem, the town is not mentioned
again till Micah, who describes it
as
still one of the
smallest of the townships of Judah, but illustrious
as
the birthplace of the Messianic king (see M
ICAH
,
According to Jer. 41
17.
the Jews
in
586
B
.C.
fled to
Egypt rested at Gidroth-chimham (see C
HIMHAM
),
Bethlehem. The Bethlehemites carried into captivity
by Nebuchadrezzar repeopled their town after the return
[B],
[A]; Neh.
726
Bom.,
[K],
[A],
cp
6
I
Esd.
5
17
[B],
[A],
[L]).
Bethlehem
is the scene of the beautiful story of Ruth, in connection
with which it is necessary
to
note that Moab is clearly
visible from about Bethlehem: thus, Ruth in her
adopted home must often have had her own fatherland
in sight.
In the lists of the M T of Joshua
(P)
Beth-
lehem is not given
;
but it is added with ten. others in
the
text of
:
reading must be genuine, since the group which it
If
it does so even then
:
see
D
AVID
,
I
a.
In
66
A
.D.
Beth-horon,
short and futile siege of Jerusalem retreated pell-mell by
same way. Josephus describes the difficulties of
ground in
a manner that leads us to suppose that the Romans in their
haste cannot have kept to the high road by the Beth-horons,
were swept down the gorges on either side
Perhaps
because of this experience, Titus, in his advance upon Jerusalem
two years later, took another road and Beth-horon is not again
mentioned in
military history of Palestine.
In
the division of the land among the tribes of Israel,
the border line between
and
ran bv
the
(Josh.
5
[L
18
which were counted
to
Ephraim (Josh. 21
They remained part of the
N. kingdom and we do not read of any Jews settled
there in post-exilic times. That is to say, they were held
by the Samaritans. Sanballat, one of the chief foes of
the Jews in Nehemiah's day, is called
'
the H
ORONITE
'
(Neh. 210,
[BA].
[L]
om.
etc.). Schlatter
Topog.
Pal. 4,
' W a r Beth-horon der
Wohnort
seeks to prove that Horonite
means 'from Horonaim,' the town in
Moab
(Is.
Jer. 483
5 34,
and Moabite stone), partly on the ground
that Sanballat is associated with Tobiah the Ammonite
but Ammonite may mean from C
HEPHAR
-A
MMONI
( a town of Benjamin, Josh.
and Buhl
1 6 9 )
points out that
b ' s
form of
(Josh.
10
IO
[B cp
S.
1334)
confirms the possibility of
'from Beth-horon.'
By
1 6 1
Beth-horon
had become a city of
(I
Macc.
Jos.
Ant.
xiii.
cp
According to
Talmud it was the
of many rabbis
(Neub.
'Jerome gives it
the itinerary of
Paula who came to it from Nicopolis
6.
Post-biblical
S.
ed. Migne, i. 883). There
are the
of a mediaeval castle in upper
Beth-horon, but the substructions in both
villages are probably more ancient. T h e name is given by very
few mediaeval travellers (Brocardus, ch. 9
;
Sanutus,
and not at all, it would appear, by the Arab
the
mentioned by
but not located he the same
place. T h e mediaeval pilgrim's d e n t to
Ramleh
and
present line of road. In
Dr. Clarke
vol.
rediscovered
name.
See Rob.
BX
3 59
1338,346
Stanley,
SP
;
GASm.
BETH-JESHIMOTH, once
3349) AV Beth-
jesimoth
is assigned
to the
(cp
3349,
[BFL],
[A]) but probably it was, like most of the
neighbouring places, in the possession of the Moabites
during a considerable period of the Hebrew monarchy.
We know that it was Moabite in the time of Ezekiel
(Ezek.
[B],
[Qa]),
who speaks of it
along with Baal-meon and Kiriathaim a s the glory of
the country.'
As
it is mentioned by Josephus
5)
as having been taken by
Eus. writes
Jerome
103
writing
describes it
as
a
village bearing in his day the name
opposite
Jericho at a distance of
IO
R.
m.
juxta mare mortuum.'
The name and description point
to the modern
The name
moth may be compared with the Jeshimon on the face'
of which the headland of Pisgah looked down
(Nu.
for probably this Jeshimon
(
desolation
is
not
the Jeshimon of Judah, but the barren land
off
the
NE.
end of the Dead Sea. With this name Hommel
compares,
the name of a
Palestinian district mentioned by
an
early Assyrian king.
Cp GASm.
HG 564,
BETH-LE-APHRAH
Mic.
1
RV,
AV A
PHRAH
, H
OUSE
O
F.
'abode of lions,'-Josh. 196,
559
G.
A .
266
27)
and
(233
S
I
)
BETH-LEBAOTH
BETHLEHEM
includes is too important to have been omitted from the
original.
The name Ephrathah or Ephrath of this passage
is
assigned to Bethlehem also in Mic.
6 [
I
]
(the reading
or
is not certain but the refer-
ence to Bethlehem is clear), in
Ru.
virtually in
Ru.
(L
om.) in
I
S .
( B
and
probably
also
in Ps.
1326.
Apart from Micah, the
documents in which
occurs are probably
so
late that we might reasonably suppose that Bethlehem
was
the earlier name of the town.
On the other hand,
these documents are probably based on very early
material: Micah (if Mic.
6 2
is his work) takes the
name
as
well known.
It is possible to argue from
I
Ch.
4 4
[A]), that
was the name of the whole district
in
which Bethlehem lay.
Bethlehem is not mentioned by Josephus after Solo-
mon’s time, nor in the Books of Maccabees; which
proves how insignificant it continued to be.
As
the
place commanded the fertile
and water-supply
around it,-the Philistines had deemed it important
enough to occupy-this silence is very remarkable.
Bethlehem reappears in Mt.
2
Lk. 2 as the
birthplace of Jesus, distinguished still as
(Mt.
5,
cp
6 8
‘the city of David’ (Lk.
2
4
15
cp Jn.
742).
Lk. de-
scribes the new-born child
as
having been laid in
a
manger
omit the definite article of
because there
was
no room for them in the
they had retired then ‘ t o
a
stall or cave where there
was room for the mother and
a
crib for the babe.’
It is significant that Bethlehem appears to have been
chosen, along with the sites of the crucifixion and the
resurrection, for special treatment by the Emperor
Hadrian.
As
he set up there an image of Jupiter and
an image of Venus, so he devastated Bethlehem and
planted upon it a grove sacred to Adonis (Jer.
Paul.,
583).
This proves that even before 132
A.
D
.
Bethlehem was the scene of Christian pilgrimage and
worship,
as
the birthplace of Jesus.
(The Talmud also
admits that from Bethlehem the Messiah must come :
Berachoth,
j
About
I
jo
A.
D.
Justin Martyr
70
78)
describes the scene of the birth as in
a
cave near the village. This tradition may be correct
:
there were many ancient cave-stables in Palestine
(Conder,
Tent
chap.
and caves are still used
stables.
In
A
.D.
the site of Bethlehem was
still ‘ a wild wood’ (Cyr. Jerus.
1220).
Con-
stantine cleared it and built a basilica. Soon after, in
Jerome’s time, a cave in the rock near the basilica was
venerated as the stable, and in a neighbouring grotto
Jerome himself prepared his translation of the Bible.
From that day to this the tradition has been constant.
The centre of interest in modern Bethlehem is, there-
fore, the large basilica
Maria a
surrounded
and fortified by the Latin, the Greek, and the Armenian
Although the architecture is mixed and of
many periods, the bulk of the church is that built by
Constantine. Cp De
de
Eutychius (circa
quoted by
2
indeed
that the church is a
of
Dulled ddwn
BETH-MERH
Under the chancel is the Grotto of the Nativity, called
also the Milk-Grotto and the Grotto of
our
Lady;
el
and
We have
seen the precariousness of the tradition which sanctions
it
:
it is only probable that Jesus was born in a cave, and
there is nothing to prove that this was the cave, for the
site lay desolate for three centnries.
Among recent works, consult Tobler’s monograph
in.
and Palmer ‘Das jetzige
17
with map and
2.
Bethlehem of
(Josh.
19
[B]),
now
7 m.
NW.
of Nazareth, a miserable
village among oak woods
3113).
In the Talmud it receives the designation
perhaps a corruption for
of Nazareth
(Neubauer,
The combination,
of
two names
so
famous in the Gospel history is remark-
able.
Most scholars take this Bethlehem to have been
the home and burial-place of the judge Ibzan (Judg.
128
I
O
).
Josephus and Jewish tradition assign him to
BETHLOMON
[A]),
I
Esd.
BETH MAACHAH
2
S. 20
14.
See
Bethlehem Judah
(Ant. v.
G .
A. S.
B
ETHLEHEM
,
2.
A
BEL
-
BETH
-
MAACHAH
.
‘the house of chariots’) and
station
of
horses are mentioned together
in Josh.
( P ) in the list of Simeonite towns.
The
readings are
:
for Beth-marcaboth ; in
Josh.
[A]
; in
I
Ch.
4
where’the
For Hazar-susah ;
in Josh. 19
5
in
I
Ch. 431, Hazar-susim
[A],
The names seem to indicate posts of war-horses and
chariots, such as Solomon is said to have established
( I
K.
9191026).
The two places
possibly be
identical respectively with M
ADMANNAH
and
‘cities’ in the Negeb towards Edom.
The
latter are the older names for Madmannah, at least,
appears in
I
Ch.
(which belongs to the list of
exilic settlements of the Calebites), whilst it is impossible
to assign a very early date to
I
Ch.
where Beth-
marcaboth and
are mentioned
as
Simeonite towns
‘
before the reign of David.
That
the two places actually were regular stations for horses
and chariots may be taken for granted but it may be
questioned whether they were
so
before post-exilic times,
when the Persians ,established post-stations on the route
from the
into Egypt (by
Gaza
to
On this view Sansannah may very well be the modern
a
village in an olive-grove on the road from
Eleutheropolis to Gaza
m. NE. from the latter
town), and
may be conjectured to be the
modern
Yzinus,
14
m. SW. from
has always been
an important station.
It may be noted that in the time
of Micah
(1
13)
Lachish (about
8
m. from
also
BETH-MEON
Jer.
See
BETH-MERHAK,
AV
place that was afar
off,’
‘the Far House,’
E N
[BAL],
a
domo).
is
either the proper name
(so
doubtfully),-
in which case the name is
like Beth-
a
description
The., Ke., Kau.
the last house
of the place outside Jerusalem where
David waited with his attendantsuntil the people and the
body-guard had passed,
S. 1517
(on the text, which
is doubtful, see Dr.
and Klo. ad
I t is evident that chariots went down to Egypt by
this
way
at
least a s
the eighth cent.
B
.
C.
Cp Gen.
Mic. 113.
BETH-MARCABOTH
was
a
chariot city.
Cp M
ARCABOTH
.
W.
R.
S.
,562
basilica there of his construction a s had there been one he must
have done. Probably Justinian
added to
church and the building is, therefore, the most ancient church
in
and one of the most ancient in the world. The fine
mosaics are from the court of the Emperor Manuel Comnenus
(circa
and the rafters by Philip of Burgundy (in
1482).
In the lntter two passages Ephrathite means, of course,
‘of
’=Bethlehem. I t is interesting that in
PEFQ Jan.
1898
Schick attempts to prove that
the
of
Ephrathite was in the neighbourhobd of
Bethlehem.
Ephrathite’ in
I
I
probably means Ephraimite
(cp
12
5
where
for
has
but
36
BETH-MILL0
BETH-MILLO
see
J
ERUSALEM
.
BETH-NIMRAH
perhaps place of pure
water‘ cp Ar.
Ass.
‘transparent’ but
see N
IMRIM
and N
AMES
,
Nu.
[BF],
Josh.
(Nu.
one of the Amorite cities which were after-
wards
built’ by Gad (Nu.
is the
and
of Eusebius and Jerome
43
102
I
), a village still extant in their day, about
5
R. m.
N.
from Livias (B
ETH
-H
ARAN
,
the
and
of the Talmud (cp Del. ad
the modern
a
well-watered oasis
on
the brink of the Jordan
valley some
miles
E.
of Jordan (cp Baed.
162).
Beth-nimrah is nowhere mentioned under this name in
outside of Numbers and Joshua, but it is identified
by
modern critics with the waters of N
IMRIM
and, as stated elsewhere (B
ETHANY
,
Beth-nimrah
may be the original of the variants Bethany, Bethabara,
in
1 2 8 .
RV B
ETH
-
HORON
.
BETH-PALET,
or (Neh. 1126) B
ETH
-
PHELET
, RV
always
Bethpelet
‘house of escape’), a n
unknown Calebite town (cp
I
Ch.
on the
Edomite border of Judah, Josh.
[B],
of Judahite villages (see E
ZRA
,
[b],
Neh.
For the gentilic Paltite
corruptly
P
ELONITE (I),
see P
ALTITE
.
BETH-PAZZEZ
a n unknown point
on
the border of Issachar, Josh.
equally obscure name H
APPIZZEZ
.
Josh.
In
the cities of Reuben in Dt. 329
the ravine
in
front of
it is mentioned as the place where Israel
was encamped when the Deuteronomy discourses were
delivered and in Dt. 346 the same ravine is mentioned
a s the place of Moses‘ burial.
The exact site
un-
certain; but it seems clear that it cannot have been
very far from the Pisgah ridge.
Eusebius states
23378) that
was near Mount
(cp the
top, or head, of Peor,’
Nu.
opposite
to Jericho,
6
m. above Livias
Tell
see
B
ETH
-
HARAN
)
and
that Mount
was opposite to Jericho,
on
the side of the road leading
up from Livias to
part of it being
7
m. from
the latter place
If
we may judge from
in the
of
E.
the ascent from Livias to
Heshbon would be made naturally either along the
WZdy
(cp Palmer,
Desert of the Exodus,
Tristram, Moab,
346)
or along the more circuitous road
N.
of this, said by Tristram
343)
to be the
ordinarily used. The statements of Eusebius, if correct,
would thus point to a site near one of these two
roads, some four or five miles
N.
of Nebs.
The
‘head of Peor’
might be an eminence in
the same locality.
The opinion that this was the site
is
supported by the mention, in Josh.
of Beth-
peor next to the ‘slopes
of
in
all probability, the declivities on the
S.
side of the
‘Ayiin
The ‘ravine in front of Beth-
poor’ might thus be the WZdy
(PEFQ
1882,
8 5
a n d
146
suggests a site farther to the
on the crest of
a
hill above
el-Minyeh, 8 m. SW. of Nebs., com-
manding (see
Nu.
and
compared with 25
I
)
BETH-PEOR
a
563
BETH-REHOB
extensive view
of
the lower valley of the Jordan.
however, the spot at which Baal of Peor was
vorshipped (which can hardly have been far from
would seem
to have been more
accessible from the plain of
(the
than
el-Minyeh would be Nu.
with
14
makes it probable also that it was
ess distant from Pisgah whilst, as we have seen,
other indications we possess point to a site N.
of
he Nebo-Pisgah ridge (the modern Nebs,
than to one
S.
of it.
Until, therefore, it has
shown that there is no eminence in the neighbour-
of the
commanding the prospect
mplied in
and
(cp
it is here that
,he ancient Beth-peor must be sought. Travellers will
explore this region with the view of ascertaining
there is such a height.
[Ti.
locality near the Mt. of Olives, on a small
on
the
road from Jerusalem to Jericho.
It is mentioned
together with B
ETHANY
I
],
and probably lay to
the E. of it
in
Mt. (vol. xvi.
describes it as a place of priests’
(cp
According to various passages of
the Talmud, Beth-phagb was the name of the district
extending from the base of
to the walls of
Jerusalem, and, according to the Talm. Bab. (Men. xi. 2,
78
was one of the limits of the Sabbatic
zone around Jerusalem (cp G
EZER
), whence
Ganneau
would identify it with Kefr
(see
PEFQ 1878,
p. 60
but see B
ETH
-Z
UR
).
The current explanation of the name is a little more
plausible than that of B
ETHANY
(the
of Talm.) would naturally
‘place
of
young figs’ cp
in Cant. 213 with Delitzsch’s note.
This, however, may be no more than a popular ety-
mology. Nestle
Sac.
1896
cp
etc.
148)
is convinced that the narrative of the barren fig-
tree, which in
Mk.
is
in
Bethany, has arisen out of this faulty popular explanation
of Beth-phagb.
It has often been remarked that there
is a startling peculiarity in this narrative as compared
with the other evangelical traditions.
See also A.
Meyer,
166.
The mediaeval
was discovered by Guillemot
and Clermont-Ganneau
1877
between the Mount
of
Olives and Bethany.
In his account of this discovery
the latter scholar offers the suggestion that the ‘Village
of the Mount of Olives
which admittedly
stands on the site of some important ancient village,
may be the Bethphage of the Gospels and of the Talmud.
This view would clear up the Talmudic statement
respecting the Sabbatic zone already mentioned. See
PEFQ 1878,
51-61.
BETH-PHELET
Neh.
AV.
See
B
ETH
-
PALET
.
BETH-RAPHA
in an obscure genealogy
of
Chelub
I
Ch.
[A],
[L]).
No
place
of
this name is
known
appears to be
a
clan-name, unconnected
of course with ‘Rephaim.’
appears to
occur as
a
name in B
EN
J
AMIN
ii.
BETH-REHOB
[BAL]), a n
town and district, which with
and
M
AACAH
sent men to the help of Ammon against
David
106,
8,
A]
[L
See A
RAM
,
5,
6.
It
stated in Judg.
In the Talmud,
also means a
jaw
or cheek, and from
Dt.
1 8 3 we learn that the cheeks (Syr.
has
belonged to the
portion
of the priests (cp Reland, 653). Hence, on the supposi-
tion that Beth-phage meant ‘place
of cheeks,’ it was presumed
that
there was a school of priests here.
A
reference to a
similar defeat
at
the hands
of Saul in
I
S.
1447,
is open to
suspicion
;
see
S
A
UL
,
3,
and
cp Wi.
1
Cp P
EOR
.
R.
,
564
BETHSAIDA
BETH-SHEAN
though these towns lay
on
the same side
and, secondly, Jesus would not seek again the territories
of Herod Antipas so soon after leaving them for those
of Philip, but would most probably return to what
Lk. tells
us
he had just chosen as his headquarters.
We may be certain, then, that the Bethsaida of Mk.
is still Bethsaida Julias.
Nor need we seek for another in the 'Bethsaida of
Galilee' to which the Fourth Gospel
(1
says
that Andrew, Peter, and Philip belonged.
In the time of the Great War
the name Galilee appears to have been
extended round the Lake-Josephus calls Judas of
the Galilean
(Ant.
xviii.
at
an
earlier date the jurisdiction of the ruler of Galilee may
have comprised part of the
E.
coast (cp
4).
Besides, a town which lay
so
immediately on the Jordan
might easily be reckoned to Galilee.
In any case,
by
84
the
E.
coast was definitely attached to the
province, and Ptolemy (v.
writing about
140,
places Julias
That being
so,
it is signi-
ficant that it is only the Fourth Gospel that speaks
of Bethsaida of Galilee.' There is, therefore (as held
by Wilson,
Thomson,
Land
ed.
1877.
Holtzmann,
1878,
Furrer,
ZDPV
2
66
Socin and Benzinger in Baed.
ed.
1891,
p.
256
GASm.
Buhl,
Pal.
no
reason
us
to the theory of a second or
western Bethsaida.
It is interesting that the disciple
of Jesus called Philip should come from Philip's Julias.
Early Christian tradition and the
works
of travel
agree in showing no trace of more than one Bethsaida. The
site shown for it, however is uncertain, and may have varied
from age to age.
and Jerome define it only a s
on the Lake
(OS).
51
merely says
i t was not far from Capernaum.
data
which place it on his journey between Capernaum and Chorazin.
suit the
E.
bank of the Jordan (in spite of what
says)
even if Chorazin
he
but
(Khersa) may
be meant.
In
probability Bethsaida remained locally distinct
from Julias after the erection of the latter by Philip.
The custom of Jesus was not to enter such purely Greek
towns as Julias must have been yet, according to Mt.
11
he did many 'wonderful works in
Jnlias had fourteen villages
about it (Jos.
Ant.
xx.
84).
Schumacher suggests for Bethsaida some ruins
on the Lake called el-'Araj, which were joined with
et-Tell (Julias) by a Roman road
9
G.
A.
BETHSAMOS
[A]),
I
A
ZMAVETH
).
WMM
153.;
BETH-SHEAN
cp
[BAL]), or Beth-shan
in
pause
1.
Position.
or Beth-
(I
Macc.
mod.
320
ft. below the sea-level, was finely situated on
a
low
table-land above the Jordan valley, at the mouth
of
the
W.
which leads gently np from the Jordan
to Zer'in (Jezreel). The Jordan itself is three miles
off
(cp
I )
but
was unusually
well supplied with water, being intersected by two
streams.
Amid the extensive ruins rises the
of the
ancient fortress, a natural mound, artificially strength-
ened by scarping the side'
(PEF
2108).
The illustration given in the Memoirs of the Survey Will enable
the. reader to divine the grandeur of the prospect from this
eminence.
The eye sweeps from four to ten miles of the plain
all round, and follows the road westward to Jezreel, covers the
thickets of Jordan where the fords lie, and ranges the edge of the
eastern hills from Gadara to the Jabbok' (GASm. H G
357).
This
farthest-seeing, farthest-seen fortress
must
have been hard for the Israelites to conquer; yet
till it was in their hands they were ex-
cluded from one of the main roads between
western and eastern Palestine, and from the occupation
of
a
coveted portion of the Jordan valley.
That Beth-
1828
that Laish-Dan was in 'the valley that lieth by
Beth-rehob'
[L],
[A]).
Beth-rehob is doubtless the
of Nu.
according to P, was the most northern point reached
by the
[B], pow0 [F]). A connection
with the
(i.
3 )
is improbable (though
not impossible, see A
RAM
,
The exact site of Beth-rehob is uncertain.
It can
hardly be the Jebel
finely situated above the
great plain of
to the W. of
and re-
markable for the remains, partly ancient, of
a
fortress
(so
Rob.
BR
Others have thought of
about
I
hour N. of D a n ; hut may not the
site of the
town
Beth-rehob he placed quite
as
reason-
ably at
itself (see
§
7f:
)
?
Josephus
tells
us (Ant.
xviii.
21)
that the Tetrarch
Philip raised
a
village
Bethsaida on
the Lake of Gennesareth to the rank of a city, and called
it Julias, after Julia the daughter of Augustus.
Else-
where he describes Julias
as
in the Lower
I
) ,
close to the Jordan
(
near where the
latter runs into the lake
Pliny (v.
and
Jerome
(Comm.
Mt. 16
13)
also. place it
E.
of Jordan.
In
conformity with these data, the site has been fixed on
the fertile and very grassy plain
in the NE.
corner of the lake, either at et-Tell,
a
mound with
many ruins, close to the Jordan where the latter issues
from the hills, or at Mas'adiyeh, by the mouth of the
river (to which Thomson [Land and
Book,
ed.
1877,
heard the name Bethsaida attached by Bedouin).
Fish abound
either side of the Jordan's mouth and
(presumably) in the river itself.
There can be little
doubt that this was the city called Bethsaida
'
(Lk.
is not found in
etc., which reads
so
Ti. W H , etc.) to which Jesus withdrew,
as
being
in Philip's jurisdiction, when he heard of John's murder
by Antipas (cp
Lk. places near it the
feeding of the five thousand, which Mt.
and
Mk.
describe
as
in
a
desert
uninhabited)
but grassy place (Mt.
Mk. 639 green grass,' such
as grows in the Bufeiha, in contrast to the paler herb-
age of the higher and drier parts), to which Jesus pro-
ceeded by boat, followed by multitudes
on
foot.
J.
also describes the scene on the
E.
shore of the lake
and says 'there was much grass in the place'
( w .
IO).
A
site
on
the Bufeiha suits also the Bethsaida
of Mk..
822,
for Jesus was already
E.
of Jordan
(w.
13)
and went thence to the villages of
27).
All interpreters of the Gospels are virtually
agreed about this.
The question has been raised, whether there was
not
a
second Bethsaida. After the feeding of the five
thousand, Jesus, it is said, constrained his
disciples to go
him to the other side
to Bethsaida (Mk. 645,
).
This
has forced some scholars, one or two much against
their will (Reland,
Pal.
Henderson,
to conclude that there was
a
Bethsaida to the
W.
of
Jordan, either a suburb of Julias, separated from it by
the river, or at 'Ain
(Rob.
LBR 358
4
along the coast, where there is a bay containing fish
in abundance, and the modern shrine of Sheikh
'Aly of the Fishermen, and strong streams
(Ewing). But, in the first place, the phrase to go to the
other side does not necessarily imply the passage from
the
E.
to the
W.
coast of the lake, for Josephus speaks of
sailing over
from
to
The mention of the 'entrance to
here is possibly
a
gloss (cp Moore
399).
I n
king of Zobah
is
called 'son
of
see
H
ADADEZER
.
So
Thomson,
Buhl,
240;
Moore,
BETHSAIDA
place of fishing or hunting).
399.
BETH-SHEAN
was included in one of the prefectures of Solomon's
kingdom is certain
( I
4 6
6
and
[A],
and
On
the death of Saul, on the
other hand, we
it in the hands of the Philistines
(I
[B],
[B]); and, though Beth-shean may be one of the
cities of the Jordan
(
I
S.
31
7,
text) which the
Israelites deserted after the battle of Gilboa, it is
equally likely that it was still a Canaanitish city when
captured by the Philistines. We know, at any rate,
that it retained its Canaanite population for some time
after the Israelite occupation of Palestine (Judg.
127,
[L]
Josh.
17
[B]).
It
possibly
have been
late as the time of David that this
great fortress fell into the hands of the Israelites.
Standing
on
the road from Damascus to Egypt and
also
from Damascus by Shechem to Jerusalem and
Hebron, it had a commercial as well as
a
military
importance which would have attracted the notice of
such
a
keen-sighted
as
David.
From the Macedonian period onwards Beth-shean
bore the strange Greek name Scythopolis (see Judg.
127,
which probably records the fact (or belief) that some
of the Scythian invaders of the seventh cent.
(see
S
CYTHIANS
) had settled here.
In
N T times it was one
of the most important cities of the
of the
[BAL]
2
Macc.
BETH-SHEMESH
95
e., temple
6
I
S.
614,
18
[A],
Beth-shemite).
I
.
Bethshemesh or I
R
-
SHEMESH
(
Josh.
a
Levitical city (Josh.
T H N
[L]
I
Ch. 659
[B])
on
the borders of
Judah (Josh.
1510,
assigned
to Dan (Josh.
is the modern Am Shems,
feet above sea level, on the south side of the broad
and beautiful and still well-cultivated W.
opposite Zorah and two m. from it : 'anoble site for
a
city a low plateau at the junction of two fine
(Robinson). It is a point in the lowland on the road
from
to the hill-country of Judah
Sam.
6
[A],
[A]),
and probably was an ancient sanctuary, since the field
of Joshua the Beth-shemite was for some time during
the Philistine domination the resting-place of the ark.
In truth, it is difficult
to identify it with the
of the Palestinian lists of Rameses
627
;
WMM
As.
166)
and Rameses
6
whose sanctuary may be presumed to be connected
with the myth of
S
AMSON
It was at Beth-
that Amaziah of
was defeated and
made prisoner by Jehoash, king of Israel
(2
K.
14
11-13,
13
[A],
2
Ch.
According
to the Chronicler, it was one of the cities in the lowland
of Judah taken by the Philistines from Ahaz, king of
Israel
(2
Ch.
28
The place was still shown in
the days of Eusebius and Jerome, who give its position
as
I
O
E.
of
Eleutheropolis on the road to
polis-a statement which suits the identification given
above. There are many traces of ancient buildings.
An unidentified city within the territory of
tali, apparently in its northward portion (Josh.
[B],
[A],
[L]).
From Judg.
[A]) we learn that,
with Bethanath,
its population continued to be chiefly Canaanite.
3.
An unidentified city
on
the border of Issachar
(Josh.
[A],
[L]), perhaps=
if the latter lay in the extreme south of Naphtali.
corruption
of
the text.
The
double
mention
of
Beth-shean probably arises
from
a
The latter was discovered by
at
Medinet
in
BETHUL
4. A city of Egypt, mentione-d in Jer.
4313,
he shall break the obelisks
of
Beth-
in the land of Egypt.' It is commonly supposed
by Griffith in
DB)
that what is meant is
the city of the sun (see ON) but
is
dittographed from
in
We should
'pillars of the
sun'
or obelisks (Wi.
4T
Che.
102,
n.
is mentioned in Judg.
.he panic-stricken
fled before Gideon. It
was
the way toward Z
ERERAH
(see
but has not been identified probably it was
well down in the Jordan valley, at the mouth of some
where acacias
The identification with
on
the north side of the
W.
5
m. NW. of
and 6 m. E. of Zer'in (cp Rob., Conder, etc.)
has
little to recommend it : it lies much too near the
supposed scene of the surprise. More, perhaps, could
be said for
Others compare el-Meshetta (see
1895,
pp.
81
Schnmacher,
writes
14
m.
SSE.
of Jogbehah. The
whole narrative is, however, composite (see J
UDGES
, 8),
and the Heb. construction favours the assumption that
Zererah does not belong to the same
as
Beth-
shittah. In J
flees east from Shechem to the
other side of the Jordan, whereas from
24
it appears
that in
narrative they turn
(to Zarethan) through
the Jordan valley, where they are intercepted by the
Ephraimites (cp Moore,
212).
BETH-SURA
[A]),
I
Macc.
Macc.
11
5
RV Bethsuron.
BETH-TAPPUAH
place
of
see A
PPLE
),
a
town in the hill-country of
(Josh.
[L]),
having
traditional connection with its
greater neighbonr Hebron
(I
Ch.
see
T
APPUAH
,
I
),
and very possibly identical with the fortified town called
T
APHON
in
I
Macc.
950.
If the similarity of
names, the vicinity of Hebron, and the fruitfulness of
the district prove anything, the modern
is the
ancient Beth-tappuah.
The village
so
named is
39
m.
W . by N. from Hebron,
stands
on a
high hill, the
slopes of which are planted with aged olive-trees;
indeed, the whole of the
abounds in
trees of all kinds. Traces of old buildings remain, and
there are two
wells (Rob.
2
428
3374).
Several ancient sites named
Beth
have
lost this prefix. Thus the
of Nu. 3236 is modern
Nimrin.
The notices of
Eus. and
Jer.
(OS 235
17
104
17
;
cp
are
of
interest
only as
showing that there was another place
on
the confines
of
Palestine
and
Egypt bearing the
same name.
Whatever the
fruit
called
was
(see
A
PPLE
),
it was as
common in Palestine
as
quinces and apricots
are now.
or
'man
of El
Methushael, and see C
AINITES
,
7
hardly for
Ass.
'house
of
a
deity'
[ADEL]).
I.
B. Nahor father of Laban and Rebekah (Gen.
[J]).
In Gen.
2520285
he is called an
as
is
also
his
son
in
31
2024.
See
A
RAM
,
3.
BETH-SHITTAH
'place
See B
ETH
-
ZUR
.
See B
ETHUL
.
BETHUL
a
Simeonite town (Josh.
called B
ETHUEL
[B],
[A],
[L]) in
I
Ch.
and corruptly
C
HESIL
Josh.
(
The form
may perhaps be classed
with Penuel; for elision of
cp
It is
doubtless the B
ETHEL
[AL],
Beth-zur
of
I
S.
30
27,
mentioned along with
The situation
of
is less
(We.,
BETHULIA
BEZAANANNIM
all
and was still an inhabited village
Bethsoro) in the days of Eusebius and Jerome
( O S
326
It is represented by
and occupies
a
position of strategic import-
ance
as
commanding the road from Jerusalem to
Hebron,
m.
N.
from the latter city. The modern
village has a ruined tower, and there are hewn stones
scattered about, as also some fragments of columns,
and many foundations of buildings.
. . .
It must have
been a small place (Robinson).
I f the statements in Macc. 11
are reliable
there
have been asecond Beth-zur in the
of
Jerusalem. Grimm suggests the modern village of
half-an-hour
SE
from Jerusalem. Schick, with more
identifies
with the modern
Ar. form of Beth-
on the central height of the
of Olives
(PEFQ,
Jan.
1895,
p.
37,
see
on
I
Macc.
See, however,
B
ETHPHAGE
.
BETOLIUS
[B]),
I
A V ; RV
Ezra 2
B
ETHEL
.
BETOMESTHAM, RV Betomesthaim in Judith
46, or Betomasthem, RV
in
[A]
om.
Vg. in 46 and
Vg. Syr. in 154) lay over against Jezreel in face of the
plain that is near Dothan.’ If toward
can be taken as meaning
eastward of’ the
of
Dothan, we are able to determine its position pretty
nearly but the exact site has not been identified.
BETONIM
pistachio nuts,’
[A],
in Gadite
territory (Josh.
may perhaps be
3
m.
W.
from es-Salt (Ramoth-gilead).
The Heb. verb is
on which see M
ARRIAGE
,
I
.
In
2
3
RV rightly
has
betrothed
’
instead of AV
espoused.
S o
also in Mt.
1
18
Lk.
1
In Lev.
the verb is
and seems to denote marriage by capture
rather than marriage by purchase.
In Ex.
it
is
RV espouse.’ There is some disorder in the text.
BEULAH(
‘married’;
Aq.
Symm.
the symbolical name
(Is.
by which Zion may fitly
be called when her land is married’
cp B
AAL
).
Two primitive and related ideas underlie the expression.
The first is that the people of a land,
as
well
as
all
other ‘fruits’ (Dt.
the fertilising influ-
ence
of
the lands Baal or divine Husband
107
the second, that
a
people which remains
faithful to the land’s divine Husband is sure of his pro-
tection.
The former is merely hinted by means of the
contrast of the two names Desolate and Married
in
on the other hand, it engrosses
the mind
of
the prophetic writer.
It is on the latter,
as
the context shows, that the writer of
Is.
62
(who is
not the author of
Is.
54) wishes to concentrate
our
attention.
Zion is at present despised
and her
harvests are plundered by the heathen
but
when her land is once more ‘married,’ she will be
to the protection of the God of the whole earth.
The sense of the passage has been obscured by an error in the
vowel points. For
‘thy sons’
read
‘he who
bnildeth thee
(cp
See
Du.
Che.
and on the other side Di., who gives no
how-
ever, for the startling play upon meanings which he assumes.
T.
K.
C.
BETROTHAL.
BEZAANANNIM
occurs in Josh.
the
of Bezaanannim,’ where
has the
oak in
a
view of the text now pretty
generally abandoned. The ‘oak (or sacred
nannim is
a
landmark on the
W.
border of Naphtali,
following Heleph, and preceding
and
Jahneel, and is usually identified with the oak of Bezaa-
naim (following the points),
or
of
‘
Bezaanim,’ or
of
Bezaanannim
in Judg.
where RV has ‘the
and other places in the Negeb but the site has
not yet been identified. There was probably
a
Bethel
near
BETHULIA
(
[BRA],
[the preferable
reading but
are also found]
the
centre of the action in the book
of
Judith (221
46
In the shorter
version of the narrative its place
is
taken by Jeru-
salem, and there is little doubt that Bethulia (properly
Betylua) represents
the house of God-viz.,
Jerusalem (see J
UDITH
,
So
already Reuss, who,
however, together with Welte, derived the name from
Bertholdt’s conjecture
virgin of
may be worth noticing.
According to therepresentations of the book (cp
lay near Jezreel, upon
a
rock by
a
valley,
commanding the passes to the
(so
Buhl,
Pal.
201,
n.
627). Various identifications have been suggested.
Some have sought for it near the modern Kefr
formerly
NE.
of the plain of
Dothan (Hi cp
Riehm):
other
are the fortress
in
Smith‘s
Kh.
Marta, quoted in
ZDPV
12
117)
Jenin
(Ew ) Beit
doubt
(6 and
being
often ’confounded)
or
(Conder Socin, also
inclines to this
Bad.
226).
More recently, Torrey
Or.
20
argues ably in favour
of
Shechem.
So
large and important
a
place
as
Bethulia-with its
rulers and elders
its streets and towers
and its siege, lasting for four-and-thirty days, by an
immensely superior army
(7
reasonably be
identified with any
insignificant locality. I t
remains to be added that the mention of Jerusalem
and Bethulia as two distinct places (cp 46
is
probably to be assigned to
a
time when the identity
of
the ideal Bethnlia with Jerusalem was forgotten.
A.
C.
BETHZACHARIAS, AV (by misprint
ZACHARIAS
;
the scene of the defeat of Judas the Maccabee
by Lysias, and of the death of his brother Eleazar
( I
Macc.
Its position is defined by Josephus
(Ant.
94) as 70 stadia
(N.)
from Bethsur it is thus
represented by the modern
(described by
Robinson
and
335
108).
BETHZATHA
the reading adopted by
Ti.
WH
in Jn. 5 where T R has B
ETHESDA
. For the
evidence, see WH. ii.
App.
76 : perhaps the purest
form would be
the place of the olive’ (cp
B
EZETH
).
BETH-ZUR
[AL],
96, ‘house
of rock,’ or, on the analogy of Beth-el, ‘house of
-a
divine name, Nestle,
47, n.
I
Hommel
see
a
city in the hill-country of
Judah, mentioned between
and Gedor (Josh.
1558,
cp
I
Ch.
where
the son of
is
stated in
Ch.
[B],
[A],
[L])
to have been fortified by Rehoboam.
It
was
head of
a
district in Nehemiah’s time (Neh.
3
16,
[A]).
Frequently an object
of
struggle in the Maccabean wars
[KV].
I
Macc.
6726314950
it was
the
time of Josephus
(Ant.
xiii.
5 6 )
the strongest place in
Bethel
a populous village of Gaza with very
ancient and much-rivered temples, is mentioned by Sozomen
15
For the form Betylua, cp the magical stones
which
derive their name from Beth-el; and on interchange of the
forms
and Beth- see
B
ETHUL
.
3
So
Jerusalem is
to as
in
(A
POCALYPTIC
4
Possibly also in
I
S.
(see
In
13
has
note of
Cp
D
AUGHTER
,
4.
BIDKAR
foreign
Wives
(see
Esd.
5,
end), Ezra 1030
[BA],
T.
K.
C.
BEZEK
cp
‘gravel’?
Syr.
[BAL]
I
.
A place at which Saul mustered
the force he had raised for the relief of Jabesh-gilead
I
S.
[B]
[A]
pupa
[L]).
Eusebius
locates two neigh-
bouring villages of this name 17 R. m. from Neapolis
on
the road to Scythopolis beyond doubt Khirbet
14 Eng. m. from
and nearly opposite the lower
end
of
with which Eshtori
(A.D.
1322)
identified it.
2.
A place at which Judah and Simeon, in invading
S.
of Palestine, encountered
routed the
Canaanites under Adoni-bezek
Judg.
1 4
[A]
om.
in v.
5 ) .
Many scholars, from Eusebius
downwards, identify this with
No.
I
but this is in-
admissible.
Judah and Simeon set out from the neighbonrhood of Gilgal
(Judg.
2
I
)
to
invade the region in which they afterwards
settled the end of the story of
conducts him to
Jerusalem, which was probably his own city
king
of
Jerusalem
see
and
Ihzik
lies wholly
of this sphere of action and in a quite
direction.
The
of Judg.
1
must be sought much farther
south.
Conder would find it at
6
m.
of
this view is scarcely
probable.
In view of the change which the name of the
king has suffered, it may be questioned whether the
name of the place has been correctly preserved.
See
2231237.
G. F.
M.
BEZER
106, ‘fortress’
[BAL]),
a
levitical city and city of refuge, Dt. 443 Josh. 208 2136
(om. M T
[L]),
I
Ch. 678
B
OZRAH
[
I
]
of Jer.
described in Josh. 208
as lying in the wilderness on the (Amorite) Mishor or
Tableland, and is usually identified with the modern
(or
about
2
m. SW. of Dibon,
and
about the same distance
N.
of Aroer.
King Mesha
of Moab in his inscription
(1.27)
says :
‘
I
built Bezer,
for ruins had it become.’ With this place some have
identified
of
4
I
Ch.
11
I
Schlatter,
a
place
near Jerusalem where Bacchides encamped, and, having
slain some deserters and prisoners, threw
into the
great pit which was there
(
I
Macc.
The readings
of
and Syr. in this passage
[ed. Lag.])
point to
an
original Beth-zaith (house of the olive).
it is possible that Bezeth may be the later Bezetha
place of olives’), the name given to the
N.
end
of
the
plateau,
on
the
S.
part of which lay Jerusalem.
See
B
ETHZATHA
,
OLIVES. M
OUNT OF.
oak in Zaanannim,’ and has inconsistently omitted
to
record the modern view
of
the text in the margin.
in Josh.
K
.
[A],
K.
[L];
in
Judg. 4
11
[B so
Theod.],
see Field‘s
The difficulty
the phrase is twofold.
(I)
In Joshua
this famous tree is placed on the
border of Naphtali but Judges
read in the light of
makes the tree much nearer to the battle-
field, which, according to
was by the
stream Kishon.
(z)
The name
inexplicable, whether
we read
(Bezaanim
or
(Bezaanannim
?).
If, however, several times in Judges (see K
ADESH
), and
once
in
Judg.4 (see H
AROSHETH
), the name
has been correctly restored, it is plausible to
suppose that the incomprehensible name, pronounced
sometimes Bezaanaim or (better) Bezaanim, sometimes
Bezaanannim, may conceal the same old name, especially
as
in Judg. 411 the words ‘which is by Kedesh’ are
added.
It is extremely probable that both in the
far north (see K
ADESH
,
and in the territory of
Issachar there was
a
place which bore the name of
Kadshon (Kidshon) the people of either place could
be called Kadshonim (Kidshonim).
Nor need we
hesitate to emend
(the form which the best critics
prefer) to
a
form which should be restored,
as
the present writer has sought to show, in Judg.
5226
(see
It is easier to suppose that the ‘oak’
or sacred tree which forms the
of
this article
was near the Kidshon (Kedesh) of Issachar than to follow
the Priestly Writer in Joshua, who places it on the border
of Naphtali.
The error
o f
the latter seems to have
arisen from the statements in Judg.
which place
the mustering of the Israelitish warriors at Kedesh-
Naphtali.
The error of the scribe who wrote
was facilitated by an inopportune recollection of the
form
(Canaanites). Whether he also
thought of the new Heb.
ditch, dike, pond (cp
‘marsh,’ Job
cannot be determined
(cp Neub.
225).
An identification of ‘Bezaanim’ with Khirbet
E. of
Tabor, on the plateau of the Sea of Galilee, was proposed
Conder in PEFQ
25
(so
Work, 2
cp
GASm.
396,
who considers it ‘well supported.’ But we
must first of all be sure of the reading of the name. I t
remarkable that tradition still affirmed that the ‘oak o f .
.
which was a fixed element in the story, was
Of
course,
is not required when we read
the sacred tree of the Kidshonim.’
T.
K.
C.
BEZAI
52
Hilprecht has found the Jewish
name
on
a
tablet from Nippur
Jan.
1898,
The b’ne Bezai, a family in the great post-
exilic list (see
E
ZRA
,
§§
Ezra217
[A],
B
ASSA
, RV
the signatories to the covenant (see E
ZRA
, i.
7).
BEZALEEL, RV
in the
shadow of God
cp
[BAL]).
The form is improbable. Sil-Bel, Bel is a shelter,’ the
name of a king of
Gaza
in Sennacherib’s time
even if correctly represented, is not parallel. Read
‘
God rescues,’
cp the
names
The number of the artificial religious names
of later times has been exaeeerated.
--
I
.
b.
h.
of the tribe of Jodah, a Calebite
(
I
Ch. 2
a
skilled workman in gold silver, and
who together with
Aholiab executed the
of
the tabernacle
(Ex.
31
35
361
all
H e is mentioned in
as
having made the brazen
One of the b‘ne Pahath-Moab in the list of those with
BICBRI
Sheba b. Bichri
(2
20
I
a
gentilic from B
ECHER
The plural
Bichrites
is postulated
by
in
S.
20
74
in place of
See
(I),
B
ENJAMIN
,
ii.
Jehu’s adjutant
2
The name
is
noteworthy, because the chief support of
the theory that at the
of proper names some-
times stands for
‘
son of’
i s
that Pesh. here has
(hence
son
of piercing ’-
a suitable name for
a
warrior cp Lanzknecht cp
Ass.
[Del.
BIER
and
see
B
ENDEKER
). For other examples,
all
doubtful, see Ges.
col.
349;
Konig,
2248;
and against this
Gr. 613.
iii.,
Jan,-June
1885)
thinks
in all
these
For this
theory we can hardly
cite the
one
or two cases in
probably
accidental
3933).
Does
imply
a reading
chief
of
his (Jehu's)
captains
'
?
.
W.
R. S .
BIER
See
D
EAD
,
I.
BIGTHA
[A]), a chamberlain of Ahasuerus (Esth.
Marq.
(Fund.
71)
finds its Gr. equivalent in
[A], for
whence he restores
(misread
=O.
Pers.
'given
God
'
cp B
AGOAS
, and see
E
STHEX
,
ii.
3.
etymology doubtful
mg. sup.
BKAL om. Jos.
Esth.
or
Esth. 62
as in
221
Jos.
a chamberlain of Ahasuerus, who,
Esth.
12
I,
is called
See
E
STHER
,
3.
BIGVAI
rather B
AGOI
,
I
.
A leader (see E
ZRA
,
8
e)
in the great post-exilic list
g), Ezra 2
7
[BN]
Esd.
5 8 ,
[BA]
[L]); signatory
t o
the covenant (see E
ZRA
,
7),
[Bl,
a.
Family
great post-exilic list (see E
ZRA
,
Ezra 2 14
Esd. 5
[A],
Family
in
Ezra's caravan (see E
ZRA
,
Ezra 814
Esd.
B
AGO
Cp H
EGAI
.
BIKATH-AVEN
Am.
See
3.
43,
the Shuhite
S
HUAH
), one of Job's friends (Job2
andelsewhere). The name either means 'Bel has loved'
(cp
42
or
a
softened form
of Bir-dad, which appears to lie at the root of
(so
Del.
Par.
See
and cp
I
Ch.
See
I
BLEAM
.
BILGAH (1
I
,
cheerfulness
I
.
Head
of the fifteenth course of priests,
I
Ch.
24
a
has
which must represent Immer
head of the sixteenth course.
the name
of the
of
the fourteenth in
[MT
is merely a transposed form
of
in a different place in the list.)
A priest
om.
in
babel's hand (E
ZRA
,
6
Neh. 12
in
;
om.
BNA)
a 'father's house.'
signatory to the covenant (see E
ZRA
,
6,
7),
Neh.
108
BILHAH (
[BADEL], but
I
Ch.
7
I
.
The 'mother
of
the tribes Dan and Naphtali,
according to J also represented as the maid of Rachel
(mother of the house
of
Joseph) and concubine of Jacob
and his eldest
son
Reuben.
W e have not, unfortunately, the means of determining
how far we are warranted in regarding these relations
as representing traditions of fact, and how far they may
be imaginative incidents of the story. Was
a
tribe (Canaanitish?
?), elements of which
were taken
up
into some of the clans of
the
house of
Joseph (the first Israel) in the earliest days after their
arrival in W. Palestine before they crystallized into the
three well-known branches (Manasseh-Machir, Ephraim,
573
Cp also
No
doubt the same as B
ILGAH
.
BINDING AND LOOSING
Benjamin) ?
Or
does the name, which occurs nowhere
outside of Genesis (and the equivalent
I
Ch.
7
simply
indicate that not only Dan but once also Naphtali tried
unsuccessfully to settle somewhere in the Highlands of
Ephraiin before betaking itself to the extreme north
Or, once more, is this true only of Dan, the inclusion
of Naphtali being then due simply to its geographical
nearness to Dan in its later seat, and
to
its worthiness
to stand by the side of the noble Rachel tribes (Judg.
5
18)
Again, is the Reuben story (Gen.
35
I
Ch.
5
to be brought into connection with the other traces of
the extension of the house of Joseph (cp Reuben's
interest in the fortunes
of
Joseph : Gen.
37
:
E.,)
beyond Jordan (M
ACHIR
E
PHRAIM
,
W
OO
D OF),
or is it
to
be explained,
as
Stade
explains it, as
a
memorial
of
the primitive society that survived
E.
of the
Jordan when there had been a change in
W.
Palestine?
Or are we to give serious consideration to a combination
(G.
H. B. Wright) with the story of B
OHAN
(cp B
ILHAH
,
2 )
the son of Reuben (Josh.
15
6
18
as an indication
that
elements were once actually to be found
W.
of the Jordan
(
in that land : Gen.
35
That
there really was contact between Benjamin and the
Bilhah tribe Dan was
a
matter of course
Ono
and Lod
ultimately became Benjainite (cp BENJAMIN,
3
We.
De Gent.
12
n.
I).
It was Rachel, however, not Bilhah,
that died when, Ben-oni was horn.
In Simeon
(I
Ch.
See
H.
W.
H.
BILHAN
77
I
.
A
Gen.
36 27
ELI)
I
Ch. 1 4 2
In genealogy
of B
EN
JAMIN
a )
:
Ch.
IO
BILSHAN
perhaps Bab.
but
more probably we should read
a mutilated form
of
Bab.
;-cp
in
I
Esd.). A name in the great post-exilic list (see
ii.
borne by one of the ten (Ezra), or eleven (Neh.,
I
Esd.
persons who accompanied Zerubbabel from
Babylon (see E
ZRA
,
8
e).
[B],
[A],
[L])
=
Neh.
7 7
[A],
L
om.
)
I
Esd.
5
8
[L]).
If Bel-gar is correct,
may not this be the Sharezer of Zech.
72
(see S
HAXEZER
,
z ) ?
This undesigned coincidence (if accepted) may
BIMHAL
in genealogy of
4
[ii.]),
I
7 3 3
BINDING AND LOOSING
(Mt.
T h e
explanation given under M
AGIC
3
may account
for the origin of the Jewish phrase 'binding
and
loosing'
but in usage to hind and to loose
mean simply
'
to forbid' and to permit' by
indis-
putable authority, the words of authoritative prohibition
and permission being considered to be as effectual as he
spell
of
an enchanter (cp
Targ. Ps.
The
wise men
or
rabbis had, in
of their ordination, the
power of deciding disputes relating
to
the Law.
A
practice which was permitted by them was said to be
'loosed'
and one which was forbidden was
called
bound'
Such pronouncements were
made by the different schools hence it was said, The
school of Shammai binds the school of
looses.'
Theoretically, however, they proceeded from the San-
hedrin, and there is a Talmudic statement that there
were three decisions made by the lower house of judg-
ment to which the upper 'house of judgment
the heavenly one) gave its supreme sanction
23
6).
Probably, therefore, Jesus adopted a current
mode
of
speech when he said to the disciples that what-
soever they bound or loosed on earth
in
expound-
ing the new Law) should be bound or loosed in heaven
(Mt.
18
Probably, too, it is
a
less authentic tradition
574
have important bearings on criticism.
T. X.
C.
BINDING AND LOOSING
which makes Jesus give the same promise to Peter
individually (Mt. 16
Nowhere is it recorded that
the great Teacher made Peter the president
of
his council of wise men.
The words which immediately
precede
16 6-self-evidently taken by the editor
from another context-represent Peter, not
as
an ex-
pounder of the new transfigured Law, but as a practical
administrator (cp
Is.
2222). It is in favour of the view
here adopted (viz., that the words on binding' and
loosing' were addressed to the disciples
general and
not to Peter individually) that in Jn.
the power to
remit and to retain is granted to the disciples collectively,
not to any one of them individually. Though the use
of
in that passage has no exact Hebrew or
Aramaic equivalent, the saying is not a new one, but
BINEA
in genealogy. of B
EN
JAMIN
a
paraphrase
of
Mt.
18
18.
T. K.
C.
B
AAN
.
B
AN
.
a
building up
on form cp N
AMES
,
I
.
Family in great post-exilic list (see
E
ZRA
,
8
Neh.
IO,
B
ANI
[A],
Esd. 5
B
ANI
[BA],
A Levite, temp. Ezra (see
E
ZRA
,
15
Ezra
8 33
I
Esd. S
63
S
ABBAN
,
R V
[L]), and probably
Neh. 12
24
( M T
son of'
so Smend,
Die
etc.
3.
A Levite in the list of wall-builders (see
16
[
I
],
Neb. 3
24
sig-
natory
the covenant (see
E
ZRA
,
[
IO
]
possibly the same a s the Levite
in
Zerubbabel's band (see
E
ZRA
,
66)
In
B
AVAI
IN],
seems a textual error.
4.
and 5. One of the b'ne Pahath-moab,
Esd.
931,
and one of the b'ne Bani (Ezra 10 38
§
Most probably the same as
BIRSHA
F
OOD
,
8)
the Torah divides them into clean and
clean (Lev.
11
13
Dt.
see C
LEAN
and U
NCLEAN
,
9).
Many, contrivances for capturing birds were in
common use
65
Eccles. 9
Jer.
5
27
Hos.
7
9
8
Ecclus.
11
30).
The
Torah protects them against cruelty (Dt. 226
Sometimes the captives were tamed and treated as pets
(Job
Bar.
3
Ecclus.
Jas.
3 7 ) .
Only
in cases of extreme poverty does the Torah allow birds
to be used for sacrifice (see
S
ACRIFICE
).
Naturally,
common small birds, on account
of
their abundance,
were of little
they were probably
so
numerous as
to prove a nuisance (Mt.
31
cp
Land
and
Book, 43). To
what extent-if any-birds were
studied for omens in Israel as
in
Babylonia (see B
ABY
-
LONIA
,
§
32,
M
AGIC
, B
ABYLONIAN
, § 3 )
it is difficult to
determine (see Lev. 1926 Dt.
2
K.
216
Ch. 336
I
433
and cp DIVINATION,
2,
beg.,
and
Schultz,
O T
ET).
Allusions to their habits in metaphors, similes, and
proverbial expressions prove how prominent thev were
Esd.
934 E
LIALI
;
the list of those
with foreign wives (see
E
ZRA
,
5
end).
BIRD. References to birds generally are very frequent
in O T and NT.
The following terms (translated in
EV
'bird or fowl
are
used to
the members of the family
collectively :
Eccles. 10
Is.
16
9
I
T
:
Prov. 117 ; and [of birds of
1.
Kinds
Gen. 14 Lev. 146
Gen.
15
11
Is.
18
6
46
Jer. 1 2 Ezek. 39 4 Job
7
and
Mt.8
13
Lk.
9
58
Rom.
1 2 3
Jas. 3 7
I
Cor. 15
39,
and [of birds
of prey]
Rev. 18
19 17
Birds of the smaller kinds are not
so
often distinguished
as the larger but special reference
is
made to several
species, both large and small.
Mention seems to be
made, for example, of the B
ITTERN
, Buzzard (see
G
LEDE
), Blue Thrush (see S
PARROW
), C
ORMORANT
,
C
RANE
, D
OVE
, Egyptian Vulture (see G
IER
E
AGLE
),
Griffon (see E
AGLE
), H
AWK
, H
ERON
, H
OOPOE
, Sacred
Ibis (see S
WAN
), K
ITE
, N
IGHT
H
AWK
O
SPREY
,
O
SSIFRAGE
, O
STRICH
, O
WL
, Pigeon (see
DOVE
),
P
AR
-
SWALLOW,
Tern (see
Black Vulture (see
V
ULTURE
), and the domestic fowl (see C
OC
K), details
and
concerning all of which will be found
in the special articles. S
PARROW
occurs occasionally in
the EV as a translation of the word
which denoted
any small passerine bird.
That feathered animals
abounded in Pales-
tine is clear from the many references to them in
OT
and N T , and lapse of time has produced
no change in this respect (see
P
ALESTINE
).
Naturally the eggs and the birds themselves were used
for food (Ex.
Nu.
Job66 Neh. 518
Ps.
7827
1 1 6 ;
see F
OWLS
,
6,
and cp
575
TRIDGE,
PEACOCK, PELICAN, Q
UAIL
, R
AVEN
,
S T O R K ,
the life and thought of the people ( c p
and see Lowth,
on
Sacred Poetry
of
the
vol.
ET
A
GRICULTURE
,
They were evidently observed with the keenest interest
as being links between earth and heaven, and regarded
with a certain awe
3511 Eccles.
I t
was noticed how they cared for and protected their young
Is.
how and where
they
their nests
(Ps.
Ezek.
times (according to a pleasing but very doubtful inter-
pretation) in the very temple
(Ps.
in
what sad plight they wandered about when cast out of
the nest (Prov. 278 Is.
how swiftly
they flew away when scared
how
eagerly they returned to their nest
(Hos.
11
how
free from care they were (Mt. 626) how regularly they
migrated (Jer.
8
7
Prov. 26
how voracious they were
(Gen. 40
17
4
Mk. 44 Lk.
8
5 )
how they descended
from the clouds in a bevy (Ecclus.
with what
delight they gathered in
a
leafy tree (Dan.
Ecclus.
Mt.
Lk.
how sweetly they warbled
(Eccles.
Wisd.
Cant.
[see, however, VINE]
Ps. 104
how God recognises and protects them (Ps.
and how they praise and reverence
him (Ps. 148
I
O
Ezek. 38
Further, Israel's enemy
often pictured as a rapacious bird that sights its prey
afar
off
and swoops down upon it
Jer.
Dt. 2849 Rev. 19
17
Thus, to destroy is to give a
man's flesh to the birds of the air for meat (Gen.
I
S.
I
K.
1411 164
Ps.
Jer.733
197
Ezek.295).
A place is desolate when
its only inhabitants are the birds of the air (Jer. Ezek.
3113
Is.
and an utter desolation when even
these too have perished (Jer. 425
Hos.
43 Zeph.
13).
The saying in Mt.
where Jesus contrasts himself
with the birds which have nests, has not yet been made
perfectly clear (but see SON
OF
M
AN
).
BIRSHA
scarcely with [or, in] wickedness
the name is corrupt cp B
ERA
), king of Gomorrah who
T h e
common view of the meaning is untenable on
all
exeaetical. historical, metrical.
I
.
No
natural
can be
Cp
and
note,
given, if
The sanctity of the temple proper would certainly have excluded
the winged visitors; Jos.
5 6
speaks of pointed spikes on
'thine altars,' has any relation to
birds.
top of the (Herodian) temple to-prevent birds
sitting
even
on the outside. This seems to have been generally over-
looked. 3. The psalm consists of long verses (lines) divided by
a
into two unequal parts. 'Thine altars, my King and
my God,' is too much to form the second and shorter portion
of one of these verses. See
and cp Baethg.
Zoc.
who attempts an exegetical compromise.
Read thus,
'Do
I count my heritage
a
carcase torn by
Are
vultures round about it
BIRTHDAY
joined the
C
HEDORLAOMER
Gen.
Jos.
Ant. 91).
BIRTHDAY
[Ti.
Mt.
146
Mk.
The only express mention of the celebra-
tion of the anniversary of birth in
OT or
in con-
nection with kings : Pharaoh's birthday (Gen.
when the chief butler' was restored to his office and
the chief baker' hanged ; Antiochus Epiphanes'
day
( z
Macc.
6
7)
;
and Herod's birthday (Mt. 146
Mk.
when
dancing was the occasion of
the execution of John the Baptist.
When it is said
in
that Job's
sons
were wont to
go
and feast
in the house of 'each one upon his day,' 'his day'
denotes a weekly and not an annual feast and in Hos.
'the day of
king' may refer to the anniversary
of his succession
as well as to
a
birthday.
How-
ever, this silence on the subject is no warrant for
us
to
conclude that the Israelites did not follow the general
custom of observing birthdays, especially those of kings
(see, for Egypt,
4
77,
and for Persia, Herod.
9
The curses invoked by Job
and Jeremiah
on the days
birth imply that under
happier conditions these days would have been re-
membered in more cheerful fashion.
Doubts have been raised as to whether Herod's
meant his birthday or the anniversary of his accession.
The Mishna
(Aboda
1 3 )
mentions as heathen
festivals, calends, Saturnalia,
kings' days of
and the day of
and the day
of
death.
It is probable that the last two mean the actual
days and not the anniversaries
the
would
naturally be the anniversaries of accessions and the
the birthday.
So Talm.
Jer.
Aboda
as
(birthday), but Bab.
Zara,
understands
' I
as anniversary of accession.
is used as birthday in late Greek (in classical
Greek it is anniversary of death) and never as anni-
versary of accession
:
thus the sense of birthday seems
well established. Cp
and the Talm.
Lexx. of Levy and Jastrow
on
also Gratz,
20
230
See also L
ORD
'
S
D
AY
,
W.
H.
B.
BIRTHRIGHT
Gen.
Heb.
see
F
IRSTBORN
, L
AW
AND
J
USTICE
,
14.
On
the story of Esau and Jacob see
BIRZAITH
Kr.
Kt.
BISHOP
well of
s e e k to suggest a lbcality.
E N
E N
[L]),
for which
I
Esd.
216
has
the name of a Persian officer of unknown origin, who
joined with others in writing a letter
of
complaint
against the Jews.
takes the name as descriptive
of the tranquil state of the writers of the letter
Bishlam is clearly a proper name.
It
either means 'in peace,' cp B
EZALEEL
, B
IRSHA
. or,
more probably, like those names, it is a corruption.
The true name may be Babylonian.
It may perhaps be
recovered if we start from one or the other
of
the forms
presented in the MSS of
I
Esd., where the proper
names are sometimes more accurately preserved. Ball
(
ad
adopting
supposes a
corruption of Bab. Bel-ibus-Le.,
'
Bel made.'
It
would seem, however, that the
of
must
be more original, and this form may have arisen from
Bel made a name (Nestle,
T.
C.
E V
'the day of the king's birth every month':
so
Pesh., Vg. om.
Grimm suggested that 'every month
is from
I
Macc. 1 5 9 ; but it is probably genuine (see
L
O
RD
'
S
BISHLAM
37
577
BISHOP
The word
is
of rare
'ence in the NT.l
The elders of the church summoned from Ephesus to
o
receive Paul's farewell
(Acts 20
are thus addressed
:
Take heed to yourselves and to the whole
flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath set you
name in
as
overseers
.
. .
to
feed (or rule
:
the church of God'
28).
I t is not clear from this passage whether the word is
as a definite title, or merely as a description implying that
oversight or superintendence was a function of the
In the address of the
to
the Philippians,
we have 'bishops and deacons formally mentioned
;
it
s
in
view
of the later usage of the words, to suppose
.hat this is merely a general description of 'those who rule and
.hose who serve.'
I
Tim. 3
the bishop and the deacon
again brought together.
The qualifications of a bishop are
:numerated :
where the article is
regarded
generic, or a t least as not implying that
:here was only one bishop in the Ephesian church. I n Tit.
n connection
with
the duty of appointing presbyters
in
the
.owns of Crete, a similar description of a bishop's qualifications
given
but no reference is
nade to deacons. The only other occurrence of the word is in
Pet. 2
where it is applied to Christ himself, 'the shepherd
md bishop of
souls.
It
is not necessary to interpret these
as
metaphors drawn from the Christian ministry.
W e note, then, that the word is found in all cases on
ground, and it would seem as if those who in the
Palestinian churches were called presbyters were in
the Greek churches spoken of at first as 'bishops and
then indifferently as presbyters or as bishops.
This
view, however, assumes that
was already at
this time in use as a title of office and the assumption
requires a careful examination.
It will be best to begin
an examination with what is admittedly the latest
portion of the
N T
evidence.
I
Tim.
'
If a man seeketh
he desireth
good work. The bishop, therefore, must be without
The whole conception of the function of an
as it is here described, suggests that the
authority which he wields is independent, not merely
that of
a
member of a governing board.
T o begin
with,
does not give any idea of assessors : it
is
distinctly personal.
It is a position of independent
importance and control, such
as
a
man may naturally
desire. Secondly, the epithet
given to hospitality
suggests a personal responsibility
the
Church's duty of show-ing hospitality to Christians from
other parts seems naturally to centre in some one person ;
we could scarcely have had Presbyters must be given
to hospitality
I n like manner, 'apt to teach
would scarcely
be a qualification for a member of the presbyteral body
as such and the same may be said of the epithets
not passionate or ungoverned in
temper.'
The control of his own house, again, gives
the thought of independent jurisdiction in the case to
which it is made a parallel--'how shall he act as
of the church of God ?
'
The singular noun with the article may, according to
Greek usage, be taken generically; but we must ob-
serve that
(
I
)
when the writer passes
on
to give
a
similar
list of qualifications for a deacon the plural is used :
Deacons in like manner
.
.
.
in like manner
. .
.
Let deacons be husbands of one wife'
.
. .
.
. .
(in the last case the use of the
singular with the generic article would have avoided an
awkward phrase)]
( z )
in Tit. 17, we have an exact
parallel:
where we
might easily have had
(3)
the usage of the article in the Pastoral Epistles is a
further reason for hesitating to explain it here as
for the
is very sparingly employed, and thera
[Analogous
t o
M H
superintendent in the synagogue or
elsewhere. See
BISHOP
seems
no
example at all
to these in any
of
the
three Epistles.
The difficulty is to some extent met by insisting on
the use of
as
a
descriptive epithet rather than
as
a
formal title : H e who exercises
In so
far as his status in the Church is dwelt on, such
a
man
would be spoken of most naturally as 'one of the
elders
but here the subject in hand is the function to
be exercised by him individually. That function is
: in the exercise of it he is
The
watchful oversight which is regarded
as
' a n excellent
work' is not
eminent position, but a responsible
activity.
H e who is
exercise it needs to have certain
special qualifications, W e feel the contrast when we
come to
which introduces in an
ordinary way the members of
a
large and subordinate
class.
The passage in Acts20 is, a s we have seen, quite
indeterminate.
If
can be shown to be
a
title
in use at the time in question, we may
render the words,
hath set you as
bishops.'
Otherwise we should perhaps
render them,
'
hath set you for oversight.' The phrase
in the Epistle to the Philippians, if taken quite
itself,
would,
the light of later history, be naturally rendered
'with the bishops and deacons'
notwithstanding the absence of the definite
article.
If, however,
be not yet found as
a
title,
a
less definite interpretation may be allowed. T h e
decision between the two views must depend
on
a
further consideration which shall include the use of the
term
at this period [see
D
E
A
C
O
N
,
and
the use of
outside the N T , in other than
Christian contexts, and
in
the earliest Christian
writings.
In the use of
in other than
Christian contexts, a great width of meaning is notice-
*.
able, due,
no
doubt, to the original
tion which fitted the words for application
to any person who exercised an office of
superintendence.
The commissioners who
superintended Athenian colonies, various other commis-
sioners or inspectors, magistrates who
the sale
of provisions, and, apparently, financial officers of a
temple or of
a
guild (Lightf.
Hatch,
Churches,
these are
spoken of as
or are said
Nor
was this the only term which had
a
similar largeness
of
reference : quite parallel is the usage of
and
(Hatch, see above).
In the
LXX
the word
is equally wide in
the persons and offices which it embraces. Taskmasters,
captains or presidents, and commissioners, are in turn
so
entitled and
as
a
synonym in the last of these cases
we find also
(Lightf. see above).
All this evidence points to the fact that
and
were words which naturally offered themselves
as descriptions of any persons charged with responsible
oversight, and were the more available in that they had
no
predominant association with any one class of officers
in particular.
The words were, as far
as
possible,
colourless, much
as
words preside and president'
are to-day.
Hatch's position, adopted by Harnack,
in
reference
is asfollows
important corporate
function of the earliest Christian communities
was that of providing for their poor and sick
members. They were, in fact, benevolent
societies, and as such they had parallels a11 around
them
the heathen world, in the countless clubs and
guilds which combined social purposes with certain
religious practices. The finance officers of these heathen
societies were called
Now, the dnties which
the Christian
had to perform are described
as
intimately connected with the care of the poor, with
hospitality to travelling brethren, and with the
579
BISHOP
ment of the common fund which was devoted to these
and similar purposes.
It
is probable, therefore, that
both the title and the functions of the Christian
are directly derived from his heathen counterpart.
The best examination of this theory is that by
des
21
,
After pointing out the
general
cation of the word
in Greek
literature-a signification which enabled
it
to be applied to any person in authority for whom
there was no fixed title already, and
so
to be used with
great freedom by the
LXX
as a rendering for various
officers mentioned in the
takes up the evidence
of the inscriptions on which Hatch's theory mainly rests.
They fall chronologically into two classes. The first
class is pre-Christian: one inscription of the Macedonian
period in the island
of
Thera, which contains a decree
ordering certain
to receive moneys and invest
them
and two inscriptions of the second century
B.
the island of Rhodes, relating to municipal officers
not further defined. Those of the second class belong
to the second and the third century
A.
and are found
in a district
E.
of the Jordan.
They are ten, and
refer to municipal officers.
In
one case the officers are
charged with some responsibility for the moneys of
a
temple.
I n this district they seem to have formed a
kind of municipal board, chosen from various tribes
or divisions of the community. Further, in
a
Latin
inscription of the fonrth century certain
regulate
prices in the market.
This appears to be the whole of the evidence
on
which
the statement that
were the finance-officers of
clubs and guilds is found to rest.
In Loening's opinion
it points exactly in the opposite direction.
As to the other part of the
that the
Christian
is, as a matter of fact, a
is no peculiarity of function linking itself
especially to the title. T o the presbyters at Jerusalem
gifts are brought
and presbyters are warned not to
exercise their office for filthy lucre (EV
I
Pet.
:
moreover, in Polycarp's letter to the Philip-
pians (chap.
11)
presbyters are charged with duties to-
wards the poor and are warned against covetousness.
The word
in itself suggests a far wider re-
sponsibility than the mere charge of finance : it implies
superintendence of persons
as
well
as
of things.
Loening even goes
so
far as to suggest that the word
was chosen just because it had
no
fixed
associations either in the Jewish or in the
world,
and was, therefore, free to be used in a community
which stood
contrast
to
all other communities sur-
rounding it.
In
the extreme scarcity of evidence, we may be
content to say that the theory that the Christian
derived his title and functions from those
of
the officers of the Greek guilds or
of
the Greek munici-
palities has not been established.
W e may say, then, that the
N T
evidence seems to
point to the existence in the apostolic age of two classes
of administration-a class of rulers and
a
class of humbler ministrants who acted
under their orders.
As
far as the first
of these has a distinctive official title its members are
called Elders
but, since their function was summed
up in the general responsibility of oversight
they could be
of as overseers
a
term which was
passing from
a
mere description
of function into a definite title. The men of the second
class aided those of the first
the humbler parts of
their ministration. They were naturally described by
the general designation of
servants
but
this term too is passing in the apostolic age into a
recognised title.
On the whole, it seems simpler to
suppose that the latter stage has been reached in Phil.
1
I
and in the Pastoral Epistles but the decision of this
point is not a matter of serious importance.
BISHOP
BISHOP
In
the later history, the second class retains its
designation, which in some localities comes to be a title
of considerable dignity. The first class, on the other
hand, presently undergoes a subdivision
:
one member
comes to stand out above his fellows, and, whilst all
continue alike to be Elders, the title of
which in itself connotes an individual responsibility and
importance, is not unnaturally appropriated as the
designation of the one who has come to be the supreme
officer of the community. The causes which led to
a
monarchical development are still wrapt in obscurity
but the appropriation of the name
to the
chief ruler is not hard to understand.
We are fortunate
in possessing a document of the last
decade of the first century, by which we
can, to some extent, test the position
The Epistle of Clement of
which we have taken up.
Rome to the Corinthians was occasioned
the ejection
from their office of certain Elders of the church in
Corinth.
As
the writer may quite well have had
personal knowledge of one or more of the apostles, his
evidence is of high importance, not only for determining
the existing organisation of the church
Corinth (and
probably in Rome as well) in his time, but also as
indicating the belief that this organisation was instituted
by the apostles themselves.
First let
us
consider the use of the designations
in
question in the most important passage.
(I
42)
‘The apostles
. . .
appointed their first fruits (cp
I
Cor.
having tested them by the Spirit, to be overseers
and
of them which should
believe.’ The words have clearly become titles and their use
as such is justified-as
not new, hut
in Is.616.
I
C
is curious that
in this citation
is
an insertion
of
Clement’s,
is not found in the
LXX.
H e is clearly quoting
from memory, and his memory has played him false.
($44) The
foresaw that there would he strife
the, title (or
office’) of oversight
Hence
they ap ointed the aforesaid and provided for successors t o
them.
is a sin to turn such, if
have discharged their
ministry blamelessly out of their
Blessed,’ he goes
on a t once, ‘are
who have gone before,’ and are safe
from such treatment. I n
we have the offence described as
a
revolt ‘against the Elders
54
we read ‘Let the flock of
Christ he a t peace along
the appointed Elders’; and in
57,
‘
ye who
this sedition submit yourselves to the
Elders.
It is plain, then, that the persons whom the apostles
‘appointed as
and as their successors, are
spoken of also as the appointed Elders.’ These Elders
are not to be rashly ejected from their
or
The difficulty which Clement’s epistle’ presents in the
matter of these designations belongs to the earlier
chapters, before he has come to
definitely of the
Corinthian disorders : he seems to use the term elders
as though he referred not to an office, but only to
a
grade of persons dignified by that name in contrast to
the young
I n the first of the passages in question
I
)
he. praises their
former orderliness ‘submitting yourselves to your rulers (or
“leaders,”
apd paying the due honour to
the elders that were among you :
on
the young ye
modesty and gravity; and on the women’ certain appropriate
duties. Similarly, in
we have, ‘let us reverence our rulers
and let
us honour our elders, let us
instruct the young
. . .
let us guide our women aright.’ Here
we seem to have a contrast between
‘elders’ : and
it
has been held
Harnack) that the ‘rulers’ are a class
of persons whose
came from their possessing the
of
Heh. 137
whilst the Elders are an
undefined grade of senior members of the Church to whom
honour is due
account of age and length of discipleship.
But the word
occurring in both passages (not
as
elsewhere so often), is an important clue, which has not been
sufficiently attended to. Clement is in fact alluding to a passage
of Isaiah, which he cites with some additions in
he
says, ‘of old the mean rose up against the hononrahle, the
young against the elder
Is.
35.
It
would he possible to interpret ‘the rulers’ as h e civil
rulers to whom Clement several times applied the term
($
but on the whole it seems most natural t o sup-
pose that at first he is carefully avoiding definite references
t o the Corinthian. revolt, and only preparing the way for its
Thus he speaks in the most general terms
of
the rulers,’ and passes rapidly away from the word
‘
elders,
introducing
it
as
a hint beforehand but dwelling
on the
coot-meaning which was still strongly
in the word, and
contrasting it with
in accordance with the
OT
passage
which is in his mind.
No
argument, therefore, can safely be based on the
rhetorical use of the word
‘
elders
the opening part
of the letter.
No
doubt the Elders were elder men;
and no doubt the revolt came from some of the younger
men
:
this was a part of its heinousness, and the covert
allusion would be understood by those to whom the
letter was addressed.
The development of the monarchical episcopate lies
outside the limits of the
but even
within the Canon we find indications of
a
tendency which the later history enables
us
to interpret as moving in this direction.
W e have noticed that all passages which describe
functions and responsibilities of Elders speak of them
as
a
class and in the plural number; whilst, on the
other hand, where the duties of oversight
are pourtrayed, the
is spoken of as a single
person, charged with responsibility-and this in one
place in sharp contrast to the
and in the other
immediately after Elders have been mentioned in the
plural number.
From this we may gather that,
as
far as a member of the ruling class was thought of as
it was natural to consider him by himself as
exercising an independent control and holding
a
position
of eminent authority.
As
far as terminology, then, is concerned, the way was
prepared for the distinction that presently came into force.
-
-
The word
suggests an in-
dividual, just as the word
suggests the member of a ruling class,
or the word
the member of a
serving class. The class of rnlers, however, did not
need two designations, and when the course of develop-
ment led to a supreme officer it was easy and natural to
appropriate to him the word
while his inferior
colleagues were simply termed
But this consideration does not really give
us
any
guidance as to the causes of the change from
by a body of
or
to government by a single
.
with a consultative colleee
inter
pares.
The apostolic age, however, presents us
with several foreshadowings of the monarchical rule
which presently became universal.
In the church in
Jerusalem the position of James, the Lord’s brother,
was one of real if undefined authority, and, though not
marked by any special title, it closely resembles that
of the bishop of the second century.
We have the
statement of Hegesippus that on the death of James his
cousin Symeon was appointed by general consent to
fill his place
H E
11).
Here, then, was a
monarchical type of government, naturally evolved and
continuously recognised
and such an example could
not
as time went on,
to
exercise an influence on
other communities.
In the Greek world the churches of Paul’s foundation
were from the first controlled by the strong hand of
their founder.
I t
is
true that he urged them to corporate
action of their own in the exercise of jurisdiction and
discipline; but he himself commanded them with an
authority beyond challenge, and his commands were
obeyed. I n certain cases he transferred this his apos-
tolic authority to delegates, such as Timothy and Titus
only, it would
for a period, and in order to
cope with special needs.
Still, in doing this, he had
given a practical proof of the advantage gained by the
presence in a community of one who could rule with
supreme authority
and this temporary sway would
doubtless help in determining the tendency of subse-
quent development.
These examples, however, would have been powerless
BISHOP
BITHIAH
by themselves to produce
so
great a change,
not
been elements in the life of the communities
which made for the concentration of authority
in particular hands.
It is often said that
such an element is discoverable in the
working of the presbyteral college itself. Any board
which meets for the transaction of business must
needs have a president.
The hoder of this position
would naturally acquire a large share of the authority
of the board itself in time he would tend to become
a
supreme officer over the whole commnnity.
This
suggestion is open to two serious criticisms.
On
the
one hand, there is
no
ground for thinking that
in
parallel cases at that period such
a
development from
oligarchical to monarchical rule came about. Presidents
of this kind were often elected for a month or for
a
year, and in any case did not acquire an independent
authority.
Moreover, the term
presbyteral college
may be challenged, if it is intended to suggest that the
practical
of the Church was carried on
by means of formal meetings
of
the Elders as such.
We have no evidence of any
that they regularly
met in this way.
It is probable that they had special
seats in the assembly of the community but that they
met by themselves for the transaction of business and
required
a
chairman is
a
hypothesis for which
no
evi-
dence has yet been given.
It is only when we turn
our
attention away from the
administration and fix it on the common worship of the
church, that we begin to get any rays of
light on this problem.
If we knew better
the history of the eucharist, it is not
un-
likely that the history
of
the episcopate
would cease to
so
perplexing..
In
the disorders
which disgraced the Lord’s Supper in Corinth, and in
Paul’s regulations for checking them, we hear nothing
at all of any kind of presidency or leadership.
In the
same church before the end of the century we find
elders spoken of as the leaders of the eucharistic worship
and
as
offering the gifts.‘
The picture which, fifty years later, Justin draws of
the eucharist in Rome, shows us a single officer, spoken
of simply
as
the president
( 6
receiving and offering the
eucharistic elements, and making the
eucharistic prayer, to which the whole congregation re-
sponds with the A
MEN
(§
3).
Likewise, after the read-
ing of the Gospels or the Prophets
‘
the president
’
makes
an exhortation based upon what has been read.
He is,
moreover, the depositary of the collection made in
behalf of the poor, and has a general responsibility for
widows
for the sick and needy, for prisoners,
and for travelling brethren from other communities
65-67).
This president is clearly the bishop,
though
language does not help
us
to decide
whether he was at that time known in Rome by the
title
or not.
If
he was, it by
no
means
follows that ‘Justin would have said
so.
H e
is
writing
for heathen readers, and he avoids technical terms or,
if he finds it convenient to use them, he explains them.
Thus,
speaking of the deacons, he describes them
as
those who with
us
are called
and his usual term for the Gospels
is ‘the memoirs of the apostles,’ t o . which in one
place he adds which are called gospels
We can argue nothing from the absence
of the designation bishop : had he cared to introduce
it, he would no doubt have done so by the phrase ‘ h e
who with us is called
(6
rap’
But the person is there, if the name
is not and we see that important collateral functions
belong to the officer who presides at the eucharistic
service. H e appears as at once the instructor and the
of, the
community.
It is a long step, however, from Clement to Justin, and
it is of some importance to
us
that we should have evidence
a
like development in other parts of the Church.
passages may be cited which point in the same
direction for the eastern side of the
terranean.
I
.
In the
the prophets are spoken of as holding a
special importance in reference to the eucharist:
.hey are not bonnd by the prescribed formulie of
but may ‘give thanks as they will.’
This
mplies that, if present, they naturally
a
prominent
in the service. They may order an
to be
ield
and to them the first fruits are
io
be given, for they are your chief-priests’ (chap.
The same document declares, however, that the ministry
of the prophets and teachers was likewise
by the bishops and deacons (chap.
15).
It is
to suppose that if
no
prophet were present
of the service would be in the hands of the
permanent local ministry, although in this case there
would be no exemption from the duty of using the
prescribed formulie.
The Ignatian Epistles,
as
is well known, portray
the completed development of the three orders for
certain Asiatic churches at a comparatively early period.
It is noteworthy that the one bishop is expressly con-
nected with the one eucharist (for references, see
E
UCHARIST
).
No
eucharist is to be held without
the bishop, or some person deputed by him to conduct
it. There is ‘One bishop, one altar, one eucharist’
pla
We may feel confident, then, that in the development
of
the eucharistic service we have
an
element-perhaps
the most important element-of the development of the
monarchical episcopate.
As soon
as this monarchical
had been established
in
a
church various sacred parallels which would be
taken as confirmatory of the divine order of
the institution, would be observed.
The
bishop and his presbyters might be com-
pared with Christ and his apostles. Or again, the three
orders of the Christian Church-bishop, presbyters,
and deacons-would find
a
ready analogy in the high
priest, priests, and Levites of the Jewish ritual.
parallels would serve to confirm -the validity of the
institution, and would facilitate its adoption in other
localities.
Meanwhile, the extraordinary ministry of apostles
and prophets had passed or was rapidly passing away.
Some of the functions which they had exercised were
essential in the Church; and these devolved as a heritage
upon the permanent ministry. The prestige which had
attached to their exercise passed over in the
to
the chief officers of the community, who thus
to
be regarded, with a large measure of truth,
as
the
successors of the apostles, wielding apostolic authority
as
the rulers of the Church
the defenders of the
BISON
Dt.
RV
has
BIT
Ps.
EV.
Christian faith.
.
J.
A .
R.
P
YCARG
See B
RIDLE
,
3
BITHIAH
‘daughter of Pharaoh,’ and wife of Mered
ben
in the genealogy
Of
( I
Ch. 418).
the assumption that Pharaoh
is correctly read,
Bithiah (which might be explained
worshipper-of
be a
Hebraised form of an Egyptian name such as
daughter of Anta (‘Anath), to indicate that the bearer
of the name had entered the Israelitish community.
This, however, does not accord with the view implied
in the vowels of the name of Bithiah’s husband.
Mered
apparently means ‘rebellion,’ and suggests
a
warning
against the wickedness of taking foreign wives (see
and cp
It would he inconsistent
with this that Mered‘s wife should bear the honourable
584
BIT H
R
0
N
name daughter of
: we should expect to find
the old heathen name retained.
Perhaps, then, Bithiah
is not the right name;
suggests to Kittel
and
may conceivably be based on
which in turn may have sprung from
pro-
ducing a description of Mered's non-Jewish wife as
'
a
young Egyptian princess (Mered's other wife
the
Jewess'
is not named).
However,
the corruption is antecedent to
and the whole story
(half-told, half-implied, by the text as it now stands) is
imaginary. The idea of the double marriage of Mered
had not occurred to the original compiler the true text
conveys no warning against mixed marriages.
Four at
least out of the'five names, Mered, Bithiah, Pharaoh,
Jehudijah,
Hodiah, are corrupt; perhaps indeed
all five are.
Mered, or, more strictly, M-R-D, has
probably come from
which is an incorrect
form of
Ramoth-or rather of Jarmuth
(see
Bithiah is not improbably a corruption
of
Bealiah'
I
Ch.
[Gi. Ba.
Pharaoh
should rather be
a clan name (cp
P
IRATHON
).
Ha-Jehudijah
and Hodiah are plainly the
same name (in
v.
19 read
his wife
').
Accepting
this view, we have two accounts of the family of Mered.
It is not quite certain, however, that the person mis-
called Mered is represented as having two wives.
Hodiah may have been deliberately substituted for
Bealiah, from a dislike to the first element in that name.
We are now rid of the only case in the O T of
a
name
compounded with Jah
such names there are
--being borne by a foreigner (cp Gray,
158).
Next, another mistake has to be noted.
It is plain that
I
Ch.
as it stands is not right.
The remedy is (with
Berth. and
to transpose
to the middle
of
17.
inserting of course
after
This gives
as the children of Bithiah or Realiah, Miriam
and Ishbah
father of Eshtemoa. Eshtemoa
also occurs (together with Keilah) in the list of the
children of Hodiah
(v.
while Gedor, Soco, and
Zanoah are connected with Mered through Hodiah's
double, Ha- Jehudijah-animportant notice
It is perhaps sad to have lost what was supposed to be
an early testimony to the presence of an Egyptian ele-
ment at and about Eshtemoa, as contrasted with the
more purely Jewish character
of
Gedor, Soco, and
Zanoah; but we gain an attestation of the traditional
importance
of
Jarmuth.
It may be added that in
Jewish legend Bithiah becomes the foster-mother
of
Moses
(
par.
I
).
T.
K.
C.
T H N
groove
or cleft
p u r
situated between the Jordan and
naim
and possibly to be identified with
the
along which, though at a later time,
ran
a
Roman road from
to Mahanaim (Buhl,
see
E
PHRAIM
,
W
OOD OF.
For the sense
of
cp
rendering of
in Cant.217
(like
in
for
The reading
Bithron is not certain, and the
Vss.
give little
although Vg. (cp also
suggests that
there was another Beth-horon
E. of
Jordan (see
NAIM).
conjecture, B
ETH
-
HARAM
, is
prohable.
[Ti.
WH]),
the district round
the central Sangarius
in the NW. corner
of
BITHYNIA
eastern frontier is often made to coincide with the
with the Parthenios, or even to extend beyond the latter river
in spite of Strabo's statement that the
of the
marked the boundary
(543,
Inland, it ran out far
E.
of the river hut the line
is indeterminate. According to
5
the Hieros or
separated Bithynia from the province
hut the
boundary fell some
m. E. of that stream (Rams.
A M
whence it ran
W.
between the Sangarius and its
tributary, the
The will of Nicomedes III., the last of its kings, left
Bithynia to the Romans in
74
but it was not until
B
.
when the sultan of Pontus had been
nally expelled from Asia, that
could
the organisation of the province (cp
Plin.
Ep. ad
79). With it was now combined
the whole of the kingdom
of
Pontus, with the exception
of those districts towards the
E.,
as well as those in
the interior (Paphlagonia), which were assigned to native
dynasts in recognition of their services to Rome (Str.
See Niese in
and
Rhein Mus.
38
567
which lay immediately
E.
of the
Halys
was the most easterly community
of that part
of
Pontus which was combined with the old
kingdom of
to form the Roman province.
This dual origin of the province was recognised
in its official
title, Pontus et
(so
generally in inscriptions, both Lat.
and Gr. cp Appian,
CZG
3548,
55262).
T h e reverse order is perhaps
the whole later, encouraged
the gradual growth in importance of the western section.
Either name, apparently might be
to denote the entire
province (cp
Ann.
with Dio Cas.
;
In administration also the two parts
retained a certain degree of formal independence, each having
its own metropolis and Diet
In
the distribution
of
provinces by Augnstus in 27
B.
c.
Pontus- Bithynia remained
its
governors, who were of
bore the title 'proconsul' (Str.
840,
Ann.
The official residence
was Nicomedeia. Under the ineffective supervision of
the Senate the province gradually became disorganised :
its finances fell into disorder, and unregulated
gave birth to turbulence and faction. In order to carry
out the necessary reforms, the younger Pliny was sent
into the province in
A.D.
His importance arises
from his official contact with Christianity
ad
96
and
97.
See Hardy,
Correspondence,
Rams.
Church,
and cp C
HRISTIAN
,
63).
In the early period of post-apostolic history Bithynia
is illustrious
but it has little connection with the
apostles themselves. The salutation
of
I
Pet.
1
I
,
where
Pontus and Bithynia are mentioned separately, bears
witness to the rapid evangelisation of the province.
Before
A.D.
Christianity had made such progress in
Bithynia that pagan ritual was interrnpted and the
temples in great part deserted (Pliny,
ad
96).
W e get a hint that there, as in Ephesus, trade interests
were at the bottom of the attack then made upon
the Christians. The
a s Pliny calls the faith, would
most easily enter the province by way of Amisus, along
the route leading from the
Gates by
and
in Cappadocia.
(Church,
conjectures from Pliny's letter that its introduction
must
about
65-75
A.
D.
Amisus
is now
Even in Strabo's time it was
gradually displacing
as
the great harbour on
the north coast. T h e route from
northwards
Aqua:
Euagina, and
to
Amisus,
even
to-day 'the only road practicable for arabas, and must always
have
a
great trade-route' (Rams.
Hist.
AM,
268).
The interpretation
of
the word Bithynia
in
Acts
1 6 7
is connected with the question concerning the Galatian
Asia Minor, extending from the mouth
of the Rhyndacus
east-
wards to that of the Sangarius.
The boundary between Bithynia and the province of Asia
coincided not as might have been expected with the line of the
with that of the range of the
Olympus
lying
N.
of the river (Pliny,
T h e
is
unintelligible and, to judge from its similarity to the
Heb. (cp We. Dr.
ad
has arisen perhaps from a trans-
literation.
churches (see G
ALATIA
).
the N.
Galatian theory, the object of Paul's
attempt to enter Bithynia must have been to reach either
Amisus or Amastris; for a design of preaching
in
the
barbarous interior is improbable. The direct route to
Amastris went, it is true, by way of Ancyra in
586
BITTER HERBS
but on the other hand no such route could have brought
the apostle over against Mysia
(so
RV
Further, both in Roman and in ordinary
Amastris, and still more Amisus, was
a
city of
Pontus, not of Bithynia; and only the word Pontus
could have been allowable
as
a
single term to express
the dual province to which it belonged
(as
is clear from
Str.
compared with
543,
in speaking of Heraclea).
T h e expression to go into Bithynia’ can only be taken
to imply
W.
the district round
and Nicomedeia, where the wealth and administrative
machinery of the province were centred.
Dorylaion
only a few miles
S.
of the Bithynian
frontier, was the point to which
all
the roads from the
south converged Paul and his companions must have
been somewhere in this neighbourhood when they were
suddenly diverted westwards (Acts
BITTER HERBS, BITTERNESS
1 2 8 Nu.
;
Lam. 3
in Mishna also in sing.
)
are
twice mentioned along with
as
the accompaniment
of the paschal feast.
Probably such herbs-whether
separately or mixed-as lettuce
sativa),
chicory
and endive
are meant.
Doubtless they originally
came into use
as
a relish or
though the
prescription of them in the Law may have to do with the
atoning significance of the Passover their association
with the sufferings of the people in Egypt is probably
a
later new
HA
2
See, further,
P
A
SS
-
Bitter herbs,’ rather than
bitterness
EV),
seems to he the proper rendering in
Lam.315,
where
answers to
‘wormwood,’ in the parallel
w. w.
OVER.
N.
T.
T.-D.
BITTERN,
RV
Porcupine
Is.
Zeph.
The
of this animal
BITUMEN
:
the use
of
the noun
in Ezek.
accords well enough
this derivation.
is equivalent in form
to
Aram.
4r.
;
and that these are the words for ‘hedge-
hog
’
in their respective languages is made clear for Ar.
)
by Damiri’s account
ii.
219) and for Aram. by the Syr.
[Lands
The instances of
in late Heb. and Aram. prove the same for
post-biblical Jewish usage (see Lewysohn,
Whilst the philological evidence
is
entirely in
favour of the rendering hedgehog’ or porcupine,’ it
must be admitted that, zoologically,
there are considerable difficulties. The
animal is always spoken of in connection with desola-
tion, and once in relation to pools
of
water: and,
whilst both these conditions would be natural in the
habitat of the Bittern, they have no particular associa-
tion with either the Hedgehog or the Porcupine.
Again, in Is.
3411,
the
is mentioned among birds
and in Zeph.
214
it is prophesied that the Pelican and
the
shall lodge together in the capitals of ruined
Nineveh, while ‘ a voice’ (if the text may be trusted)
shall sing in the windows.
The answers made by
Bochart to these objections-that the Porcupine or
Hedgehog was regarded
as
an unfriendly, desert-loving
animal on account of its formidable equipments ; that
we can find parallels to the mention of
a
beast among
birds in such enumerations as Lucian’s large oxen, and
horses, and eagles, and bears, and lions
and that the
capitals on which the animal is to sit may be those
of
fallen columns-are ingenious, but perhaps scarcely
satisfying. It has been suggested that the translation
‘bittern’ may be reconciled with the etymology by
considering the fact that this bird has the power of
drawing
in
its long neck
so
that its head almost rests
upon
its
Still, it, is not easy to set aside the
argument derived from the meaning of the word in the
cognate languages.
The Bittern,
is found in marshy
and reedy places throughout Europe, Asia (including
India), and Africa.
Canon Tristram records its occur-
rence in the marshes of
It is a nocturnal bird
of
considerable size, and is remarkahle for its loud
booming note.
Formerly
a
common bird
in
suitable
localities in Britain, it is
but a winter visitor.
It
is
grouped with the Herons in the family
C O R M O R A N T
and PELICAN.
)
For Is. 34
‘bittern see
O
WL
,
BITTERNESS, WATER OF
Nu.
RV, AV
‘
bitter water.’
BITUMEN,
the proper rendering
(
I
)
of
as
recognises
bitumen; EV has
This evidence seems enough to
show that the original sense
was
‘ t o contract or ‘cause contraction by striking not to
‘cut ; and that those were misled who, like Fuller
nearly
all
the older scholars, explained the name of the animal from
the latter sense. I n post-biblical Hebrew and W. Aramaic the
sense of cutting is fairly common
;
but this may be explained
partly perhaps from a misinterpretation of
in
Is. 38
partly from association with Gr.
and
derivatives
:
cp
(N.S.
piece of flesh’-late Gr.
I t seems more probable that the
Arabic word is a loan-word from Aramaic, than that
is
N.
M.-A. E.
S.
See
J
EALOUSY
,
O
RDE
A
L
OF.
So
is far from certain : opinions
of great variety have been held.
T h e ancient
unanimously render Hedgehog’ (or
Porcupine’-the two were scarcely distinguished), and this is
in general supported by Jewish tradition though Rashi thinks
that in
a bird is
and D.
interprets
in all three passages (see their com-
mentaries in
Of modern
has in all
three places
and so Luther (followed as usual by the
Dutch).
and
in
their Latin
render
Coverdale followed
the Great
Bible, bas ‘Otter’ in
and
in
Zeph.
2
while the Geneva Bible has in Isaiah Hedgehog’
mg. or ‘tortoise’), and in Zephaniah
‘Owl’
or
hog’). The French Protestant version seems alone to have
anticipated
AV
in the rendering
ou
The Roman Catholic Bibles follow the
The etymology of the Hebrew word is not, however,
unchtain.
I t
is
derived from a verb which in Assyrian means ‘to plot
transitively (Sargon,
2
and in Arabic (
I
)
‘to
a blow on the neck of another’
have a thick or loose
neck.‘ The original sense is
better seen in Syriac
where the same verb means ‘ t o gather
a heap or
(trans. or
the sense of
also
Assyrian
(cp intrigue,’
T h e
occurs
but once in
Hebrew (in
form) Is. 38
I
have
(or possibly shortened,’ see
ad
like a weaver
my life,’-a simile referring to the treatment of the finished
is, according to Dioscorides
(2
the wild variety of
(chicory or endive): Pliny
838)
mentions
it as the
bitterest sort of
(see the
in Di. on
and
in Nowack,
H A 2
:
probably
by both. I t does not of course follow that the meaning of
is identical with that of
Vegetable food with meat is a dietetic necessity, and would
naturally be eaten raw until it was discovered that certain kinds
were
cooked. It is a matter for curious inquiry why so
many salad
were bitter, a t any rate in their feral form.
Dandelion is a striking example.
Also used to render
Is.
and
Is.
Which he wrongly supposes to he the meaning of
Explanations of these various renderings will he found in
Fuller‘s
;
Bochart’s
3 36.
587
horrowed.
however (Aram.
holds that
the latter is the
3
Cp, for Syriac the other references cited
P.
Smith.
appears’to he used for the ‘owl’ in
w.
Cp Brehm’s
‘79) 6388.
‘When it
(the Bittern) rests and is a t ease, it holds the body erect in a
somewhat forward position and draws in its long neck to such
a n extent that its head rests upon its neck.’
Perhaps with reference to the reddish colour
occasionally observed
1
Ar.
BIZJOTHJAH
slime’) in Gen.
1 1 3
but also
of
which, like its Aram. cognate, is an
loan-word
(EV P
ITCH
) in Gen. 6
where its occurrence furnishes
one of the proofs of the Babylonian origin of the
Deluge-Story (see D
ELUGE
,
13).
I n the Bab.
Deluge-Story six
of
bitumen
and
three of
(naphtha
:
Jensen)
are
poured upon the
outer and inner sides of the ship, respectively.
naphtha,’ is the word used in the legendary account of
the infancy of Sargon
I.
(3
R.
5
56)
she
placed me in a basket of reeds, with
my door
‘she shut’ in the similar story of Moses the words
and
P
ITCH
are combined
2
3
but
[B AF]).
The origin
of
bitumen, or asphalt, and
naphtha need
not
delay us long.
Together with
petroleum and mineral tax, they form
a
series of sub-
stances which
are
the result of certain changes in
organised matter.
These substances merge into each
other by insensible degrees, and it
is
impossible to
say at what point mineral tar ends and asphalt ,begins.
Naphtha, which is
the
first of the series is in some places
found flawing out
of
the earth
as
a
clear
and colourless
liquid.
As
such it
is a
mixture of hydrdcarbons, some
of
which
are
very
volatile and evaporate on exposure it takes
oxygen
from
the
air,
becomes brown and thick, and in this
state
it
is
called
petroleum.
A
continuation
of the same process of
evaporation
and oxidation gradually transforms the material
into
tar,
and still later into solid glassy asphalt.
Asphaltic deposits are widely diffused throughout
the world, more especially in tropical and sub-tropical
regions-for example in the basin of the D
EAD
$6).
The asphalt of the Dead Sea (which was
very well known to the ancients) is not a t present of
commercial importance but the sources of the supply of
ancient Babylon, the bitumen springs of Hit (the
of
Herod.
are still used.
At this very old city on
the Euphrates the shipwrights adhere to the ancient
fashion of boat- building.
,
Tamarisk and mulberry
branches form the substratum, which is covered with
mats
and thickly besmeared with bitumen (cp Ex.
Bitumen was much used in architecture (see Gen.
11
3).
Unburned brick protected by a plaster of bitumen
proved the most indestructible of materials (see A
SSYRIA
,
6,
B
ABYLONIA
,
and cp Peters,
Bitumen was used in ancient times as
a
fuel (Verg.
8
for medicinal purposes (Jos.
8 4 )
and for embalming
(see
E
MBALMING
).
RV
Biziothiah
among
the cities
of
the Negeb (Josh.
1528).
ai
ad.
[L
om.]) enables us to
restore
her villages
’).
See
We.
and
14.
BIZTHA
Ginsb. for common
a
chamberlain
of Ahasuerus (Esth.
1
If
any reliance
be put on
the reading of the
one
might, with Marq.
(Fund.
compare
with
0.
Pers.
or
with
the name
of
a
eunuch of Darius 111.
Job 616
see
8.
BLACKNESS
for
Prov.
79
RV and Joel26
see
for Job 3
5
BLAINS
Ex.
See
B
OIL
,
BLACK
and
BLACKISH
8
for Is.
5 0 3
8.
BLASPHEMY
K.
I
S
. 373
Neh. 9 18
26
Ezek. 85
Tob. 118
I
Macc. 26 Mt.
2665). The word
so
translated is derived from
a
root
meaning literally to scorn or reject’ (see
Ps.
18
Is.
I n Hebrew, therefore, it can
naturally be used to describe an attitude of hostility
Perhaps connected with
‘burning.
fiery’
See the illustration called ‘ A Noachian
at
Hit,’
Peter.,
2
589
BLASPHEMY
towards God or man, things holy or things
(Jer. 33 24
Is.
60
14 I
S.
2
17).
Blaspheme’ (cp the verb
‘ t o
blame,’ Romanic
and see Murray,
however, occurs in the
as
a
also
of
the following ,words
:
I
K.
AV
‘renounce
cp Dav. on
Job
EV,
EV,
Nu.
‘reproach’),
EV, and the Gk.
(not V)
Mt.
Mk.
328
(followed by
Rev.136,
I
I n
I
Macc. 738 ‘blasphemies’
is
the rendering of
in
41
‘ t o blaspheme’ represent: the
related verb
the object of the blasphemies
is the temple,
It is important to determine
the
sense of
accurately, because the sense of to blas-
pheme’ in E V follows this exactly.
I n
a
word, the
conception of ‘blasphemy in current English is narrower
than the conception that we find in this supposed pattern
of English speech, which includes all modes of reviling
calumniating God or man (see
K.
196 [Heb.
[Heb.
and
Is.
[Heb.
uncertain
conj.], and cp Acts
186 Jude
with Lk.
Jn.
36).
Among the Hebrews (whose view, it is needless
to
say, profoundly affected our own
law)
blasphemy or the expression of unjust,
derogatory opinions regarding God or his
government of the world was made a
capital offence-(Lev. 24
11
c p
I
K.
21
and
see
Jos.
Ant.
iv.
8 6 )
the blasphemer must be cut off’ from his
people (Lev. 2415
P
see
L
AW AND
J
USTICE
,
13).
I t was forbidden
to
use the name of God lightly
Dt.
whether to ask a blessing or to invoke
a
curse
(cp Ex.
and see B
LESSING
A
ND
C
URSING
,
I,
and
Schultz,
O T
2
[ET]).
Whenever Israel
is
brought to shame G o d s name is scoffed a t by the
heathen (Ps.
At a later date it was held to be
a
mark of profanity even to pronounce the real name of
the God of Israel (see Lev. 2411 and cp N
AMES
,
Josephus
(Ant.
and the
interpret Ex.
2228 as a prohibition of blaspheming strange gods
but the interpretation, however much in the interests of
the Jews themselves, implies
a
misunderstanding of the
use
of
(see Schultz, 2127). I t was on
a
charge
of blasphemy-claiming to be the Christ, the
Son
of God-that Jesus was found worthy of
death (Mk.
Mt.
cp Jn.
and for
blasphemons words against ‘the holy place and the
law’ Stephen was condemned to be stoned (Acts613
See
S
TEPHEN
.
By blasphemy against the
Holy Spirit in Mk.
Mt.
was meant originally
a
definite offence of the scribes and Pharisees, who had
ascribed Jesus’ cures of demoniacs to
a
power derived
from the prince of the demons. This was blasphemy
against the divine power which had come upon
Jesus a t his baptism
1
IO
Mt.
316
Lk. 322). I n
Mt.
however,
a
later interpretation is given, which
implies that the disciples of Jesus had thoroughly
absorbed the idea
of
the indwelling
The Holy
Spirit is put in antithesis to the ‘Son of Man.’
One
who fails to pierce below the
exterior of Jesus
may be forgiven.
One
who not merely rejects, but
openly disparages, that great gift which
‘
the Heavenly
Father will give to those who ask him’
cannot be forgiven : the inward impediment in the man
himself is too strong. The idea of the original distinc-
tion was suggested by that
the Law (Num.
A parallel to it will be found in the Mishna (Sanhedr.
He who says that the Law is not from Heaven
has no part in the world to come’
The
later interpretation, however, has no parallel, and
is
a
This rendering of
is very doubtful: but it is quite
possihle that in passa
es
like
Job 1 5
21
a
later
editor
substituted
for
or
In
we may
even
have
side
by side the correction
and the original reading
BLASTING
product of the Spirit of Christ working in the hearts
of
the first disciples.
BLASTING
6
[Hag.
is, as we learn from Gen.
41,
a term specially applied to the blighting effect of wind
upon corn.
The root in Arabic means blackness and
the Heb. word thus describes a blackening (almost
burning) process which is regarded
as
due to a severe wind
-a sense which is expressed by the various renderings
of
The word is in each passage coupled with
mildew.’ Nevertheless, it is doubtful whether wind is
in itself sufficient to account for such
a
blackening.
In
British Islands wheat when young assumes a yellow
colour from cold, a well-known physiological effect.
Under a burning drying wind, it might turn brown,
but scarcely
Further, it must be noted that in
Gen.
41
6
the corn was in ear it had made its growth,
but the ears were
thin-i.
e . , diseased.
It seems prob-
able, then, that the effect conceived in the dream was
that produced by corn smut,‘
Carbo;
and that
this is the real meaning
of
Mildew
is
the other
common disease of corn,
N.
T. T.-D.
(
[Ti.
WH]), the chamberlain
of
Herod
I.
(Acts
12
BLESSINGS
and
to bless-a
denominative from
the knee, with the lower part of
the leg; perhaps ‘ t o cause to make progress,’-and
to curse
Ass.
(
I
)
to curse,’
to
bind
and their derivatives
in parallelism,
chiefly in poetic and legal sources of JED ‘and later
imitations cp Gen.
27
Dt.
11
26
Josh.
8
34
etc.
represents
by
by
(also
NT
words).
I n
Hebrew for cursing
’
we find also (a)
(prop.
verb and noun, c p
‘oath of cursing’
Nu.
5
‘adjuration’), rendered
‘execration,’
4422, and R V only Jer.2918; its
derivative
occurs in Lam. 3
(c)
see
B
A
N
.
only in the Balaam stories
(Nu.
22
23
8
24
I
O
)
and
possibly to be connected
(prop. to pierce rendered in
Lev. 24
‘blaspheme.
From the Jewish tradition which
explained it to mean ‘pronounce, speak aloud’ arose the d e e p
rooted belief that the divine name was not to be uttered
any circumstance (see
N
AMES
,
I
DOLATRY
,
8.
Is. 65
E V ‘curse,’ properly oath a s
in
see
O
ATH
and cp
C
OVENANT
, $3
T h e
N T
words are (a)
Mk. 1471 (in
;
Mt.
26 74 Rev. 22 3
;
see B
A
N
.
Rom. 12 14 Jam. 3 (in
for
Gal. 3
and
accursed
Rev. 22 3
;
cp also
under a curse,’ Gal.
3
(c
Mt. 15 4 Mk.
RV
speak
evil
of’ (in
for
see
O
ATH
.
In
the primitive sense of the word, a blessing
or
a
was a spell, pronounced by holy persons, and
containing a divine name, or divine names, which drew
down the divine favour
or
disfavour
e . ,
prosperity
adversity), as the case might require,
on
certain
persons.
It was a consequence of the hardness of life
that curses were more frequently in demand than
blessings.
Thus
the breaking out of
between states naturally led to the solemn utterance
of cursing against the enemy. These
would be uttered at the opening
of
a campaign,
especially when the warriors were
on
the point o
advancing against the foe.
Goliath, we are told
‘cursed David by his gods’
(
I
17
43).
The battle
shout certainly had a religious character and, if it
not always devote the enemy to destruction, at any
it invoked a blessing on the national side.
Cp Ps.
68
and the story of B
ALAAM
The laws too hac
Nu.
22 6
shows that Balak, according to
the narrator, wa
about to fight with
the
Israelites.
BLUE
an increased sanction through the cursing
attached.
Thus
iv. mentions
a
statute
the maintenance of boundaries, which is
iforced by a curse on any one who should violate it.
this category of curses belong those in Dt.
28.
It is true that a series of blessings is attached to the
of cursings. Moses, from his close connection with
Deity, had a special power of blessing and cursing.
him the priests had a similar power, which they
xerted in the interests of the faithful community (cp
J
R I M
AND
T
HUMMIM
,
6).
The uplifted hands of the
riest drew down
(as
it were) a blessing on Israel (cp
9
22
Nu.
6
23-27)
and a curse on Israel’s enemies.
potent, indeed, were the blessings and the curses ot
he reputed founder of Israel that they could be said to
e
on
the two sacred mountains which enclose the
centre of the people-the valley of Shechem-
eady to descend, as the case might be, ,with rewards or
(Dt.
11
Within the family it was the father who (according to
ideas not unconnected with the worship of
had the mystic privilege of determining the
veal or woe of his children
9
and more
:specially when his days were manifestly numbered (see
I
SAAC
,
5,
JA
COB
).
Nor
does it appear
hat the early Israelites
this power by moral
(see Gen.
27
35).
Obviously, however, such
limitation was a necessary consequence of a pure
nonotheism. The post-exilic writers declare that only
.he offspring
of
the righteous can be blessed
(Ps.
37
that the observance of
God‘s
laws ensures his favour
without the aid of priests or enchanters.
Fear not,
.hen, said the later sages to their pupils, if thine enemy
thee
:
the curse causeless shall not come (I’rov.
26
Still, even
in
post-exilic time we sometimes find
a
half-consciousness that curses had an inherent
power.
I t was worth while to curse
a
bad
man,
to
ensure his full punishment-such is the idea of
Ps.
109-a
strange survival of primitive superstition.
In the discourses of Jesus we find blessings and
curses. They are, however, simply authoritative declara-
tions of the eternal connection between right-doing and
happiness. wrong-doing and misery
in the case of
Judas).
Parallels to the Israelitish view
of
blessings and
cursings outside of the Semitic peoples hardly need to be
quoted.
The objective existence of both, but especially
of curses, was strongly felt by the Assyrians and
Babylonians,
as
the magical texts show. The Arabian
beliefs
the subject
also very suggestive, as
Goldziher has pointed out. See M
AGIC
,
n.,
and
on the curse-bringing water’
(Nu.
)
see J
EALOUSY
,
BLINDNESS
Gen.
1911
2
K.
618
See
E
YE
,
D
ISEASES
, and M
EDI
-
For blood in law and ritual, see S
ACRIFICE
For
‘avenger of blood’
For ‘issue of
WATER
OF.
T.
K. C.
Dt.
Zech.
CINE.
BLOOD.
PASSOVER; CLEAN
A N D
UNCLEAN,
COVENANT,
K
INSHIP
,
$3
and
$3
Dt.
see
Mk.
see
D
ISEASE
,
MEDICINE.
BLOOD, Field of
Mt.
278.
See
BLUE
Ex.
25
4,
etc., a variety
of
Purple.
See
C
OLOURS
,
Blue is employed
E V of Esth.
1 6
to
distinguish certain
kinds of stones. Thus for
we have AV ‘blue marble,’
The blessing and the curse referred to were those attaching
to the fulfilment and the non-fulfilment of the commands of the
Law.
They were ‘laid before’ Israel by Moses and were
to
be ‘laid’ by them on their arrival in the
land,
probably by solemn proclamation on Mounts
and Ebal
respectively. In Dt. 27
we
a later writer’s interpreta-
tion of this command. See
Kue.
BOANERGES
‘marble’ RV ‘white marble’: and for
‘stone
of blue ’colour,’ E V ‘black marble.’ See, however, M
ARBLE
,
and cp
For
‘blueness’ in Prov. 20 30t AV
‘blueness
of
wound’) RV has, better, ‘stripes that wound.
BOANERGES
[Ti. Treg. W H follow-
ing
etc.
;
T R
aname
given, according to
to James
[I]
and John
the sons of Zebedee. The reading of
etc., points to
as the accepted analysis of the name, and
the evangelist explains it by
‘sons of
thunder.’
Each element, however, presents some
difficulty.
I
.
The difficulty in taking Boane- to be
‘sons of,’ is
for
Attempts to explain it as a phonetic ‘corruption’ have been
unsatisfactory. There does not appear to he any
Bretschneider’s
a
corrupt pro-
nunciation of a provincial (Galilean) a,
or
for Hugh Broughton’s
statement4 (Works
620)
that the Jews pronounced
as
oa.
I t is more
to regard the corruption a s textual.
Since
is natural enough (cp
Josh.
45
[A]), and
is not unknown (cp
oa
might be a conflate
Dalman (Gram.
n.
supposed the transposition of an o which originally stood after
p
(see below).
H e now prefers to regard either
o
or
a
as a
(
39, n.
4).
I n some such way the double
vowel must have arisen it is strange that the
MSS
have not
preserved any trace of variation in the first syllable.
The orthography, therefore, cannot he explained
quite satisfactorily.
W e may be reasonably certain,
however, about the signification.
a. This cannot be said of the second element in the
word. The evangelist (or a scholiast) understood
to mean
thunder’ but we do not know what
Semitic word it was supposed to represent, nor can we
say whether the interpretation
an original hypothesis
or a really current belief.
(a)
In the Syriac versions (Pesb. and Sin.)
appears as
That may, however, be nothing more than a translitera-
tion. Only in Arabic does
mean ‘thunder.’ If it occurs in
the O T a t
it probably
‘throng.
In
it means
‘tumult,’ ‘rushing,’ etc. If
is
therefore, it can hardly
BOCHIM
dural of
Beza on the other hand
to improve on
by
ng that a mistake had occurred
a
Semitic text:
was
nisread
A
text containing the name
would not need to give
explanation of the name (cp col.
n.
I
)
.
On the other
hand, a Greek translator could not have given the supposed
translation if he had misread the
There remains the possibility that
(see
A
NAZ
B
OAZ
).
Kautzsch
suggests that
may
‘anger’ (cp Dan.
and,
of thunder, the Ar.
and this solution is adopted by Dalman
who further accounts for the translation
by
The historical origin of the name not being known
(cp J
AMES
,
I
) ,
we cannot determine the second
Semitic element with certainty.
There is no evidence
that Boanerges can ever have meant strictly sons of
thunder.’
On the other hand, what is said in the
Gospels of the sons
of
Zebedee gives a certain appro-
priateness to such a title as
taken in the sense of
See
S
WINE
(end).
I
.
hardly, ‘quickness’ [BDB
Ass.
or
means a wild boar or the like;
but see
A
ND
A
and
L
in Ru.
2 1 5
4 8
I
Ch.
of Bethlehem, kinsman
of Naomi and husband of R
UTH
According to
the post-exilic genealogy, Ru.
(cp
I
Ch.
he was the son of S
ALMON
or
S
ALMAH
,
and the ancestor
of D
AVID
I,
n. a ) .
2.
The name of one of the two pillars set up before
Solomon‘s temple
(
I
K.
Ch.
3
17).
See J
ACHIN
I
Esd.
I
.
BOCHERU
61
for the ending
cp J
ETHRO
and see G
ESHEM
), a son of Azrikam, Saul’s descendant
(
I
Ch.
8
38
9
44).
however, punctuated and
read
-
doubtless correctly
-
Azrikam his firstborn
:
makes up the six
sons
of Azel by enumerating
in
the fifth place, besides
in the third.
[BAL]), the name of a place near Gilgal, where the
b‘ne Israel sacrificed after the visit of the angel of
(Judg.
and
probably of a place in Judah (Mic.
1
IO
emended text
see below). The name of the former place is interpreted
Weepers
but the passage which refers to this
is
an insertion (see J
UDGES
,
4 ) based upon
where we may expect to find the older and more gener-
used name
of
the place. Here, however,
com-
bining two readings gives
(on the corrupt
see
Moore ad
and the latter, which suits the con-
text well, is accepted a s correct by most critics (Bu.
Sam.
We., Mey., Kue., Bu., Kitt.).
W e must
therefore correct
in
to
‘Bethel.’
The explanation of ‘Bochim’ in v.
suggests
a
doubt as to the correctness of the present
form, which may have been changed to agree with a
more than half sportive derivation from
to
weep.’
The correct pronunciation must have been
‘Baca-trees‘ (see M
U
LBERRY
). These
trees were probably abundant near Bethel, and it is
possible that the ‘Tree
of
Weeping’
grew near them. The play on the name would, at any
rate, be familiar to the ancient Israelites, and may have
led to a variety in the pronunciation of the name (cp
Mareshah, Moresheth).
I t is difficult to see how this could
of
angry,’ soon angered’ (or the like).
H. W. H.
BOAR
Ps.
BOAZ.
See RUTH,
AND
BOCHIM
103,
‘weepers,’
. .
mean
Jerome, indeed, conscious of this, declares
ad Dan.
that the true readine is
sons of
Ex.
Pseudo- Jon.)-and this
he quietly assumes in his
L i d .
de
under ‘John.
That he ignores it in the Comm.
on
Mk.
however, probably shows that it is a mere hypothetical
not a variant reading (cp
Apparently: therefore, we must adhere to
The second letter of
however, might represent not
hut
y,
as in
but
is no nearer
than
Besides,
y
a s a rule only when it is represented in
Arabic
g,
not by
but
there is in Ar. a word
the phonetic
of which in Hebrew would be
(not
agrees most closely with
in
meaning, and
a
would not as a
appear as
common word for ‘thunder’ in Hebrew and Aramaic
would not conflict with this phonetic principle
;
nearest word
in Arabic to Hebrew
Drusius
( A d voces
NT
prior
39
therefore and Glassius
Sacra,
revived the theory of Jerome that
should
be p
regarding the
as merely a Greek termination
a
final consonant dropped as
in Gehenna. No doubt
would be rather
for a man’s name’: but
Boanerges is not a
name
:
it is the name of two ’men.
Indeed Suidas gives the name a s
(as if the
There
is
no hint of such a name anywhere else in the N T
(cp, however,
Lk.
6
14
; but too much must not be made of
that. Glassius pointed out that Boanerges is professedly a name
shared by two men (more conveniently called ‘ t h e sons of
Zebedee ’), one of whom met a n early death (Acts 12).
Cp the strong language of Kautzsch, Gram. d.
dram. 9.
3
Adopted
Lightf.
ad
who instances
So
(practically) Glassius (d. 1656).
So
now Arnold Meyer,
7
See below
M T has
in
Ps.
and
in 643 (cp
in
21)
but
each case it has been questioned whether the text
correct. See Che.
There
is no reason to suppose
in the passage cited ,hy
Lightfoot
B.
mid.) the word means ‘thunder.
A corruption-of
into
(see
would be easy.
(Strabo, 764) for
38
593
Of course a gloss embodying a true tradition may have made
J. F . K.
Gurlitt had considered this word in his careful
So now also Arnold Meyer,
its way into a translation of a faulty
discussion in
(1829,
594
BOHAN
forerunner of leprosy, and that
in
the speeches
Job
of his malady, though poetically expressed, point (a
most scholars admit) to leprosy in its worst form. See
[The text is disfigured by two errors due to
One is the word ‘not’ before ‘upon them,’ repeated from v. 17
the other is
nations that go not up to
the Feast o
Booths,’ repeated from v.
has simply
595
BOIL
asses and camels).
596
\
T h e r e
is an
e a r l y testimony
to the
form Bochim i n
Mic.
if
( E V weep
not at
all’)
may be
e m e n d e d into
‘in
weep (Elhorst,
We.,
Now.,
omitting
the
intrusive
n o t ’
c p Che.
July
1898).
No
locality called
n e a r Micah’s native
town is k n o w n t o
us.
T h i s causes
no
difficulty.
T h e r e
h a v e been m a n y places where Baca-trees grew.
T h e alternative correction, I n
weep n o t ’ (Reland,
etc.
i s geographically inadmissible.
We
c a n n o t
well s u p p o s e
a
Philistine city
of
that name
(G.
A. Smith),
nor
d o e s Micah concern himself with
G
ILOH
).
BOHAN,
THE
STONE
OF
an
u n k n o w n point
on
t h e h o n n d a r y between J u d a h
and
Josh.
[A],
[L]).
B o h a n
is
called i n b o t h places t h e
son
(sometimes
sons
in 18
of
R
EUBEN
;
possibly,
however,
the
s t o n e o r r o c k w a s
a
well-known l a n d m a r k ,
t h u s designated
on
account of its supposed resemblance
to a
t h u m b
The Heb. word
(lit.
‘an
inflammation. f r o m
a
root f o u n d
BOIL,
BOIL
of Egypt.
.
i n
Syr. and
Ar., m e a n i n g
to
b e h o t
for
the
‘ b o i l ’ i n
the
sixth plague of E g y p t ,
and the
‘
botch of
i n
Dt.
is
applied a g a i n t o
the
‘ b o i l ’ of Hezekiah
and to
s o m e
diagnostic s i g n t h a t occurred i n o n e
or
m o r e of t h e
various contagious a n d mostly parasite skin-affections
included u n d e r t h e c o m m o n n a m e
of
(see
L
EPROSY
)
i n Lev.
13
variety called
burn-
i n g
(really
a
pleonasm) b e i n g clean,
and
t h e
variety of boil which g a v e place t o
a
o r bright
s p o t being unclean.
The
reference i s almost certainly
to
local o r limited s p o t s of inflammation, although it
is
h a r d l y possible t o give
a
m o d e r n n a m e
to
t h e m
or to
the same word is applied to a
disease ‘from the sole of the foot
to
the crown of the head’ ; but
probably it is so used without any precise nosological intention,
and merely to express a peculiarly loathsome affliction.
I n Dt. 28
35
and Job 2
It is
only t h e
disease specially associated with
E g y p t t h a t i s h e r e considered.
There occur four other references to diseases specially
Egyptian
not called
Two of
and
evil diseases of Egypt,’ and ‘all
diseases of Egypt’) are in admonitory passages written in
a
popular style.
In
the third
a plague is to
smite the Egyptians if they do not comd up to keep the
Feast of Booths. I t is the same
that is to
the other peoples who neglect this ordinance, and there
nothing, as the text now
to indicate that the writer is
Botch
is
a name commonly and with the definite article
distinctively, given to plague
Elizabethan and the Stuart
periods.
the Edinburgh treatise on
by
Gilbert
Skene (1568) it occurs in the form of ‘boiche.
I n the
Vision
Piers
the spelling is
and the meaning specific
or
generic(‘
and boches and brennyngagues’). The most
probable etymology
Fr.
meaning pocket, poke, pock
(cp also It.
a bubble), and applied in the plural
like the Spanish
bubas,
to epidemics of camp
ness, about
A.
D
.
1528,
which seem to have been typhus,
may have included bubonic cases, or perhaps cases of
plague. The translators of the AV seem to have meant
‘
botch’ the familiar bubo plague of
time. Milton
may use the word
its exact sense of bubo plague, where
says of the sixth
of Egypt
:
‘botches and blains must
his flesh emboss
12 180). With the disappearance o
plague from Britain after 1666, the word lost its
meaning.
Rather, ‘scar of the boil,’
(v. 23
cp RV).
[As
points out the expressions in
a n
borrowed from the
to Job. That section of the
appears to be based on a folk-tale; the designation which i
gives to Job’s malady is, therefore, general, not technical.
must remember, however, that
Lev. 13
the
is
linking of the ‘botch of Egypt.’ The reference in the
4
IO
), however, may possibly be to some actual epidemic
i
the history of the northern kingdom. T h e ‘pestilence in
of Egypt’ may well be equivalent to the
or
f
Dt.
which should mean some specific disease such
as
(KV
;
or plague-boils) of
I
with
it is coupled, certainly means. As the sixth plague is
pecially called one of ‘boils and blains,’ this also may be taken
stand for some definite
of Egypt.
We
m u s t
now
consider which of t h e boil diseases of
i s m e a n t b y
It
is s t a t e d
that
boil
accompanied b y blains broke forth
T h i s , if nosologically
would exclude b u b o plague,
as
b e i n g
i n cattle.
O n t h e other h a n d , a n t h r a x , which
night
be
correctly described a s
the
boil of cattle,
is
excluded,
as
in man
it
i s never
b u t only sporadic.
I f we might s u p p o s e
he
narrative,
or (as
t h e critics s a y ) t h e interwoven
of
t h e plagues
to
be
based
on
a
or
simpler narratives, which would
bear to be
reated
as
matter-of-fact description, w e might expect
hat
i n
the
original narrative
the
sixth p l a g u e
t h e p l a g u e proper ( b u b o plague), which i s
i n e d t o
man,
whilst
the
fifth stood for epizootic disease
n
general.
Certainly
the
special association of b u b o plague with
E g y p t
is
historically correct,
so
that
t h e word
b o t c h ’ i n
the
AV
i s
a
h a p p y choice ( c p
I
,
I
).
Besides t h e constructive evidence
as
to
the
disaster
is said t o have befallen Sennacherib’s a r m y
Pelusinm
(see
P
ESTILENCE
,
and,
on
t h e historical
I
),
there is, indeed,
no
extra-biblical
t o
p l a g u e i n E g y p t earlier t h a n a b o u t
300
and
even this testimony
has
been only indirectly
?reserved.
Oribasius, who was physician to the Emperor
cites a
from Rufus of Ephesus, a physician in
of
wherein he describes bubo plague with singular clear-
; it is indeed rare as
remarks to find in ancient
such positive d a r k s of the identity of pestilential type.
Rufus says that the disease was most common, and very mortal,
in Libya, Egypt,
Syiia. H e adds that
and
Poseidonios had enlarged upon pestilential buboes in writing
upon the pestilence which in their time ravaged
supposed to have been the same great epidemic, about
B
.c.,
which is mentioned by Livy, Julius Obsequens and Orosius.
Rufus further says that the pupils of one
make mention of these pestilential buboes. An
to the Vatican codex of Oribasius explains that
the above surname (‘Hunchback’) conies into the
of Hermippus.
This would fix his date prior to
280
B.C.
W h i l s t
the
botch
of
E g y p t cannot, u p o n independent
testimony, b e traced farther
t h a n
300
i t
highly improbable t h a t i t was first seen then.
A s
points out,
the
endemic inflnences favouring
plague i n E g y p t , depending u p o n
the
peculiar alterna-
tions of
wet
a n d
(caused
by
t h e periodic rise
and
fall of
the
Nile), were t h e r e l o n g before.
Pariset
etc., Paris, 1837) has argued
with great cogency that the elaborate pains taken in the best
period of ancient Egypt to preserve the soil from putrefying
matters
and other were inspired by the risk of
plague, and
have been in
high degree effective.
It is
clear however that
failure of the sanitary code would give
its
the pressure of population and the
climate or hydrology
constant, and that such failure may
reasonably be assumed at first as an occasional thing and
from the time that the ancient civilisation, with
(en-
forced by religious sanctions) a principal part of it, began to
decay under the influence
Persian, Greek, and Roman
con-
quests-as permanent.
b o t h
man
a n d beast.
without the negative particle, but ‘it has the second insertion.
A
critical edition should give
text thus
:
‘And if the
Egyptian people go not up nor come, upon
will the stroke
come with which Yahwk will strike.
.
.
.
The close of the
sentence may early have become effaced. The plague intended
was, at
rate, not that
of
the other nations. which was want
What is said
of the ‘murrain’ upon the horses, camels, asses, oxen and
sheep is expressed in a sense too comprehensive for any
epizootic malady
anthrax is a disease that oxen and sheep
suffer
from in common, but not
so far as is known,
The qualification (‘in general’)
is designed.
BOILS, PLAGUE
and
BOILING HOUSES
24,
RV.
BOILING PLACES
Ezek.
See C
OOKING
,
I.
BOLLED
swollen,'. see Skeat,
in flower'
:
Ex.
The Hebrew word occurs only once, but
evidently (see Ges.
Levy,
1 2 9 6 )
connected with
cup
and the
usage (Ges.
is in favour of its referring to
the flower-cup (perhaps as a closed bud), rather than
(as
supposed) to the formation of the seed-pods (see,
however, Tristram,
445).
BOLSTER
I
S.
267.
$4
( u ) .
BONDAGE
Ex.
1 1 4
Rom.
8
15,
and BONDMAN
Dt.
15
Rom.
6
16,
etc.
See
S
LAVERY
.
BONNET. For
Ex.
etc. (RV
'headtire'), see M
ITRE
,
I
(I);
for
Is.
320
(RV 'headtire'),
(RV 'tire'), see
T
URBAN
,
BOOK
Gen.51 etc.
Lk.
3 4
etc.,
etc.).
See W
RITING
,
3,
end;
H
ISTORICAL
L
IT
.,
3,
16
C
ANON
,
4 3
Rev.
35.
Ex.
and see
L
AW
AND
14.
BOOT
Is.
9 5
See S
HOES
,
3.
BOOTHS
Lev.
See T
ABERNACLE
,
P
AVILION
,
I
,
S
UCCOTH
, and cp
T
ENT
,
I,
and
C
ATTLE
,
I,
5.
BOOTY
etc.), Jer.
etc.
[Ti. WH],
[Ti.
Lk.
332).
RV has B
OAZ
.
[BL]
Vg.
Pesh.
the true
M T
reading (Gi.
in
I
where many printed
edd. have
(AV
RV
For
in Ex.
25
37
14
(I
om.),
in
P's
description of the 'table
see
I
O
;
in
I
K.
K.
16
tion of the lavbr bases
in
in
[A];
in
[A;
om.
BL];
'panels'), see
L
AVER
,
I
for
in Nu.
15
38
'corner' [of garment]), see
F R I N G E S ;
for
Mt.
9
14 36
RV,
see
F
RINGES
.
BORITH
4
Esd.
BORROW
Ex.
;
Ex.
See
L
AW
AND
J
USTICE
,
16,
T
RADE AND
C
OMMERCE
.
BOSCATH
2
K. 221
RV
BOSOR
[Ti.]),
AV, RV
BOSOR
and in v.
36
[A cp Is. 346
631,
a
town of
Galaaditis, taken by Judas the Maccabee in
164
B.C.
(I
Macc.
is identified by some with B
EZER
in Moab. Galaaditis, however, was the name of
the country
N.
of Moab (GASm.
HG
549,
n.
5),
and
the campaign in which Judas took Bosor was waged
in the latitude of the
If
be
the present
Bosor may be the present
in the
SE.
corner of the
which the
Arabian geographer
in
A.D.
(1621)
still calk
only Busr [sic]. The passage in which it is mentioned
is obscure;
Y
V.
are probably corrupt.
(Cp
We.
See S
POIL
.
Probably the same
as
BORDER.
See B
UKKI
,
I
.
That the sanitary precautions did utterly break down
under Mohammedan conquest, and that bubo plague
did become for fourteen centuries the standing pestilence
of Egypt, we know as matter of fact. We know also
that it was from Pelusium that the great' plague
of
Justinian's reign
A.
D.)
started-to overrun the
whole known world.
It is probable, further, that
the pestilence in Lower Egypt 'at the time
of
the
massacre of Christians in the episcopate' of Cyprian
included bubo plague. The valuable testimony pre-
served by Oribasins as to Egyptian, Libyan, and
Syrian pestilential buboes, as early as 300
has
been already cited. If beyond that date we are left to
conjecture, there is still a high probability that the plague
was known
in
'Egypt at a
earlier date.
This historical bubo plague of Egypt answers best
to
the sixth plague.
The boil breaks out in the
manner of the plague bubo, which may be
single or multiple. Its situations are the
armpits, groins, and the sides of the neck
and it consists of one (or
of
a
packet) of the natural
lymphatic or absorbent glands
of
those regions enlarged
to the size
of
a
hen's (or even a turkey's) egg, often
of
a
livid colour, hard, tense, painful, and attended with
inflammatory swelling of the skin for some distance
around it. Just as in Asiatic cholera and yellow fever
there are explosive attacks
so
suddenly fatal that the
distinctive symptoms have hardly time to develop,
so
there may be death from plague without the bubo
or
the botch.
Still, the latter is the distinctive mark
of
plagne, the same in all countries and in all periods
of
history.
Other signs of plague were livid
or
red
spots
of
the skin (called ' t h e tokens' in English epidemics), large car-
buncles (especially
on the fleshy parts), and blains
,
which were really smaller carbuncular formations or cores with
a
collection of fluid
their summits. Besides the pain of the
hard and tense buboes there were often delirium gentle or
raving, vomiting,
of muscles
gait and
speech), and many other symptoms a s if from a deadly poison.
About three days was perhaps the average duration of fatal
cases.
Usually half the attacks were mortal.
beginning
of the epidemic there would be but few recoveries, while
at the end of it as many
as
four out of
Recovery was most
five might recover.
likely when the buboes broke and ran sometimes the
suppuration, especially in the groin, would continue for
months, the
being able to go limping in the
streets.
In
the history of plague in London, which is
continuous from the Black Death of
1348
to
1666,
the
great epidemics came at intervals, and, in those for
which we have the statistics, carried
off
from a fifth to
a
sixth of the population, including but few of the richer
class.
With
a
population of nearly half
a
million in
1665,
the highest mortality from plague was
7165
in
the week
September. Sometimes for
a
suc-
cession
of
years' the deaths from plague kept at a high
annual level, especially during the summer and autumn
months.
During the whole three centuries of plague
in London there were few years which did not have
some deaths in the warmer months.
From what
is known of the mediaeval history of plague in Cairo
(from Arabic annals cp von
in
Phil.
Hist. Class. Bd. xcvi.), and of its modern history (cp
Pruner,
des
Orients),
it appears to have come,
a s in London, in terrific outbursts at intervals of years,
and to have been at a low level
or
apparently extinct in
the years between.
T h e plagoe season in Egypt; within the period
of
exact
records has begun as early as September and a s late as
has reached its height in March and April, and
has
ended with great regularity almost suddenly about
John's
day (24th
the height
the epidemic
with
the. lowest level of
Nile. There bas been no plague since
last
was that of
described hy
in Eothen.
c.
c.
BOILS, PLAGUE
See
597
BOSORA
n.
I
).
Herod the Great, in order to keep
the
in his power (Jos.
Ant.
xvii.
fortified
a
village called Bathyra, and this may have been the
BOSORA
I
Ch.
I
Macc.
;
Jos.
in Gilead, held by some to be the Bozrah in Moab
spoken of in Jer. 4824, must have lain farther N. (see
ii.
).
Hence many (Ewald PEF Map etc.)
more plausibly take it to have been Bostra, the capital
of
the Roman province of Arabia, modern
m.
SE.
of Edrei (cp Porter,
Merrill,
E.
Jordan,
53,
58
;
Rey,
Dans
Atlas; Buhl,
same as Bosor (cp GASm.
618).
G.
A.
S.
See, however, Bathyra under
G.
A.
S.
BOSS
text doubtful),
See
S
HIELD
.
BOTCH
A V ;
RV
B
OIL
BOTTLE.
The statement that ‘what we call
bottles were unknown to the Hebrews’ (Riehm,
art.
needs qualification.
It has
long been known that the Egyptians manufactured
glass from an early period.
The Phcenicians and the
Assyrians were well acquainted with glass (see the
relative volumes of
and Chipiez,
Hist. de
etc.
),
that manufactured by the former being of special
repute in antiquity (see G
LASS
).
It is impossible,
therefore, that among the imports from
glass bottles should have had no place.
They must
always, however, have been
a
luxury of the rich (cp Job
28
[RV]).
The bottles’ of Scripture fall into two ‘very different
classes :
(I)
leather skins for holding and carrying water,
wine, and other liquids, and
earthenware jars for
the same and other purposes.
For the Hebrews in the nomadic stage of civilisation,
as for the Bedouin of the present day, the skins of
beasts of their flocks supplied the readiest
and most efficient means of storing and
transporting the necessary supply of water
in the camp and on the march.
This method was
found so simple and so satisfactory that it was retained
in a more settled state of society, and, indeed, has
prevailed throughout the East until the present day.
The writers
of
classical antiquity, from Homer down-
wards, contain many references to this use of the skins
of domestic animals.
The skins used by the Hebrews
for this purpose, as in modern Syria and Arabia, were
chiefly skins of the goat and of the sheep.
When
a
smaller size than ordinary was required, the skin of
a
lamb or of
a
kid sufficed for larger quantities there
was the skin of the
and, perhaps, of the camel
(Herod.
39).
Among the Hebrews the pig-skin was, of
course, excluded.
T h e method of preparation varied in complexity and
efficiency according a s the peasant prepared his own skins (cp
Doughty,
Des.
1227) or employed a professional tanner.
T h e head and the lower part of the legs are cut off (such is the
method a t the present day), and the animal is skinned from the
neck downwards, somewhat as one removes a tight-fitting glove
care being taken that no incision is made in the skin of
carcase. When the tanning process is completed (cp Tristram
92,
Robinson,
2
all
other apertures
previously been closed, the neck is fitted with a leather thong,
by means of which the
skin is opened and closed (cp
L
EATHER
).
In
the
OT
we find such skin bottles designated by
a
variety of names.
Such are
( a )
the water-skin
(probably of a kid) which Abraham put upon
shoulder
21
The Bedouin name is
(Doughty,
index).
I n
(RV ‘heat’)’ and in
Hab.
(RV
mg. ‘fury’), the R V more
finds
another word of similar
(6)
like the
of the modern Bedouin, is the milk-skin of
the nomad Jael (Judg. 4 19 cp Doughty
passim). I t
According to Lane
(Mod.
Eg.) an ox-hide holds three
or
§
times a s much as a goat-skin
599
BOX TREE
lso
occurs frequently as a wine-skin-Josh. 9 4
I
S.
16
etc.
a water-skin it is used metaphorically in Ps.
(‘put my
ears into thy bottle’), where there is no reference to the much
ater tear-bottles,’ so called, and where the
text
is doubted
see
T h e exact sense of Ps.11983, where the poet likens
himself to a ‘bottle
“wine-skin”) in the smoke,’ is
(see the comm.
(c)
and
frequently of
ordinary wine-skin
I
S.
3,
etc.
( d )
has the same signification in
32
we read of ‘new bottles
. . .
ready to burst.
Budde
’96)
renders ‘skins with new (wine),’ which gives us an
to
the familiar passage in the N T (Mt. 9
Neither do men
new wine into old wine-
the ,RV has rightly discarded the
rendering
In
we have the curious
a
leathern bottle’ of wine.
Vessels of earthenware also are mentioned in the O T
receptacles for wine.
Such was ( a ) the
Jer.
I
IO
(
made by the
potter, perhaps with
a
narrow neck
which caused a gurgling sound (Ar.
when the jar was being emptied.
It was
used to hold honey,
I
K.
[AL
B]
EV C
RUSE
(6)
The name
was also
to wine-jars or
of earthenware, as is
from Is.
30
(EV [potters’] vessel
‘bottle
potters’), and Lam.
(EV ‘pitcher’). In both
passages
has
W e have no indication
the size or even of the shape of the earthen
‘see
POTTERY
also C
RUSE
).
A.
R. S. K.
BOW
Gen.
Bowstrings
21
RV.
See W
EAPONS
.
be dealt with in the articles mentioned below.
BOWL.
I
.
Ex.
the bowl or reservoir of a lamp, Zech.
4
;
see
C
ANDLESTICK
,
Used in a simile in Eccles.
126
The globe-shaped bowls or capitals of the
twin pillars of
JACHIN A N D
[as
see
F
RING
E
S
]
AV ‘pommels,’
See
P
ILL
A
R
.
The various Hebrew and Greek words will
See
C
UP
,
M
EALS
,
3.
I
Ch. 28
etc., RV.
Ex. 273.
5 .
[BAFL], used in temple
ritual especially upon the table of shew-bread, Ex. 25
37
Nu.
4 7
52
(where AV ‘cups
See
See
3.
6.
haph,
I
K.
7
50
see
4.
7.
a larger bowl or
probably of wood,
Jud.
5
38
[BAL] in 5
[AL]); cp
8.
Bel, 33, a vessel for holding food (in Acts 27
30 32,
a
boat).
In
OT
it represents
see
3 ;
M
EALS
,
and cp generally
C
UP
, G
OBLET
,
P
OTTERY
.
BOX,
synonymous in AV with jar
or
cruise, not
a
case of wood or
I
.
K.
9
I
3
; RV and in
I
S.
10
I
,
AV vial
’
For the ‘alabaster box’
of Mk.
etc.
AV (RV
cruse’) see
C
RUSE
,
4,
A
LABASTER
.
3.
I n
of Jn. 126’13 29, where E V has B
AG
; ‘box’ is
suggested as an alternative rendering of
which
originally and etymologically signified a case in which the mouth-
pieces
of wind instruments were kept.
Later it
assumed a more general significance and denoted any similarly
shaped
or case.
employs it to indicate the chest
set up
by
Josiah in the Temple
Ch.
whilst
Josephususes it
‘coffer
I
S.
E V
;
see
C
OFFER
),
or small chest, in which the Philistine princes deposited
golden mice. I n the Mishna it is used to signify a case for
books
in Lexx.) and even a coffin (cp the parallel use
of
in the latter sense also in
(Gen.
5026,
of
Joseph’s
see C
OFFIN
). Thus it would appear
that the preferable rendering in
is that of
9.
Rev. 58 157, etc.
‘vial’).
Shape and material are both uncertain.
A.
R. S. K.
BOX TREE, BOX,
cypress
once
276;
RV
Boxwood
For this
EV
employs ‘chest.’
boo
Document Outline
- Title
- Preface
- Abbreviations, symbols, and Biblioraphical Notes
- Practical Hints to the Reader
- Aalar - Achsah
- Acts of the Apostles
- Acua - Ain
- Airus - Amphipolis
- Amplias - Apocalypse
- Apocalyptic Literature
- Apocrypha - Ariel
- Arimathaea - Asshurim
- Assideans - Azzur
- Baal - Baca
- Bacchides - Bastard
- Bat - Beth-Basi
- Beth-Birie -Box Tree
- Bozez - Bush
- Bushel - Canon
- Canopy - Chariot
- Charity, Feasts of - Chronology
- Chronology - Circumcision
- Cis - Conduits
- Coney - Covenant
- Coverlet - Cyrus
- Dabarah - David
- David, City of - Dial and Sun-Dial
- Diamond - Dysentary