Encyclopaedia Biblica/Machir-Mani

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
Encyclopaedia Biblica
Thomas Kelly Cheyne and John Sutherland Black
see Encyclopaedia Biblica for other articles, typographic issues, links to PDF copies, and public domain status



(T3D; M<\x[e]iP [BADFL]).

i. Son of Manasseh, son of Joseph (Gen. 50:23, E). The name, however, is properly ethnographic. Either the gens which bore this name was the most important of the gentes of Manasseh this is expressed by representing Machir as Manasseh s firstborn (Josh. 17:1, 1 Ch. 7:14); or else the whole of Manasseh was one great gens of Machir this is symbolised by the statement that Machir was the only son of Manasseh (Nu. 26:29+ ; cp Gen. 50:23). The latter view is extremely plausible. In Gen. 50:23 E tells us that Joseph saw Ephraim s children of the third generation : the children also of Machir, the son of Manasseh, were born upon Joseph s knees. 1 Clearly Ephraim and Machir are put upon the same footing. Similarly in the Song of Deborah (Judg. 5:14) we find Ephraim and Machir mentioned instead of Ephraim and Manasseh. The tradition is that Machir (i.e. the gens of Machir) went from the W. to the E. side of Jordan and conquered Gilead (Nu. 32:39 JE) ; this is even placed in the time of Moses (cp Nu. 32;40 Dt. 3:15, late passages). Other writers add Bashan (Josh. 13:31, P ; 17:1b, R ; a gloss in the former passage carefully says, 'half Gilead' ). It is also stated that Gilead was the son of Machir (Nu. 27:1, P ; 1 Ch. 2:21 ; cp Josh. 17:1b, R, where Machir is ly^an 3N, 'father of the Gilead', i.e. , the land of Gilead). This of course simply means that Gilead was occupied by Machirite (Manassite) clans. Cp Kuenen, 7/4. 7 ll(i877) pp. 483^, and notes in Oxf. Hex. vol. ii.

Was the conquest of Gilead really so ancient as to be loosely referred to the time of Moses? Judg. 5:14 is opposed to this ; Machir is there equivalent to (western) Manasseh. It is possible that we may assign the conquest of N. Gilead to the clan of Abiezer, whose representative in legend is GIDEON \q.v. ].

This hero is represented in Judg. 8:5-16 as the conqueror of Succoth ; now Succoth is explained elsewhere (SUCCOTH) as a corruption of Salecah or Salhad, the frontier-city of Bashan towards the E. Salecah occurs, the present writer believes, under various disguises in the genealogies of Chronicles (which contain valuable early material, though often in a corrupted form). Two of its most noteworthy corruptions are HAMMO LECHETH [?.z>.] and ZELOPHEHAD {q.v.\ ; now Hammolecheth (Salecah) is given in 1 Ch. 7:18 as the sister of Gilead, and Zelophehad in v. 15 as the second son of Manasseh. Abiezer (the eponym of Gideon's clan) is in the same context (v. 18) called a son of Hammolecheth. It is possible that the conquest of N. Gilead by the Machirites was marked by a desperate fight for Salecah, and in this connection it may be remarked that in 1 Ch. 7:14 Machir the father of Gilead is said to have been the son of Manasseh by his concubine the Aramitess (RV). Gilead should here, as in some other passages, be Salhad (= Salecah) : the reference to the concubine is a sym bolic indication of the subordination of the Aramaean element in the population of NE. Gilead to the Israelitish. In Nu. 26:29 (P) we read of the family of the Machirites ( V3D \ C ia X e P t ) - See further GILEAD, MANASSEH.

As to the name Machir. Has it some connection, as has been suggested (EPHRAIM, 1), with the story of Joseph ? Rather it is one of the many corruptions and abbreviations of Jerahmeel ; the Machirites may have been partly of Jerahmeelite origin. Now perhaps we can understand why the hero who conquered Succoth (Judg. 8) is called not only Gideon, but also Jerubbaal ; for Jerubbaal too is very possibly an ancient corruption of Jerahmeel. Manasseh may perhaps be a title of the god once worshipped in the Machirite territory W. of Jordan. Cp GAD, and see MANASSEH, 4.

2. Son of Ammiel, residing at Lo-debar, commonly supposed to be a place on the E. of the Jordan (see LO-DEBAR), 2 S. 9:4-5, 17:27. It has been inferred from these two passages that Machir was a wealthy landowner, who remained faithful to the house of Saul, and gave a refuge to Meribbaal or Mephibosheth, though at a later time he was ostentatiously loyal to David, whose army he supplied with ample supplies at Maha- naim, during the rebellion of Absalom. There is reason, however, to suspect that the text of both passages has been so seriously corrupted that no reliance can be placed on these inferences. See SAUL, 6, and cp MAHANAIM, MEPHIBOSHETH. T. K. c.

1 On the idiom, see Stade, ZA TW6 (1886) 1467.


(1 Macc. 9:73). RV MICHMASH, q.v.


Can^D? a corruption either of 1313 \??P (Che.) or of 133130, 'possession of Nebo' [Ass. namkur= 'possession' ] ; see G. B. Gray, Exp. T, Feb. 1899, p. 232/1 ; but cp NEBO), one of the b ne BANI in list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5 end), EzralCUof. MT is practically supported by /jLaxa-Svajlou 1 [B], ax- [N], /maxvadaa. [A]; but a read ing Nadab (an:) is suggested by @ L (KO.I vadajBov [Lag.], cp K. va5a.fj.ov [19], K. vadafiov [93, io8]). 2 || i Esd. 934 reads /cat K TWV viuv efapa (OzoRA, RV EZORA) ffefffis K. T. X. [BA] 3 with which cp the Com- plut. in Ezra I.e. KO.I /uax^aSa /ecu ffapova nal ffffffi whence it appears to be not improbable that <S BA read ertp nt? (for 31330) 33O ; see SHARAI. [ Barnabas may ultimately come from Bar-nadabu (Che. ).]


(r6s3En, the Machpelah ), a piece of land (mB ) and a cave near Hebron (Gen. 2891719 25 9 49 30 50 13, all P).

(TO 8i7rAoui>), Vg. (dnflex), Tg. Onk., and ps.-Jon. derive from Vs3 'double', the suggestion being that this, like other sepulchral caverns, had two chambers. This is plausible ; but in 28:17 (cp 19) the field of Ephron is 'in Machpelah'. Mach pelah is nowhere else referred to, and P s date is late. Still, P had access to older writings, and we have no reason at all to doubt that the name 'the Machpelah' (putting aside the ques tion as to the reading) belonged properly to the whole district in which the property including the cave lay.

Few points of biblical geography are more interesting and more difficult than that connected with Machpelah. The statements in Genesis - i.e. , those of P - can only be estimated in connection with the statements of J and E respecting the death and burial of the three patriarchs.

i. We have first to assume the general correctness of the geography of the lives of the patriarchs as given in the traditional text. According to P (Gen. 23:19, 25:9, 50:13) Abraham, Sarah, and Jacob were buried 'in the cave of the field of Machpelah', and it is implied in 35:29 that Isaac also was buried there. Turning to JE, we notice that the account of the death and burial of Abraham and Isaac has been lost. But we may assume that J placed Abraham's tomb at Hebron, where he considered the patriarch to have resided ; Isaac's grave, however, may possibly have been put farther south, viz., at BEER-LAHAI-ROI [q.v.]. On the death of Jacob J appears at first sight to be inconsistent. In 47:30 Jacob directs Joseph to bury him where his fathers were buried, but 50:5 (J) points to a tomb specially his own, for Jacob says that he had digged, or less prob ably bought, 4 one for himself in Canaan. It must be admitted, however, 6 that 47:30 (J) has been manipulated by R to make it accord with P (see We. CH 62 ; Oxf. Hex.2n}. In Gen. 50:11 J places the burial of Jacob at Abel-Mizraim or rather Abel-mizrim, a place in the far SW. of Canaan (see ABEL-MIZRAIM). Whether E's account agreed with that of J must be left uncer tain. This narrator (unless, indeed, we suppose the original document to have had a S. Palestinian geo graphical setting) must be held to have placed Rachel s death and burial near Beeroth (35:16, 35:19? crit. emend.; see RACHEL), and Dinah s death and burial near Bethel. He also mentions (33:19-20) Jacob's purchase of a piece of ground from the Shechemites. All this seems adverse to the choice of such a remote spot for Jacob s burial as Abel-mizrim. On the other hand, the burial of Rachel had probably the same location in J as in E, yet J places the funeral of Jacob in that very remote spot. Possibly more than one place boasted of being the guardian of the tomb of Jacob, 1 and from the title of the altar (or rather masseba) at Shechem in Gen. 33:20 (see EL- ELOHE-ISRAEL) we may perhaps assume that the tomb at Shechem (which must surely have existed, perhaps near the sacred tree, Gen. 35:4, Josh. 24:26, both E) was known originally as Israel's grave, and that at Abel- mizrim as Jacob's grave. A confusion of names would, of course, arise very early. Jacob s well (near Shechem) is no doubt late in its attestation ; but the name in the Karnak list of Thotmes III., usually inter preted Jacob-el, may conceivably (though not at all probably) be explained Jacob-beer i.e. Jacob-well ? (so apparently C. Niebuhr). We have now done our best to make the traditional geography intelligible, but must confess that all is not as satisfactory as we could wish.

1 Cp MACHBANAI, or Nebo in T. 43.

2 19, 93, and 108 in Holmes and Parsons exhibit Lucian ; cp Ceriani, Lag., and see Field, Hex. 87.

3 l- retains cal NaSa/3ou as in Ezra.

4 JVnS admits of either rendering (Staerk) ; but m3, to pur chase, is rare, and if Jacob had referred to the legality of his acquisition of a tomb, he would have said from whom he had purchased it (cp 50 13 P). See Is. 22 16.

6 Driver s analysis of Gen. 47 27-31 does not recognise this. Consequently he can represent Gen. 47 29-31 as parallel in JE to 49 29-32 in P (Hastings, DB 2 532 a).

2. At this point it is needful to examine the accuracy of the text. It is maintained elsewhere (see REHOBOTH, and cp Crit. Bib.) that Hebron and Kirjath-arba are probably in some passages corruptions of Rehoboth and Kirjath- arbim (city of the Arabians) respectively, and that Rehoboth has a claim to some part of the fame appropriated by Hebron. Also (see ISAAC) that Beer-lahai-roi is a corruption of Beer-jerahmeel, and (see SHECHEM) that Hamor, Shechem's father (Gen. 33:19) is a corruption of Cushan-jerahmeel. Dinah's burial-place too was very possibly near the southern Bethel," 2 close to Halusah or Ziklag (see SHECHEM). The traditions of the sepulture of the patriarchs in the original tradition were, therefore, probably not so very different from that given by P, except that P does not place the tombs of the ancestors sufficiently far south. It was in Jerahmeelite land that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (as dis tinguished from Israel?) both lived and died.

We now come back to the name ham-machpelah (n?S3Dn)- It is itself a distortion of Jerahmeel (^KCITr - The place near which the cave lay was Cushan-jerahmeel i.e., one of the chief cities of the Jerahmeelite Negeb (see NEGEH), most probably Halusah (Ziklag). Mamre, to the E. of which ( 32?) lay he 'field' and the 'cave', is nothing less than this same Cushan- jerahmeel (, > OCC = ?N!3n~r). If we take this view in connection with other similar rectifications of ancient but not primitive tradition, it will readily be seen how plausible, nay, how satis- factory it is. If Hebron loses some of its delightful associations, the Jerahmeelite cities of Rehoboth and Halusnh are the gainers, and readers of the lamented E. H. Palmer s Desert of the Exodus will quickly adapt themselves to the truer theory.

3. The traditional 'Machpelah has a claim to be considered which is somewhat in excess of our space.

'The cave of Machpelah is concealed, beyond all reasonable doubt, by the mosque at Hebron', are the words of Dean Stanley. The same opinion has been often expressed, and in deference to the antiquity of the tradition, we are bound to give some details from the accounts of early pilgrims, beginning with Josephus, who says (BJ iv. 9:7, 532) that the monuments of Abram and his, sons are still shown at Hebron in the fairest marble.

The Bordeaux Pilgrim (333 A.D.) tells of a square inentoria of marvellously beautiful masonry, in which were placed the three patriarchs and their wives. Arculf (700 A.D.) says that each of the tombs is covered with a single stone worked somewhat in the form of a church, and of a light colour for those of three patriarchs which are together.

The most circumstantial account of the cave, however, is that of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela (1163 A.D.). He says that for a fee a Jewish visitor is allowed by the Gentiles to enter the cave. He descends into a first cave which is empty, traverses a second in the same state, and at last reaches a third which contains six sepulchres those of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and of Sarah, Rebekah, Leah, one opposite the other. All these sepulchres bear inscriptions. It is probable enough that R. Benjamin was one of the last who, in the period of the Christian rule, obtained admission into the interior. For a full account of this great mosque (the Haram) and of everything about the caves except the caves themselves, see PEFMetn. 3:303, etc., and for the statements of the various travellers and other authorities, the Pal. Pilgrim Text Society's publications, and Palestine under the Moslems. See also Sir C. Warren s article, Machpelah, in Hastings DB 2:197-202.

Cp W. Staerk, Stitdien zur Religions- und Sfirachgesch. des y4 7*164-73; C. Bruston, La mort et la sepulture de Jacob, ZA Tll 7 202 Jf. T. K- c .

1 Cp C. Niebuhr, Gesck. 1 161.

2 For [7N ln 37 nnnp the original document used by E may have had n l3fT13-


(MAKPCON [AV]), surname of one of the Ptolemies, 2 Macc. 10:12. See PTOLEMY.


(HO), the third son of Japheth (Gen. 102, AA&A&I [ADL], M&AAI [E]=iCh. Is, M&A.MM [B], MAA&i [AL]). See GEOGRAPHY, 19 ; ELAM ; PERSIA.

The same Hebrew word is rendered by EV (a) Medes (MVjSoi) in 2 K. 176 18 ii Is. 13 17 Jer. 2625 (np<ro.x [BKAQJ, MTJSwi- [Q m e-]) Ezra 6 2 and elsewhere, (6) the Mede ( "ISrt) in Dan. 11 i, and (c) Media in Is. 21 2 (oi Ile pcrcu) Dan. 8ao (MTJfiot) Esth. 1 3 10 2 (M^oi). In Is. 21 2 and Jer. 25 25, how ever, there is reason to think that the original reading was different. In the case of Jer. I.e. this is virtually certain. See SHESHACH, Crit. Bib.


(RV EMADABUN, HAAAA&BOYN [BA]), and ELIADUN (RV ILIADUN ; [e]iAiAAoyN [BA], eA. [L]), two names of Levites, i Esd. 658 (|| Ezra 89).

Probably Jesus (in the same verse) and Madiabun are doublets to Joda and Eliadun. Eliadun (BAL) seems to represent Henadad (read ENADOUN = pjn?)> and rj^aSaftovv perhaps arose from the form itava&af} (see HENADAD). LXX{L}'s i Ko.i-rtfa.SaS (contrast LXX{L} in || Ezra) must be a later correction derived from the MT. S. A. C.


(Acts 7:29), RV MmiAN (q.v.).



i. A remote city of Judah towards Edom, mentioned with Ziklag and Sansannah Josh. 15 3 i, P (MA\AP6IM [B], BeAeBHNA [A], M&p<\peiM [L]). The name, however, is corrupt (cp MADMEN). In Josh. 19:5 its place is taken by Beth-marcaboth ; Madmannah (from mnc) must be a corruption of Marcaboth, which is itself certainly a distortion of Rehoboth. See MARCABOTH. That Eusebius and Jerome connect the name Medebena or Medemana with a village near Gaza called Menoeis (OS 27924 139 10) is no objection to this view. Cp MEKONAH.

2. The eponym of the city Madmannah, i Ch. 249, see RV (fiapfii)i>a [li], fiaSfi. [A], fxe/x. [L]). T. K. C.


(j?D"l??), a supposed Moabite city, Jer. 48:2 (rr&YCIN [BNAQ] ; cpPesh. Vg.). The name ( dung- heap ; cp Del. lob 62 f.) is most improbable, and since (i) the context is suggested by Is. 15*, and (2) there is a very similar corruption in Is. log (see DIMON), we can safely for Madmen read O ISJ, NIMRIM (q. v. ), which in Is. 15s/. occurs just after HORONAIM.

T. K. C.


(HJOIP; MA^eBHNA [BNAQ]), a supposed village of Benjamin, mentioned with Gebim, Is. 1031. No trace of the locality is left (Di. -Kittel). Probably the name is corrupt (cp MADMEN), and we should read rusn, Rimmonah ; for a parallel see DIM- NAH. This Rimmonah was not the rock Rimmon of Judg. 2045, but nearer to Jerusalem. See Che. Geographical Gains, etc., Expos., Sept. 1899, and cp GEBIM. T. K. c.



1. Terms.[edit]

The Hebrew root yyo, saga, which the mad of the RV most commonly represents is in use almost a synonym of K33nn to prophesy (Jer. 29:26) and denotes either the raving of the madman (1 S. 21:14-15. [15-16] = x3jn 18:10) or the prophetic ecstasy (Hos. 9:7). The root-meaning is clear from Ass. sigu 'to be in vehement inward excitement', Del. Hll- B 639. Arabic saju'a means to be strong, vigorous ; either the root is the same as y^g, but has developed a secondary meaning on Arabic soil (cp Del. Pro!. 9), or it has nothing to do with yyy in which case asja'u, 'mad', meusja "", 'utterly mad', will be loan-words from the Hebrew. This would account for the anomalous correspondence of y and Arab. s. Cp Barth, F.tyni. Stud. 47.

Another root also rendered by mad in RV (Is. 44:25, Jer. 25:16) is 7?n halai, the root meaning of which (cp Ar., Ass.) is 'to cry aloud'. The nouns fi77iri, or ni77in are synonyms of JTPpD, folly (see FOOL). The root-meaning of nS^nD (Prov. 26:18) is not clear. [The final fl is dittographed ; read V?innp [Frankenb., Toy], '(As) a madman'. ]

Greek words rendered madness in the RV are navia (Acts 26:24), wapatypovia. (2 Pet. 2:16), ai oia (Lk. 6:11; mg. foolishness ).

2. OT references.[edit]

In spite of the fact that madness (Kggd dn} is one of the plagues with which Israel is threatened in the event of disobedience to the law (Dt. 28:28), actual cases of insanity are rare in the OT. One might be inclined to regard the case of Saul as the most historical, occurring as it does in the course of a narrative which no one can deny to contain a kernel of fact ; yet even here we cannot be sure, without strict investigation, that the notices of Saul s frenzy do not belong to the less historical stratum (see SAUL, 4). This does not, however, involve our rejection of these notices as material for an article on Madness in OT and NT. As the narrator represents, the successes of David awakened Saul s jealousy, and at last the turbulent ferment of passion broke forth into wild frenzy . . . With the tenacity peculiar to one haunted by an illusion, he devotes himself henceforth almost exclusively to his purpose of avenging himself on his supposed mortal enemy and persecutor (Kittel, Hist. 2:121). Saul's reported breach with Samuel also, according to the narrator, contributed to unhinge the mind of Saul ; he feels himselt forsaken by God . . . sees spectres everywhere which are hatching mischief against him (Gesch. 2:105). Looking at the notices of his state from a non-critical point of view, we may perhaps say that the malady of Saul was an idiopathic insanity, exhibiting the usual mental symptoms of melancholia (i S. 28:20) and delusion (20:30), with homi cidal and suicidal mania (18:11, 20:33, 31:5).

3. Case of Nebuchadrezzar.[edit]

A second instance of insanity in the OT, the 'lycanthropy' 1 (or 'boanthropy' ) of Nebuchadrezzar (Dan. 4 cp Verg. Ecl. 6:48-49) is, in spite of the testimony of Abydenus (ap. Eus. Prcep. Ev. 9:41), most probably unhistorical.

The passage is translated in full by Bevan (Daniel, 87-88) ; the part which bears most closely on the question of Nebuchadrezzar s madness is as follows :

'or else, would that he might betake himself to some other place, and might be driven through the desert, where is no city nor track of men, where wild beasts seek their food and birds fly hither and thither, would that among rocks and mountain cliffs he might wander alone !'

With this we have to compare Dan. 4:33.

'The same hour was the thing fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar : and he was driven from men, and did eat grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hair was grown like eagles (feathers), and his nails like birds (claws)'.

Prince (Daniel, 1899, pp. 32-35) is of opinion that the great king may have been afflicted by a form of insanity which incapacitated him from governing, and necessitated the succession of his son.

Bevan (Daniel, 1892, p. 89) can only say that prob ably 'some Babylonian legend on the subject of Nebuchadnezzar had, perhaps in a very distorted form, reached the ears of the author of Daniel'. With this, Driver (Daniel, 1900, pp. 59 f.} appears to agree. See also Schrader, Die Sage vom Wahnsinn Nebukad- nezars, /.Pr? [1881], pp. 618+ {2}

1 A form of disease in which the sufferer, imagining himself to be a wild beast, roamed about the forests. A somewhat milder form of the disease is not unknown to alienists.

2 [Nebuchadrezzar s madness, however, is simply the product of misunderstanding, if the words of Dan. 4:25 are borrowed from a Babylonian song in which eating grass was a symbolic expres sion for living in misery (so Winckler, OLZ, 1898, p. 71; AOF12H, n. 2 ; cp Gunkel, Gen. 17).]

4. Beliefs respecting origin of madness.[edit]

Madness is conceived of in the OT as a kindred phenomenon to the prophetic furor ; see PROPHECY. A spirit from Yahwe is in both cases the agency at work (cp. 1 S. 16:14 with 1 K. 22:19+), and, whilst some of the contemptuous pity which the lunatic could not but evoke attaches at times to the prophet (2 K. 9:11), the superstitious awe with which the prophet was regarded serves to clothe the other also and renders his person sacrosanct. In the East the madman is still regarded as something sacred. It is possibly the sacred character of the madman which accounts for the refusal of ACHISH (q.v. ) to interfere with David when he feigned madness (1 S. 21:12+ [13+]; cp Ewald, GV1 3:116). It would seem too that, according to the narratives, Saul forfeited the allegiance of neither court (16:15+) nor people (26:1, 28:4 ; but cp 22:17 ).

The madmen of the NT are not kings but common folk, and their malady is attributed not to a spirit sent from God (cp SAUL), but to inferior deities or demons entering into them a conception of madness, as of disease generally, which the Jews brought back with them from Babylon (see DEMONS, 11). The influence of music is no longer invoked to calm and soothe ( 1 S. 16:16), nor is the lunatic s person sacred; he wanders about at large, or, if dangerous, is bound in chains (Lk. 8:29). It is hard to say how many of the 8a.ifj.ovi- fo/uevoi healed by Jesus may be reckoned as insane ; see further DEMONS, 8/, LUNATIC. In Jn. 10:20 we have madness expressly connected with demoniacal possession. A. C. P.


(P"ID), a royal city of the Canaanites, perhaps on the W. of the Waters of Merom. Josh. 11:1 (fj.appuv [BF], fjLaduv [AL]) ; 12 19 ([\a]fj.opuv [L] ; for BF see SHIMRON).

But is the text right ? Following <E& (cp Eus. OSP) 278 7, /xapioju) we might read ono or jl"O ( see MEROM). This seems better than identifying with Aladin near Hattln, W. of Tiberias (PEFAf 1 365). Further study is needed. See SHIMRON.


(MAHAoc [A]), i Esd. 9 26 = Ezral02 S , MIJAMIN 2.


(/v\&r&AAN) is the reading in Mt. 15:39 of NBD Ti. WH, RV, etc. , for the M&rA&A& MAGDALA [^.f.], of TR and AV. Accepted by the most author ities, the names cannot either of them be identified with any site (but see GALILEE [SEA OF], 5). The corre sponding passage Mk. 8:10 has DALMANUTHA [q.v.~\, which is equally uncertain. Eusebius (Otiom. ed. Lag.) spells it blayedav and identifies it with the Mayedavri of his time in the neighbourhood of Gerasa, that is, on the E. shore of the lake (cp Lightfoot, Op. Post. 70 6, on the site of Magdala). But Jesus is said to have embarked from it for the other (i.e., eastern) side (et j TO irepav, Mk. 8:13). Ewald (Hist. ET 6348) suggests Megiddo (^lay^du in Jos. Ant. viii. 6 1) ; so too Volkmar ; Henderson (Pal., 114) says there is nothing unlikely in the identification, as our Lord may have passed into the plain of Beisan. But whilst this in itself is improbable, on Conder s theory that Megiddo was near Beisan, it becomes almost im possible if we adopt the usual and best supported theory which places MEGIDDO [</.z>.] at Lejjun in the plain of Esdraelon. G. A. S.


(E"2?O ; M&KBeiC [L]), a name in one of the post-exilic lists ; the b'ne Magbish returned with Zerubbabel to the number of 156 ; Ezra 2:30 (MAfeBooC [B], -Bic [A]) = i Esd. 521, NEPHIS, RV NIPHIS (Wi^eis [B], <f>ii>eis [A]). The name is absent from [| Neh. 7- Cp MAGPIASH, which, as Meyer (Eni. 156) sees, represents the same name. Almost certainly that name is D D B] [c trs:?], NEPHISIM (q-v. ). The next name in Ezra (I.e. ) is iriN D 1 ? ]?. which is a corruption of See also MESHULLAM. T. K. c.


(MAHA^A), the reading of TR in Mt. 15:39 where NBD Ti. WH have MAfAAAN. MAGADAN [q.v.]. Whilst Magadan is the best supported reading and Magdala is supposed to be a substitution due to the ignorance of later scribes with regard to Magadan, it ought to be pointed out that Iilaya5ai> is a possible corruption of an original Magdala. However that may be, the existence of a Galilean Magdala is rendered certain both by the name of Mary Magdalene (cp MARY, 26), and by the testimony of Jewish writers. The Talm. Jerus. places a Magdala, xSnJS, within a sabbath day s journey of Tiberias ( EriibinSi}, and indeed within the same distance of the hot baths of Hamata, to the S. of Tiberias (Id. 284) ; and the same things which some Talmudic writers assign to Magdala others assign to a Migdal Sebo ayya, N jnx ^"UB. Dyers- Tower, (cp Midrash, Shir ha-shirim 1 18 with Talm. Jerus. Pesdhim 4 i ; and Midrash Ekhah 3 3 with Talm. Jerus. Ma User Shcnibz) which accordingly Neubauer identifies as a part of Magdala ( Gtogr. Talm. 218). The Babylonian Talmud speaks of a N JU ViJD, Migdal Nunya or Fish-Tower, one mile from Tiberias (Pgsahim 46 b}. [Cp GALILEE (SEA), 5, where it is suggested that Magadan, Magdala, and Dalmanutha are all corruptions of this compound name Migdal Nunya. ED.]

Magdala was a place of some wealth (Talm. Jer. Ta'anith 48) and is said to have been destroyed pan rmn, because of licentiousness (Midrash Ekhdhlz). The name does not occur in other early writers, nor in Josephus (for the reading McrySaXa in Vita 24 on which some older scholars depend for their location of Magdala on the E. of the Lake should be Ta/iaXa) ; nor even in Eusebius and Jerome.

Willibald (about 722) passed from Tiberias round the sea, and by the village of Magdalum to the village of Capernaum." Whether this was the Magdalum Castrum of Brocardus is less certain though most probable. It is doubtless that of a writer of the same century who after speaking of the Mensa Domini goes on to say ; Ibi prope juxta mare Tiberiadis versus Tabariam est locus quse dicitur Magdalon (Rob. BR 3 279 n. 3, who refers for the citation to Steph. Baluzii, Miscellanea., torn. 6369, Paris, 1713). Quaresmius (2866) mentions a Mejdel on Gennesaret in his time and identifies it with Magdala. The name still lives, on a site which is suitable to the mediaeval data, but too far N. to suit the Talmudic statement that Magdala was within a Sabbath day s journey of Tiberias.

On the Lake, in the SE. corner of the plain of Gennesaret, 3 m. NW. of Tiberias, near a stream which comes down from the Wady el-Hamam, el-Mejdel is a miserable little village, with some indications of ancient ruins both of walls and foundations (Wilson, Lands of the Bid!e,2i36), probably a watch-tower guarding the entrance to the plain (Stanley, Sin. and Pal. 382). The country immediately around is called the Ard el- Mejdel (Wilson), and is cultivated by the villagers and Bedouins. Some have taken it to represent the MIGDAL-EL [q.v. ] of Josh. 19s8.

Besides the authorities quoted, see Lightfoot, Op. Post. -job; PEFQ, 1877, p. 121 /. ; Buhl, Pal. 225.7. .; Schiir. GJVft 1 515 = ET 2 224 (on a proposed identification with Tarichese).

G. A. S.


See col. 2894, end ; also MARY, 26.


PSHJIip, 38; 'God is my costly possession' ? cp perhaps the Palmyrene rruD 33, the Sab. fem. name SyiJD, ar >d njoDt. 8813; MAfeAmA [AL]) a duke of Edom in regione Gebalena (OS 137 13), Gen. 8643 (/vuroAiHA [AD" 1 -], M^AeAmA [E]; iCh. 1 S4 , MeAmA [B], M&r^enA [L]). 6 E s reading (cp MAHALALEEL) suggests an original Jerah- me el (Che. ).


(i Macc. 6:36), RV MAKED.


( M <\roi, M^roc [Ti. WH]), Mt. 2:1, Acts 13:6t, RV mg (EV 'wise men', 'sorcerer' ). Cp MAGIC, STARS. See also ZOROASTRIANISM, SIMON MAGUS, JANNES AND JAMBRES.

In <& fiayos = Aram. fjK X, enchanter, magician, Dan. 1 20 (Theod. but (B ciAocrocous), 2227 (Theod., <B <f>apna.K<ov), 5 7 (Theod., tTrcucovs ai Cp (uayeueii/, to practice sorcery, etc., Acts 89.


  • Definition (1).
  • Factor in Hebrew life (2a).
  • In Babylonian religion ( 2b).
  • OT terms (3).
  • In NT (4).
  • Bibliography (5).

1. Definition.[edit]

Magic may be briefly described as the attempt on man's part to influence, persuade, or compel spiritual beings to comply with certain requests or demands It rests upon the belief that the powers in the world are controlled by spirits, and that therefore to be able to overrule these spirits is to have the mastery of nature. In a narrow but later sense, magic has to do with feats of power, not of knowledge, the relation between it and divination being comparable to that between miracles and prophecy. At the beginning, and at the present time among savage people, this distinction is not drawn. Similarly, at the first, good spirits and bad spirits were not distinguished. 1

There are, no doubt, many cases in which spirits are little, if at all, thought of. The means employed to ob tain good or to obviate evil seem to have no connection with belief in spirits ; just as ritual acts are performed by some people with little or no thought of the deity or deities they were originally believed to conciliate. Never theless, however much the invocation or other charm may appear as cosmic means of influencing the forces of the universe as such, there was originally, as there still is at bottom implied, an acknowledgment of spiritual beings who are influenced in these ways. 2

1 Divination is but a species of magic in the wider sense im plied in the first definition given above : it is magic used in discovering the will of spiritual beings. See the present writer s Magic, etc., p. \f. Divination has to do, however, usually with omens, and it is more convenient, as it is more usual, to dis tinguish magic and divination as is done above.

2 Frazer (Golden Bough ( 2 ), 1:61) takes magic proper to be a kind of savage logic, a crude species of reasoning based on similarity and contiguity. Where the operation of spirits is assumed (and these cases are exceptional ), magic is, according to him, tinged and alloyed with religion. He admits, how ever (pp. diff.), that in actual fact, such an assumption is often made, but he concludes from various considerations that 'though magic is ... found to fuse and amalgamate with religion in many ages, and in many lands, there are some grounds for thinking that this fusion is not primitive'.

8 See BLESSINGS AND CURSINGS, and for Arabian illustrations see Goldziher (AM. z. Arab. Philol. \rtff. [1896]), who has shown that among the ancient Arabs, as among the Jews, the magical words of blessing and of cursing played a prominent part. In war, the poet by cursing the enemy rendered service not second to that of the warrior himself; the uttered word was, in fact, a most potent fetish (Goldziher, 28). The Jews of Medina brought into their synagogues images of their arch foe Malik b. al-Aglam, and at these they hurled curses every time they came together.

4 In JE no such reference to the magicians occurs.

B For a Babylonian connection (Kardamu) see Hommel, Exp. T, Feb. 1900, p. 234.

2a. A factor in Hebrew life.[edit]

Such an acknowledgment is certainly made by the ancient narrative (JE) of the story of Balaam (see BLESSINGS). That Balaam is a magician, it is, in the light of ancient Arabian customs, impossible to deny; and it is equally clear that the reality of the power claimed by Balaam is acknowledged in the biblical account. Else why should Yahwe be represented as transferring Balaam's service to the cause of Israel?* Nor can we overlook the same acknowledgment in P's account of the Egyptian plagues 4 (Ex. 7-11). Moses throws down his rod and it becomes a serpent ; the magicians do the same (Ex. 1:11-12). The reality of the transformation accomplished is not so much as doubted (see SERPENT, 3). Moses, by his rod, turns the water of Egypt into blood ; the magicians by their enchant ments do the same (Ex. 7:20-22). The case is similar with the plague of frogs. The power of the magicians fails indeed when it is a question of producing gnats (Ex. 8:17-18 [13-14]. ; EV LICE [q. v.]). Even here, however, there is no scepticism as to the reality of magic.

The word rendered magicians (D Sp^n, hartummim)^ is found in one of the older sources (Gen. 41:8, 41:24 [E]), where it denotes the dream interpreters of Egypt those whom the Pharaoh summoned to interpret his dream. In Exodus, on the other hand, it stands for magicians in the narrower and stricter sense. The only other passages in which the word is used are in Dan., where the men so described are represented as living in Babylon ; but as the book was written in Palestine, and Gen. and Ex. in their present form stood before the author, there is good ground for believing that the writer borrowed the word from the old books.

A trace of a belief in the efficacy of a plant is clearly seen in Gen. 30:14 [J] where Reuben brings Leah duda'im or MANDRAKES (q. v. ). This plant was known among the northern Semites as Baaras (cp Jos. BJ vii. 63), and was supposed by the Arabs and by the ancient Germans to be inhabited by a spirit which gave it extraordinary powers (see WRS Rel. Sem.W 442, and cp Lang, Custom and Myth, 143 ff.}. The biblical narrative ascribes to this plant effects which could not be supposed to follow from its natural properties ; but no disapproval of its magical use is expressed either by the author or by the redactor. [Whitehouse, in Hastings DB 3 210 i>, connects duda'im with the mn of Mesha's inscription, l. 12, cp also ISSACHAR, 2.]

There is another incident recorded in the same chapter which belongs to the category of magic, though it is magic of the sympathetic or symbolic kind. (For a description of this see Jevons, Intr. to Hist, of Religion, 28 ff. , Frazer, Golden Bought 1:49 ff.}. The peeled rods which Jacob put in front of the sheep and goats as they came to drink water, caused those that were pregnant to bring forth young that were spotted and striped (Gen. 30:37-38 [J]) ; the natural explanation may be adequate, but it is probable that more than this was in the mind of the writer.

There is a good deal of uncertainty as to the teraphim which Rachel stole when she and Jacob left her father s house, Gen. 31:19+ [E] (see TERAPHIM). They were of human form ( 1 S. 19:13), and were looked upon as gods (Gen. 31:30 and Judg. 18:24), though their possession is regarded as illegitimate. (Josiah put them away with the wizards, etc., 2 K. 28:24; cp Zech. 10:2 where they are associated with diviners. )

Among the Assyrians images of gods were kept in the house because they were believed to have the power of warding off evil spirits. A certain exorcist is said to have had statues of the gods Lugalgira and Alamu put one on each side of the main entrance to his house, and in consequence, he felt perfectly impregnable against all evil spirits (see Tallqvist, Assyr. Beschw. 22).

It is probable that in Gen. and elsewhere we should construe teraphim as a plural of 'excellence' or of 'majesty', answering to D n ^N (Elohlm), D J IK (Adonim). The teraphim were kept in the house as a guarantee of good luck ; though originally perhaps idols, they were afterwards, and in biblical times almost exclusively, a kind of charm. That they had a magical import is suggested by Zech. 10:2, where teraphim, diviners, and tellers of false dreams are put in the same category. The Genesis narrative, and also Hos. 3:4, show that teraphim were not always condemned.

In the prohibition 'Thou shall not seethe a kid in its mother's milk' (Ex. 23:19. 34:26, Dt. 14:21), many scholars, from Spencer (Leg. Heb. Rit. \T,^ff. [1732]) downwards, have seen an allusion to a magical broth, prepared in order to give fertility to the fields ; 1 more probably the reference is to an ancient form of sacrifice similar to the sacrifice of blood (WRS Rel. Sem.W 221, n. ).

In Is. 3:2 the Kosem (magician or diviner) is named along with the knight and the warrior, the judge, the prophet, and the elder, among the stays and supports of the nation ; of none of them is any disapproval implied.

One great fact which induced the Hebrews to con demn magic and the like was that it was so closely connected with idolatry ; in 2 K. 9:22 it seems identified with it. T. W. D.

1 Spencer adduces (340), as supporting his view, Maimonides, Abarbanel, Nic. de Lyra, and an anonymous Karaite com mentator.

2b. In Babylonian religion.[edit]

i. Place of magic in Babylonian religion. In the religion of the Babylonians magic always had a prominent place. Every misfortune, and especially all sickness, was regarded as arising from some malign spell, a ban (mamitu), under which the sufferer had come. A ban of this kind could be incurred in all possible ways - not only by the commission of positive acts of sin such as murder, adultery, theft, fraud, but also by neglect of ritual and ceremonial precepts, or by casual contact with persons or things which themselves lay under some ban.

All the contingencies in which the ban can be incurred are exhaustively set forth in the second, third, and eighth tablets! of the Surpu series of exorcism tablets. Thus, for example, we read in the second tablet : 'Has he [the bewitched person] sinned against his god, been guilty towards his goddess? . . . Has he dishonoured his father and mother? . . . Has he used false weights, circulated false money? . . . Has he approached his neighbour s wife, shed his neighbour's blood, stolen his neigh bour s garment?' The same tablet, however, contains also the question whether the sufferer has slept on the bed of a bewitched person, sat on his seat, eaten from his dish, drunk from his cup.

Alongside of this conception of a more or less im personal visitation we find that other doubtless more primitive in which malevolent divine beings, demons, or else human beings, wizards and witches, in league with these evil demons, are regarded as the producers of disease and disaster. The malign activity of these wicked spirits in connection with whom the number seven is prominent (cp Lk. 8:2, Mk. 16:9, Mt. 12:45) is vividly depicted in the Babylonian exorcism texts.

They are regarded as the spawn of hell. The wilderness is their favourite dwelling-place, whence they make their inroads upon the abodes of men. From house to house they make their baleful way, no bar or bolt being able to exclude them ; snake- like they steal through doorways, windlike through crevices. Their hostility to men is unsparing ; their influence is specially seen in the havoc they work on family life. They alienate husband and wife, father and son, partners and friends. Of these Babylonian demons we meet with two representatives in the OT ; Lilitu (see LILITH) and the sedu (Heb. Sedim, see DEMONS).

The activity of wizards and witches is in like manner fully and vividly set forth in the exorcism texts, especially in the exorcism tablets of Maklu. 2 Day and night the witches for in this field the female plays a much more conspicuous part than the male dog the steps of their victims.

The witches haunt the streets and public places, beset the wayfarer, force their way into houses. Their tongue brings bewitchment, their lips breathe poison, death attends their foot steps. A very favourite method of working their enchantments was, in popular belief, by means of figures of clay, wood, dough, or the like. The tying of witch-knots was also largely resorted to. The most usual Babylonian word for witch is kassaptu ; cp Heb. nflBbD (below, 3 [2]).

2. Methods of counteracting the evil power. - In corre spondence with this deep and widespread belief in the power for evil wielded by demons and witches was the belief in the possibility of counteracting it ; and the methods by which this could be accomplished constituted an essential part of the religion of Babylonia. The spell, the ban, to which a man was constantly liable demanded a counterspell, an exorcism. This was sought in a great variety of ways ; and the main part of the business of the exerciser lay in finding out which particular charm could be used against each particular spell.

Here, water was regarded, above all other media, as of great efficacy. Sprinklings and washings with pure water, taken if possible from the sacred rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris, accordingly have a large and important place in the Babylonian ceremonies of exorcism. Similarly, the power of breaking hostile spells was ascribed to fire. Hence the practice freely resorted to of placing a brazier at the bedside of the sick and burning on it a great variety of substances so as to represent symbolically the breaking of the spell. Besides water and fire, many plants and minerals of real or supposed healing virtue were brought into requisition, and thus the practice of magic constitutes the primitive stage in the practice of medicine.

The evil demons who had laid their victim under a ban and taken possession of him were expelled by exorcism and driven back into the wilderness whence they had come. For the witches death by fire was regarded as the only appropriate punishment.

Whether as matter of fact witch-burning was actually practised by the Babylonians cannot indeed, as yet, be quite clearly made out. At all events the witches were burned in the effigy which their victim kindled before the image of the divinity whose help he wished to invoke. The form taken by these witch-adjurations is in many respects quite similar to that of a legal process in which the bewitched person is the accuser, the witch the accused, and the divinity the judge.

1 Translated by H. Zimmern in Beitr. zur Kenntnis der Bab. Rel. i., 1896.

2 Translated, with a useful introduction on Babylonian magic in general, in K. Tallqvist s Die Assyrische Beschvaorungsserie Maqlu (1895).

A matter of prime importance and in this, relatively, Babylonian magic presents a good side always was to secure the assistance of one or more of the good greater deities in counteracting these assaults of demons and witches ; hence the frequent and fervent prayers still preserved to us in the magical literature of Babylon.

No notices of the practice of necromancy in the manner of 1 S. 28 have as yet been met with. Still something quite similar can be read at the end of the Gilgames-Nimrod epic in the summoning of the spirit of Eabani by Gilgames with the assistance of Nergal (god of the under world). 1 At all events the Babylonians had quite the same ideas as the Israelites about the spirit of the departed (ekimmu) and the possibility of causing it to appear.

This is plainly shown by the repeated mention of the necro mancer (muselu sha ekimmu, 'literally, he who causes the spirit to come up' ) in Babylonian lists of official names. Of special interest in connection with the Babylonian notions regarding the disembodied spirit is a text 2 containing the prayer of one possessed by a ghost along with the petition for deliverance from it.

3. Soothsaying. - Alongside of magic, soothsaying also had an important place in the Babylonian-Assyrian religion. Through the agency of the seer (baru) a class of priest held in special esteem the effort was made to obtain information as to the future from all sorts of occurrences. The clay tablets recovered at Nineveh from the library of Asur-bani-pal, the last of the great Assyrian kings, are full of texts containing omens of this description which were taken from the flight of birds, from anomalous birth of man and beast, from the behaviour of certain animals, such as the pig, ass, horse, dog, serpent, scorpion, and locust. The in terpretation of dreams, and especially the hepatoscopy, are important departments of soothsaying, and these two can be most clearly shown to have existed from the earliest times. Lastly, the cuneiform literature shows that astrology, the observing of the positions and combinations of the stars - a pursuit which has ever been, justly, regarded as having taken its rise in Baby lonia influenced the entire life of the Babylonians in the highest degree. The Assyrian kings made extensive use of all the methods of divination mentioned above, in de termining their policy (cp Ezek. 21:21 [26] ). 3 H.Z.

1 See Jeremias, Izdubar-Nimrod (1894), p. 42; Jensen in Schrader s KB, vi. 1 263.

2 L. W. King, Baby Ionian Magic and Sorcery (1896), no. 53 ; cp also B. Meissner in ZDMG f>0, 750 (1896).

3 See Zimmern, Beitr. z. Kenntn. d. Bab. Rel., p. 82_^C (1901).

4 Cain is derived by G. Hoffmann (ZATlVZsq) from Arab, (hatm) nose, and explained as meaning one who speaks in a low nasal tone (cp JJtyp. DIVINATION, 2, and yor/res, below, 4). gives variously c^qyqrai (expounders), en-aoiSoi (chanters, those who say incantations), and 4>ap^axoi (those who use drugs for magical ends).

3. OT Terms.[edit]

For the many terms used in the OT, several of which include both magic and divination, cp DIVINATION, 3-4. Two words appear never to have had any exclusive reference to one or the other. These are hakamim (o DDn ; cro(f>oi, co(f)iffTaL) 'wise men' and hartummim (o SBin; EV 'magicians' ).

Hakamim is used of the counsellors of the Pharaoh (Is. 19 iif.), and of the King of Persia (Esth. 1 13 f.) ; hartummim, which may be rendered 'sacred scribes' 4 (Gen. 41:8, RV g.), is applied to the dream-interpreters of the Pharaoh (Gen. 41:8, 41:24 E), and in post-exilic writings to the magicians at the Egyptian court (Ex. 7:11, 8:7[3], 9:11 [P]), and to the dream-interpreters of Nebuchadrezzar (Dan. 2:2, 2:27, 4:7 [4], 5:11).

The specific terms, of which the commonest is kesem, are in some cases obscure. They are the following :

i. Kesem (cog). This word probably had originally a magical reference (Fleischer), though the secondary sense (see DIVINATION, 2 [i]) has almost driven out the primary.

Cp Ar. kasama, which (in 2 and 4), as well as the noun kisama ( oath ), has a distinctive magical meaning ; also the Syriac erwmi, to exorcise, strictly to make swear, and likewise the Gr. opxta Tf /u.i>e<T#ai = to make an oath, and then to make a covenant with. W. R. Smith, however (/. Phil. 13 278), and Wellhausen (ffeitf.W, 128, Heid.V), 133, n. 5), both take the con trary view ; Smith making decision (cp Prov. 16 10 and Targ.), Wellhausen allotment or distribution, the fundamental meaning. The present writer differs with reluctance from such eminent authorities. It is true that there are cases in which the Ar. word has the sense of divination (e.g., Kuran 5:4), obtaining a divine decree by headless arrows, etc., and that in Aram., the same signification is most common ; but we must remember that in early times magic and divination came under one category.

The primary sense may be one which includes both the special ones. Of the two senses that of magic seems much more likely to be the original.

2. From n/kshp, ^3 (2 Ch. 335 'to use witchcraft', RV 'practice sorcery' ) are derived kassaph (ijtra ; Jer. 27g) and me'kasseph (<]BOp, Ex. 7:11, Dan. 2:2, Mal. 3:5) rendered by EV 'sorcerer' (in Dt. 18:10, and Ex. 22:18 [17]: fem. nBtsop. AV 'witch', RV 'sorceress' ).

W. R. Smith derives from Ar. kasafa, to cut, the Hebrew word having in it the idea of cutting oneself in coming to the deity (see 1 K. 18:28 and Jer. 41:5). He points out that it is still common in Arabia for a person guilty of some wrong to cut himself in the presence of the wronged person as a sign of re pentance. The noun 'keshaphim' (o BlM)) he takes to mean 'herbs or drugs shredded into a magic brew'. (Cp Ar. kisfa, 'bits of things'. ) The meaning of verb and noun, however, are unconnected, and though in Mic. 5:11 [12] O SB 3 ma V we " nave the meaning of material drugs, in 2 K. 9:22 and Nah. 3:4 (EV witchcraft ), it cannot have that meaning, notwithstanding tjta.pfj.aKa. Nor is this sense suitable in Is. 47:12, nor in Nu. 28:3 (where we should perhaps read with Kue. rSC D 1 ? "JTlX

The present writer follows Fleischer, who argues for its derivation from Ar. (kasafa) 'to obscure', of the sun and moon 'to eclipse'. If the derivation just suggested were adopted, the Hebrew might denote first of all 'to have dark appearance', then 'to be gloomy', 'distressed', and finally 'to be a suppliant', 'to seek something from the deity' ; cp the Syriac ethkesheph 'to entreat'. 1

The Syriac word, in all the twelve instances in OT where kashaph (rps), in one or other of its forms occurs, is heresh. Now in the simple form this verb means to be silent i.e., 'to re strain one's voice'. In the Pa. and Aph. it means to practise magical arts. To distinguish two separate roots (with the Lexx.) would seem to be unnecessary. Suppose the primary sense to be 'to restrain', then 'to keep one s voice under', 'to speak in a low mumbling tone' ; we have in that case a link of connection with the meaning in the derived form, for the magician utters his incantations in such a suppressed tone. Smith, however, con nects the Syriac word with the rare Arabic term hurs and hursa = a kind of food given to women in child-bearing, which was a drug, thus agreeing exactly with <j>dpiJ.aKa.

3. Lahash (jyn^), 'enchantment' (cp Is. 83, cmV jiaJ, RV a skilful enchanter ) is used more specifically of serpent- charming (Jer. 8:17, Eccles. 10:11 ; cp c nSp Ps. 58:5 [6] 'charmer' ), and hence of any charm which could be worn, cp Is. 3:20 (o rnS RV 'amulets' ). 2

The primary meaning of the word may perhaps be seen in 2 S. 12:19, Ps. 41:7 [8], not however in Is. 26:16 (see SHOT). It has been thought that lakash (jprh) and nahash (sj-m) may have a kindred origin, and it is at any rate singular that the Arabic equivalents of both 3 are used in the sense of unlucky.

4. Heber (13n), found only in pi. (Is. 47:9, 47:12 enchantments ) or in connection with hober, "Uh (Dt. 18:11, Ps. 58:5 [6], charmer ), is explained by Ges. (Thes. 1:441) to mean binding or tying i.e., of magical knots. 4 Similarly Smith, who says it is used to denote the tying together of words in order to con stitute an incantation. He (followed by Ges.(l 3 )-BuhU 2 l, and Sieg.-St., also by Stade, GF/1 505, and Dr. Deut., ad loc.) goes back to the Jewish tradition which sees in the word some kind of snake-charming. Note the parallelism in Ps. 58:5 [6].

Here we may refer to the Rabbinical kemia (JTCp), 'amulet', from Jjcpi 'to bind'. Most likely it signifies something bound to a person, with no reference therefore to magical tying. It is the Rabbinical term for phylacteries ; see FRONTLETS. It is not at all impossible that Jesus words in Mt. 10:19, 15:18 were suggested by this magical practice, known in his time and in his country as in all times and lands. See BINDING AND LOOSING.

5. Sak(k)er (^s\tf)ia Is. 47:11, is explained by the great majority of critics (Hi. Ew. Di. etc.) 'to charm (away)', or the like (so RVmg.). This can he well defended (see the Comm.) ; but the absence of any analogy in Heb. and Aram, favours the view that the text is corrupt.!

1 Cp also Ar. kdsif, unlucky (of days). Note that Fleischer (Levy, NIfW%4y)<i) takes Ar. kasafa in the derived sense of speaking in a low, murmuring tone.

2 Similarly C ; S: Jjl3 (/.), AV tablets, RV perfume boxes," is taken by Smith to be a kind of amulet.

3 Lahasa (as liihus, unlucky ) and nahasa (na/ts, unlucky ). Cp SERPENT, i [3].

4 Cp Ar. habar, - a narrative i.e., a series of words bound to gether. Or we may argue for a derivation from habara, to be beautiful, from an (assumed) earlier, but lost meaning 'to weave, bind'. So "Oi"I> haber, a companion, one that is bound (to an individual or society), cp T. W. Davies, Magic etc., 55-56

4. In NT.[edit]

Among the ancients the employment of certain formulas was considered efficacious in proportion to the number of repetitions. In India to-day if an ascetic says in one month the name of Radha, Krishna, or Rom 100,000 times, he cannot fail to obtain what he wants ; and it is in the same spirit that Moslem dervishes renew their shrieks or whirlings. Similarly, the prophets of Baal called upon their god from morning until night, saying Baal, hear us, 1 j K. 1826.

The words of Jesus say not the same thing over and over again (Mt. 67/^7 pa.TTo\oyya-r)Te 2 ) have reference to the same superstition.

In 2 Tim. 3:13 7617x6? (from 7000;, 'to sigh', 'to utter low moaning tones' ) is used of a class of magicians who uttered certain magical formulae in a low deep voice. They were to be found, according to Herodotus, in Egypt (2:33) and elsewhere (4ios 7igi) I they are mentioned also by Euripides and Plato.

Paul, in addressing the Galatians (5:20), names among the works of the flesh tpapnaKfia [EV sorcery ] ; Syr. harrashutha ; Heb. versions of Salk. and Del. D BE>3 [keshaphim], which is closely connected with idolatry by being placed next after it. It is not possible here to do more than mention Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-10) and Bar-jesus, the sorcerer whom Lk. calls also Elymas (Acts 13:8). This name the writer explains by /j.dyos ; it is really the Arabic ( Alim), 'learned', which is much the same in sense as (tdyos (cp SIMON MAGUS, ELYMAS). Cp EXORCISTS. T. w. D.

5. Bibliography.[edit]

F. B. Jevons, Introd. to Hist, of Re?., 1896; A. C. Lyall, Asiatic Studies, chap. 4 ; E. B. Tylor, art. Magic, EBW; Frazer, Golden Bought 1 7-128 ; W. R. Smith's articles in /. Phil. (18273-288 14113-128) treat ably on the principal biblical terms. Cp also Rel. Sent. 246 427, et passim ; Driver on Deut. 18 10 /f EV ; T. Witton Davies, Magic, Divination, and Demonology among the Hebrews and related peoples (1898); Sc\io\2.,Gotzendienst und Zauberwesen bei den Hebreiern, 1877 (uncritical); D. Joel, Der Aberg laitbe und aie Stellung des Judentlnuiis zu demselbcn (1881-83).

On the Bab. Magic, cp the work of Lenormant now of course somewhat antiquated (La magie chez les Chaldeens et les origines Accadiennes, 1874 I Chaldean RIagic, its origin and develop ment, trans, with add. by the author, 1877 ; Die Magie und Wahrsage-Kunst der Chaldiier, 1878). Lenormant is to be sup plemented by reference to the various works cited in 2 b ; see also the relative sections in Tiele s HAG, 1886 ; and Gesch. der Rel. im Alterthum, 1895 ; in A. H. Sayce s Origin and Growth of Rel. (Hibiert Lectures), 1888 ; in Rommel s Die Sem. Vtilker . Sprachen, 1888 ; (by F. Jeremias) in Chantepie de la Saus- saye s Lehrb. der Rel.-gesch.(-), 1897; and in Jastrow, Rel. of Bab. and Ass., 1898; L. W. King, Babylonian Magic and Sorcery (1896); Zimmern, Beitrage zur Kenntnis der bab. Re ligion in Assyriolog. Bibliothek., Bd. xii., with L. W. King s review in AJSL 13 142^ H. Z. , 2 b ; T. W. D.

1 Ges.a3)-Bu.(2) (followed by Che. Isaiah, SBOT, Heb.) most felicitously reads for ninB* in fTiray- Render : There shall come upon thee an evil which thou art not able to prevent by payment. Note the use of the verb in Job 022, and the parallelism of 1B3 and ~\n& in Prov. 6 35.

2 From Battus, a stuttering Greek poet (see Herod. 1 155). Cp Ecclus. 7 14 Repeat not thy words in thy prayer (/j.rj SevTepiuoTjs \6yov tv irpoa-fvxfj <rov). For references relating to battology among Moslems and others, see Lange in Herzog, 18 396.



The terms to be enumerated are five

1. ESir Sophet (Dt. 16 18 etc.). See JUDGE, i.

2. "I!J? V~?., yores eser (Judg. 18:7 t) RV 'possessing authority' (mg. 'power of restraint"), an impossible rendering (Moore). The text is very corrupt. In connection with other emendations, and parallel cases of misunderstood references to the N. Arabian Musri (see MIZRAIM, 2b), it may be best to regard both (TV and -|<jy as corruptions of a dittographed 1^0 (i.e., Missur = Musri); [-1x3, 'in the land (of ) precedes'. The city conquered by the Danites was apparently in the far south (see MICAH i., 2 ; ZIKLAG), not in the far north.

3. apxn, Lk. 12 1 1 AV ; cp 20:20.

4. ap^taif, Lk. 1258 ; cp RULER.

5. erTpa-rrryos : () Acts 16 20-38; cp PR^TOR, PHILIPPI ; (8) Lk. 224 etc., see ARMY, 6. 7. K. C.




See PASHHUR (i).


(E tt SJp, cp MAGBISH?), signatory to the covenant (see EZRA i.,7); Neh. 102o[2i] (B&r"6." 4>HC [BN], MAIA. [A], MrMAC [L]).


(Acts 13:68 RV mg-). See BAR-JESUS, MAGIC. 4-




RV Mahalalel (^N^np, 34, as if praise of God ; but < BAEL , M&AeAenA, suggests 7i|p?rUp, praiser of God [Gray, HPN 201, with Reds- lob and Nestle] ; but see below).

1. Fourth in descent from Seth, Gen. 5 nf. ; i Ch. 1 2f (Bk. Jubilees, Malalel). Cp CAINITES, MEHUJAEL.

2. One of the bne Judah in a post-exilic list, Neh. 11 4t (fJ.a\f\r,fj. [BN]). See PEREZ.

The Judahite name, if not also the Sethite, is probably to be explained, like JF.HALLELEL, as one of the many popular corruptions of the tribal name Jerahmeel. Cp j3fAfAer;A, " i Ch. 8 i, a fuller form of the Benjamite name Bela, which, like Balaam, seems also to come from Jerahmeel. See also MAGDIEU , T. K. C.


(D?np, 74,78 ; also as a proper name in Talm. Bab. Pes. 1 12 a. The name possibly comes from rrVNcrry, Jerahme elith = awoman of Jerahmeel [Che.]).

1. Esau s Ishmaelite wife: Gen. 28g [P] (MAeAe9 [ADEL]), called BASHEMATH (q.v.) in chap. 36. For an explanation of the double name see SALMAH.

2. Daughter of Jerimoth b. David, and wife of Reho- boam : 2 Chr. 11 18 ([j.o\[\]a.O [BA], jttaeXXetf [L]).


upon [AV], or set to [RV] (rhr\V~hv. yrrep M<\eAee [BXART] ; erri xPei<* [Aq-], ^i<* \Opoy [Sym.], YTTep THC xopei&c [Theod., Quinta] ; pro choro, per chorum [Jer. ]), Ps. 53, 88 (headings). Ibn Ezra suggested that Mahalath was the first word of a song, to the tune of which these two psalms were set. Ewald and Wellhausen adopt this view ; the sickness might be that of God's people. Rashi , however, thought that the flute, Gesenius and Lagarde that the cithara or cithern, was meant. Jerome and the Greek versions except LXX imply the pointing rfbho, meholoth, dances : cp heading of Ps. 88, where Leannoth ( perhaps for singing ) follows. None of these views has much plausi bility or is free from objection. A musical note which occurs in only two psalm-headings, and has no clear meaning, is probably corrupt. As Gratz has seen, a better reading is almost certainly upon ALAMOTH [^. .] LEANNOTH (niayV ; rov a.TroKpi.6rivai [<5] ; rod ^dpxav [Aq.]; ad respondendum [Jer.]) is also prob ably a mis-written rithy, originally intended as a correc tion of nSna; see PSALMS [BOOK], 120 (on Alamoth ).

T. K. C.

1 [That the form is not really dual, is maintained elsewhere (see NAMES, 107). We. (CH 46) would take n:ns (mahdne) in Gen. 32 22 [21] as a proper name, parallel and equivalent to Maha- naim ; but Mahane does not occur elsewhere, and Ball (SBOT) therefore reads QjnO- There may, however, have been a form Mahanath (see MINNITH). Note the sporadic 110.0.1*0.16 in i Ch. 680 (B), as well as the cases where renders by the sing. TJ Trape/ujSoATJ. See ad fin. s - A - c -l




(D^TO, encampment, cpcas/ra). 1

1. OT references.[edit]

A city on the E. of Jordan, placed by P on frontier of Gad and Manasseh (Josh. 13:26-30), and mentioned by him again as a city of refuge together with Ramoth in Gilead, Heshbon, and Jaazer (ib. 2l38[ 3 6], cp i Ch. 68ot6 5 ]). There was doubtless an ancient sanctuary there, for Jacob, so E represents, when he came to the place after parting from Laban, met there a host (mahdneh) of divine ones : a skilful application of the obvious etymology. Some find a second reference to the ety mology in Gen. 32? (J), where two hosts (mahanoth) are spoken of ; but there are difficulties in supposing that the scene of Gen. 324/1 (J) is N. of the jabbok, where E rightly, of course, places Mahanaim (see Holzinger, ad loc., and GlLEAD, 4). On two great occasions the security of the position of Mahanaim seems to have led royal personages to make it their residence. I shbosheth resided there during his short reign (28. 2812), and David retired thither in his flight from Absalom (2 S. 172 4 2 7 ; cp 1932 i K. 28). Under Solomon, Mahanaim was the administrative centre of a department (iK. 4 14); see AHINADAB. The name occurs in the list of Palestinian cities taken by Shishak (Maspero, Struggle of the Nations, 773), and is finally met with (if the article prefixed to D :no is no objection) in Cant. 613 [7i], where the Shulammite is somehow brought into connection with the dance of Mahanaim (Xpoi ruv 7T<xpe/u/3o\u>c, AV, company of two armies ) ; criticism, however, throws much doubt upon the text * (see CANTICLES, 9 ; DANCE, 7).

Reference is probably made to a re-conquest of Mahanaim in Am. 6:13 ; for Q j-p read Q jnOi and render, 'Have we not, by our strength, taken Mahanaim' ? The name of the other town was hardly Lo-debar, but Jabesh-gilead (of which the MT x 1 ? 13T is a corruption). See MEPHIBOSHETH ; SAUL, 6.

2. Identification.[edit]

The exact site of Mahanaim is uncertain. Conder's reasons for placing it to the east of es-Salt, 2 beyond the round basin of the Bukei will hardly bear examination. The critical analysis of Gen. 32 seems to show that Mahanaim lay N. of the Jabbok, but where, is disputed. Merrill (East of the Jordan, 437) thinks of the ruin called Suleikhat, 300 ft. above the Jordan valley, in the Wady Ajlun. Robinson, van Kasteren (ZDPV 13*205/), and Buhl (Pal. 257), however, urge the claims of Mihne or Mahne in the Jebel Ajlun, a little to the NE. of the town of Ajlun, whilst Porter and, according to Gautier, Germer-Durand, suggest that Gerasa rose on the ruins of Mahanaim.

In 2 S. 229, Abner and his men, on leaving Gibeon, are said to have passed over Jordan, and gone through all Hithron, and so come to Mahanaim. Prof. H. P. Smith explains pinan, as doubtless, the proper name of one of the side valleys up which Mahanaim was situated. This is correct, except that all Bithron is corrupt ; the real proper name of the side valley was probably the 'valley of Pistachio trees' 3 (C^tjari ?n3). Accord ing to 2 S. 18:6 the battle between the army of David and that of Absalom took place in the 'wood of Ephraim'. For Ephraim an early authority reads Mahanaim ; but probably Ephraim should rather be Rephaim (see EPHRAIM, WOOD OF). At any rate, it was clearly in the vicinity of Mahanaim, and the nearest way from this 'wood' or copse-land to the city was by the "\33 (EV plain ), or rather, since no satisfactory explanation of this reading (v. 23) has been offered, 4 by the 7PU that is to say, the eager Ahimaaz ran along in the wady in which, at some little distance, Mahanaim lay.

1 Plausible as the sword-dance theory may be, there is so much corruption in the context that we may suggest an emenda tion akin to that proposed for Cant. 611 (see TIRZAH). Read, What do you see in the Shulammite? A narcissus of the valleys (D pSJM nSinn). This is grammatically easier and suits the context.

2 Heth andMoab, ISO/

3 Pistachio-trees are found in Gilead (Post, PEFQ, 1888, p. 200 ; Tristram, NHB 367). The current explanation of Bithron as ravine will hardly bear examination (cp BKTHER). Cp D 333 (EV Betonim), a place in Gad, mentioned beside Maha naim, Josh. 13 26.

  • See, e.g., Lohr, ad loc.

From a critical glance at the OT passages it is evident that Mahanaim was a strong city ; we have to look for one of the very best sites for such a city in N. Gilead. It must also, as Gen. 32 shows, have been easily acces- sible from Mizpah, which we have elsewhere provision ally identified with Suf. Putting all this together, we may plausibly identify Mahanaim with Ajlun, so finely situated at a point where valleys meet, with abundant wood in its neighbourhood (GILEAD, 7), and with an unequalled site for a fortress not far off, which is still occupied by the imposing Kal at er-Rabad. At some distance to the N. is still found the name of Mihne or Mahne, and some of the liest geographers (Robinson, van Kasteren, 1 and Buhl) would therefore place Maha naim there. It seems better, however, to suppose that the wood of Mahanaim extended as far as Mihne, and that the name of Mihne is really an abbreviation of that ancient phrase.

Here, as elsewhere, geographical results are dependent on critical exegesis. The idea that Ajlun might be Mahanaim has also occurred to Prof. G. A. Smith (IfG 587 ; cp 335 n., 586); but he did not recognise that it was almost forced upon us by the biblical data, rightly viewed. Miihlau (Riehm< 2 ), 954) feels a similar hesitation ; he thinks that Mihne is not near enough to the Jabbok and the Jordan Valley.

Readings : Josh. 13 26/Uoai [B], fj.aav [Bah], ^avaj.ft. [A], paav. [L] ; v. 30 ij.aava [B], AL as above. Jos. 21 38 [36] Ka^eiv [B], juai/ju [L], A as above, i Ch. 680 [65] fj.aava.id [B], -ai/x [A], /Sai/afl [ L], vWy [ Pesh. ]. 2 S. 2 8 <e rVjs 7rapt/u/3oAVj [ B AL], B add eis fifii-affj., cp We. ad loc. ; v. 12 \j.ava.t\.\i. [A], trapefi^oAirjs [L], lost in B ; z>. 29 (rt\v) Trape/u./SoATJi [BA], 7rape^/3oAas fj.aSi.au [L] ; Jos. (Ant. vii. 1 3) Mai/aAcs. 2 S. 17 24 ^ai/aeifx. [B], -v [A], 7rape/u/3oAas [L] ; v. 27 fj-aavaeifj. [BA], L as before ; 19 32 fiacaei/x [BA], L as before, i K. 28 n-ape^/SoAas [BAL] ; 4 14 paai/amoi [B], fj.aavai.fi. [A], fiaxeiAaji [L]. The ethnic is perhaps to be found in i Ch. 11 46 (crit. emend.). See MAHAVITE ; also JEPH- THAH, 3, n. 4. T. K. C.


or Dan's camp (GMBoAH AAN [BAL]), a place behind i.e. , W. of Kirjath-jearim, where the 600 Danites from Zorah and Eshtaol encamped in the course of their advance north wards (Jud. 18:12). The explanation of the name is questionable, and a different localisation of Mahaneh- Dan is given in Judg. 13:25 viz., between Zorah and Eshtaol. It was there that the spirit of Yahwe first stirred up Samson. The explanation of this discrepancy is to be found in 1 Ch. 2:52-54, at least if we may read jT-nmo instead of p-njro. The Manahethites were partly sons of Shobal the father of Kirjath-jearim, and partly connected with the Zorites (of Zorah). See MANAHETHITES. s. A. c.


(nn, cp Ph. ^imnQ?), a Netophathite [of the Zerahites], one of David's heroes (2 S. 2328, Noepe [B]. MAep&ei [A], MAARNAN [o TOY qbeATiA] [L], iCh.H 3 o, N eepe [BK, i.e., nnj], MOOP& [A], MAppI [L]; 27i3. M6HpA. [B], MOOP<M [A], MA&PI [L])-


(nnp, cp Ahimiti, son of Azuri king of Ashdod, temp. Sargon, see below ; M&A.6 [BAL]).

1. b. Amasai, in the genealogy of the Kohathite Samuel ; i Ch. 635 [20] (fifS [B], ani<oO [L]) apparently = AHIMOTH (y.v.) in v. 25 [10] (where L has afata6 as here); perhaps derived from Mahath b. Amasai in 2 Ch. 29 12 (niaefl [A]). Cp JAHATH, 2, GENEALOGIES i., 7, iii. c. Mahath, Amasai, Azariah are all Kohathite (i.e., S. Palestinian) names. Amasai probably comes from Ishma ell (Ishmaelite, cp i Ch. 2 17), Azariah from Asshuri (cp ASSHURIM); Mahath or Ahimoth is presumably also an ethnic, and perhaps (like Ahitub?), comes from Rehobothi. A Reho- bothite king of Ashdod, and a Levite connected with Rehoboth are very possible.

2. A temple officer temp. Hezekiah (2 Ch. 31 13 ; Oavai [B ; see NAHATH, 3], aa$ [L]), perhaps the same as i. T. K. C.


Eliel the Mahavite is the EV rendering of the MT D^HSn ^N^N (i Ch. 11 46 . . . o Mii [BN], o MACOGIN [A], o M&C06I [L]). a rendering which cannot be legitimately obtained from the present state of the text.

Read O inan (cp Vg., Mahumites), a man of Bahurim. Eliel and Bahurim are both probably Jerahmeelite names (Che.).

Be. (CAro.)and Barnes (Cam6. BiMe) would read jnen, an inhabitant of MAHANAIM (q.v. ). Pesh. presents a form yv die )


(niK^nO, visions, cp NAMES, 23), according to the Chronicler a son of Heman (i Ch. 26430, MeAzu)6 v. 4, MAzco6 v. 30 [B], MAAZICOG [AL], mahazioth [Vg. ]), see HEMAN.


(T3 K : n fytf 1HD, 23; oiEetoc rrpoNOMHN TTOIHCAI CKyAtoN and TAxeooc CKyAeycoN, oSecoc npONOMeycoN [BNAQl 1 ]), the name given by Isaiah to his son (Is. 813). Like SHEAR-JASHUB (q.v. ) this name is intended as an omen (cp Che. Is. I 3 , ad loc.). The name means 'swiftly cometh spoil, speedily hasteneth prey' or, to keep closer to the abruptness of the Hebrew, 'hasten booty, speed spoil'. See ISAIAH i. , 4.


(PDnO ; M &A* [BAL], MAAAA [F]), a daughter of ZELOPHEHAD [^.^.] (Nu. 2633 [37]; 27 1 [L om. all the names of the daughters] ; 36 n MAAAA [B], MAAAA [ALJ; Josh. 17 3 MAAAA [BL]). In RV of i Ch. 7 18 Mahlah (AV MAHALAH) is one of the sons of HAMMOLEKETH \_q.v.~], Machir s sister (/j.ae\a [B], fj.oo\a [A], /u.aa\a.0 [L]).

All these names are corrupt ; but the true readings can prob ably be recovered. Zelophehad springs from Salhad ; Hammo- leketh from Salecah (another name of the same place). Mahlah may come from [AbelJ-meholah ; there was possibly a second place of this name, which ultimately comes from Jerahmeel. Note that Gideon, who has been fused with Jerubbaal, is an Abiezrite, and that Abiezer in i Ch. 7 18 is a brother of Mahlah.

T. K. C.


(^TBJ, 74 : MOoA[e]i [BAL]), a Levitical subdivision which appears as a distinct family in Nu. 2658 (@ I!AFL om. ), but is elsewhere associated with the division MERAKI. These names seem to appear inde pendently in EzraSiS/. (see SHEREBIAH) i Esd. 847 (/nooXXet [L]) ; more commonly, however, they are brought into relationship. Thus Mahli is either made the son of Merari (and brother of MUSHI) in Ex. 619 (AV MAHALI) Nu. 820 i Ch. 619 [4] (/uooXXi [L]) 29 [14] (om. B) 2821 (/J.OT)\ [B in t>]) 2426, or becomes the son of Mushi and grandson of Merari, as in i Ch. 632 [47] (/*ooXAi[L]), cp232 3 24 3 o( / uooXXet[B]). See, generally, GENEALOGIES i. , 7.

The gentilic Mahlites ( Snarl) occurs only in Nu. 3 33 (6 moAei [B], o jU.ooA[e]i [BabAFL]) 26 58 (see above).

The name is possibly derived from MAHALATH (f.v.) ; but may come straight from Jerahme eli (Che.) ; note that one of Mahli s descendants is named Jerahmeel (cp i Ch. 23 21 24 2%f.), and see MOLID.


See CHILION, and cp RUTH (BOOK).


(biniD, 74 ; M AA [B], MAOyA [A], MAAAA [L]), the father of Heman, Calcol, and Darda, three (foreign) wise men who, together with Ethan the Ezrahite, were surpassed in wisdom by Solomon (1 K. 4:31 [5:11]). These names can all be accounted for on the assumption that the wisdom of the Edomites is referred to. Ethan and Heman both seem to be corrupt forms of TEMAN {q.v. ] ; Calcol (SsVj) is probably a corruption of Caleb (3*73), and Darda (y-m) of AROER (ijny). EZRAHITE is certainly another form of Zarhite, and Zerah in Gen. 36:13, 36:17 is an Edomite clan. Lastly, Mahol, like HAMUL, comes from JERAHMEEL (Snom ). It was really, perhaps, only Aroer that was a son of Jerahmeel ; <S BL give uWs or vibv, not viovs in i K. I.c. The enthusiastic remark of i K. 4:31 [5:11] now becomes more striking, for the wisdom of the Edomites (with whom the Jerahmeelites were connected) was proverbial (cp Obad. 8), and when we take into consideration that in v. 30 we should almost certainly read c/T) :3 (a cor ruption of ^NorrV Ja, sons of Jerahmeel ) for MT s mp 33, and that Job was also greater than all the Jerahmeelites (read cpn 33 Job 1 3), the view here offered becomes in the highest degree probable. See EAST (CHILDREN OF), JERAHMEEL, MAHALATH.

Klo.'s ingenious theory (see his notes on i K. I.e.) that there was a poetic dialogue, like our Job, in which Ethan and the other sages took part, is baseless ; *?inD cannot mean a round of alternate speeches. 1 Lag. (Or. 225) more plausibly thought that *?inO 33 meant dancers (and singers); cp Ti^n rma, Eccles. 124. T K C


( RV, Jer.32:12, 51:59. See MAASEIAH i.


RV Maiannas (MAIANNAC [BA]), 1 Esd. 9:48 = Neh. 8:7, MAASEIAH ii., 16.


(TO^, almah, Ex. 28, etc.; H/in?, bZthuldh, Lam. 5n, etc.). See IMMANUEL, 1, FAMILY, 4.


(fi?; MAXCMAC [B], MAXMAC [A], MAfXAC [L]), mentioned first among the cities of the second of the prefectures of the land of Israel, 1 K. 4:9. The next three places named being among those reckoned to Dan (Josh. 19;41-43), it would seem that Makaz should be a corruption of one of the other names of Danite towns. ME-JARKON (q.v.) suggests itself as probable. If the site proposed for this place is correct, Me-jarkon well deserved to be so prominently mentioned. 1 Makkus, a little to the NE. of Ascalon, once proposed by Conder, is neither in an important position, nor would the site be Danite. T. K. c.


(MAKeA [ANV] ; Vg. Magetk), an unknown place in Gilead, mentioned in 1 Macc. 526 (MAKeB [A]) cp 36 (where AV MAGED) along with Bosora and Carnaim.


(nnp ; MAKHAoo9 [BAF], MA-KHAcoG [L]), a place named in Nu. 33:25-26, probably identical with KEHELATHAH ; cp also MIKLOTH.

All these forms are almost certainly corruptions of Jerah meel. P's list of stations is artificial ; the substratum, how ever, consists of place-names belonging to the Jerahmeelite region, S. of Palestine.



(nn|?p; MAKHAAN, MAKHAA ; Jos. Anf.v. li? MAKXlAA, v.i MAKKHAA , Pesh. makdr, but in 15:41 nakdd), a royal Canaanite city (Josh. 12:16 ; om. [?] B) in the lowland of Judah (15:41), mentioned at the end of a group of cities together with Beth-dagon and Naamah. It was in the cave at Makkedah that the five kings of the Amorites, who had sought refuge there after the battle of Beth-horon (10:10, 10:16), were taken and slain. Makkedah itself was captured after wards (10:21). Eusebius places Makkedah 8 R. m. E. from Eleutheropolis (052/890; cp 1388). This is clearly impossible. Nor is it at all certain (the name having disappeared) whether the site proposed by Warren at el-Mughar ( the cave ), SW. of Ekron, 5 m. E. of Nd anek (perhaps the Naamah of Josh. ), and some 25 m. from Gibeon, is the right one. There are, indeed, signs that an ancient town stood here, and Conder says that this is the only site in the plain where caves are to be found. The Wady es-Sardr has, in fact, made a way here through a bar of soft sandy stone, and the precipitous cliffs are pierced by caverns of various sizes (PEF Mem. 2411). The narrative in Josh. points to a single specially large cave (mjra-i) which was outside of the town. The name may seem to suggest a sheep-breeding region (cp ipj and Dr. on Am. 1:1). It may, however, have suffered changes, and the original name may possibly have had the same origin as ME- GIDDO [q.v. ]. It has not been traced with certainty in the Egyptian name-lists. T. K. c.

1 In the main as Klost., who reads the name Me-rakkon.


(^rOn ; THN KATAKeKOMMersiHN [BNAQ] ; eiC TON oA/v\ON [Aq.], TOON oA/v\coN [Symm.], gN TOO BA0ei [Theod.]), usually supposed to be the name of a quarter of Jerusalem where mer chants and dealers resided (Zeph. 1:11), and to be so called because in configuration it resembled a mortar (RV m s-, the mortar ); cp Judg. 15:19 the mortar (EV hollow place ) that is in Lehi. See MORTAR. The Tg. thinks of the Valley of the Kidron, most moderns of the Tyropoeon (see JERUSALEM, 23). The name, however, which is both odd in itself and nowhere else found, is not improbably corrupt. It is best to read rnwsrr-n (2 K. 23:13), or rather c v inne 8n"in (see DESTRUCTION, MOUNT OF) ; the locality meant is the Mount of Olives. Observe that the gates and the hills are mentioned just before.

This may be illustrated by Neh. 13:15, where we read, accord ing to a probable critical emendation of a corrupt text, that sellers of agricultural produce brought their goods into Jerusalem by the ascent of those who worship (Q lrWCJSn nSyC2 for D1 3 VJ,W TX DTDO)- Probably there were houses or shelters on the Mount of Olives for those sellers who could not return home in the day. Possibly, too, the phrase D lnnBJSrt n^D is the original name of the c n in *1H (Zech.14:4): i.e., DTI t (olives) may be a corruption of Q lnDB D ( 'those who worship' ). In 2 S. 15:30 we find the phrase QTI in H^yo ( 'the ascent of the olives' ), for which we should perhaps read (cp v. 32) nSj?D Cp OLIVES, MOUNT OF. T. K. c.


1. Name.[edit]

According to the title (Mal. 1:1), the last book of the Minor Prophets contains the word of Yahwe to Israel by Malachi. It would seem that a proper name is intended here, but the difficulty of understanding the word malachi ("ON?!?, 'my messenger' ) 1 in this way has been felt since the earliest times. Even LXX{BKAQ} has iv x tL P^ dyyt\ov avrov, 'by his messenger' ; a translation which (whether from ^x^O or ISK^D) would hardly have been possible at a time when the existence of a prophet Malachi was generally recognised. In fact, the prevailing tradition among the Jews for some time after Christ continued to reject the proper name.

The Jon. Targ. (Mal. 1:1) declares this messenger to have been no other than Ezra the scribe, and Jerome adopts this view. Cp also Talm. Megilt. 15a. The earliest Church Fathers generally regard the word as an appellative (see Reinke, Malachi, 6-9; Kohler, Nachexil. Proph. 4:4-5; Nestle, Sept. Stud. 3:13, and cp 4 Esd. 1:40). In any case, it is hardly to be doubted that the superscription is the work of a later hand.-

When, finally, it is observed how the phrase 'my messenger' is employed in 3:1, at the beginning of the most striking passage in the book, the conclusion seems imperative that the proper name Malachi originated in a misinterpretation of this word, aided perhaps by Hag. 1:13 as well as Mal. 2:7.

1 So far as the form is concerned, 3K^O rnight be a con- traction of n SX^D or irPDxSs, messenger of Yahwe. But the name is not a likely one, and there is no evidence of the occur rence of the longer form in any Hebrew text (to appeal to the later Greek superscription, MaAaxw, is absurd).

2 Cp especially Zech. 9:1 (text incomplete) J2 i.

2. Contents.[edit]

The book falls into two main divisions : (a) a rebuke addressed to the priests (l:6-2:9) ; (b) a series of oracles addressed to all the people (2:10-3:21 [4:3]).

(a) The theme of the brief introduction (12-5), Israel God's peculiar people, plays a very important part in the book from beginning to end. See 1:6, 2:10, 3:6-7, and cp 2:5-6. That the prophet should choose here as his sole illustration of this truth a reference to calamities that have recently come upon Edom, Israel's brother nation, is characteristic of the time at which he wrote (see below, 6).

Of the charges brought against the priests, the fore most is one of gross misconduct in their performance of the temple service (1:6-13). They treat the sacred rites with indifference, and bring the most worthless offerings as good enough for the worship of Yahwe. They are further accused of betraying their trust as the official guides of the people in religious matters (2:4-9). As members of the priestly tribe, they are the bearers of the torah (mm) or (oral) teaching concerning the religion and worship of Yahwe. They have broken their covenant, however, and turned aside from the path ; their teaching has become a stumbling-block to the people. In v. 9b, if the text is correct, still another accusation is unex pectedly introduced, namely that of partiality in the use of the teaching. The meaning of the charge is not quite clear, and it is decidedly out of place as it stands.

(b) In the passage 2:10-16, with which the second main division of the book begins, nearly all interpreters since Jerome have seen the prophet s rebuke of two evils marriage with heathen women, and divorce (so also Targ., though with a noteworthy variation in v. 16. due to the corrupt state of the Hebrew original ; see also EZRA i. , 5). This interpretation fails to meet the requirements of the text (see below, 4). The rebuke is rather directed against the encroachment of foreign worship in Israel (so LXX, Pesh. ). Judah has dealt falsely with the wife of his youth, the covenant religion, and is wedding a strange cult. The people lament because their offerings fail to bring a blessing, and are strangely unable to see why ill-fortune has come upon them (vv. 13-14a).

The two sections 2:17-3:5 and 3:13-21 [4:3] are very much alike in character and contents. In each, the assertion of some of the people that Yahwe does not concern himself with human affairs is answered by the prophet s assurance that the great and terrible day will soon come, when the good shall be separated from the evil and the righteous shall finally triumph. These oracles are interrupted by a characteristic passage (3:6-12) in which the people are censured for neglecting to pay their tithes. The passage was begun in a quite different strain (see esp. v. 7), suggested by the catalogue of sins in v. 5. The way in which the prophet seizes upon this particular delinquency as it occurs to him, abandoning the main line of his reasoning altogether, illustrates both the hasty looseness of style into which he some times falls, and his present interest in matters connected with the public worship.

It is probable that 3:22-24 [:4-6] is a later appendix to the book. ! It has no natural connection with the preceding, but has all the appearance of an addition by another hand, having for its chief object the providing of an impressive close for the collection of the prophetic writings. It is hardly by accident that Moses and Elijah, the two great representatives of Israel's golden age, appear together in these isolated verses at the end of the last of all the prophets.

3. Heathen worship.[edit]

The most interesting passage in the book from the theological point of view is 1:11, with its assertion that all sincere worship of the one God, even among the heathen, is accepted by Yahwe, whose name is truly honoured (cp in the NT Rom. 1:19-20 [cp 2:10-11 ; Wisd. 13:6-9] ; Acts 10:35). This interpretation, which is now adopted by most OT scholars, is the one required by both the language and the context of the verse. See esp. Kuenen, Hibbert Lectures (1882), p. i8o/. ; GASm. The Twelve Prophets (1898), p. 358 /. But the passage stands alone in the OT. In Ps. 65:3 [2], which is perhaps the nearest approach to a parallel, the language is much less definite. Still, remarkable as the expression is, the idea was certainly not foreign to Judaism it is quite in the spirit of the Wisdom literature, for example nor can it be said to be out of keeping with the character of this prophet as it appears in the rest of the book.

1 [The phraseological evidence for this view has been collected by Bohme, /.A TM 1 210^ ED.]

2 No one of the attempts to emend e?>. 150; i6a can be called even partially successful.

4. Figurative interpretation of divorce.[edit]

It has been remarked above that the current interpretation of 2:10-16 is untenable. The text of the passage is, unfortunately, corrupt ; 2 but it is not difficult to recognise the nature interpretation of thg charge brought by the prophet against his fellow-countrymen. The sin which he is attacking is one of unfaithfulness, of false dealing (verb bagad}. The accusation is stated definitely in v. 11b : 'Judah has profaned the sanctuary of Yahwe, which he loves, and has espoused a bath el nekar' (n33 *?K m. 'daughter of a foreign god' ). A few verses farther on (vv. 14-15) the charge is made : 'Thou hast dealt falsely with the wife of thy youth, the wife of thy covenant'. To treat these expressions literally, as referring to actual marriage and divorce, 1 involves us in insuperable difficulties. To assume, in the first place, that divorce of Israelitish wives stood in any necessary or even probable connection with the wedding of women from other nations is unreasonable. Many modern commentators, in the desire to avoid this difficulty, suppose a change of subject, from intermarriage with Gentiles to divorce in general (Kohler, Orelli, Wellh. , etc. ). It is not possible, however, thus to separate vv. 13-16 from vv. 10-12. The phrase 'wife of thy covenant- religion' (that eseth blrithlkd [-JVQ ns^x] cannot mean 'wife of thy marriage vows', Kraetzschmar, Bundes- vorstellung, 240 f. has shown conclusively) is plainly contrasted with 'daughter of a foreign god' ; 'with whom thou hast falsely dealt' (v. 14) refers to the charge made with the same word in v. 11 ; berith in v. 14 is repeated from v. 10. Better evidence of con tinuity could hardly be desired. 2 Another attempt to remove the apparent incongruities of the passage is that of G. A. Smith ( The Twelve Prophets, 2340 365), who proposes to strike out vv. 11 and 12 - a desperate ex pedient. There is one, and but one, admissible inter pretation, namely, that which recognises the use of figurative language here. Wedding a foreign cult necessarily involved divorce from the covenant religion. The figure employed by the prophet is very natural and effective, certainly better suited to his time than that introduced by Hosea.

5. Conditions.[edit]

The book of Malachi gives us in small compass a many-sided view of the religious conditions in which the writer lived. Israel was beginning to feel the effects of her more intimate acquaintance with the great nations round about. The world had grown larger, and the perspective had changed. A new type of free thinkers had arisen (2:17, 3:13+); a class too numerous, and perhaps too sincere, to be ignored. The feeling was gaining ground that the old beliefs and rites were outgrown. Hence the shameful conduct of some of the priests, and the readiness of many influential men among the people to betray the nation (as the prophet insists, 2io) by openly espousing foreign cults. On the other hand, the orthodox, the God-fearing, formed a sort of church or party by themselves (3:16) in opposition to these tend encies. The situation closely resembles that which pro duced the two parties of the Pharisees and the Sadducees at a later day. The prophet s own position is that of one who can welcome the broader view, while remaining thoroughly loyal to the national religion. He declares without hesitation that heathen worship is accepted by Van we, but in the next breath appeals to the patriotism of his hearers, and to their hope of a Messianic time.

1 [The latest advocacy of the literal interpretation is to be found in Nowack s Kl. Proph. 389 410^, and Che. Jew. Rel. L.ife(f)a). The most plausible reconstruction of the whole back ground of the passage (Mal. 2:10-16) on the same view is that of Stade ((7K/2 136^), who remarks, The connection shows that the writer has to do in the first place with matrimonial alliances which respected members of the community, who were already of a certain age, had contracted with rich and influential families of the peoples of the land. These persons were already married, and their non-Jewish fathers-in-law were able, in consequence of their social position, to make the new marriage conditional on a preceding divorce of the Jewish wife. Against this, how ever, see Winckler, AOF1=,Tf,jff. ED.]

2 [It is, of course, v. 16 which may appear to break the con tinuity nf Mal. 2:10-16. For I hate dismissal (of a wife), says Yah we, may seem too general and far-reaching to serve as an argument in this special case. But it is urged that reformers often do not see all that follows from the general principles which they invoke, which explains some of the strange incon sistencies in the later OT literature. ED.]

  • It has been customary, chiefly because of the traditional

exegesis of 2:10+, and the fact that mixed marriages are assailed in Ezra-Neh., to assign Mai. to the middle of the fifth century. [The precise position of the book in relation to Nehemiah and Ezra is a matter of controversy. Stade places it before the arrival of Ezra ; Driver during the absence of Nehemiah at the Persian Court ; Che. (Jew. Rel. Life) shortly before the arrival of Nehemiah, and consequently before that of Ezra. The ques tion has passed into a new phase in consequence of recent critical study of the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. ED.]

6. Date.[edit]

As for the date of Malachi, it was certainly written in the Persian period (allusion to the 'governor' in 1:8), after the completion of the temple (3:10). Regarding the other criteria it may be said that they all point distinctly to a late rather than an early date. 3 The remarkable passage 1:2-5 (Edom the arch enemy of Israel) is to be classed with Am. 9:12 and Ob. 21 ; l the apocalyptic passages 3:1+, 3:19+ (4:1+), with their conception of the day of judgment as the day when 'the wicked' (o J/Bn) shall be destroyed out of Israel, remind us of the Psalms (Wellh.); the theological development presupposed by the book finds its nearest parallels in the Psalter and the Wisdom literature ; and finally, the position of Mai. at the end of the collection of the Prophets may be adduced, though the argument is not weighty. We may, therefore, assign the book with some confidence to the first half of the fourth century. To argue from the fact that Mai. calls the priests sons of Levi, that he was not acquainted with the priestly law-book (Wellh. on Mal. 3:22 [4:4] ; cp Now. 391) is hardly permissible. It is evident, from all parts of the book, that the writer (like many of the latest OT writers) is strongly influenced by Dt. Nothing could be more natural than that he should use its familiar phraseology. The same may be said of 3:22 [4:4] (probably by a later hand ; see above) with its mention of Horeb instead of Sinai. Such expressions as the laws and statutes which were enjoined by Moses upon all Israel were, of course, associated with the name Horeb (see, e.g., Dt. 5 i.yi). Cp also Ecclus. 48 7 Ps. 10*3 19. From 3:10 (cp Nu. IS viff.) it is natural to sup pose that the priestly law of tithes was already codified, as it certainly was recognised.

7. Style.[edit]

The diction of Mai. is pure, the style vigorous, though often prosaic and sometimes awkward. In more than one place, the meaning is seriously obscured by an abrupt transition, due apparently to the writer's impulsive haste. A personal peculiarity of his style is seen in his favourite way of opening an argument, by introducing the supposed objections of his hearers, which he then refutes (1:2+, 1:6+, 2:17, 3:7-8, I 3+)- 2 Originality and earnestness are marked char acteristics of the book in all its parts. The estimate that pronounces it a monument of the degeneracy of Hebrew prophecy, the product of an age whose religious teachers could only imitate, but not attain to, the spiritual fervour of the old prophets (so esp. Duhm, Reuss) is decidedly unjust.

8. Literature.[edit]

Among the special comms. on Mal. those of Edward Pococke, 1677 ((-), 1692), Reinke, 1856, Kohler, 1865, may be mentioned. Cp also Stade, Gesch. Isr. 2 128-138 ; and JBL 17 1-15, where the views expressed in this article, as now revised, are more fully set forth. [See also W. Bohme, ZATIV 7 (1887) 210^!: Wi. .} W. K. S. C. C. T.


RV Malcam (D|).

1. b. SHAHARAIM [q.v], in the genealogy of BENJAMIN (q.v., 9, ii. ft), i Ch. 8 9 t ( M eA X s IBJ. /* [AJ, -OM [L]).

2. In Zeph. Is (TOU /WiAe ws O.VTWV [BNAQ], juoAox [Q m e-]) RVmj;. has their king, as in 2 S. 1230 RV m g- has MALCAM for EV s their king. See MILCOM.




(^2>/>, God is King (or my king) 1 24, 36 ; on early history of name see MALCHIJAH ; MAx(e)lHA [ADFL] ; but in Nu. MeAAmA [B*], in Ch. MeAAeiH [B]), an Asherite family, Gen. 46i? Nu. 26 4 s (where also ^N 3 1 ?!?, MalcMelite,A\eAAiHAi [B]. MeA X (e)lHA(e)l [B ab AFL]) i Ch.7 3 i- The same name is prominent in the correspondence of the Amarna tablets. Milkil ( = Malchiel) was one of the chief enemies of the governor of Jerusalem (cp Jastrow, JBL\\ 120 ; Sayce, Pat. Pal. 135, etc. ). See ASHER i. , I-

  • See/.SZ. 17 16-20 ; also EUOM, 9.

2 It is a curious fact that many scholars, following Ewald, have seen in this (in itself by no means remarkable) habit of style a mark of the transition to the dialectic manner of the Jewish schools, although dating Mai. in the fifth century.


(Pwfy?, irpata as if 'Yahwe is my king' ; 36); but possibly the original name was a corruption of Jerahme'el ; Hammelech and Harim (24-6) seem to be corruptions of Jerahme el. Note also Malchijah the Rechabite (7, 8) ; cp MALCHIEL. That nos. 4-6, 7 and 8, and 9-11 represent only three individuals is highly probable. /u.f\x[e]ta [BNA], /j.e\- Xtas [L].

1. Father of PASHHUK, q.v. ; Jer. 21 1 MELCHIAH [AV], MALCHIAH [RV] (nifA X tou [BNAQ]), Jer. 38 1 EV MALCHIAH BNA om., MfAxiou ([Aq., Theod., in Q B-]).

2. b. Hammelech (RV the king s son, but see above), into whose dungeon Jeremiah was cast; Jer. 336 EV MALCHIAH (MeA x [e].ov [BNAQ]).

3. Ancestor of Adaiah the priest ; i Ch. 9 12 (naA X ei.a [B], fieAxiow [A]); Neh. 11 i2, AV MALCHIAH; probably to be identified with the Malchijah who gave his name to one of the twenty-four priestly lots; i Ch. 249 (M e A\ti)A [L]) ; cp the occurrence of the name in the Asaphite genealogy in i Ch. 640 [25], AV MALCHIAH (^A X ta [L]).

4. 5, 6. (AV MALCHIAH) b. Parosh, b. Parosh secundus, and (AV MALCHIAH) b. Harim, laymen in list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5 end) ; Ezra 1025 [Ms], 10 31 (UNA om. the second Malchijah in 10 25 and add crajSia [K], a<ra/3ia[A], etc., see ASIUIAS; L for the first reads /uixaias. In i Esd. i) 26 32 MELCHIAS). Malchijah b. Harim was one of the repairers of the wall ; Neh. 3n ( M eA x eia? [HA]).

7, 8. (AV MALCHIAH) b. Rechab, ruler of the district of Beth- haccherem, Neh. 3 14 ; and one of the goldsmiths," Neh. . {31, both repairers. If Ben-rechab, the designation of the former, means Rechabite, it shows that the Kenites still lived among the representatives of the old people of Israel. Cp Be.-Rys. ad loc. ; E. Meyer, Entst. 167. And certainly Rechabite is the meaning, if, in accordance with parallels almost innumerable, flixrrp (fiurifex) is a corruption of -p nD":s> ; son of a Zarephathite. Observe that in Neh. 3 32 (by a necessary emendation) the Zarephathites (n riEnxn) ar >d the Jerahmeelites (o ^HBrrVJl f r D Ssin) are mentioned as co operating in the repairs. See ZAREPHATH.

9, 10, 11. A supporter of Ezra at the reading of the law (see EZRA ii., 13 / ; cp i. 8, ii., 16 [5], ii. 15 [i] c), Neh. 8 4 (ju.eA X etas [BNA]), cp i Esd. 944 MELCHIAS; priestly signatory to the covenant (see EZRA i., 7), Neh. 10 3 [4] ; and a priest in procession at dedication of wall (see EzKAii., 13^) Neh. 1242 0A X eias [N c a mg ; BNA om.]). T. K. C.


(DTS^D, 41, 'my king is exalted' ; perhaps an adaptation of a name corrupted (cp HAMME LECH, MALCHIJAH) from JERAHMEEL (Che. ), one of the sons of Jeconiah ; i Ch. 3i8 (MeAxtellRAM [BAL]).


(INtr^D, or in one word [Bab. MSS] as in i S. ; NAMES, 41 ; MeAxiCOye [NAL] but MeAxiPoye [A], ! S. 312; MeAxiceAAi [L], i S. 1449; MeAxeicoye [B], iCh. 939102; MeAxec- [B], iCh.Sss; /weAxeiCA [B], i S. 1449812 ; MeAxiceAeK [K], i Ch. 10 2), son of Saul, said to have fallen with his father (i S. 31 2). Both fact and name, howevtr, are questionable.

As to the fact, see SAUL, 4. As to the name, the second element y\& is a corruption of INE , the first three letters of SlHt? dittographed. 3-13 in the preceding name 313 is evidently a variant of jrti in jnjv- The name of Saul s second son may have been either I^JTUN (Abimelech) or, if ^K is merely a variant of V (Marq.), 370 is most probably a corruption of 7K"inO (MahrieI) = ^KOnT (Jerahme el). The latter view is preferable. Cp MEPHIBOSHETH ; SAUL, 6. T. K. C.

1 Aq. rendered oil (aAei^/aa) ; Sym. and Vg. bark (<Aoiou, cortices).


(MAAxoc [Ti.WH]), the name of the bond-servant of the high -priest whose right ear was struck off by Peter (Jn. 18:10). The name is of Semitic origin and not unfrequent (cp MALLUCH and see NAMES, 57).


(Lk. 8:37), RV MAHALALEEL- (q.v.).


(2 Macc. 4:30). RV MALLUS (q.v.).


rniks, 23; i.e. 'I have fulfilled' ; MdvAAHGl [L]; but in i Ch. 254 M6dvAco6l [A]. M&N06I [B]; and in v. 2 6f MeAAHOi [A], Mee<\9ei [B]), one of the sons of Heman. See HEMAN.


RV Salt-wort (mallush, PI^D, &AIM& 1 Job 30:4 t). The abject wretches who make Job their mock are described as cave-dwellers who feed miserably on the mallush and other desert plants. [See further JUNIPER, and for a recovered parallel to Job304 (Job 66) see PUKSLAIN. ] Malluah comes from melah, salt, and it is now agreed that the plant is that called fiXtyitos [alemos] or d\L/j.ov by the Greeks, viz. the sea orache, Atriplex Halimus, L. This was first shown by Bochart (Hieroz. 3i6), who quoted the statement of Ibn Baitar (d. 1248 A. u. ) that the people of Syria in his time gave the name mallukh to the a\ifj.ov.

The plant is described by Dioscor. (1 120) as a hedge shrub, resembling a bramble, whitish, but thornless. Its leaves are like those of the olive, but broader and softer ; they are used as potherbs and cooked for food.

According to Tristram (NHB 466) the sea orache grows abundantly on the shores of the Mediterranean, in salt marshes, and also on the shores of the Dead Sea still more luxuriantly. ... It forms a dense mass of thin twigs without thorns, has very minute purple flowers close to the stem, and small, thick, sour-tasting leaves which could be eaten, as is the Atriplex hortensis, or Garden Orache, but it would be very miserable food.


(-spta 57 ; MAAoyx [BKA], - K [L]).

1. A Merarite ; i 01.644(29] 0/.oAu>x [BAL]); see GENE ALOGIES i., 7 (iii. a).

2. b. Bani, a layman in list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5 end) ; Ezra 1029 (oAouju [B], oeAou^. ["])= i Esd.&3O MAMUCHUS Oua^oux * [BA]).

3. b. Harim, a layman in same list; Ezra 1032 (fioSovx [?] fiaAtoK [L]) ; Neh. 10 27 [28] ((aaaAoux [N vid -]).

4. A priestly signatory to the covenant (see EZRA!. ,8 7); Neh. 104 [5] ; the name occurs also in the list of those who returned with Zerubbabel ; Neh. 12 2 (jxaAouA [B]). The head of the fathers house of MALLUCHI or the Malluchites in Joiakim s time was Jonathan(see EZRA ii., 66, n), Neh. 12 14 ( 3^3 Kt., but \yjD Kr. RVmg. MELICU). See MALLUCHI. Both Harim and Malluchi suggest Jerahmeel (Che.).


see MALLUCH, 4. (See EZRA ii. , 6b, ii).


(MA.AACOT&I 2 Macc. 4:30). Mallus rebelled, along with Tarsus, against Antiochus Epiphanes about 171 B.C. Its earliest Greek name was Marios (cp coins) ; in the Middle Ages it was called Malo. It was a town of some importance, lying on a height (t<j> v\(/ovs KfL/^vri, Strabo, 675), on the E. of the Pyramus (jihun), for Alexander the Great had to bridge the river before reaching the town in his advance to Issus. The site lies about i hour SW. of the small village of Kara- task. The Pyramus divides near its mouth into two arms, which flow respectively E. and W. of the short range of hills extending along the coast NE. of Kara- tash. In ancient times the western arm was the more important ; but now it is almost dry and the real mouth of the river is at the opposite end of the chain, at the bay of Ayash (anc. /Egas).

The conclusion as to the site given above, which is that ot Ramsay (Hist. Geogr. of AM, 385; cp Murray s Handbook to AM, 190, with map), is controverted by Heberdey, the most recent authority. He holds that Kara-tash represents the ancient Magarsa (Strabo, 676), Mallus lying 150 stades farther inland, just at the point at which the Pyramus forks. Some support to this view is given by the coins, which show the goddess of the city between two river gods : the proposed site is now a marsh. The ancient authorities, however, combined with the presence of many inscriptions of Mallus at Kara-tash, would seem conclusive against this view though undoubtedly the Stadiasmus in saying that Mallus lay 150 stades E. of Magarsa is greatly in error. w. J. W.


(Cant. 2 i 7 t RV" 1 *-)- See BETHER.


(M&AT&NNAIOC [B]), i Esd. 9:33 RV = Ezra l0:33, MATTENAI, 2.


RV Samaias (CAMAIAN [BA]), i Esd. 8:44 = Ezra 8:16, SHEMAIAH, 17.


(MA./v\A<M[B]), i Esd. 9:34 RV = Ezra 10:35. BENAIAH, 9.


The word occurs four times in the NT in two passages, Mt. 6:24, Lk. 16:9, 16:11, 16:13, the last of these verses being parallel to Mt. 6:24.

1. Spelling.[edit]

AV everywhere 'Mammon', in Lk. 16:9-11 mg. 'Or, riches'; 'RV mammon'. Yet no critical editor of the Greek now sanctions the mm ; fj.afj.uva is found as early as the Complutensian Polyglot and the first two editions of Erasmus ; it is in editions 3-5 of Erasmus, in Stephens, and in Elzevir that we first find fj.afj.fj.uva, and this not in Lk. , but only in Mt. , c. min. ut vid. pauc. (Tisch. ). 1

Though not found as yet in any uncial MS, this spelling is attested by several ancient versions, especially MSS of the O. Latin c, f, fTj, gi, h, Ulfilas in Mt. (titatinnonin, with the marginal gloss faihu-Tpraihna=pfcunia; the latter word stand ing in Lk. in the text) ; the official Vulgate, with some ten of the MSS of Jerome as collated by Wordsworth-White, who now, with the greater number of older MSS, write mamona; the Sahidic (though in the Catena published by Lagarde everywhere [7 times] ft.aft.iai a, p. 15, 160). In ecclesiastical literature fiaft.ft.<ai as is the prevalent spelling (Zahn, Einl. 1:12) ; but the editions of the fathers can only in part be trusted. For uafMWM see Clem, ad Cor. 6, i ; Clem.Al. (ed Dindorf, i. 85, iii. 3143), Orig. c. Cels. 8 3:56 (ed. Koetschau, ii. 222:25, 273:13) ; Adam- antius (ed. van de Sande Hakhuyzen, 56:23-24; 684:6); Apost. Const. 3, 7 (ed. Lagarde, 102:17-22; Pitra in both passages lift.). There is an interesting passage in the newly dis covered Latin Didascalia (ed. Hauler, p. 46), De solo mammona cogitant, quorum Deus est sacculus ; in the Syriac N31CD~I> they are only of ( = for) the mamon, whose God is the purse and the belly (p. 65, 8, 11) ; in the Greek : avr\ TOV (Jeou TU ft.aft.tava Aarptufi TouTeVrt SouAeuet TUJ <ce p6ei. Origen (ed. Klostermann, iii. 6828). 0e6 ox>v eo~rii> r) KotAt a (Phil. 8:19) . . . Oeos crov eariy 6 /LtOfiwcas Kai (cupios.

The question of spelling is more important here than elsewhere because of the etymology (see below, 3, 4) ; for the Greek the single fj. seems to be certain (cp also Edward Miller, Textual Commentary 47, fj.afj.uva, Burgon, All Uncials and most Cursives ); the Latin mm may be influenced by the analogy of mamma and annona ; cp also grabbatum for grabattum, Barrabas for Barabbus, and similar cases.

2. Accentuation.[edit]

The question of accentuation is also of unusual importance. 2 All modern editors write fj.ap.wvq. in the dative, with 'iota subscriptum'. As the oldest MSS of the JsT have no accents we cannot tell how far this iota rests on MSS authority ; but the nominative fj.afj.uvas is found in the Onomastica Vaticana (Lag. 194, 59, fj.afj.wvas TT\OVTOS ?) fj.ufj.os, Supa }) Trffj.fj.aTa with f [^Tet] i.m. at the last word) ; in Suidas (ed. Bernhardy, ^679) : Ma/jLuvas Xpi tros, yrjl vos TT\OVTOS oi xi o fK TOV "ZaTava, dXX 6 vepiTTos Kal VTrtp T-qv xpetac. As the word is already inflected in the earliest Latin writers (e.g. , Tertullian) we need not doubt that the nominative was fj.afj.wvas (not -a), like Caracas. 3 Certainly to Greek readers fj-afj-uvas must have had the ring of a masculine proper name, at least in such a connection as that of Mt. 6:24 = Lk. 16:13. The latest editor, Fr. Blass (Evangelium secundum MatthcBum cum varies lectionis delectu, Lipsise, Teubner, MCMI) returns to the spelling with a capital as WH had printed in their privately - distributed Gospels. As an impersonal neuter it would have been spelt fj.afj.uva like fj.avva, iraffxo- That it really is mas culine as the dictionaries mostly state is shown by the passage from Origen, 853, quoted in i. 4

1 Bengel quotes for /uta/u.wi/a the cursive MSS 83, 84, 86, 89, evst 24, et multi alii ; for fiaft.fi. only editions.

2 Kautzsch (A ram. Gramm. 10) states that WH accentuate ftOfutyd., but in fact in all impressions they have fiafniava. as genitive and fia/j.tava as dative. This iota subscriptum points to the fact that they consider the nominative to be fiafKovas. It I s strange too, that Kaljon should give in the dictionary /nafxioi/a, a 6 (with Cremer(N), 632) ; in NT he himself gives the dative as

3 Hence arises the question whether Lagarde was right when he inferred from the termination -a; that a word like Sarai/as was regarded as a proper name and not as an appellative. Schmiedel-Winer, 6, n. 17, denied it, and we may compare Kopfiavav beside Kopfiav.

  • Nic. de Lyra (on Mt.) remarks, in accordance with the

Glossa Ordinaria, mammona syra lingua divitia , adding that it was also said to be the name of a demon ( nomen dajmonis qui tentat de cupiditate divitiarum ; Glossa Ordinaria, qui pneest divitiis ). In Lk. he takes the other course : Mammon

st nomen daemonis tentantis de divitiis male acquirendis et

ideo nomen eius ad divitias significandas derivatur et potest esse prima; vel tertian declinationis dicendo mammona, mammonae, vel mammon, mammonis.

3. Use and meaning.[edit]

Biblical Hebrew does not contain a word p0c) or "ISO ; it is met with, however, in MH, see, e.g., Pirke Aboth 2:l2 (R. Jose used to say rD ^ y 3<:in " n:in I 1CD T> 'the mamon (riches) of thy neighbour shall be dear to thee as thy own' ; or npix poo n*?D, 'the salt of mamon is almsgiving'.

Here Strack vocalises pD3 even in the st. cstr., whilst Delitzsch punctuates rrSlJW pDD in Lk. 16:11n [but in ed. 1892 n^fty MiDD] ; Pagninus" gave J1SO K31SO, Dalman (Gram. I 35) gives |iCD, Ex. 21 3* (Onk.). In the Syriac versions it is uniformly )L> Q-XOO (), though Karmsedinoyo in the Thes aurus Syriacus mentions the spelling fJ O NT^.^O (,;) in the first syllable. In the Palestinian Syriac we have the spellings |jCL33Jtt cod. B (in Mt.), C (in Lk. n 13), (jQJsoJoc cod. B (in Lk. ii 13), |g,x>aaa C (in Mt.), AC (Lk. n 13). On the Mandaic forms JIJKO and Njiyo (with j), see Noldeke, Mand. Gr. 50.

The LXX seems to have found the word in Ps. 36 (37) 3 for njiaN. J The word is especially frequent in the Targums and sometimes supplemented there by npcn ( =r^y d5i/ctas of Lk. ). The passages of this kind are marked in the following list with a star.

It corresponds to Heb. J?S3 in Gen. 37:26, Ex. 18:21, Judg. 5:19 1 S. 8:3, Prov. 15:27, Ezek. 22:27. pn in Ps. 44 13 [12] Prov. 3 9. J lCn, Eccles. 5 9, Tg. and Pesh., Targ. with the addition TJV ; cp 6 n-epiTTO? in Suidas above, 2. 7T1 in Ps. 49 ii [10]. 1S3 in Ex. 21 30 (also Pesh.); Nu. 8631 *i 8.123 *Amos5i2. IK.p in Dt. 65 Onk. D3J (wherewith cp Ecclus. 58, ^pp CDJ = XP )/ l;Lao t ai /cocr). Tna in Is. 55 i. IS in *Hos. 5 n. K*OT in Gen. 14 12 (Jon.), nntr in *Is. 33 15 45 13.2 I n the Peshitta of Ecclus. the word is found 108143 (, ^pij^ara), 8158 (, xpvcrt oi/). In the Hebrew Ecclesiasticus it is now found 31 8, not in 14 3 (where rnn)- On the proposal to read pOBD or pOCi a so 40 z6c (, SorfBeiav) see Schechter- Taylor, 55. In 42:9 we have ^t>h P3 piTTO?^pij^ (marg. araBei) = LXX, xpvcrt oi i/cta 7T1 t a, Pesh. K>^ . Strange that in Tg. it stands nowhere for poao (Tg. mostly =J^pD, always 6r)<raupoi Gen. 43:23, Job 3:21, Prov. 2:4, Is. 45:3, Jer. 41:8), from which many derive it.

4. Etymology.[edit]

The following are the chief etymologies which have been proposed,

(i) From N /|CN, the thing in which men trust or what is entrusted to man, or that which supports and nourishes men. The Syriac lexicographers favour the last view. In Lk. 16:11 there is an apparent play of words with this root (iriaroi, TO a\T)di.vbv, irurTe&ffci),

2. From ^yno^ = pc(^)D, Eccl. 5:9, Ps. 37:16.

3. From \/]OB, as contraction of pCBD- This ex planation is much older than Gesenius ( Thes. ), being already quoted by Calovius and Castell-Michaelis. It is maintained also by Dalman (Gram. 135), who thinks that peo = pDBD came as a Hebrew word to the Aramaeans, and that its origin was considered to be of the form katol and consequently vocalised with a. and without dagesh.

4. From N /pn in the sense of ,T:D = the allotted por tion; thus Frz. Delitzsch (7.LT, 1876, p. 600). For a different view see Michaelis (Cast. Lex. Syr. ).

5. Lagarde (Mittheil. 1229 and Ubersicht] maintained that it is = joyo = Arab, madmun.

6. It was even connected in early times with ju.u>/j.of (see Onomastica and Buxtorf) ; with /iai^cww (see Bux- torf, Castell) ; and in modern times, by G. Hoffmann, with v6fj.icrfj,a (see details in his Pkon. Inschriften, 43). Hoffmann s objection to Lagarde s explanation, that it does not fit the Punic meaning lucrum, known to Augustine ( Lucrum Punice mammon dicitur, 1 on the Sermon on the Mount, ii. 14 17) is scarcely to the point.

That there was a god (or as Nic. de Lyra said [ 2, n. 3], a demon) called Mammon or Mamon, like the IIXoDros of the Greeks, does not follow from the words of Tert. adv. Marc, 433, iniustitire enim autorem et dominatorem totius saeculi minimum scimus omnes ; nor from those quoted above from the Didascalia, quorum Deus est sacculus. The personification of riches lies close at hand.

Luther is apparently the first German translator of the Bible to give 'Mammon' ; the early translators (like Ulfilas, and later translations like the French Martin) gave its equivalent. So far as we have hitherto been able to learn, it makes its first appearance in English in Piers Plowman (1392 ?) : 'And of Mam- monaes money mad hym many frendes' (1187). The wide currency of the idea that Mammon is the name of a god is due to Milton (\V. H. Bennett, in Hastings, DBSzn).

See Thayer-Grimm, Academy, 1888,24161:; Barth, Etymo- logische Studien, ^vf. ; ZA 5 568 ; the Dictionaries of Levy and Jastrow. Eb. N.

1 Not, however (as is sometimes stated), in Is. 33:6, where iy (fyo-avpois corresponds to pn- Nevertheless this passage is important, because 0i)<raupoi SiKaiovvvris (m lN) later in the verse reminds us of the iia.it.tava rijs a6ii as in Lk.

2 Cp, further, i S. 2:5, Ps. 11:29, 2 S. 14:14 (nothing to corre spond in Hebrew),and jn?TI pDO, Hab. 29 = JH J7S3. The plural does not seem to occur in the Targums ; but in Jewish writings rfUlEO Tli processes about property, are distinguished from >m \-


RV Mamnitanemus (M&M-TA.N&IMOC [B], MA.MNITA.NAIMOC [A], MA.T6A.N IA [?] [L]), a corruption in r Escl. 934 of Mattaniah, Mattenai, and Jaasu (Ezra 10 37).


(&ppp ; M&/v\BpH [ADEL]), a name closely connected with the legends of Abraham.

1. References.[edit]

The 'oaks' (or rather perhaps 'oak' ; so LXX, Pesh. ; cp Gen. 18:4 'the tree'} , of Mamre, for which AV constantly gives 'plains' (see PLAIN) are mentioned in Gen. 13:18, 14:13, 18:1 (all J, except 14:13). In 14:13, as also in v. 24, Mamre is described as an Amorite, and as the brother of ANER and ESHCOL. In P (Gen. 23:17, 23:19, 25:9, 35:27, 49:30, 50:13) Mamre is connected with Abraham's burial place, and is identified (28:19, 35:27) with HEBRON [q. v.]. Jos. (BJ iv. 97) speaks of a large terebinth, as old as the world, which stood in his time six stadia from the city ; doubtless it was traditionally associated with the oak of Mamre, and in the Jewish legends which sprang up later, Mamre plays a prominent part. Sozomen states that in his time it was called Tepe/Jii flos [Terebinthos], 1 and was the scene of a yearly feast and fair (cp WRS Rel. Sem.W 177, 193)- We may admit, then, that Josephus's statement as old as creation is not without an element of truth ; the old, heathenish tree-worship survived, in an innocent form, even to Christian times. See further, NATURE-WORSHIP, 2, and, on the name, cp MARY.

Winckler, however (Gf 2:38-39), thinks that the connection of Mamre with Hebron is due to misunderstanding. Mamre and Kirjath-arba were connected ; but Kirjath-arba was in the far N., and may have been Dan. The terebinths of Mamre represent the sacred precinct of the sanctuary.

2. Textual criticism.[edit]

So far we have proceeded on the assumption that MT is correct in its readings. In the light of emendations, however, which have been suggested in other passages, we can hardly help emending N-ca :*?K3 (Gen. 13:18, 14:13, 18:1) into SN2nv3 'in Jerahmeel', or nv 1N33 'by the well of Jerahmeel'. This and the related critical emendations pour a flood of light on the legends of Abram or Abraham, whose name indeed possibly means 'The (divine) father loves' (properly Ab-raham), indicating that he represented originally the tribe of Jerahmeel ( 'God loves' ?). The brothers of Mamre are Aner and Eshcol. For -up, Aner, read yaiK, Arba 2 (probably from any, 'Arabia', and for Sijrx, Eshcol, read nsSn, Halasah (re membering that pns\ Isaac, not improbably comes from p jrrnN, Ahiheles ; see ISAAC).

It was probably at Rehoboth, not at Hebron, that the tall sons of Anak dwelt; cp 1 Ch. 11:23, which suggests that the Musrites were noted for their stature (see MIZRAIM). Reho both, Halasah, and Beer Jerahmeel were all important places in the Negeb, and famous in legend (see NEGEB, HEBRON).

S. A. C. , I ; T. K. C. , 2.

1 The Tepe j3iv0o? in OSftt 297 36, is that of Gen. 35:4 (Shechem). There is also a Tpe/uuSous in Cyprus, explained from the trembling of the ground when Aphrodite set her feet upon the spot, but really, as Steph. Byz. says, Tpejiiflous is Cypriote for Te p^ui/Oo?, terebinth. The connection of the terebinth with Aphrodite is doubtless correct (WRS, MS note).

2 ply, Anak, is suggested by Wi. (GI 2 40) as a possibility ; but see SODOM.


(/wAMOYXOC [BA]), i Esd. 9:30; see MALLUCH, 2.


HIPP). This word, probably of popular origin (see below), became a technical term in later Judaism for one born of related persons between whom marriage is illegal (see BASTARD). An old Talmudic tradition, however, defines a Mamzer differently, as meaning a child born of a marriage of a non-Jew or a slave with a Jewess (see references in Geiger, Urschrift, 54). Geiger thinks that this is the original meaning, and that this is proved by Zech. 9:6, 'a mamzer shall dwell in Ashdod' (cp Neh. 13:23-24). It is highly probable, however, that -uoo in that passage is a cor ruption of an Assyrian loan-word mindidu, measuring- clerk (see SCRIBE), so that the passage means that Ashdod shall be subject to Assyrian functionaries. If so, the only OT passage containing mamzer is Dt. 23:2 ; the ideas which gathered round the word, however, are alluded to in Jn. 7:49, which Nestle is probably right (against B. Weiss) in paraphrasing thus, We are no heathen, but the legitimate members of the assembly of God (Exp.T, Feb. 1900, p. 235).

The origin of mamzer seems far from being settled. Must it not be an old popular corruption, not of IT CJW, as Geiger thought, but of the lengthy Hebrew phrase ] ~\Kn C]S, aihdares (cpjn.749)? Dt. 23:2+ can hardly be pre-exilic. Nestle, Der Mamzer von Asdod, ZA 7VF20 [1900], p. i /., raises the question of a connection between Zech. 9:6 and Neh. 13:23-24, but quite misses the sense both of 1122 and of nc2C- Cp the present writer s article, PSHA 22 [1900] i6$yC

T. K. C.

MAN, MEN[edit]

Five Hebrew words are thus rendered :

1. DIN, 'rim (on possible root, see ADAM AND EVE, 3 [a], and cp Del. Prol. IOT,/. ; Muss.-Arn. Ass. Diet. 20 ; Di. GV.< 6 ) 53 f. ; in Sab. ciN means servant, vassal ). A collective term (properly with art.) for mankind (Gen. 6 i 7) or men as opposed to God ( II r N or C CMX [Is. 217, and, without art., 9 n]). Also, 'a representative or typical member of the human race," so n DIN, 'a living man," Lam. 3:39 (but see LAMENTATIONS, 4, end) ; J/Bn D"JN, a wicked man (Job 20 29 2" 13 Prov. 6 12 11 7). In late usage, D~1N can mean any man (Neh. 2 10). If emendations suggested elsewhere are accepted, it is re markable how liable this word is to corruption ; consequently some very doubtful meanings have found their way into the lexicons. Examples are, Gen. 16 12 (see ISHMAEL); Is. 484 Jer.3220 Hos. 67 (see LoviNGKINDNESs) ; Job3l33 Ps. 174827 116 ii. In J s narrative of creation, E1N1 s l ^ e * rst created man (see ADAM AND EVE). On the phrase son of man, see special article. Cp MESSIAH.

2. B> N, 'ish (root uncertain ; the plur. C % !?3K is evidently connected with trijj* [3]). The word is used as a designation of the male sex (e.g. , Gen. 4 t z S. 1 n, and [of animals] Gen. 7 2). Also for a husband as opposed to a wife (Gen. 36 29 32 34 Ruth In). Hence for Yahwe as Israel's husband (Hos. 27(9] 16 [ 18]). Also, for an inhabitant of a city or country (Judg. 10 i i S. 7 ii, etc.); generally as a collective (Josh. 96 Judg. 723, cp -I// 1 10). Also for servants or soldiers (i 8.28312, etc.); cp the phrase 'man of God' = prophet. Whether ty % N"":3 and C1N"33 in antithesis (Ps. 49 3 [2] 62 io[g] ; cp 4 3 [2]) mean low and high, men of low degree, and men of high degree (so EV), is disputed. In Jer. 5 i C"N even acquires an ethical connotation.

3. I?iJK, 'enosh (possibly connected by the Hebrews with \/E 3N. 'to be weak' : a mere Volksttymologit)\ cp A~-. tenisetuiit, 'human beings' = mankind ; nisu, a people, pi. nise, people. Properly a collective = 'the human race' (Dt. 32 26 Job 7 17 15 14 Ps. 84(5]); so also rir|3 (Ps. 144 3). Rarely of individuals (Is. 662 Jer. 20 10 Ps. 55 13114] JobS^lSg). In Is. S i CN3M 3^n, aman spen = in common characters (RV "k -). In allusion to its supposed etymology !?iJN can mean frail (mortal) man, as opposed to God ; so in Job, Psalms, Is. 51 7 12 2Ch. 14 io[n]. Di. and Del. would thus explain Enos(Enosh)ui Gen. 4 26 ; but see ENOS, and on Is. 8 i, see Crit. Bib.

4. 133, gebher (Aram. 1?3 ; M/50i6, p3J and ma:, 'men' and 'women' ; Arab, jabr, 'a vigorous young man' ; cp "112:1, a strong man ). In the sing, only once in prose viz., in Dt. 22 5 (opposed to WK, woman ) ; in plur. Ex. 10 1 1 12 37 Josh. 7 14 IT/, i Ch. 23 3 24 4 26 12. D Tljl (the pi. form) is more definite than D E JK (see 2), which includes men, women, and children. ^3 is (<r) = B i> N i.e., simply man (Ps. 34g[s] 405(4] 529(7] 94 12 Jer. 1757); (*) strong man, like 1123 (Job383 Is. 22 17); (c) = 13T, male (Jer. 306 31 22), also of a male child (Job 3 3); (if) husband (Prov. 634); (e) warrior (Judg. 630); (_f) man ( = D^*J), as opposed to God (Job 4 17 10 5 14 10 14 Prov. 20 24 Lam. 3 35).

5. C rip, methim (sing, ino, cp perhaps METHUSAEL, METHU SELAH ; cp Ass. mutu, Eth. met, both meaning 'husband' ), especially in the phrase "1BDO J1C, few people "(Gen. 34 30 Dt. 4 27 Ps. 105 12 i Ch. 16 19), or the synonymous BVp T|D (Dt. 265 2862). Six times in Job (11311 19 19 22 15 24 12 31 31) ; six times in Dt. (234 36 427 265 2862 336). The only old passage is Is. 825, where it seems to mean 'warriors'. 1 In Judg. 1*048 (see Moore, Bu.) Cn,p should be read for DTO. T. K. C.


(D pTK), Jer. 40 1 AV "e- ; EV, CHAINS (q.v. 2).


(MANAHN [Ti.WH], i.e., DPttp ; cp readings of MENAHEM), a Christian prophet or teacher at Antioch called [RV] the foster-brother [Vg. col- lactaneus\ of Herod the tetrarch, Acts 13 i ( HpySou rov TfTpaa.px.ov <rvvTpo<t>os). Foster-brother, however, seems to say too much ; avvrpcxpos is well attested as a court-title in Hellenistic Greek (Frankel, Alter- thiimer von Pergamon , viii. 1 , pp. 1 1 1 f. , quoting inscrip tions and Polyb. v. 94 xxxii. 25 10 ; Ueissmann, Bibel- studien, i8of., cp 173). Manaen, then, was in the confidence of Herod Antipas ; the title implies nothing as to his early life.

Mararjiuos was also the name of an Essene who foretold that Herod the Great would one day become king (Jos. Ant. xv. 10 5), and who is to be identified with the colleague of Hillel in the Sanhedrin (Chagigd, 2 2 ; Geiger,/? Zt., 1869, pp. ij6f.). But the coincidence is accidental. The name would naturally be a favourite with those who waited for the consolation of Israel (Lk. 2 25). Cp Manaim (ISRAEL, 101), a zealot. Ace. to Talm. Jer. Ber. la,, Midr. on Lam. 1 16, one of the names of the Messiah would be Menahem, comforter. Cp MENAHEM. T. K. C.


(HPiaO, 78 ; MANAXA9 [AZ?L]).

1. One of the sons of Shobal the Horite, Gen. 8623 (fj.avvaxa.8 [A], fj.a.vaxa [E]) ; i Ch. 1 40 (/j.a.xa.va.fj. [B], Havaad [L]). Cp the origin assigned to the Mana- hathites of Judah, i Ch. 252 54.

2. A place to which the Benjamites of Geba were compelled by other Benjamite clans to migrate, i Ch. 86 (fj.axa.va.6eL [B], /jtavaxaOi [A], /navovad [L]). This Manahath may be assumed to be the chief town or village of the MANAHATHITKS of Judah [$.v.], and may reasonably be identified with (3).

3- (pavoxw [BAL], fMvax [4454 etc.], pavvax [7476 etc.], Mdnak [Syrohex. ]. ) One of the cities of Judah added by LXX in Josh. 15 59 (cp SHOT}; it follows BETHER (q.v. ) as the last in the list. Perhaps the modern Maltha (n and / confounded, as often), a large village SW. of Jerusalem, near Bittlr (Bether). So Cl. -Gan. PEFQ, 1874, p. 162. See above, 2.


("FirUBn ; MAAAGei [B]. MANA9 [A], -| [L]), i Ch. 254, and, by a virtual cor rection of the text, v. 52, RV MENUHOTH (nin-UDPI; M60NAI60 [B], AMMAN 10 [A] J om. L). AV s (virtual) harmonisation of v. 52 and v. 54 is fully justified (see Ki. SBOT) ; but the English form Manahathites in RV is preferable to Manahethites. Manahathite is a gentilic noun from MANAHATH [y.v.]. The clan so called had Calebite affinities. The origin of one half of it is traced to the tribal hero Shobal, that of the other half to Salma. The locality of Salma s half is at and near Zorah- the well-known town of MANOAH [q.v.~\ that of Shobal's is not mentioned, but presumably it was Danite. SHOBAL [q.v.], it should be remembered, is both Edomite and Judahite. There was also an Edomite MANAHATH (q.v. , i). Note, too, that Salma (called in i Ch. 2:51, 1 the father of Beth-lehem, i.e. , Beth-jerahmeel ? [Che. ] ) is properly N. Arabian. See SALMAH.

1 <sn was unintelligible to the old translators (e<reipa H<ava.i.<a [B], e<rei a^ai/ifl [A] ; L om.). Tg. makes on equiva lent to nmen.


(MANACCHAC [BA]), iEsd. 9:31 = Ezra 10:30, MANASSEH (2).


  • Application of name (1).
  • Relation to Ephraim (2-3).
  • Meaning of name (4).
  • OT references (5-6).
  • Probable history ( 7).
  • P's geographical data (8).
  • Genealogies (9).

1. Application of name.[edit]

Manasseh (i"lt? jp ; 62 ; on etymology see below, 4 ; gentilic Manassite, 'U' JD [see 4, end] ; noun and MJective iffli, MANACCH f BAEDFL], MANN. [A], MANACCHC [BAQR I]) is mentioned in Is. 9:20 as a part of Israel, engaged, or about to be engaged (Marti, ad loc.}, in strife with Ephraim 1 (cp EPHRAIM, 5, i. end). There is no other contemporary reference of a historical char acter. 2 In the genealogical schemes Manasseh ranks as a brother of Ephraim. Since Ephraim is practically synonymous with Israel (see EPHRAIM, i), if we could feel sure that the seniority ascribed by J, E (virtually), and P (see below, 2) to Manasseh repre sented a real tradition, we should be tempted to believe that the people who held the highlands of N. Israel at an early date were called Manasseh. 3 Machir, who in Judg. 5:14 seems to represent Manasseh, is in Josh. 17:1 Manasseh's eldest son, and in Nu. 26:29+ (cp Gen. 50:23) his only son, and is therefore perhaps Manasseh himself (cp MACHIR, and below, 5, end). It is not im possible, if Benjamin was not originally mentioned in Judg. 5:14* (cp BENJAMIN, 4), that Ephraim and Manasseh (or Machir) were by poetical parallelism names for the same thing. This would explain how, when, at a later date (Graf, Gesch. des Sfammes Simeon, 5; Ew. desch.l^-sff.}, Western Israelites planted the name of Machir-Manasseh E. of Jordan (JAIR, MACHIR), the geographical name of EPHRAIM [</.? ., 2] pre vailed in the west. If the names ascribed to Manasseh (there is no definite territory : EPHRAIM, 11) in Josh. 17:2 be taken to make probable the existence of some special Manassite clan or clans forming part of the population of the Ephraim country they may, before most of them migrated eastwards, have been influential enough to lend their name sometimes to the whole. How well Machir as an equivalent for Joseph would suit the Genesis narrative has been pointed out else where (EPHRAIM, i). It may have been the com paratively early migration of most of these settlers that led to the western story of the seniority of Manasseh.

1 Che., however ( Isaiah, Heb. SPOT, 194), thinks that 92o[ig]<5 19 [18] c 2o[i9]<r 2i[2o]/> probably come from another context, and that Judah alone was referred to by the original writer [of the poem]. This would leave the date of the reference to Manasseh and Ephraim uncertain, for v. 21 [20] a b can hardly be brought into connection with 3 14 ; it would have to be a gloss.

2 For a hypothetical mention see col. 2406, n. 5.

3 Note that Manasseh of Judg. 1 27 becomes Israel in v. 28.

4 Its mention between Ephraim and Manasseh would be strange.

2. Relation to Ephraim.[edit]

Whatever may have been the real history of the name (see 1), then, at some time or other Manasseh was identified with Ephraim, was in fact subordinated to it. The supremacy of Ephraim could not be denied. It was held to be the effect of the laying of the right hand of the blind old Jacob-Israel on the head of the eponymos of Ephraim (Gen. 48:14a, J). J, however, evidently felt that there was something strange about the dis tinction falling to the lot of Ephraim. His explanation is the quaint story told in Gen. 48 : Ephraim had not always been first.

Original precedence is definitely ascribed to Manasseh by J (Gen. 48:14 and practically 48:18), and virtually by E (v. 20 ; followed by P, v. 5) in the adoption story, and by P quite explicitly (-1133) in Josh. 17:1. perhaps to account for Manasseh's inheritance being originally described by P (cp 16:4) before that of Ephraim (v. 5), not, as in our present book of Joshua, after it (17:1).

Apart from these passages there is no evidence excepting (1) the order in which the names of the two tribes occur in statements made about them, and (2) the order in which they are dealt with when all the tribes are treated in succession.

(1) In the case of passages dealing with the two tribes, Manasseh first is found (once) in P possibly (Josh. 16:4),! later (Steuernagel) in 14:4 certainly. Nor need J be opposed to this. 2 The Chronicler's five passages 3 give no positive light on his way of thinking, the order (Ephraim first) being merely geographical.

(2) In the case of passages treating of all the tribe; Manasseh is again first in the genealogical lists of this kind in P (which may belong to supplementary strands: Gen. 46 = Nu. 26), in P's list of dividers of Palestine, and in the arrangement adopted by the Chronicler in the first section of his book : Manasseh (1 Ch. 7:14), Ephraim (v. 20); 4 perhaps also in J *. All the other lists in P and in Chronicles give Kphraim first."

3. Its explanation.[edit]

There may possibly have been from the first, as Staerk (Slitdien, 223) suggests, two orders in use ; but if those who repeated the story told by J and implied by E saw no underlying meaning ; it would have been enough, as Winckler remarks, simply to say that Ephraim was the first-born. When a Vedic hymn says 'The Brahmana was his mouth, the Raganya was made his arms', etc. the explanation may explain nothing; but there was something to explain. In addition to what is said elsewhere (EPHRAIM, 5, i. ; JOSEPH i. , 2), some considerations must be offered here.

In favour of Jacobs' explanation as a survival of a 'junior- right' from a pastoral period (EPHRAIM i., 5, i.) is the ad vantage it has of explaining so many other cases of the younger being preferred. 7 It is doubtful, however, whether the genea logical system is quite old enough to have retained a custom so antique. Still, though the whole question of the meaning and origin of the junior birth-right where it is known to have prevailed is difficult, the suggestion that some at least of the old Hebrew genealogical relationships are due to it perhaps deserves more consideration than it seems to have received. 8 Reference is made below ( 4, begin.) to the view of Winckler (GI 2:74-75) that the two sons of Joseph, whom he regards as in some respects a solar character (above, col. 2582, n. 3), represent the two halves of the year, and that their exchange of places refers to a change in the mode of calculating the year that is known to have occurred (MONTH, 3). This seems one of the least tempting mythical interpretations,!* and appears to be uncalled for, as Winckler himself offers another explanation decidedly more plausible (GI 2:85).

Winckler suggests that there was much more than the story of Gideon-Abimelech to indicate an early importance of Manasseh. The fact that in one account the career of Saul began at Jabesh in Gilead he regards as one of several indications (GI 2:158) that Saul was from across the Jordan, probably a Manassite leader of a band of warriors who made the chieftainship of Benjamin a stepping-stone to the kingship of a Benjamin monarchy, which, through the expulsion of the Philistines, became a state of considerable dimen sions (161 164). A forecast of this is given in the victory of Jephthah over Ephraim (2:141), which Winckler thinks originally made Jephthah king in Shechem (141), and with this he connects the story of Abimelech. Manasseh had thus the supremacy in a very real sense before it passed to Ephraim with Jeroboam. The theory that Saul's home was across the Jordan is strongly defended by Winckler. For Cheyne s reasons for rejecting it, and the emendations of the text on which his own theory partly rests, see SAUL.

1 So MT, LXX{L} and Pesh. ; but LXX{BA} gives Ephraim first.

2 J seems to take the other side (Ephraim first); but it is only in appearance: in Josh. 17:17 the phrase is a gloss ( -, HA om.), and in Dt. 34:2 the same is probably true ; although the passage is old enough to be found in (BAL), its place in the Sam. text is taken by one quite different.

3 i Ch. 93 (dwellers at Jerusalem), 2 Ch. 15 9 (gerim at Jerusalem : temp. Asa), 30:1 (letters), 30:10 (posts), 30:18 (at Hezekiah's passover : destruction of sanctuaries).

4 Since he has already given Benjamin, the order cannot be geographical, as that in Ezek. 48 may well be in this part of it.

5 The order, Manasseh first (w.^f. and 29 in the account of the tribes in Judg. 1), may be due to R ; and what to make ofjudg. 5 (Ephraim [Benjamin] Machir) is not clear.

Nu. 1 sfr (censors), \ytff. (census), 2 is^l (camp), 10 -27. f. (camp), 138ii ("spies ), Josh. 21 5 = 1 Ch. 666^7 (Kohathite cities), 212125 = 1 Ch. 665 [where Ephraim is omitted] (priests cities), i Ch. njof. (deserters to David), i Ch. 27 2o_/ (David s tribal rulers [ntififf]).

7 Jacobs list (/?#/. Arch. 50) is: Abraham, Isaac, Bethuel, Rebekah, Jacob, Rachel, Judah, Joseph, Benjamin, Ephraim, Moses, etc.

8 Even Gunkel in his interesting note (Gen. zji/.) does not refer to it.

" Cp Gunkel, Genesis, p. liv, n. i.

4. Meaning of name.[edit]

Naturally the name as well as the status of Manasseh was popularly explained. It was connected with the verb to forget. Josephus says that the name means 'causing to forget' (Ant. aW< ii. 61, 92, iwi\fi6ov) : Joseph's present happiness made him forget his former misfortunes. The explanation intended by Josephus occurs in Gen. 41:51 (E), alongside of another version (J ? so Gunkel) which makes the thing forgotten not Joseph's trouble (hsy [E]) but his father's house.

It is not very clear what is the point of the emphasis laid (41:50 [E]) on Manasseh and Ephraim being born in the fruitful years before the years of famine : it is doubtful whether it implies a special interpretation of the names Manasseh = 'postponer' (cp Arabic nasa'a), Ephraim = 'fruitful' (cp EPHRAIM, 1-2). Such a popular etymology would fit admirably Winckler's (GIZ 74 f.) mythological account of Ephraim's taking the place of Manasseh as referring to the postponing of the new year from autumn to spring (see YEAR, 68); but the theory is precarious (see above, 3).!

The real etymology of the name is unknown. The abnormal vocalisation (":2 ; j) of the verb expressing E's explanation would confirm the traditional vocalisation of the name if we could be sure that it is not (so Ball, ad loc. ) accidental. Fortunately Manasseh is one of the few tribe names that were early used by individuals, and so we have seventh-century evidence of the pro nunciation. 2 It is, however, not quite decisive. In Esarhaddon's list of tributary princes the name is Menase (Me-na-si-e) ; but in that of Asur-bani-pal it is Minse (Mi-in-si-e).

Noting certain other names ending in sa (NB ), Sieg fried in 1875 :i suggested that Manasseh was a compound name: Men-nasa (cp (S5 A , fj-avvacrfftj), Men sustulit (cp Amasiah, rrosy)- Meni, who seems to have been, like Gad, a god of fate (see FORTUNE, GAD, i, end), found worshippers in Israel even in very late times (Is. 65 ii, RV). If Meni has been shortened into -man in Ahiman, as Furst suggested (cp AHIMAN), it is possible that it might be treated similarly even at the beginning of a word. It is not certain, however, that the names ending in sa support the theory. NI? in NfD n may be a divine name like Dusara in idcmsT!, and in NCTi 1 ?^ it may be like Bel in SanSn (EXa^Xos). 4

It would thus be possible, indeed, to regard the name Manasseh as one of a class by no means small, the class namely of names that contain two divine titles. Min-se, which would be the exact Hebrew equivalent of Asur-bani-pal's Minse, would in that case contain the two divine names Men and Sa (cp BAASHA).

1 The suggestion of G. H. B. Wright (Was Israel in Egypt 245) that we should connect the name with the story of a sur viving remnant of Ephraim in Judg. 12:4 (n IBX *B % 7fl> cSo being considered equivalent to o^, whence Manasseh) is hardly con sistent with a recognition of the fact (see Moore, Bu., Now. ad loc.) that the text of the passage is corrupt. (The use Steuernagel [ll anderting, 25] makes of the passage is more cautious.) Nor is there more to be said for a connection (Wright, i.e.) with BJ, standard ; whatever the story of the 'witness-altar' in Josh. 22 may owe its origin to (see col. 2922, n. 3), it is hardly- possible that a -standard had anything to do with it ; and moreover, even if we should incline to accept Steuernagel s acute suggestion (Kimvattderung, 96) that originally it was only certain Josephites that were blamed (see REUBEN), Manas seh does not seem to have been mentioned in the story originally.

2 We must remember, however, the possibility that the pronunciation of the personal name may have reacted on the tradition of the tribal name.

3 ZPT (1875) .v-6/ He is followed by C. Niebuhr(G : cA. Ebr. Zeit., 252 [1894]).

4 On names in sa see S. A. Cook, Exp. T 10 5257. (1899).

It would be natural then to conjecture that the strange name Nimshi ought to be Minshe (see, however, NIMSHI). Jehu, the founder of the third great post-Davidic northern dynasty, would thus be called ben Minshe a Manassite. It has been sug gested elsewhere (ISSACHAR, 4) that there are perhaps hints of a recognition of a deity Sa in N. Ephraim. If Men, on the other hand, were more at home on the east of the Jordan, the com pound title Minse would be symbolical of the east and the west. Menahem, who was probably a Gadite (ben Gadi ; see GADI, GAD, 10), may have borne the name of the same deity : to judge from the spelling of the king's name in Tiglath-pileser's contemporary list of tributaries (Me-ni-hi-im-me), Menahem may stand related to HAMUEL [s .z .] as JOAB to ABIEL.

If on the other hand we are willing to follow the old Hebrew etymology in regarding Manasseh as a parti cipial form (see below), it will be plausible to find in it the name or title of a divine being honoured by Manassite clans. The unnamed god who vanished with the appearance of morning (Gen. 32:24+ [25+], JE) inflicted an injury in what v. 25 [26] calls niy-in T3 1 (EV, 'the sinew of the hip' ). In Arabia nasiya is to suffer, and nasd, to inflict, such an injury. Manasseh (the piel participle) would thus be the name of a super natural being of whom the inflicting of such an injury was characteristic (so Land, De Gids, Oct. 1871, De wording van staat en godsdienst in het oude Israel, 20). 2 Gunkel suggests that the story is connected with a local religious dance of a peculiar halting kind. It is worth noting that tahalluj, 'walking in a loose manner, as though disjointed, ... as though dragging a thing' is the effect of contact with ginn (Ham. p. 30, /. 4 ; compare the story in Abulf. Ann. 8202). It is not certain, however, who it was that was lamed. Gen. 32:26a (E, Gunkel) certainly suggests that it was Jacob's antagonist, and Jacob in v. 26b (J ? Gunkel) may Tery well be an erroneous gloss. W. M. Muller (As. u. Eur. 163, n. i ) well compares Iliad, 23:725-727 (Odysseus' unfair wrestling). That this is really the view of J seems to be borne out by v. 29 (J) where Jacob has prevailed with gods and men. 3 It would appear, therefore, that in the original story the epithet Manasseh was a fitting title of Jacob himself, which might be borne by his worshippers, as in the case of Gad. According to 1 K. 18:26 the N. Israelite prophets (priests?) were accustomed to perform certain religious dances which could be called limping 4 (RVmg; ^DS i). There may have been something similar east of the Jordan, where it is commonly held that the wrestling scene is laid. Bernh. Luther, however, argues with some plausibility (ZATW 2l6:9 [1901]) that it really belongs to Bethel (Gen. 28). The question is of less importance in the present inquiry, since, if the story is connected with a real tradition of some kind, it refers to settlers on their way to the west.

It is perhaps in favour of this last explanation that there is some evidence that the name Manasseh was felt to be a participle, therefore in a sense an adjective, and consequently capable of being used with the article.

Manasseh occurs in the Hexateuch with the article some twelve times (D and P), in each case after the construct vjn B3B , 5 which occurs only thrice 6 (P)7 without the article. Out- side the Hexateuch on the other hand i.e., in Chronicles S n B3B 1 (4 times) does not take the article, 1 and it is therefore at least quite possible that the abnormal neuoil is due to misreading .TJCn in the archaic script, which may have continued in use m the Torah (and Joshua () longer than elsewhere. This gentilic Manassite ( 8 f JD) occurs four times, always (quite normally) with the article 2 and always of the trans-Jordan tribe.

1 The critical analysis of the passage is still matter for dis cussion. Verse 25 [26] may be wholly late.

- Land compares the Arabian ginn.

3 Cp Holzinger, Gen. 210; PENUEL. Of course J may have had a parallel to E s Mahanaim fragment 32 if., which perhaps originally told of a (successful?) conflict of Jacob with divine hosts (so Gunkel).

The dancing of David (28.614) is called whirling C 1 ?"?? 1 ?) at least f the text is right (but cp DANCE, 4 [4]).

8 After -mo (-so), on the other hand, the article is never inserted. Is this due to the final n of PIED?

6 Of course also in Nu. 8233 before nor p.

The ungrammatical rtE jrn CUBTI in Josh. 13:7 is no doubt a scribal error (probably homoioteleuton). Konig's explanation \Ltkr%eb.<l*, 2oc) itself needs explanation. Kautzsch's ex planation (Gramin. 125 d, n.) is not convincing.

5. Legends of settlement.[edit]

Reference has been made to the representation in Judg. 5 of a Machir (= Manasseh) settled in the highlands of Ephraim and the representation of J according to which the Machirites crossed the Jordan (?) and established themselves (Nu. 32:39, 32:41-42) in Gilead, the land of the Amorites. See further JAIR, NOBAH. Gad and Reuben, however, having been described in JE (Nu. 32) as being assigned their homes before their kinsmen settled in W. Palestine (cp GAD, 1), it came to be said that Machir too received Gilead from Moses (v. 40). With this is connected the view of the Deuteronomic writers that the whole country from the Jabbok north wards the half of Gilead (Josh. 12:25, 13:31), i.e., the part not given to Gad (Dt. 8:12), and all BASHAN, all the region of ARGOB, the kingdom of OG (Dt. 3:13) was given by Moses to Manassites (cp Dt. 298 Josh. 12:6, 13:8 [LXX, Di. etc.] 13:30-31, 18:7, 22:7 ; for Bashan Dt. 443 Josh. 20:8, 21:6 , 21:27), who come to be called regularly 'half the tribe of Manasseh'. Naturally it became necessary to asso ciate these Manassites with Gad and Reuben in helping their kinsmen (mentioned alone in Nu. 32) to effect a settlement in the west 3 (Josh. 1:12, 4:12 [D2]) and in the obscure story of the altar (Josh. 22 ; see GAD, 11, and especially REUBEN). The view of P has often been supposed to be similar (cp Josh. 13:29, 14:3?).

According to Steuernagel, however, E and (so now also Holzinger, Joshua, p. xii) P recognise only Reuben and Gad in the east (Josh. 201) ; his view being based on the P parts of Nu. 32 and on the genealogy (216). From the fact that the Manassite genealogies in Nu. 26:29+ {4} and Josh. 17:1+ differ only in their account of Machir and Gilead, 5 Steuernagel argues that Machir and Gilead are a later insertion into P which knows nothing of any Machir - an insertion worked in in two ways 217-218).

The confusion on this subject is perhaps past repair ; but we venture to make the following suggestions. It appears that in Josh. 17:1b-2 as it now stands the sons - being called 'the rest' in opposition to Machir who figures as the father of Gilead - are regarded as settling in W. Palestine. Steuernagel reaches the same result, for when he cuts out the mention of Machir he cuts out also the words 'the rest of'. On the other hand it is just as certain that in P's list (Nu. 26:34) the sons are assigned to the east (on Nu. 27:1, 36:1 see below). Kuenen argues that Gen. 50:23 (E) also held Machir to be the only son of Manasseh. Is it necessary, however, to suppose that E would have called Machir 'father of Gilead' ? May not the 'sons of Machir' mean the tribe of Machir, and the 'adoption' (St. ZATW 6:145+ [1886]) be E's acknowledgment of the equiva lence of Manasseh and Machir ? (so practically Gunkel). The names of some of the sons certainly suggest the west. That is true of Abiezer, Shechem, and Hepher ; perhaps also of Shemida (yvDB )> which may be connected in some way with Shamir, Shimron, Shomron ; reads (mostly) r for d. None suggests the east : Helek is unknown and so is Asriel, if indeed it be not an intruder, for it seems on the whole as probable as not that the writer of the words (17:5) And there fell ten parts to Manasseh [. . -] 1 (v. 6) for the daughters of Manasseh received an inheritance amongst his sons counted the brothers carelessly as five, including Hepher. How the name Asriel might come into existence we see from 1 Ch. 7:14 (see ASRIEL).

1 In i Ch. 2721 occurs rvoysn !n-

2 Dt. 4 43 B JC 1 ?, 2 K. 10 33 fibril, and twice with t^p ^n. Dt. 29 8 [7] i Ch. 2(5 32. In each case ReubeniV* precedes.

3 On the possibility of some historical reminiscence underlying this story (Steuernagel, Kinii>a.ndcrung, 94) see REUBEN.

4 Gen. 46 20 gives no genealogy of Manasseh (ErHRAi.M, 12, n. i, and see below). HAL inserts a notice agreeing with i Ch. 1 14 : by an Aramaean concubine Manasseh begat Machir, who begat Gilead.

Machir's relation to Hepher, etc., is in Nu. that of grand father, in Josh 17:2 that of brother (in v. 3, however, grandfather : see Kue. Th. Til 487).

6 LXX{B} reads mot? in Josh.; but the /u maybe a graphical error from a. In i Ch. 7:18 Ishhdod may possibly represent Shemida (so Benzinger, ad loc.) especially if the y is not original.

If the sons must then be assigned to the west are we to conclude that, as Dillmann (on Nu. 26) suggests, the writer who is responsible for the mention of Gilead had lost all hold of the geographical meaning of the name Gilead, or, believing that Gilead was conquered first, regarded the W. Manassites as offshoots of the E. Manassites? 2 It is on the whole more likely that the source of confusion is the word Machir. Sons were assigned to Machir-Manasseh (e.g.. Gen. 50:23, E), who was then mistaken for Machir-Gilead, and therefore called in a gloss father of Gilead (see below, n. 3).

It seems natural to suppose that the five daughters (Nu. 26:33) are to be judged like the sons.

27:7 does not say that Moses actually gave the daughters their inheritance, nor does 36:2, whilst in Josh. 17:4b 'them' not 'us' shows that we are to regard the provision as having been carried out by Joshua i.e., in W. Palestine. 3 The case had to be mentioned in Nu 27:36 because it was necessary that the legal decision should be attributed to Moses. The most natural ex planation of the postponement of the carrying out to Josh. 17 is that the whole story was known to belong to the west. There is nothing in the five names as they appear in the present text to suggest the east : Tirzah, Beth-hoglah, and Abelmeholah are in the west ; Noah is probably, like Neah (Josh. 10:13), a corrup tion of something else (Naarah on the boundary of Ephraim ?), and Milcah is obscure (see, however, the special articles). On the question who the father was, see below, 9.

We must pass on to other aspects of the Manasseh question. On the assumption, which is universal, that Manasseh is a real tribe name, it is generally supposed that when the curtain rises the Manassites are part of the inhabitants of Mt. Ephraim.

Winckler's suggestion that the Gideon -Abimelech story is a monument of the arrival of Manasseh from the east has been mentioned above ( 3). Steuernagel, conversely, remarks that Gideon's claim on Succoth and Peniel suggests that part of what he calls the Jacob-tribe - . i.e., what afterwards became Joseph ( Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh) may have remained E. of the Jordan when the others entered Palestine (Ein wanderung, 64).

Although it is also commonly supposed that Benjamin had already been constituted when Manasseh or Machir became distinct from Ephraim, 4 this is by no means certain (see BENJAMIN, 1-2, 5, EPHRAIM, 5, ii., JOSEPH, 2). The expansion of Joseph seems to be dealt with in a much discussed passage in Josh. (17:14-18). The house of Joseph (see the comm. ) complains that the blessing of Yahwe has made it too large for a single tribal portion : it finds the highlands too narrow and the plain inaccessible. The answer is : clear the forest and force a way into the plain. At the same time it is admitted to be entitled to more than one portion. If the plausible theory of Budde ( Ri. Sa. 35/1 ), adopted by Kittel (Gesch. Heb. 1 240), that the forest to be cleared was in Gilead 5 (cp EPHRAIM, 3), be adopted, it is natural to regard the spread of Machir- Manasseh to the E. (Nu. 32:39) as a further stage of the same expansion which produced West Manasseh. Steuernagel (Einwanderung, 97) finds an echo of the birth of Manasseh in the story of the advance of Joseph to Dothan. 1 He thinks that there were probably struggles with the Leah tribes Issachar and Zebulun who were making their way from the SW. of Ephraim where they had at first settled (see ZEBULUN).

Judg. 5 seems to imply that the whole of Manasseh was in West Palestine. When the Machirites are to be supposed to have crossed into Gilead of course we do not know. Steuernagel thinks that there was a conflict between (W. ) Manasseh and Gad (Einwanderung, 24, below) which ended in the conquest of northern Gad (Gilead) by the Machirites (expedition of Gideon, conquest of Succoth and Peniel ; see, however, GIDEON) : when the Gileadites are called a Machirite clan they are thereby treated as dependent on Machir.

1 The omitted words and the second part of v. 6 are probably from another hand (Steuernagel).

2 So also E. L. Curtis, Hastings DBIi-i^b and perhaps Driver, 3 232.

3 In Nu. 30 it is heads of the fathers houses of the family of the children of Gilead (7 . i) that call Zelophehad their brother (7 . 2) ; but in 7 . 5 the speakers are called the tribe of the sons of Joseph. Gilead and Machir, therefore, in v. i are prob ably not original. According to Jos. Ant. iv. 7 5 it was the chief men of the tribe of Manasseh that told Moses of the death of Zelophehad.

So Stade ((7/Y1 160), Guthe (Gl I 56), and others.

5 Hitzig (Gl l 106) found it in S. Ephraim, Knobel, Keil, and Steuernagel (ad loc.), in the N., Ewald (GT/( 3 > 2 243^) in the plain.

6. Other references.[edit]

The Blessing of Jacob contains at present no mention of Manasseh (or Ephraim), treating it as part of JOSEPH (see, however, JOSEPH i. , 2, first small type, EPHRAIM, 5, ii., second paragraph), and there is considerable confusion in the blessings connected with the adoption of Joseph's sons (see Carpenter-Battersby and the comm. ). In the Blessing of Moses on the other hand the last two lines of Dt. 33:17 where Manasseh is mentioned are a gloss. Who the 'first-born' (MT, ms? 1133) referred to in the first line is, is disputed ; but in any case the reference is not to Manasseh.

It is improbable that 2 S. 20:26 tells us that David had a Manassite priest - having perhaps (Winckler) carried off some Manassite deity to his capital. Besides the question at what date Jairite and Manassite were equated (see 9, ii ), there is the question whether the reading 'Jairite' is correct. In addition to what is said elsewhere (URA, 3) is to be noted Winckler's suggestion (GI 2:241, n. 2) that Jairite has arisen from a variant Jair for Ira. The sixth and the seventh in the list of Solomon's administrative districts (1 K. 4:13-14) lay in the northern part of the trans -Jordan country. In Ps. 60 [7] ( = 108:8) Gilead and Manasseh represent the trans-Jordan district (|| Ephraim and Judah); in 8O:2 Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh are the representatives of the ancient northern Israel. 2 There is nothing to be learned from the Chronicler's list of seven Manassites who deserted to David at Hebron (i Ch. 12:20).

7. Probable history.[edit]

It is now time to ask whether it is possible to get behind the legends and other data and arrive at any theory of the actual course of events. The centre of gravity of northern Israel in historical times appears to have been at Shechem (EPHRAIM i. , 4 10). There is no hint in the OT of any tradition of the southern Leah tribes ever having been farther north than Shechem. If we are to connect them, as seems probable, with the Habiri of the Amarna letters, 3 the settlement of the Israelites proper (including Manasseh ) in the Ephraim highlands will fall later (cp NAPHTALI, i 3). They contributed, as we have seen, to the struggle sung of in Judg. 5. It seems probable that the southern Benjamite monarchy of Saul was made possible by earlier achievements farther north. It is not possible to distinguish definitely Manasseh from the rest of the Ephraim highlands which are dealt with elsewhere (EPHRAIM, i. 3/ ). There can be little doubt that there was always more or less com munication with the trans-Jordan lands. The history of the northern portion of the trans-Jordan lands, which is traditionally regarded as Manassite, is very obscure. See GILEAD, BASHAN, ARGOB, ARAM, HAVVOTH-JAIR, JEPHTHAH. The most obvious fact written on the face of the records preserved to us is the series of struggles with Aramaeans. If there were such, as no doubt there were, in the earlier days (see JACOB, LABAN), it is even more certain that they were frequent later (e.g. , Am. 1:3). On the contributions made to the history of Israel by the trans-Jordanic division see GAD, 10. On East Manasseh's reputation for valour see Josh. 17:1, 1 Ch. 5:18-22. According to the Chronicler the [eastern] half of Manasseh was transported by Tiglath-pileser (1 Ch. 5:26) ; 2 K. 15:29 had said simply Gilead, on which see NAPHTALI, 3, n. In the fragment referred to below we are told, if the reading is correct, that Geshur and Aram obtained possession of the Havvoth- jair (1 Ch. 2:23). The Chronicler is strangely fond of introducing references to Manasseh.

1 He combines with this the fight at the waters of Merom, which, following OS 278:99, he places near Dothan.

2 Either Benjamin or Manasseh must be an addition perhaps Manasseh, as best accounting for the strange order (cp Judg. 5:14).

3 See above, col. 1316, n. 5. Since that was written Steuernagel has argued ably for this view in his very clever discussion of the settlement of Israel (EiltmtUteUrtmg, 115-123). On the general question see (besides NAPHTALI, i) SIMEON.

8. P's geographical data.[edit]

There is nothing surprising in the fact that the geographical data as to where Manassites were settled are perplexing. P's south border is dealt with elsewhere (EPHRAIM, 5 n); the northern border is omitted (see JOSHUA, 9), unless the last clause of v. 10, which has no grammatical subject, represents it. No list of Manassite cities is given (cp JOSHUA, 9), only a list of those which might have been expected to be Manassite, but were not : Tappuah belonged to Ephraim, and five - viz. , BETH-SHEAN near the Jordan, IBLEAM, TAANACH, and MEGIDDO on the S. edge of the great plain, and Dor 1 on the coast - remained in the hands of the Canaanites (on the text of v. 11 see ASHER, 3). What the Naphoth in Issachar and Asher were we do not know (see NAPHTALI, 2). Instead of a list of Manassite cities we have in v. 2 a list unparalleled in the book of Joshua : each item is 'the sons of -' . Some, however, if not all, of the names are names of towns ; and the same is true no doubt, as Kuenen saw ( Th. T 11:488 [1877]), of the daughters mentioned in v. 3.

1 Endor which MT adds to the list as given in Judg. 1:27 and in <S (but see ENDOR) of Josh. 17 is to be omitted : see NAPHTALI, 2.

2 On Gen. 46 see above, col. 1320, n. i.

3 In estimating the value of this datum it must of course be remembered that dod is a somewhat indefinite term.

9. Genealogies.[edit]

i. The list just referred to (Josh. 17:1-2), and the equivalent list in Nu. 26:34 -* has been discussed already (col. 2922) in its bearing on the Manasseh-Machir-Gilead question. As a genealogy it raises a further question. The brothers among whom the daughters received their inheritance (TIN Tnm 1V3N I Josh. 17) are nowhere mentioned. The father himself is named in five passages (Nu. 26 = i Ch. 7, Nu. 27, Nu. 36 and Josh. 17) ; but nowhere is there any hint of his having any brothers. In fact, as Kuenen (for another object) has pointed out ( Th. T 11 489), only if there were no such brothers could the daughters succeed to Hepher's inheritance. In Nu. 36:11, however, it is expressly said that the five daughters married sons of their uncles ([mi 3 J3). If the daughters' father were Hepher instead of being Hepher's son the difficulty would disappear. If we suppose that Nu. 26:33 originally began 'And Hepher had no sons', 1 and that later Hepher became corrupted into Zelophehad (nsnSi becoming insSsi), necessitating the gloss 'son of Hepher', we clear up the matter and also get rid of the difficult name Zelophehad. Cheyne very acutely treats Zelophehad as a corruption of a supposed Salhad (see SALECAH) ; but that assumes that we are to look in the E. , and that view, it has been urged above ( 5, mid.), is not without difficulty.

ii. The 10 (11) Manassite (?) names mentioned before (5) reappear for the most part, though quite differently arranged, in what seems to be the Chronicler's main Manassite genealogy (1 Ch. 7:14-19): it comes between Naphtali and Ephraim. The passage seems to be deeply corrupt (see the separate articles).

Abiezer is a son (not an uncle), and Mahlah a son or daughter (not a sister), of Milcah who is called Molecheth. Helek (called Likhi) and Shechem are sons (not brothers) of Shemida. Hepher is not mentioned, being represented by Zelophehad. Shemida has no brothers, two of them appearing as sons (Helek and Shechem) among whom is also No'ah one of Zelophehad's daughters (in Joshua), of whom two (Hoglah and Tirzah) disappear, whilst two new names appear (Ahian son of Shemida, and Ishhod son of Moleketh).

The source of the names in vv. 16-17a. (Peresh [which LXX{B} omits = Sheresh], Ulam [Benjamite in 839], Rekem [a Benjamite town, Josh. 18:27], and Bedan) cannot be conjectured. The same is true of the little list of seven names which some one has inserted, as a register of half the tribe of Manasseh, who dwelt in the land, to supplement the Reuben and Gad lists.

Since the famous JAIR [q.v.], called Gileadite in Judg. 10:3, appears to be assigned in Nu. 32:41 to Manasseh, it is strange that there is no mention of him in the genealogies. The Chronicler has perhaps re paired the omission : a fragment (i Ch. 2:21-23) wedged into the Judah genealogy tells that a daughter of Machir had a grandson named Jair who had twenty-three cities in the land of Gilead. The closing words of v. 23 suggest that the fragment belongs to the obscure gene alogy in 7:14+. 1 Whatever be the real meaning of that genealogy, however, it is not quite certain that anywhere else, at least, Jair is correctly made to be a Manassite. Dt. 3:14 is not a reliable passage ; but it may mean this : no doubt Moses had given the territory mentioned in the context to half the tribe of Manasseh, but (read IN ! with LXX) Jair took all the region, etc. 'Son of Manasseh' was probably appended to Jair after Nu. 32:41 had received its present form i.e., probably after the insertion of v. 40 about Machir the son of Manasseh. Originally v. 41 probably resembled v. 42 where Nobah has no patronymic. Jair was therefore Gileadite rather than exactly Manassite. 2

The late passage Josh. 13:30 of course implies the later form of Nu. 32:41.

Whether we may venture to infer from i Ch. 2:21-23 that Jair was the outcome of a fusion of Reubenite (cp Ed. Meyer, Entsteh. 16) families (Hezron) with Gileadite families (sister of Gilead), that it was settled at first somewhat S. in Gilead (Judg. 10:3_), and afterwards moved northwards (Nu. 32:41), mingling with Manassites (so Steuernagel, Einwancierung, 25), is less certain. See REUBEN. If SEGUB, Jair's father (i Ch. 2:22), is a corrup tion of Argob, which Jair is said to have conquered (Dt. 3:14), there may have been a theory to that effect.

On the problem connected with Manasseh see in addition to the commentaries, the histories, and the dictionaries, Kuenen, De stam Manasse (Th.T 11:478-496 [1877]) and Steuernagel, Die Einwanderung der israelitischen Stdmme in Kanaan (1901), especially 21-28. H. W. H.

1 See col. 2361, n. 3, and especially ZELOPHEHAD.

2 So also Cheyne (JEPHTHAH, 3).


(H^p ; M \NACCH(c) [BKAL]).

i. King of Judah (692-639 B.C.), son of Hezekiah, and father of Amon ; on his mother s name see HEPH- ZIBAH. Very little is recorded of his long and, it would seem, extremely prosperous reign. As we approach the final catastrophe, the editor feels it less important to communicate details, because of the reactionary character of the religion favoured by the latest kings. The sins of Manasseh, so we are assured i.e. , first, his patronage of heathenish cults, and next, his shedding of innocent blood (as a persecutor of the prophets?) were the true causes of the captivity. But how could this wickedness of the king be consistent with the long-continued pros perity which the annals appear to have recorded ?

According to a long-assumed critical result (see Graf, St. Kr., 1859, pp. 467 ff. ; Kue. Onrf.W i. 473; Wellh. Prol.W 215 [ET 207], and cp CHRONICLES, 8 (e)), the Chronicler found a way of reconciling this inconsistency, which seemed to threaten his dogma of prompt retribution for sin, by supposing a Babylonian captivity of Manasseh (a sort of prophecy of the later captivity under Nebuchadrezzar), from which the king was only delivered through his repentance (2 Ch. 33:11-13). Schrader, however (KAT 1 367 ft), has given highly plausible arguments in favour of the accuracy of the Chronicler, so far as his facts are concerned, (i. ) In the lists of twenty-two tributary kings of Canaan and the small neighbouring countries given alike by Esarhad- don and by Asur-bani-pal we find the name of Manasse king of Jaudu - i.e. , Judah (KB ii. 1492 39 ). (ii. ) When Shamash-shum-ukin, king or viceroy of Babylon, rebelled against his royal brother (cp ASURBANIPAL, 7), he obtained the support of the kings of the very region to which the tributaries on the lists belonged (K B 2 185 ; cp 195). It is not known whether Manasseh was more cautious than the rest ; but we have no reason to suppose this. (iii. ) Even if we grant that Manasseh was suspected of being implicated in the revolt, he would certainly have been summoned by Asur-bani-pal to give an account of his actions, and there are inscriptions to prove that after the overthrow of Shamash-shum-ukin (647 B.C. ), Asur-bani- pal received both kings and ambassadors in Babylon. Knowing, as we do, much better than Graf, how the Chronicler generally worked viz., by adopting and modifying or supplementing earlier traditional material we have no sufficient reason to doubt that Manasseh did go to Babylon at the call of his suzerain. Whether he was carried thither in chains, like Pharaoh Necho I., or whether this is a romantic addition to the story, we cannot venture to say. That the repentance of Manasseh was a fact, no historian could assert. The whole course of the later history is opposed to such a view (cp ISRAEL, 36; Wi. AT Unt. 122 f.; M Curdy, Hist. Proph. Mon.2386, who boldly corrects Babylon in Ch. into Nineveh ; Driver, in Hogarth, Author, and Archceol. 114-116).

The vagueness of the Chronicler's statement in 2 Ch. 33:11 may seem to support the idea that the narrative is an edifying fiction. But was the vagueness always there ? One expression may lead us to doubt this viz., 'took him with hooks' (so RV B- for This expression might pass in poetry (see 2 K. 19:28 Ezek. 19:4 ; cp Job 40:26 [41:2]), but hardly in sober prose. Yet the rendering 'in chains' (RV ; so (8, Vg., Tg.) does violence to usage. We must either render 'with hooks' or emend the text. A parallel passage (2 K. 25:5) suggests that QTtin may conceal the name of a place, and further, that the latent place-name may be Jericho (irpT3 > miswritten niri3 = D < niro). If so, Manasseh fled to Jericho on the capture of Jerusalem, and was taken there. So, too, iB x may perhaps be a relic of ^flJTlB ijtt^] i.e., 'of Asur-bani-pal'. Observe that the parallel description of the imprisonment of Pharaoh Necho (Schr. KA T 371) says nothing of hooks.

2. One of the B'ne Pahath-moab in list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5, end), Ezra 1030! (/lai/acrei) [Baf]) = i Esd. 9:31 (/iayacrarjas [BA]).

3. One of the B'ne Hashum in same list, Ezra 10:33! = i Esd. 9:33.

4. In Judg. 18:30 [MT] (fia.vi>a<ra-ri [A]), ancestor of Jonathan the Danite priest. See, however, JONATHAN, MOSES.




1. i Esd. 9 33 = Ezra 10 30, MANASSEH ii. (3).

2. Tobit 14 10. See ACHIACHARUS, TOBIT.

3. Judith 8 2, the husband of JUDITH.

4. Mt. 1 10. See MANASSEH ii. (i).

5. Rev. 76. See MANASSEH i.




(^JP), Dt. 4 43 etc. See MANASSEH i. 4. end-


RV m (f- LOVE-APPLES ( MHAA MANApAf-opoy. Gen. 30i4; MANApAfOpAl (-01 AD once), Gen. 30 1 5 /. Cant. 7 13 [14] [-pec A]f).

The Hebrew name, dudd im, was no doubt popularly associated with dodim, D Tn, love ; but its real ety mology (like that of /navdpaybpas) is obscure. It de notes the fruit in Cant. 7 13 [14] possibly the flowers of a plant of the same genus as the belladonna plant (Atropa Belladonna, L. ). A Greek description of the mandrake will be found in Dioscorides (4 76) ; among its names he mentions Ki.pKa.ia. 1 Wetzstein, who on 9th May (1860) found the already ripe fruits growing profusely on a mountain in Hauran (cp Del. Hohelied u. Koheleth, 439 ff.}, argues for the plant of the OT being the autumn mandrake (Mandragora autumnalis, Bertol. ), rather than the spring mandrake (M. qffici- narum, L. ), because in Palestine the spring mandrake would have disappeared long before the time of wheat harvest (ib. 444/1). It appears, however, that M. autumnalis is not a Palestinian plant at all ; and the other species, which flowers from February to March, or in warm situations as early as Christmas, has, according to Tristram (NHB 468), the time of wheat harvest as its general period of ripening. Tristram describes the blossom as cup-shaped, of a rich purple colour. The fruit is of the size of a large plum, quite round, yellow, and full of soft pulp. It has a peculiar, but decidedly not unpleasant, smell, and a pleasant, sweet taste. Tristram adds that the belief still survives in Palestine that the fruit when eaten ensures conception. A quite distinct tradition is that on which rests the use of the plant as an aphrodisiac (see Wetzstein, I.e. , and Low, 188). Cp MAGIC, 2 a, and see Starr, Am. Antiq. and Or. Journ. , 32259-268 (1901).

[The connection of the story in Gen. 30:14-15 (on the origin of which see ISSACHAR, 2) with heathen superstition is easily recognised. Like the mallow, the mandrake was potent in all kinds of enchantment (see Maimonides in Chwolson, Ssabier, 2459, and the notes). The German name of the plant (Alraun ; OHG. Alruna) indicates the prophetic power supposed to lie in little images made from this root which were cherished as oracles. The possession of such roots was lucky (see Ducange, s.v. Man dragora, and Littre).] N. M. W. T. T. -D.

1 <ffi6rj Soxfl jj pia <j>i\Tptav elmi 7roi7)The>j.


is given in EV once (Ezek. 45 12) for Heb. i"!3O (V^E, cp MENE ; MNA [BAQ] ; Vg. MINA or MNA]. In all other places where maneh or /j.va occurs (i K. 10 17 Ezra 269 Neh. 7?i/. i Esd. 645 i Mace. 142* 15 18 Lk. 19 13 16182024 /I) 1 EV has pound. See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES, KESITAH, POUND.

In Ezek. 45:12 MT is indefensible : the true form of the text is that in LXX{A} ( so Co.). J. P. Peters (JBL, 1893, pp. 48 /) has explained the motive of the ungrammatical emendation in MT, which succeeds after a fashion in making Ezekiel say that sixty shekels = one maneh, and so harmonising what was regarded as a prediction with fact. The cause of this early emendation is now plain. The [true] text of Ezekiel places the maneh at fifty shekels, which seems to have been the old Hebrew ratio, and was actually retained in the silver coinage. But the maneh of fifty shekels gave way to the Babylonian maneh of sixty shekels. The whole note \nJBL, I.e., is well worth reading.


(MANHC [BA]), i Esd. 9:21 RV = Ezra l0:21,


(q. v. ii. , n).


(<J>A.TNH)- Lk. 2:7, 12 16 EV ; also Lk. 13:15 RV m s-, EV stall. See CATTLE, 5 ; INN, end.


(MANI t BA ]). 1 Esd.9:30=Ezra 10:29, BANI,2.