Encyclopaedia Biblica/Adoption-Alamoth

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search


(yioeeciA). Ro. 8 .5 23 94 Gal. 45 Eph. Isf. .See I-AMII.V.


(see below) or Adoraim (D'^'llX ; on form of name see Xamks, 107 ; aAcoRAI [H]. -M [A and Jos. .Inf. viii. 10 1], -pAM [1-] ; .i/Ha'.i.u), mentioned with Mareshah, Zijih, and Lachish among the cities fortified by Hehoboam (2 Ch. 11 gt). The sites of all these places having been securely fixed, there can be no hindrance to identifying Adoraim with the modern Diira, which is 5 m. W. by .S. from Hebron, and is described by Robinson (2215) as 'one of the largest (villages) in the district.' The site is well adapted for a town, being ' on the gradual eastern slope of a cultivated hill, with olive groves and fields of grain all round ' (cp PEF Mem. 3 304). Under the new Egyptian empire an Adoraim is perhaps mentioned twice (V\'MM. As. u. I'.iir. 167, 174) ; but it is not clear that Rehoboam's city is intended. At any rate, Adoraim is doubtless the Adora or Dora of Josephus (^Aiit. .xiii. I54 and else- where abiiipa, aoujpeoi, 8. ; C. Ap. 9 Scupa), and the ADC)k.\ of I Mace. l:32o(a5ajpa [.\NV]). In the latter, .Vdora is a point on the route by which Tryphon entered Juda;a ; in the former, it is usually coupled as an ldum:ean city, with Marissa (.Mareshah), the fate of which it shared, being captured by John Hyrcanus and compelled to accejJt circumcision and the Jewish law (Jos. Ant. xiii. 9i ; BJ \. 26). T. K. c.


(D'lnX), 2S. 2O24; i K. 12i8t. See



("?]^r3^1X, aAramgAcx [L], -A6k[A]; Jos. -Aexoc, ANApoMAXOc)-

I. A Babylonian deity. According to 2 K. iTsi, after 'the king of Assyria,' i.e., Sargon (see Sakgon), had transplanted the Sepharvites into Samaria, they there continued to worship Adrammelech and Anam- MKi.Kcii {q.v. ), the gods of Sepharvaim. This passage presents two difficulties. In the first place, according to the biblical account the worship of Adrammelech was accompanied with the sacrifice of children by fire : ' they burnt their children in fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech.' Throughout the cuneiform inscrip- tions, however, there is no allusion to human sacri- fice, and in the scul[)tures and reliefs no representa- tion of the rite has lieen discovered. The second difficulty concerns the explanation of the name Adram- melech and its identification with some known divinity of Babylonia. The name was originally explained as Adar-malik, ' Adar the prince,' Adar being regarded as the phonetic rendering of the name of the god Ninib. This identification, however, was unsupported by any evidence, and has now Iieen abandoned. A clue to the solution of the problem, however, is afforded by the statement that Adrammelech was a god of Sepharvaim, a city that is generally identified with Sippar (cp Sepharvaim). The god whose worship was especially centred at Sippar was ama the Sun-god. That this was the case is abundantly proved by references through- out the historical and religious texts of the Babylonians and Assyrians, and the remains of the great temple of the sun-god exist in the mounds of Abu-1.4abbah at the pi-esent day. Some scholars, therefore, would see in Adrammelech a subsidiary name or title of the Sun-god himself Others, however, do not accept this view. They strike at its chief support by repudiating the identification of c'nsD with Sippar, suggesting that it is to 1^ identified with Sahara in, a city mentioned in the Babylonian Chronicle. No satisfactory explanation of the name, therefore, has yet been offijred. But cp N is KOCH. L. W. K.

2. A son of the Assyrian king Sennacherib, who, according to 2 K. 1^37 (aSpe/ifXex [-'^]) fi'id Is. 3738 (aSpa/ifXex [BX'AOQ], avSpafj.. [ii*]), in conjunction with his brother Shakkzek {</.v.), slew his father while he was woishipjjing in the tem])le of Xisroch at Nineveh, and thence escaped into Armenia. In the Babylonian Chronicle mention is made of this r-evolt, in which Sen- nacherib met his death ; but the only trace of the name Adrammelech hitherto found is in Abydenus under the form Adramelus, and in Polyhistor under that of Ardu- musanus. Scheil however thinks that Adkmlk and Adramelus are corruptions of Assur-MU-M-iK (or -G.\l), the idiographic reading of the name pronounced Asur-sum-usabsi. This is the name of a son of Sen- nacherib for whom his father erected a house amidst the gardens of Nineveh. For analogies cp the royal name Sammiighes = Samas-MU-Gl-NA. The Ardumu- sanus of Polyhistor nray be a corruption of the phonetic form given above, just as 2aoo-5otXos is .Samas-sum- ukin, the phonetic reading of Samas-MU-Gl-.\.\. (.Sec Scheil, ZA 12 i ; J^fv. bib., April 1897.) Cp Esak- haddon, Nisroch.


(aAramytiON or atr. : the adjective, which alone occurs in the .\T, is, as in some cursive MSS of Acts, aAramythnoc or atr.; neither inscriptions nor coins give the form -JTHNOC of Tisch. following NB^ ; W & H -yNTH. after AH*). .\ seaport of Mysia, which gave, and still gives, its name to the gulf, a great triangular indentation along the S. foot of Mt. Ida, whence it was called also the ' Id;tan." Adramyteum, in the E. recess of the gulf, was always important. It would profit by the trade in timl^er from Ida. There were also copper mines in the neighbourhood, and iron mines at Andeira not far to the N\V. Strabo (p. 606) describes it accurately as ' a colony of Athens, a city with a harbour and roadstead ' ; but its importance goes back to a much earlier epoch if, as Olshausen asserts {Rhein. .Mus. f. Phil. '53, p. 322 ; cp Hazar-maveth), the name points to foundation by the Phoenicians. Of necessity Adramyteum was intimately connected with the road system of NW. Asia. The coast road from Ephesus and the inland road from Pergamus converged to Adramyteum, whence they diverged, on the one hand, across the Mysian peninsula to Cyzicus on the sea of Marmora, and, on the other, to Assos, Troas, and the Hellespont. Consequently, it became an assize town, or head o{a.conventus juridicus. .-\draniytian coasters such as that in which Paul performed the first stage of his journey to Rome (Acts272t) must have been familiar visitors to Caesarea and the Syrian harbours. Adramyti {Rdrcmid), which preserves the old name, is 5 m. from the sea. Thus, Kiepert is perhaps right in putting the ancient town on an eminence by the sea, 8 m. S\V'. of the modern Adramyti (Z. d. Geselhch.f. Erdk., 1889, 292/. ). Nevertheless, Edremid is heir to the importance of .'\diamyteum. Silver mines are now worked in the hills behind the town. w. j. vv.


(eN TOO aAria. Acts2727 [BX.A], .//m/../.s/ 'stony sea,' Wiclif), the division of the Mediterranean which lies between Sicily and Malta o\\ the W. and Crete on the E. So the name is applied by Paus. v. 203 (speaking of the straits of Messina), toO 'ASpiov Kal

^f iripov irf\ti7ouj t KaXfirai. Tvp<rr]v6v. Cp id. viii. 54 3. I'rocopius considers Malta as lying on the boundary (/?ri. 14: Tai/Xcf; re Kal 'MfXirr) irpoaiaxop, at rdre 'ASptaTiKbv Kal Tvpprji/iKdv ir^Xayos Siopi^ovaiv). Ptolemy distinguishes between the Adriatic sea and the Adriatic /^u//. Acts reproduces the language of the sailors. For this extended application of the name cp Strabo, who, writing about 19 A.u. , says that the Ionian Sea is 'part of what is now called Adrias ' (p. 123). This implies that the ancient use of the word had l^jen more limited. In medi;i!val times the name was still more widely extended, lx;ing practically = ' Levant, ' as opposed to '/Egean' (cp Ram. Pm^/ 298. See Myra). The question is connected with the identification of the island upon which Paul was cast ( Acts 28 i) after fourteen days' drifting in Adria (see Mei,it.\). We may com- pare the shipwreck of Josephus ' in the middle of the Adria' (Kara fiiuov t6v 'ASpiav) : he was picked up by a ship sailing from Cyrene to Puteoli ( Vif. 3).

w. J. w.


(PX^iny, not 'God's flock,' out either (a)

miswritten for ?X*"lTy, 'God is helper' [cp forms of name in (5, 2S. 218 below]; or (/') the Aram, form ^ of Heb. ^S'^TJ?. The former view is adopted in Names, 28 ; the latter by Nestle, ZDPT 15 257 ; cp Barzill.m ; see also HPN 266 n. i, 309 n. 8). Son of Barzillai (</.!'. , n. 4) the Meholathite, to whom Saul married his daughter Mkrab [q.v. ) ; i S. 18 19 (om. B ; irj\ (usually = t(r/)a7;\) [A], e8pi7j\ [L]), 2S. 21 8 (aepei [B], eaSpt [A], etpi [L]).


(aAoyhA [BX], nayh [A] ; ^^(o?J). the

great grandfather of Tobit (Tob. 1 1 ). No doubt another form of AuiKL ((/.J'. ).


(D^ny. oAoAAam [BAL], oAoAam [R. 2 Ch. ; Bavi.i^ Mi.; A, i S.]. oAoAAa [A, Josh. I535], aAaA&m [L /6.]; onor./.AAf, variants adu{i,)lam, ODOL.iM, odcllam; gentilic "'Dpiy, AduUamite, oAoAAAAA[e]iTHC [ADI':l], -mhthc, oGoAAamithc [K]), a town in the Shephelah (Josh. 1.') 33 35), with a changeful history. For a considerable time it seems to have remained Canaanitish. We still have a legend in Gen. 38 i/. (J) which describes the fusion of Judahite clans with a Canaanitish clan whose centre was AduUam. This fusion had apparently not been accomplished in David's time, for Adullam was still outside the ' land of Judah ' when David took refuge there ( i S. 22 1 ; cp v. 5). We cannot therefore accept the editorial statement in Josh. 12 15 (cp I'. 7) that Joshua 'smote' the king of Adullam. The Chronicler speaks of Rehoboam as having fortified Adullam (2Ch. II7). He names the place in conjunction with Soco (Shuweikeh), which harmonises geographically with Micah's combination of it (Mic. I15, if the text be correct) with Mareshah (Merash). It is included in the list of cities which are stated to have been occupied by the Jews in the time of Nehemiah or Zerubbabel ( Neh. 1 1 30 ; so N'=- '" '"f- L ; BNA om. ) ; but the list in Neh. 11 25-36 appears to be an archaeological fiction of the Chronicler. Judas the Maccaljee, at any rate, in a raid into ' Idumaea,' occupied Adullam and kept the sabbath there (2 Mace. 1238).

The chief interest of Adullam, however, lies in its con- nection with David {q.v., 3). Here, not in some enormous cave (such as that fixed upon by tradition at Khareitun),* but in the ' stronghold ' of the town, David on two occasions found a safe retreat ( i S. 22 1 ; 2 S. 5 17 ; cp23i3).

Where was Adullam? The authority of the Pales-

1 The word is found both with d and with z on Aramaic seals ; e-S- , yinin (C/S 2, n<3. 1 24) bu t -ny-in, ' Horus is a help ' (//>. 77).

2 The Magharct Khareilfin enters historj-, not with David, but with an ascetic named Chariton, who, after having been taken by robbers on the way to Jerusalem, founded one of his two lauras here, and died in the cave about 410 a.d.

tine Survey has led many recent writers to adopt the identification of Adullam with 'Id-el-mS, proposed in 1871 by M. Clermont-Ganneau. This is the name of a steep hill on which are ' ruins of indeterminate date,' with an ancient well at the foot, and, near the top, on both sides, caves of moderate size. The site is in the east of the Shephelah, about 3 m. UK. of Soco, and 8 from Mareshah ; and, though it is much more from Bethlehem, ' the journey would be nothing for the light- footed mountaineers who surrounded David ' (Clermont- (ianneau, PEI-'Q i-j-j ['75]). The identification, how- ever, is only conjectural. The caves are unimportant ( i ) because the MT (cp Jos. Aut. vi. 12 3) speaks of a single cave, and (2) teeause with We., Ki. , Bu. , and Kau. we should correct ,n-i;'c, 'cave,' in i S. 22i 2 S. 23 13

1 Ch. II15, into ,-insp. 'stronghold'; cp i S. 224/

2 S. 23 14. Nor does the position of 'Id-el-ma exactly agree with that assigned to Adullam in the Ono- masticon. On the very slight resemblance of the name to Adullam no reliance can be placed. Other sites are quite possible. Cp GASm. //C 229 /. See MiCAii, 2 a, n. T. K. c.



See Marriage, 4.


The Ascent of (D'P"1N n'pyp ; Josh. 1^7 AAAAMeiN [H], aAommi [A], aAammein [I-]: I817 AiGAMeiN [l^]. eAcoMi [A\ eAcoweiAA [I-];

adom.ujm), a point marking the frontier between Judah and Benjamin. The sharp rise near the middle of the road from Jericho to Jerusalem ajjpears to be intended ; the name (connected with mx, 'red') was perhaps suggested by the ruddy hue of the chalk rocks in that neighbourhood, to which appears to be due the name of the khan el-Ahmar ( ' the red '), the traditional ' inn ' of the (jood Samaritan, and that of Tula at ed-Dam ('the hill of blood'), NE. of the khhn. With the latter spot the ascent of Adummim has been plausibly identified [PEF Mem. 3 172).


The word so translated in 1 S. 1 6t (J\yi sdra, RV 'rival,' &nti2hAoc [L].^ cp Lev. I818 [B.VL]) is the technical term for a fellow-wife, answer- ing to Ass. sirritu, Ar. 4arrat"", Syr. 'artha (\irra). All these forms are dialectal variations of a single Old-Semitic word. Similarly, in Lev. 18 18 the words ' to vex her ' are better rendered by RV ' to be a rival to her.' The words that follow may be rendered, in- terpreting the metaphor, ' marrying the second sister, in addition to the first, in the lifetime of the latter.'

The sense of the metaphor is given by the Arabic Utakiina darrataha. See Dr. TKS, ad loc. and especially Lag.'s 'Mittheitungen 1 125/ (GGN, 1882, no. 13). w. K. s.


(n&RAKAHTOc), i Jn. 2i, see PARACLETE


(ahAciac [B]), I Ksd. 9 27 = Ezra 10 26, RV Elijah, 3.


(aincac [BNA]), a paralytic at Lydda healed by Peter (Acts933t). The form of the name, .(^neas, not as in Homer /l-".ncas, is noteworthy. It is met with in Thucydides, Xenophon, and Pindar.


(aincon [Ti.WH]), Jn.323t. See Salim.

^SORA (aicoora [BA], etc.), Judith44t RV = AV

ESOKA (./.f. ).


See Family, Ki.nship.


RV AccABA (akk&Ba [B]). i Esd. 530 = Ezra 2 46, Hagab.


(apaBoc [Ti. WH] ; 68). one of the ' projihits ' w ho came from Jerusalem to Antioch at the time of the dispersion from Jerusalem ' upon the tribula- tion that rose about Stephen' (Acts 11 19, cp 84)- He predicted a great fanune over all the world, ' which came to pass in the days of Claudius' (.Nets 11 27 28). The reference, doubtless, is to the great dearth which visited Judtea and the surrounding districts especially Jerusa- lem between 44 and 48 A.D. (Jos. Ant. xx. 26; 5a; I The text of BA differs.

Kus. HE ii. 11 3). For other famines in the reign of Claudius, see Suet. Claud. 18; Tac. Ann. xii. 43.

The next mention of Agabus is in Acts 21 10/., where it is said that he * came down from Judaea ' to Cajsarea when Paul was there, and, taking Paul's girdle, bound his own feet and hands with it to symbolise the captivity of the apostle. As this leference looks like a first mention of Agabus, those who ascribe the whole of Acts to one writer regard it as an indication that the second half of the book was written first. By others the passage is naturally regarded as one of the indications that the author of Acts did not himself write the ' we ' passages, but adopted them from an earlier source. On the other hand, Overbeck and Van Manen legard vj. 10-14 ^s an interpolation, and suppose that the 'we' was introduced by the last redactor. Jiingst thinks that the prophecy cannot originally have lx.'en ascribed to Agabus, but must have been assigned to one of Philip's prophesying daughters, or these would not have tjeen mentioned. At all events, it is to be noted that ' from Juda-a' (21 10) does not harmonise with 218, for Caesarea belonged to Judtea.

Agabus is included in the lists of the ' seventy disciples of our Lord' by pseudo-Dorotheus and pseudo- Hippolylus, and is commemorated in the great Clieek Menaai (.Apr. 8), along with Rufu';, Herodion, and Asynciilus.


(3^X, 33X, cp Ass. agagu, 'be powerful, vehement, angry' ; Igigi, the spirits friendly to man, Maspero, DawnofCiv. 634 ; e^rA,p[B.\L]), akingof the Amalekites, so celebrated in early tradition that the Yahwist makes Balaam say, by an obvious anachronism, of the future Israelitish kingdom, ' His king shall be higher than Agag ' (Nu. 247; r^^r [^--^L], following Samar. text). Saul, after his successful campaign against the Amalekites, exempted Agag from the general doom of devotion to the deity by slaughter, and brought him to Gilgal, where Samuel hewed him in pieces before Vahwe i.e., at the great sanctuary where festal sacrifices were offered ( i S. 158/. 20/. 32/ ). Making allowance for the endeavour of the narrator to harmonise an old tradition with later ideas (see S.\UL, 3), and throwing ourselves back into the barbarous period which begins to pass away under David, we cannot doubt that the slaughter of Agag was a eucharistic sacrifice (see S.\ckifice), akin to that of the nakl'a (lit. 'victim rent in pieces'), which was in use among the Arabs after a successful fray, and which might be a human sacrifice (WRS ES^-) 491, cp 363; We. Ar. Held. 1.2 [87]).


('33X ; for Greek readings see below), a mcniber of the family of Agag ; a title applied ana- chronistically to Haman (Ksth. 3i 10835). Haman, as an Anialekite, is opposed to Mordecai, the descendant of Kish (Esth. 25). Neither description is to be taken literally (see Esther, i, end). The meaning is that there is an internecine struggle between the Jews and their enemies, like that between Saul and Agag of old. Similarly, Haman is called a ' Macedonian ' in the Greek parts of Esther ; 126 {n.Q.Kehova [L"] ; but /Soi'voios [BN.\L3] ; AV Agagite ; RV Bugean) I610 (EV Macedonian; fiUKeowv [BNAL^]; but ^ovyaios [L"]), and the name has made its way back into 924(iJ.aKf5t.jv [BSALfl]); cp Esthek, 10. Elsewhere the reading is ^ovyaios [BN-AL^^] (only in 3i 85 [j^c.a mg.])^ ()erhaps a corruption of raryoios (in Nu. 24;, the same version has Tory for A7a7).

==AGAR== (AfAP [I^A]). I. The sons of Agar, Bar. 3 as kV ; A\' Agarenes. See H.vgak, 2, n.

2. Gal. 424/. KV Hagar (<^.v., end).

==AGATE== {n5-]3. Is. 54.2, lAcnic [BNj\Q] ; n'S*]?, Ez. 27i6 [Ba. Ginsb.], xopxop [BQ], KOpxopyC [A], etc. ; i2C', axathc [B.AL]) occurs four limes in AV, twice for Heb. kadkod, RV ' rubies ' and twice for shlbo. On the identification of these stones, see Chalcedony. On the question whether the agate, which is a variegated chalcedony (translucent quartz) with layers or spots of jasper, was known to Israel, see Precious Sto.nes.


(N:X. apoaLA]; &c& [B] ; hAa [L] ; Jos. hAoy [g'^n-]; -^f-^). father of Shammah {q.v., 3); 2 S. 23ii. His name should doubtless be cor- rected to Ela {<?N (so Marq. Fund. 17) ; 3 and 7 in the older character were very similar. He is mentioned again in i K. 4 18. See Elah, 6.


(ArrABA[B='""e- A]), i Esd. Szgf RV = Ezra 245, Hagahah.


, AV Aggeus {Aggci [ed. Bensly]), i Esd. 6 1 73, 4 Esd. l^of. See H.\GGAI.


(AflA [BA]), I Esd. 534t RV=Ezra257. Haiti L.


Agriculture is here considered (i) as conditioned by the land ( i), (2) as conditioned by the people ( 2-10), (3) as a factor in the life of the people ( 11-15); a concluding paragraph ( 16) will contain some notes on historical points.

I. The great variety of the conditions in the different natural divisions of Palestine (Dt. I7) must be kept in mind.

1. Conditioned by land.[edit]

The various local products, alluded to by the Old Testament writers, the most important of which are wheat and barley, olive and vine and fig, will be de- scribed in special articles [qq.v.). On the seasons see Rain, Dew. We simply note here First, the long dry season (Apr.-Oct. ), including all the harvests, the dates of which vary slightly in the different districts (cp Feasts, 10) : the Tsp in spring, when rain seemed miraculous (rS. 12x6/) and the steady W. wind every evening made it possible to winnow with ease, barley beginning in April, wheat about a fort- night later ; the j'>p, summer fruits and vegetables, in summer ; olives in autumn ; the -\-iZ, vines, from August onwards. Second, the wet season (Oct. -Apr. ), the earlier part of which saw the preparation of the soil by the early rain (mv, rrk) for the winter crops, to be brought to maturity by the succeeding showers, especially those in March-.April (rip':';;), before which was the time for sowing the summer crops.

With such stable conditions, all that seems to be needed is a fair amount of intelligent industry ; and the lack of this, rather than any great change of climate, is probably the cause of the retrogression of modern times. - The productivity, however, was not uniform (cp parable of sower), and there seems to be a somewhat periodic diminution in the amount of rainfall. Agriculture is also exposed to pests ; the easterly wind c'lp, drought. Mildew, and Locusts (</</?'. : see also Ant, 4).

II. We consider now, more in detail, agriculture as dependent on the energy, skill, and general condition

_ f ^'^ ^^^ inhabitants. Our account must

infoSfon naturally be fragmentary.3 The minute prescriptions of the Mishna must of course be used with caution. We begin with

I. Technical details of agricultural procedure. (For the most part we shall deal only with the raising of grain crops. For other departments see Vines, Garden, Cattle, etc. ) Incidentally the biblical records de- scribe many agricultural processes, and mention by name some of the implements used. Of these implements, however, they give no description ; and the only speci- mens found, up to the present time, are of sickles (see below, 7).

For Egypt, however, we have fuller sources many pictures of processes and implements, and some actual specimens. And

1 .See Palestine for details on (leology ( 3), Physical divisions ( ^ff-). Hydrography (g 13), Climate and Vegetation ( '4 A)-

2 See however Fraas, Aus dent Orient 199.

3 There is no Hebrew word corresponding to our termy&rw. Tilling the soil is .TDlun miy \ husbandman is laK, etc. ; field is ,mL~.

since modern Egypt and modern I'alestine are very similar, these ancient Egyptian remains may be used to illustrate ancient Palestine. Further, since modern implements and methods are, in Egypt, very like those of antiquity, the same is probably true of Palestine. Hence it is reasonable to hold that, m Pales- tine also, modern may be taken to illustrate ancient.

Our main side-lights,' therefore, are modern Palestine and ancient Kgypt ; and they are best used in this order, subordinated always to the actual data of the OT itself.

We shall take the processes in natural order.

Sometimes land had to be cleared of wood or shrub (xna Josh. 17 18), or of stone Cjpo). chiefly in vineyards. For loosening or otherwise moving the soil many words are used, such as

3. Preparing soil.[edit]


nn, nSs. nPB, p?y, my: ; nit-, nc', of which the first group denotes ploughing, the second, breaking up the soil (hcik) or the clods (nimJS Joel 1 17) with the mattock or hoe, while the third as clearly means levelling off the surface with something serving for a harrow. Of the names of the instruments '^ we have riw'tnc or n-b:^inc. nx. -\ii;r2, of which the first pair probably representsthe plough ( NT di/joTpoj'); the last, a sort of mat- tock ; while riN must remain undetermint- J, ploughshare or hoe. It is clear, therefore, that we have at least three processes ploughing, hoeing, and harrowing. We cannot be sure that there was of old in different parts of the country any more uniformity than there is now. It is not likely that the shallow soil would ever be much more deeply ploughed than now, when a depth of 5-6 inches is consid- ered sufficient. Perhaps ploughing would some- times (as now), after sufficient rain, be dis- pensed with.^ Hoeing would probably take the place of ploughing in steep places (Is. 725), as now in stony ground.* In modern Juda;a there is no ploughing before sowing except where manure is used. In Galilee, on the other Fig. i.-Eg>'ptian Hoe (/?r/V. ^^"^1- ^h^^e is one Mus.). For picture of hoe in ploughing, and in some use .see fig. 3, and cp Egypt, districts more than one. ^ 34. n- When ground has been

left unsown with grain and is overgrown with weed, this is ploughed in.

Turning now to the implements used for these purposes, and beginning with the less important, we

4. Implements "'f "'^' '"^ Egyptian //-..^ (fig. ,), ^f

for nrenar ^ '^ nuportance m ancient Kgypt as to

in? soil ^^ ^^^ natural symbol of agriculture, as the goad is in modern Palestine,^ has no representative in modern Syria ; but neither has it in

1 Babylonia, as well as Egypt, no doubt presented points of contact with Palestine ; but in the department of agriculture our direct knowledge of Babylonia is very slight. See A'/'(2) 3 94^, and Meissner, Beitr. z. althah. Privatrccht.

2 See partial list of Talmudic names in Hamburger and Ugolinus, and now also a very full collection in Vogelstein's work (see below, 17).

< In Egypt two ploughs seem generally to have been used, the one behind the other ; perhaps the second turned up the soil between the furrows made by the first (cp, however, next note). On the other hand, at least in later times, the Egyptians sometimes used a lighter plough, drawn by men or boys.

  • If we could regard the Egyptian agricultural pictures as

representations of actual scenes we should have to conclude that in Egypt the hoe was used sometimes before (so always [?] in the Old Empire), sometimes after, or both before and after the plough, to break up the great clods of earth. The depicting of the various operations side by side, however, is very likely a mere convention designed to represent in one view all kinds of field work. So Prof. W. Max Muller in a private communication to the present writer.

6 The illustration (fig. i) needs only the explanation that the twisted cord adjusts the acuteness of the angle of the two other p.-irts.

  • Cp Wetzstein's note on Judg. 3 31 (/.r. below, 17).

modern Egypt. A modern Syrian hoe may be seen in PEFQ, 1891, pp. 110-115; as also mattock, spade, etc.

'I"he harnnv does not seem to have been used by the ancient Egyptians, although their modern representatives use a weighted plank or a totjthcd roller. In modern Palestine a bush of thorns is sometimes used. The writer of Job 39 10, however, seems to have known of some implement drawn by beasts following the labourer ; but this throws little light on general usage.

ThQ plough, although it is probably, strictly speaking, an inferior substitute for the spade, is in common practice a very important implement, and merits more detailed treatment.

Of the Israelitish plough we know only that it had, at least sometimes, an iron share that needed sharpening (roS, I S. 1820, editorial comment in corrupt text). That the Syrian plough was light ' we have the testimony of Theophrastus. The modern Syrian plough, which is light enough to be carried by the ploughman on hLs shoulcfer, and is simpler than the usual ancient Egyptian 2 plough (tig. 3) in having only one handle and therefore

Fig. 2. a. Babylonian Plough (from cylinder seal, ciic. 2000 B.C., belonging to Dr. Hays Ward). /. Syrian Plough and Goad (after I'l^FQ, 1891).

1. cs-sikka jp:,-?-^

2. cd-dakar, dhckr, 3-^-

3. cl-kahnsa, kdlmsa.

9. eUara, skcr'.


4. el-buruk, burk, -T13.


5. .^-^7cv7;7r(.Schum.), n'T3-

6. cl-wufla, 7uasl, ':'is'.'*

7. kofrib (Post), mnp.

8. halaka (Post).


14. nu-ssns or minsds.

15. ,mkuza.

16. 'a/'a, s.MUt.

not needing two men to manage it, may safely be taken to illustrate that used by the Israelites. There is no more uniformity in its construction than in any other matter relating to agriculture, and it would seem to be at its simplest in Southern Palestine. The woodcut (fig. 2) illustrates its general form. It is of wood, often oak. The stake on to which the pointed metal sheath that serves for ashareis thrust, passes up through ahole in the pole, toend in a cross handle piece. The pole is of two pieces, joined end to end. T\\g yoke {S'y, ,ij:ic more rarely cic. nifiio Vyn ; ^vyov, ^i>y6s) is repeatedly mentioned in the OT. It varied in weight according to circumstances ( r K. 124). It is now made as light as possible, often of willow. Two pegs, joined below by thongs or by hair string, form a collar for each of the o.xen, and two smaller pegs in the middle keep in position the ring or other arrangement for attaching the plough pole. Repairs are attended to once a jear by a travelling

1 The simplest plough would be made of one piece of a tree, bent while growing. See N'erg. GVor:.'-. 1 169, and illustration in Graevius, T/ics. Antiq. Koiii. 11, p. 1674.

- The ancient Egyptian plough, which underwent little modification in the course of millenniums, was all of wood, although, perhaps, the share w.-is of a wood (harder?) different from the rest of the plough, and may .sometimes have been sheathed in metal (Wilkinson). Of the .As-syrian plough we know from an embossed relief found ne.ir Mosul, that it (some- times) had 4 board for turning over the earth, and just in front of it a drill that let the seed down, to be covered by the soil as it turned over.

3 Where two forms of the .-Xrabic name are given, the first is from .Schumacher, and the second from Post (of', cit. below, 8 17X The Hebrew names are from Vogelstein (pp. cit. below, 17).

expert. The ploughman holds in his left hand a goad (messds = ic^c. pni,^ n'uaTn) some eight or nine feet in length, having at one end a metal point, and at the other a metal blade to clean the share.

The /I'a/n (ics, i;(uyos) would, as now, oftenest consist of oxen (Am. G12), but sometiuies of cows (Job

6. Sowing.[edit]

Fig. 3. Ploughing, hoeing, and sowing. From the ma^faba of Ti at Sakkara (Old Empire). After Baedeker.

1 14, Heb. text), and perhaps sometimes of asses (Is. 30 24; Dt. 2"2io). Even camels and mules may now be seen occasionally. In Armenia many pairs of o.xen draw one plough, the driver sitting on the yoke ; but this is hardly the meaning of i K. 19 19.

'Y\iG. furrows were called '70, n^ya^ (n'3i'c)- They are now sometimes very carefully drawn (cp ?3"ii<n, Ps. 120 3), and are some nine to ten inches apart.

Irrigation {7\\-\7\. npc'n ; see G.\KnKN) must have been

.. . one of the processes used by Israel. ^ Pales-

C. imga- ^jj^g indeed, differed from Egvpt(Dt. 11 10/..

tion. etc. , , T- o \ 1

' on which see Egypt, 34, n. ) m havmg

a copious supply of rain and in having natural springs (Deut. 8 7) :

gation, and there may have been districts under culti- vation which were entirely dependent on it. It would not be safe to assign an early date to the elaborate methods and regulations of Mishna times ; and it is difficult to determine whether by the streams that were so highly prized (Dt. 87 ; Nu. 246, Cant. 415),* and without which a garden could not live (Is. I30), artificial canals are meant, and whether, e.g., the bucket (-St,, Is. 40 15; Num. 247) was used in irrigation. The Mishna has ' regulations concerning manuring (Ssi), and there may ' be a reference to it in such passages as Ps. 8-3 10 [n] (toin'? P~) or Is. 2.5 10 (Kthib). In NT times, at least, manure was used for trees (Lk. 138; /3d\w Koirpia), as now for figs, olives, etc. ; it was worked in at the last yearly ploughing, which was after the first winter rain. For grain crops the use of manure is exceptional (e.g., at Hebron). Remains show that in the hilly j country ferraa'f/g (c^np'VD niSiJS. Cant. 5 13?) was used 1 even more than now, especially for vine cultivation ; : but the wider terraces are still used for grain, the clearing of the soil being called ak/>.

Fences (nj) were employed, perhaps only in vine-

1 Vogelstein argues from Kelim, 96 that this is the n.ame of the metal he.-id.

2 Cp, however, Del. on Ps. 120 3, Ges.-Buhl sub voc. etc.

3 See now the account in Vogelstein, 4.

4 Cp.ff.bM2) ,06.

6 The prophets delight to speak of the copious supplies of water that will refresh even the most unlikely places in the ideal future (see Cheyne on Is. 30 25).

yards (Is. 5s ; Ecclus. 2828), where hedges (.isicvo Is. 5 5 ) were also in use ; and there was sometimes a border, e.g., of nDD3 (see Fitches, 2) (Is. 2825). Between grain-fields, however, the commonest practice was to set up sloncs to mark the line of partition Cj^^j Hos. 5 10) ; on the strong sentiment that prevailed as to the unrighteousness of tampering with these, see below (g 12, 14).

Whether the various words used for sowing the seed were technical terms we cannot tell, jm is a word of general significance. In Is. 2825 three words are used in one verse : pEn and ^^v of scattering n:ip (see FiTCiiKS, i) and cummin with the hand ; Cb,^ of setting wheat and barley in the straight furrows.^ Nowadays a drill is sometimes used. The common practice is, whether the land has been already ploughed or not, to plough in the seed.^ This protects it from ants and from dryness due to intermission of the early rain.'* As to protection from man and beast, see HuT.

To reap is -jiip. Two names of implements have been preserved ( eo-in, only in Dt. [16 9 ; 2326t] ; V-:c. only in Jer. [50 16 ; AV mg. scythe*] and Joel [3 (4)13]; ^pi-Kdvov) ; but whether they refer to the same thing or to varieties, we do not know. Perhaijs the commonest method was to pull up by the root (see fig. 5), a practice confined in ancient Egypt to certain crops, but still followed both in Egypt and in Palestine. The use of sickles in

Canaan in very early times is, however, pro\ed by the finding of sickle Hints "at Tell-el-Hesy in the earliest and all suc- ceedinglayers, while the use of iron sickles by the Jews in at least pre- Hellenis t i c times is proved by the finding of the specimen represented in fig. 7.

By putting together different allusions," we can follow the various steps. The reaper (":'j'p) filled his hand

7. Reaping.[edit]

taha of Ti. After Baedeker.

Fig. 5. Pulling up grain. After Erman.

1 In Am. 13 jnt.T 7]-vo is used of the process of sowing.

2 It is not unlikely that .Tiib- is to be dropped, with We. Che. and Du. (against IM.), as = ri-)ij,'C'.

3 Accordmg to Strabo, this w.is done also in Babylon (cp above, col. 78, n. 2), and in ancient Egypt the seed was sometimes, especially m the Old Empire, trodden in by sheep (Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, ET 429; not goats), in the time of Herodotus by swine.

  • On the stages and accidents of growth cp Vogelstein, 10.

" For '"I^Cja, which AV mg. thrice renders 'scythe,' EV has, more correctly, Pki^N'ING-hooks (y.r'.).

6 The method of setting the sickle flints is shown by the specimens found by Dr. Petrie in Egypt (Illahun, etc. pi. 7 no. 27 ; see above, fig. 6).

7 E.g., Ruth223; Ps.1297; Is. 17s ; Job24a4 : Jer. 922[2i].

(12) with ears (o'Vac') of the standing corn (ncp). and with his arm (yi'ii) reajjud thcin (nsp)- i'he stalks (nzp) were, in I't^ypt, and still are, in Palestine, cut pretty high up (Anderlind ; knee high). They must some- times have been cut, whether at this or at a later stage, very near the ear (^jin nSas* Job 2424). The armfuls (nay) would fall (Jen 922 [21]) in a heap ("I""!') behind the reaper, to be ga- thered by the navn ID.xc, in his bosom (ir-.T:2) and tied (c'^.n::) into sheaves (rf^Sx) and set in heaps (cnr^)'

In Kgypt the sheaf consisted of two bundles, with their heads in opposite directions. In modern ^yria fii.'- quently the sheaves are not tied at all. It has l)r>ii

Fio. 6. Sickle with cutting edge of flints found at lllahun. After IVtrie.

Fig. 7. Iron sickle found at Tell el Hesl. After ^FQ.

.pposcd- that already in An;

) may sometimes have bee

time the bundles

aped into a heavy

(Is. 2827) it was usual to beat out cummin and rap(see Fitches, i) with /vi/s{nt:D and ear res|>cctively). The other processes were probably more conunon in later times. For these was needed a threshing-Jhor (pS,' 4Xwy, fiXwc), for which was selected some spot freely exposed to the wind, often a well-known place (2 S. 24i6).' Beating the floor hard for use may be alluded to in Jer. 5I33 (Heb. Te.xt ; .rionnn). Sometimes the wheat heads may have been struck off the straws by the sickle onto the threshing-floor (Job 21 24), as Tristram describes {East. Cust. 125); but usually the bundles would be first piled in a heap (crna) on the floor, and thiMi from this a convenient cjuantity (ntrno)^ from time to time spread over the floor.

The threshing then seems to have been done in two ways : either {h) by driving cattle round the floor on the loosely scattered stalks till their hoofs gradually trampled (c'n) out the grain (12). for which purpose o.xen'* were used (Hos. lOii),^ or {c) by special imphments.^

The instruments mentioned, which were drawn usually by o.xen, are [a) j-nn', j-nn* (?), (pin) Jiic ; " {b) .^^jy with pini" (wheel) prefixed (Is. 2827), and perhaps alone (Am. 2i3t; .see, however. We. ad Ivc). These two sets of expressions probably correspond pretty closely to l.vo instruments stili in use in Palestine, and a description of them and llicir use will be the nearest we can come to an account of their ancient representa- tives.

a. The .Sj'rian inn-aif (inic) is a \\ooden drag'^ (see fig. 10) with a rough under-surface, which when drawn over the stalks chops them up. The illustration needs few explanations. The roughness is produced by the skilful insertion in holes, a cubic inch in size, of blocks of basalt (nvB'S Is. 41 15) which protrude (when nc>v) some inch and a half. The sledge is weighted by heavy stones, or by the weight of the driver, who, when tired, lies down and even sleeps, or sits on a three- legged stool.

8. Sickling and bundling.[edit]

.Xfter l.cpsius

load on a cart (rhvj .^m. 213) ; but the reference mr.y very well be to the threshing wain.^ In Kgypt they were conveyed in baskets or bags, by men or on donkeys, to the threshing-Uoor.

Threshing was called

t;nn, pp-^, en,

S-hi ccn ; of

which the first describes beating with a rod, the second ft TVironTiititr indefinite (to break \x\> fine), and the . inresnmg. ^^^^^^ j^ literally to tram])le. {a) The first of these evidently represents the most primitive practice, still followed sometimes in both Palestine and I'.gvpt. Naturally, gleaners (cpSo) and apparently others in certain circumstances e.g., Gideon in time of danger beat out the grain ; and in much later times

1 It is hardly possible to determine how many of these terms re practically synonyms. .-Vccording to Vogelstein op. cit. dijjf., the loose D'HrS were tied into fliaSx and piled into C"1J^^ while TDU (see Excurs, I.) is an entirely distinct word meaning hav.

2 E.g-., by Wellhausen.

  • So, e.g., Hoffman and Wetzstein in Z.4 TW.

6 81

/3. The Jlrlan of Northern Syria, called in Egypt by

1 ' T'.arn-floor,' 2 K. (27 .W.

2 lUit in I K. 'I'l iopj2 is probably dittography for C^j3 "' So written, without dagesh, by Raer.

^ It is not clear how the horses of Is. C82S are supposed to

sed. Du. proposes to read VE'IEI ^s a ^


In Eg>-pt in later times o.\en were so used, three in a line, with their heads bound together at the horns by a Inam (see fig. 0), or in the ancient empire, donkeys, ten in a line ; so in modern Syria, the line being called a iaran.

> Just as several rods are used together in method (.a), so there could be duplicates of ffaran {^, or of implement (r), or mi.xtures of (i^) and (r) used simultaneously, as now in Hauran.

7 ' Threshing-wain,' Job 41 30 [22] RV.

    • Cle.irly some kind of sharp instrument of iron (2 S. 12 31 =

I Ch. -'0 3f), EV 'harrow,' HofTm. (/T.-/ 7'// "266) 'pick.'

" Perhaps by a gloss we have here independent names for one thing (Is. 41 15). Ry D"3pi3(Iudg. 87, i6t), which some would add here, the Talmud (with ipL [once]; 5ual (on) trans- literates) understands 'thistles': a view that is confirmed by the existence in modern Egyptian .\rabic of a word terkdn as the name of a thorny plant. See Bkiek, i.

10 jrjit, alone = (threshing) wheel, Prov. 20 26 RV

" Some 7 ft. X 3 ft. X 2 in.

the name of the unused nora/ (see fig. 1 1 ) , and known to ttie Romans as plcstcllum Foenicum, has in place of sharp stones revolving metal discs, which, when pressed down by the weight of the driver seated in a rude arm-chair, eflectually cut up the straw

The process of winnowing (.-iit) is often mentioned. Two names of instruments are preserved, the nnio (EV fan') in Is. (3O24) and Jer. (loy), and

9. Winnowing.[edit]

the nm (EV ' shovel ') in Is. alone (30

24). 1 They seem to refer to different things : perhaps to

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

The work is done sometimes by horses, but most commonly, as of old, by oxen, either singly or (oftener) in pairs, sometimes muzzled, contrary to ancient Egyptian usage and Hebrew maxim. ^

The modern tioor is a circle some fifty feet in diameter.


Fig. 10. S>Tian threshing-sledge. After Beiizinger.

with the heap [kadis) in the centre, from which a supply (far/ia) is from time to time spread all round in ring form, some two feet deep and seven or eight feet broad. When one farAa has been thoroughly threshed to insiu^e which, it is from time to time stirred up with the

-Modern Egyptian threshing-machine (norag). .\fter Wilkinson.

handle of the winnowing instrument, or even with a special two-pronged fork (deikal, 5i\-eX\a) the mixed mass (darts) of grain {^aM), chopped straw {(ii/i [zn), and chaff etc. {favydr), is formed into a heap ( 'arama), to make room for a new tarha.

1 The Mishna seems to assume the practice in KelIt\<S-j iSr CIDn.T i-e., np3 '^v- I' douhtful whether the preceding phrase "npa Sc* CpScn refers to a practice, reported by some travellers, of banaaging the eyes of the oxen in threshing. Philological consider.-itions would give the preference to Maimonides's explanation : ' Sacculus fielliceus in quern colligunt stercus jumenti ne pereat triticum dum trituratur.'

the implements still called by similar names in Palestine ^ the fork and the shovel. The products are grain (ns), choppedstraw(pn),andchaff(j'b, zx'r\, my, dx^'P'"')- The first is heaped up in round heaps (,^D-|J; Ru. 87; Cant. 73, Heb. Text). The second is kept for pro- vender (Is. 11 7). The third is blown away by the wind (Ps. I4).

In modern SjTia the 7nidrd (see fig. given in Wetzstein, op. cit. below, 17) is a wooden fork almost 6 ft. in length, with some at least of its five or six prongs separate- ly inserted, so that they are easily repaired. The prongs are bound together by fresh hide, which on shrinking forms a tight band. The raht is a kind of wooden shovel (see fig. in Wetzstein, I.e.), with a handle 4 ft. long. It is used chiefly for piling the grain, but also for winnowing leguminous plants and certain parts of the daris that have had to be re-threshed. The winnowers stand to th,e E. of the '(/ra/rt heap, and (some- times first with a two-pronged fork called shaul and then), with the midrd, either toss

the darls against the wind or straight up, or simply let it fall from the inverted fork, according to the strength of the evening W. breeze. Wltile the chaff is blown away some 10 to 15 ft. or more, the straw [tihn) falls at a shorter distance, and is preserved for fodder ; the heavy grain, unbruised ears, and joints of stems, fall almost where they were, ready for sifting.

Strange to say, in the case of sifting it is the names of the implement that are best

10. Sifting, etc.[edit]

PI"'^':^^^- The siei-e is

called Krbhdrak (,^^;2,^ Am.

Pgt) and ndphah (nsj, Is.

30 28). In the former case probably the good grain, in the latter probably the refuse, passes through. In modern Sjria there are

1 omits these words ; but rm;oi'_ occurs repeatedly in the NT.

2 Fleischer denies any philological connection between Ar. raht and nm, regarding the former as a Persian word, borrowed in the sense of tool.

3 But KKKp.6<i.

Fig. 12. Winnowing. After Erman.

FiG. 13. Sifting. After Lepsius.

two main kinds of sieve used on the threshing-floor. They are made of a hoop of wood with a niesh-work of strips of camel-hide put on fresh, and become tight in drying. The coarser meshed kirbdl is like the kebhdrah of Amos. When the winnowed heap is sifted with it, the grains of wheat pass through, while the unbruised ears etc. remain in the sieve,' and are flung back into the tarha to be re-threshed. The finer meshed ghirbdl is like the he: of Is. 30 28; all dust, bruised j grains, etc. pass through, but none of the good wheat.

When the grain has been finally separated, it is heaped with the raljt in hemispherical piles (sodba), which probably represent the 'arema (nany) of the metaphor in Cant. 7 3 (Heb. ). By this Boaz slept (Ru. 87), as do the owners still, while (as a further pre- caution) private marks are made on the surface, and a scarecrow is set up.

Storage. In Jen, Dt. , Joel, Ps., 2Ch., there are names of places for keeping stores of grain ; - but we do not know anything about them.^ In the dark days of Gedaliah corn and other stores were hidden in the ground (Jer. 41 8) ; dry cisterns hewn out of the rock are still so used. For a representation of an ancient cistern see ZDPyS, opp. p. 69. The mouth is just wide enough to admit a man's body, and can be carefully covered over. Grain will keep in these cisterns for years.

2. Ne.xt falls to be considered the dependence of agriculture on the general condition of the people, a dependence that is very obvious from the present state of agriculture in Palestine.

In the days of Israel's greatness, when agriculture was the chief occupation of the people, the population,

., _ , whatever may have been its numerical

11. General conditions.[edit]

strength, was certainly enough to bring

the country, even in pl.aces that are now quite barren, into a state of cultivation. The land would be full of husbandmen tilling their fields by day, and returning to their villages at night. Yet, down to the end of the monarchy, the old nomadic life still had its admirers (Jer. 35), who, like the Bedouin of to-day, would despise the settled tiller of the soil. At the other extreme also, in such a society as is described, e.g., by Amos and Isaiah, there was an aristocracy that had little immediate connection with the land it owned. Slave labour would doubtless, as elsewhere, be a weak point in the agricultural system, tending to lower its status (Zech. 13 5 ; Ecclus. 7 15 [16]) ; though this would not preclude the e.xistence, at some period or other, of honourable offices such as those attributed by the Chronicler to the age of David (i Ch. 2725-31). After making allowance for homiletic colouring, we are bound to suppose that agricultural enterprise must have suffered grie\'ously from a sense of insecurity in regard to the claims of property, and from the accumulation of debts, with their attendant horrors. Civil disturbances (such as those abounding in the later years of Hosea) and foreign wars would, in later times, take the place of exposure to the inroads of nomadic tribes. The burden of taxation and forced labour (i S. 812) would, as now in many eastern lands, foster the feelings that find ex- pression in the narrative of the great schism (i K. I24) and in some of the accounts of the rise of the kingdom (on the 'king's mowings," Am. 7i, see MOWINGS and Government, -20).

The existence of an effort to ameliorate evils of the kind to which allusion has just been made, and of a

y consciousness of their inconsistency with

. aws. ^j^g ^^^^ national life, is attested by the inclusion in the Pentateuchal codes of a considerable number of dicta on agricultural matters, in which we see

1 For lins is most likely stones.

2 D'D2K0, DTDX, nr.siN, nnaSD, '.11^p, rfasps, NT afro9^<nf.

3 In Egypt corn was stored in buildings with a flat roof reached by an outside stair. There were two openings, or sets of openings, near the top, for pouring in the grain, and near the bottom, for withdrawing it (see model in Brit. Mus.).

how religious sanctions became attached to traditional agricultural practices.

Already in the Book of the Covenant a fallow year (Ex. 23 11), once in seven, is prescribed for the sake of the poor and the Ixast, and a day of rest [v. 12). once in seven, for the sake of the cattle and the slave ; while the principle is laid down that for damage done to a neighbour's field reparation must be made (Ex. 22s/. [4/.]). In the Deuteroiiomic Code, if there is already the precept against sowing in a vineyard two kinds of seed (229), or ploughing with an ox and an ass together (22 10), and the requirement of a tithe (14 22), there are still such maxims as the sacredness of property (19 14, landmarks ; = Prov. 22 28 = 23 lort [cp Job242], and, in the form of a curse, Dt. 27i7) on the one hand, and, on the other, generous regard for the needs of others (2325 [26], plucking ears; 24 19, sheaf; 20, olive; 21 2324 [23], grapes), even of beasts (254, mu/zle), with a provision against abuse of the privilege (2325 [26], no sickle; 2324 [25J, no vessel); while an effort is made to moderate the damage done to agriculture by war (2O7, exemption from conscription; 2019/"., preserve trees). In the Priestly Code there is still, in the remarkable collection preceding the last chapter of Leviticus, a further development of the provision for the poor at harvest time (19 9, corners = 23 22), with a repetition of the charitable maxims (I99/. ) ; but there is on the whole an emphasising of such prescrip- tions as non-mixture of seeds (19 19), defilement of seed (II37/. ), uncircumcision of fruit-trees (I923-25), strict calculation of dates of agricultural year (23 16); while the Jubile year makes its appearance. Here we are appreciably nearer the details of such discussions as those in Zera'im etc. Of course, the c|uestion how far such maxims made themselves felt in actual practice, or even as a moral directive force, is not answered by pointing out their existence in literary form.

III. We pass now to the consideration of agriculture as a factor in the life of the people.

That agriculture was an important element in popular life is very evident. Land was measured by yokes S. 14 14 ; Is. 5 10) and valued by the

13. Common life.[edit]

amount of seed it needed (Lev. 27 16).

Time was measured by harvests (Judith 227 1), and places were identified by the crops growing on them (2 S. 23ii, lentils ; i Ch. 11 13, barley). Tilling the soil was proverbially the source of wealth (Pr. 12 ti 28 19) ; implements not needed for other purposes would as a matter of course be turned to agricultural use (Is. 24) and so on. That work in the fields was not confined to slaves and jjeople of no culture is evident, not only from the existence of such narratives as that of Joseph's dream, but also from what is told of Saul (1S.II5), and Elisha (1K.I919), and Amos (714) before they appeared on the stage of history. On the other hand, the narrator of the story of Ruth seems to represent neither Boaz himself nor his deputy as doing more than overseeing and encouraging the labourers (Ru. 2s); and in the time of the writer of Zech. 13s (RV) a tiller of the soil seemed to be most naturally a purchased slave, while the ideal of the writer of Is. 61 5 is that ploughmen and vine-dressers should be aliens.

At all times, howe%'er, even the rich owner entered naturally into the spirit of the agricultural life. If it was perhaps only in the earlier times that he actually ploughed or even followed the oxen, he would at all times be present on the cheerful harvest field and visit his vineyard to see the work of the labourers (Mt. 208), his sons' included (Mt. 21 28), and give directions about the work (Lk. 187). when he would listen respectfully to the counsel of his men (Lk. 138/. ). It was not derogatory, in the mind of the Chronicler, to kingly dignity to interest one's self in agriculture (2 Ch. 26 10),*

1 The text of a S. 23 13 is verj- doubtful ; cp Dr. ad loc.

2 The meaning of Eccles. 6 9 [81 is obscure.

14. Sentiment.[edit]

and a proverb-writer points out the superiority of the quiet prosperity of the husbandman to an insecure diadem (Prov. 2723-27).

Not unnaturally it is the life of harvest-time that has been most fully preserved to us. We can see the men, especially the younjjer men (Ru. 29), cutting the grain, the young children^ going out to their fathers (2 K. 4 18) in the field, the jealousies that might spring up between the reapers ((ien. 37?), and the dangers that young men and maidens might be exposed to(Ru. 29 perh. Hos. 9 \f. ), the simple fare of the reapers ( Ru. 2 14), and the unrestrained joviality of the evening meal ( Ru. 87) after the hot day's work (2 K. 4 19), the poor women and girls gleaning behind the reapers and usually finding more than they seem sometimes to find nowadays, beating out the grain (Ru. 217) in the evening and carrying it away in a mantle to the older ones at home (Ru. 815), not only the labourers but also the owners sleeping by the corn heaps at night (Ru. 87), so that the villages would, as now in Palestine and Egj'pt, l)e largely emptied of inhabitants. The Egyptian monu- ments could be drawn on for further illustrations.

Such a mode of life had naturally a profound effect on the popular sentiment, the religious conscience, and, in time, the literary thought of the people ; and, to complete our survey of the subject, a few words must be said here on these matters.

That the agricultural mode of life was regarded as originating in the earliest ages is evident from Gen. 3 and 4 ; '^ but it was sometimes regarded as a curse (817/.), or at least as inferior to pastoral life (43/.), while at other times nomadic life was a curse (4 12), instead of being a natural stage (4 20). These two sides are perhaps reflected in the glowing descriptions in which certain writers delight e.g. , Dt. 8828 : a tilled land of corn and wine and oil (Dt. 87-9), a pasture land flowing with milk and honey (Ezek. 2(16). This land, which is lovingly contrasted with other lands (I'^zek. 206 15), was felt to be a gift of Yahwe to his people, and specially under his watchful care (Ut. 11 12). The agricultural life was, therefore, also of his appointment (Gen. 823; Ecclus. 7 15 [6]), and indeed lay as the basis of his Torah. From him the husband- man received the principles of his practice (Is. 2826), as also, he depended absolutely on Yahwe for the bringing into operation of the natural forces (Dt. 11 14) without which all his labour would be in vain [v. 17). This, how- ever, was only a ground of special security (Dt. 11 12), for no other god could give such blessings as rain ( Jer. 14 22), and Yahwe did give them (Jer. 024). If they were not forthcoming, therefore, it was because Yahwe had with- held them (Am. 47), and this was Ix.'cause of his people's sins (Jer. 525), which also brouLjht more special curses ( Dt. 28 38-40). The recognition of N'ahw^ had, therefore, a prominent place in connection with the stages of agricultural industry (see Feast.s, 4), the success of which was felt to depend on the nation's rendering him in general loyal obedience (Dt. 11 8-17); the land itself was Yahw^'s ; the people were but tenants (Lev. 2523) ; and the moving of the ancient landmarks, though not unknown, was a great wrong (Job 24 2). Some of the moral aspects of agricultural life have been already sufficiently touched on. It is probable that many of the maxims referred to were widely observed, being congruent with the better spirit of the people. Thus Amos records it as an outrage on the ordinary sentiments of common charity, that even the refuse of the wheat should be sold for gain (Am. 86). Other maxims, again, can be little traced in practice.

In this description of Hebrew ideas we have taken no note of the differences between earlier and later times. Deuteronomy and the prophets have been the main

1 Several children may .sometimes now be .seen weighting and driving the threshing-sledge.

2 Cp also Gen. 1 28/ and WRS RS'!^) 307.

authority. In the public consciousness, however, there lived on much of the old Canaanitish popular belief, in which the liA'alim hold the place here assigned to Yahwe, so that, e.g., the fertile spot is the Baal's plot of land, who waters it from unseen sources, underground or in the heavens (see B.\AL, i) a mode of expression that lived on into Mishna times, although its original meaning had been long forgotten.

The influence on Hebrew literature was very deep. The most cursory reader ^ must have observed how much

16. Literature.[edit]

the modes of expression reflect the agricultural life. Prophetic descrip- tions of an ideal future abound in scenes conceived in agricultural imagery.^ Great joy is likened to the joy of harvest (Is. Kig/. ); what is evanescent is like chaflf that is burned uj) or blown away ; something unexpected is like cold ( I'r. 25 13), or rain ( Pr. 26 1), in harvest and so on. Lack of sjjace prevents proof in detail of how, on the one hand, figures and modes of speech are drawn from all the operations and natural phenomena of agri-

j culture, while, on the other hand, every conceivable subject is didactically or artistically illustrated by ideas and expressions from the same source. It is a natural carrying forward in the NT of this mode of thought, to find Jesus publishing his epoch-making doctrines of the

i ' kingdom ' so largely through the help of the same imagery. No doubt the commonest general expression is ' kingdom ' ; but even this often becomes a vineyard, or a field, or a tree, or a seed ; and it is extended by sowing etc. It is unnecessary to pursue the subject farther. The whole mode of thought has passed over into historical Christianity, and thus into all the languages of the world.

1 c TT* 1 ^^ shall now in closing give some fragmentary notes towards a historical outline of the subject.

The traditional account of the mode of life of the ancestors of Israel in the earliest times introduces agri- cultural activity only as an exceptional incident. Agri- culture must be rudimentary in the case of a nomadic people. That Canaan, on the other hand, was for the most part well under cultivation,-' when the Israelites settled in the highlands, there can be no doubt. The Egyptian Mohar found a garden at Joppa,'* and of the agricultural produce claimed by Thotmes III. at the hands of the Rutennu some at least must ha\e been grown in Palestine. Israel doubtless learned from the Canaanite not only the art of war (Judg. 82), but also the more peaceful arts of tilling the soil, which, as the narratives of Judges and Samuel prove, were practised with success, while it is even stated that Solomon sent to Hiram yearly 20,000 Kor of wheat and 20,000 Bath of oil (i K. 5ii [25] Var. Bible). Later, Ezekiel (27 17 ; see Cornill) tells us how Judah bartered wheat with Tyre,^ as well as honey, oil, balm, and jjs (see Pannag) ; which illustrates the tradition in iK. 2O34 (see COT) that there were bazaars (see Tk.\de ; Stk.\nger, 2) for Israelitish merchants in Damascus, and for those of Damascus in Samaria. It is strange, but true, that in the very period to which this last notice refers, there arose a popular reaction against the precious legacies of Canaanitish civilisation (see Rpxhaisites). The Assyrian conquest of Samaria naturally checked for a time the cultivation of the soil (2 K. 17 25, lions), the colonists introduced by Sargon and Asur-bani-pal being imperfectly adapted to their new home. In Judaea under Gedaliah the Jews ' gathered wine and summer

1 Even of the English version, which .sometimes hides such metaphors as, f.c. , 'ploughing evil' tran.slated 'deviseth,' Prov. 14.

2 Am. 9 tj,_ff: ; Ho.s. 14 ey: [t/.] ; Mic. 44 ; Jer. 31 12 ; Zech. 812; Mai. 3 II.

^ The implements found at Tell-el-Hesy appear to carry us back to the earliest days.

  • Cp RP ist ser., '1 113.

5 //'/(/. 23 and cp Brugsch, Jigy/'t under the Pharaohs ('91), p. 167.

6 Cp a similar relation in the time of Herod (Acts 12 20).

fruits very nuich ' (Jtr. 4O12), and liaci stores of wheat, barley, oil, and honey, carefully hidden in the ground j (Jer. 41 8). In Is. 41 15 mention is for the first time j explicitly made of a threshing instrument with teeth (nvB'S) ; hut whether this was of recent introduction it is impossible to determine. On the fall of the Babylonian [K)wer the old relations with Tyre were doubtless renewed (Kzra37; cp Is. 23 15 18). The imperial tribute, however, is regarded as heavier than the agricultural resourcesof the country could then well bear (Neh. 63/. ). This tribute may have been partly in money (54), but also apparently to a considerable e.xtent in produce (Neh. 937, nKOn)- In Joel, of course, there is a description of agricultural distress, but in such a way as to imply that agriculture was in general receiving full attention. In Eccles. (25/. ) there is acquaintance, as in other things, so in agri- culture, with several artificial contrivances. To go into the detailed accounts of the Mishna is beyond the present purpose.

I'"or complete bibliographies see the larger Cyclopaedias, liililical and Classical. Of special treatises may be mentioned

that in vol. 29 of the V'/us. of Ugolinus ;

17. Literature, of special articles, on agriculture in general[edit]

in Mod. Palestine, Anderlind, /.DPy^ \ff.; Klein, //'. 3100-115 OSi-ioi, but especially 457-84; Post, PEFQ, 1891, p. 1107?; ; on the plough, Schumacher, /.DPVVl 157-166 ; on sickles, V. C. J. Spurrell in Archieolog. Jourti. A9, no. igj, iS.^2, p. 54^ and Plate I., fig. i ; on tlinshing sledge, Wcti-striii. /.. f. l\ihnoloi;ie, 1873, p. q-jo Jf. ; on niintwiving, Wit/.t. i!i ii. I )< 1. /.v.(2) 709/ ; on the .f/Wv, Wctzstein, /.DPl^ 14 I //. : .ill i>la,.- in OT literature, O. I'ngewitter, Die land ivir:i:.Jt.i/':iiJ:c>i lUlder u. Metaphern i. d. poet. Biicli. d. --I /' ( K.r)nigsbg., 1885); on later usage, Hermann Vogelstein, Die Liiiiii'.virt/isclia/t in /^allistitia zur Zeit der Mischna, I. (Berlin, 1894), a clissertiilinn that did not reach the writer till this article had been written. H. w. H.


(AfPinnA), -Vets 25 /.f See Herodian Family, 7.


(1-liK; so Pesh. ; ia,^/; but and Vg. , translating, ct)OBHaHTl [r5AS] ; Congrcgantis), h. Jakeh, an author of moral verses (Prov. 30i). His name is variously explained as ' hireling ' of wisdom (Bar Bahlul) and 'collector' of words of Torah (Midr. | Shfiiioth K'.,Yyar.6). Such theories assume that Solomon j is the author of the verses, which (see Provkrbs) is impossible. All the description given of him in the heading is 'the author of wise poems' (read, not Nb'Sn, but 'rc'E.i, with Griitz, Cheyne, Bickell). Very possibly the name is a pseudonym. The poet who ' takes up his parable' in 7^.5 expresses sentiments very different from those of .Xgur ; he seeks to counteract the bold and scarcely Israelitish sentiments of his predecessor.

See Ew., Salotn. Seliri/ten 250^; Che., /ol' ami Solomon 1497?:, Jewish Rel. Li/e, Lect. V. ; Sniend, A I' Rel.-gesch. 479y? ; and, with cautton, Dillon, Sceptics 0/ the OT 131^ 26977; Cp also Proverbs ; Ithiei, ii.; Lemukl. t. k. c.


(2NnN, 65,1 'father's brother,' cp Ahiam and the Assyr. woman's narne, Ahnt-abisu, and see \\\. /.A', 1898, Heft I ; also 3Nn [for ^XflN] on an inscrip- tion from Safa [Jonrn. As. 188 1, 19 463]). i. (Axaa^ [B.AL], -oa/t4 [A once] ; Achab ; Assyr. .lijahbu.) Son of Omri, and king of Israel (875-853? B.C. Cp ChK()NOLO<;y, 32, and table in 37). The im- portance of this king's reign is shown by the large space devoted to it in the Book of Kings.

1 Sources[edit]

To obtain a just idea of his character, however, is not easy, the Israelitish traditions being derived from two very different sources, in one of which the main interest was the glorification of the pro[)hcts, while the other was coloured by patriotic feel- ngs, and showed a strong partiality for the brave and bold king. To the former belong i K. 1 7-19 and 21 ; to the latter, chaps. 20 and 22.- Both groujis of narratives are very old ; but the former is more difficult than the latter to understand historically. In chaps. 20 and 22 we

1 Cp Niildeke, ' Verwandtschaftsn.amen als Personenn.imen ' in Kleini^keitcn zur seinitisc/u-n Onotiiatologie (ll'ZA'.M 307- 316 (92I):

2 .See Kings, 8, .-ind cp Ki. Gesch. .' 184-186 [ET. 2214-216].

seem to get nearer to the facts of history than in chaps. 17-19, 21 ; at the same time we nmst rememljer that even here we have to deal, not with extracts from the royal annals, but with popular traditions which are liable to exaggeration, es[x--cially at the hands of well- meaning interiX)lators. ' The story of Ahab in his relation to Elijah has lx;en considered elsewhere (see Elijah, 1/:). We can hardly deny that the writer exalts the prophet to the disadvantage of the king. Ahab

2. Ahab's policy.[edit]

was not an irreligious man, but his interests were mainly secular. He wished to see Israel free and prosjjerous, and he did not believe that the road to political salvation and physical ease lay through the isolation of his [Kjople from all foreign nations. The most pressing danger to Israel seemed to him to lie in its being slowly but surely Araniaised, which would involve the depression and per- haps the ultimate extinction of its national peculiarities. Both under Baashaand under Omri, districts of Israelitish territory had been annexed to the kingdom of Damas- cus, and it seemed to ,\hab to be his life's work to guide him.self, not by the re(|uirements of Yahwe's prophets, but by those of political prudence. Hence he not only maintained a fiim hold on Moab, but also made himself indispensable as an ally to the king of Judah, if he did not even become, in a (|ualified sense, his suzerain (see jKHOSiiAi'iiAT, i). Besides this, he formed a close alliance with Ethbaal, king of Tyre (Jos. Artl. viii. 13 1), whose daughter Jezebel (Baalizebel ?) he married. The object of this alliance was doubtless the improvement of Israel's commerce. The drawback of it was that it required on -Ahab's part an official recognition of the Tyrian BaaP (commonly known as Melkart), which was the more offensive because the contrast between the cultus even of the Canaanitish Baalim and that of the God of Israel was becoming stronger and stronger, owing to the prophetic reaction against the earlier fusion of wor- ships. -Ahab himself had no thought of apostatising from Yahwe, nor did he destroy the altars of Yahwe and slay his prophets. Indeed, four hundred prophets of Yahwe are said to have prophesied before him when he set out on his fatal journey to Ramath Gilead. His children, too, receive the significant names of Athaliah, Ahaziah, and Jehoram.

We can understand Ahab's point of view. But for its moral dangers, we might call it thoroughly justifi- able. It was of urgent im[X)rtance to recover the lost Israelitish territory and to secure the kingdom of Israel against foreign invasion. If Israel were absorbed by Damascus, what would become of the \\ 01 ship of Yahwe? To this question E,lijah would have given the answer which Amos (i/.t-. , 18) gave after him : ' Perish Israel, rather than that the commandments of Yahwe should be dishonoured.' Jezebel's judicial murder of Naboth and -Ahab's tame acquiescence show ed El ijah what might be expected from the continued combination of two heterogeneous religions. It was for the nmrder of Naboth that Elijah threatened king Ahab with death, ^

1 We must begin, however, with an analysis of the narratives. Van Doorninck ( ///- /'. iSo:;. on. ^76-584) has m.ade it highly probable that til .if Samaria and the battle

ofAphekin i K interpolations tending to

make thedeli\' ,,wre wonderful, in addition

to those alre.-iu\ jiumieu i.ui ..> .w-. (C// 285/), and Kue. (Einl. 25, n. 10).

'^ Of H.aalath, the fem.ile counterpart of Baal, the Hebrew tradition m.akes no mention. It is an interpolator who has introduced into 1 K. IS 19 thewords 'and the prophets of the Ashera, 400,' which are wanting in the MT of r'. 22, though -supplied in <P"i 1(P'- omits 400 in r. 22] (cp WKS, A".S'(2( 189; We. Cll 281 ; Klo. Sa. Kff. 367; Ki. in Kau. /IS). Of course, Paalath may have had her cultus by the side of P..ial, but not in such a way as to strike Israelitish observers. Nor could either Haalath or Astarte (Jezebel's father had been a priest of Astarte, Jos. c. A p. 1 18) have been called ' the Asherah ' Dy a contemporary writer.

3 Note that i K. 21 20^-26 in which (i) the whole house of Ahab is threatened, and (2) the punishment is connected with Ahab's religious policy forms no part of the old narrative (see Ki. in Kau. US).

and it was probably for this, or for other unrecorded moral offences of Ahab and the partizans of Baal, that the uncourtly prophet Micaiah ' never prophesied good concerning Ahab, but evil ' ( i K. 228).

To what precise period of Ahab's reign his encounters with Elijah belong, we are not told. Nor is it at all certain to which years the events recorded in i K. 20 are to be referred. To the popular traditions further reference is made elsewhere (see Israel, History ok, 29). Suffice it to say here that they show us Ahab's better side ; we can understand from them that to such a king . much could be forgiven. Our remaining

Inscriptio^n. ^^'""' '"'" ^ '^^^"^ ' '^"^ '7 ""^fK ^ tions relative to episodes m the life of

Ahab. The earliest record comes from MoAB (g.v-). King Mesha informs us in his famous inscription (/. 8) that Moab had been made tributary to Israel by Omri, and that this subjection had continued ' during Omri's days and half of his son's days, forty years," after which took place the great revolt of Moab.^ How this state- ment is to be reconciled with that in 2 K. 1 1 84 need not be here considered. It is, at any rate, clear that the loss of the large Moabitish tribute, and of the contingent which Moab would have to furnish to Israelitish armies, must _. . have been felt by Ahab severely. The

^ , ' second mention of this king occurs in neser . s ^j^^ Monolith Inscription of Sh.^lma- Inscription. ^.^^^.^ jj ^^^ ., ^ j^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^

given of the allied kings of .Syria whose forces were defeated by Shalmancbcr at the battle of Karkar (near the river Orontes) in 854 k.c. occurs the name of Ahabbu Sir'Iai, which, as most scholars are now agreed, can only mean Ahab- of Israel* (or, as Hommel thinks, of Jezreel). Two important questions arise out of this __, record. (i) Did Ahab join Bir'idri

Ahab^t^^ (Benhadad I. ) of Damascus of his ^ , own accord, jealousies being neutral-

ised by dread of a common foe? or was he a vassal of Bir'idri, bound to accept the foreign policy of his suzerain and to support it with (or at any rate through) his warriors on the field of battle? The former alternative is adopted by Kittel'* and M' Curdy ; the latter by Wellhausen and Winckler. To discuss this here at length is impossible. The remarks of Wellhausen will seem to most students very cogent. ' If feelings of hostility e.\isted at all between Ahab and Benhahad, then Ahab could not do otherwise than congratulate himself that in the person of Shalma- neser II. there had arisen against Benhadad an enemy who would be able to keep him effectually in check. That Shalmaneser might prove dangerous to himself probably did not at that time occur to him ; but if it had, he would still have chosen the remote in preference to the immediately threatening evil. For it was the political existence of Israel that was at stake in the struggle with Damascus.'* Cp Ben-hadad, 2.

It does not follow, however, that we must give Wellhausen's answer to the second question, which is (2) Are

RpI f '^"^ events related in i K. 20 22, with

Ht V^* the exception of the contest for Ramath

_ ^ J Gilead, to be placed before or after the

1 K 20^ battle of Karkar (854 B.C.)? It is, no doubt, highly plausible to suppose that

J For a somewhat different view, see Chronologv, 29, n. i.

2 Against Kamph.'s view, that Ahab is mentioned by a mis- take of the Assyrian scribe instead of Joram, cp Schr. A'GF 370.

3 The form Sir'Iai may be illustrated by the vocalisation ^fOr-K Asarel, i Ch. 4 16, which Lag. {Uebers. 132) thinks may represent the original pronunciation rather than 7l*Tip\

  • Ki., however, after adopting this view of the course of events

in his narrative, turns round, and with some hesitation indicates his preference for the view of Kamph. {Chronologic der fuhr. Kdn. 80), held also formerly by We., according to which the As- syrian scribe confounds Ahab with his son Jehoram {Hist. 2 273X On the whole question cp Schr. A'^Ji"^ 356-371.

8 //isi.i^l 61. So the conservative critic KShler {Bii/. Gesch. 8379X On the other side, see M 'Curdy, Hist. Proph. Man.

Ahab took advantage of the blow dealt to the power of Damascus at Karkar to shake off the suzerainty of Benhadad : so far, at least, it seems reasonable to follow Wellhausen. But it is not likely that, consider- ing the threatening attitude of Assyria, Benhadad would have thought it prudent to fritter away his strength on those ' furious attacks ' on Isr.ael to which Wellhausen refers ; ^ it is not likely, in short, that the siege of Samaria and the battle of Aphek are to be placed after 854 n.c. It may be asked, if they are not placed thus, where are we to find room for them ? In i K. 20 23-34, Ahab is represented as gaining the mastery over Benhadad, who has to make most humiliating concessions to him. After such a success, how can we account for Ahab's enforced presence at Karkar as vassal of Benhadad? The answer is that tradition selects its facts, and that the facts which it selects it idealises as an artist would idealise them. We may admit that Ahab, in his obstinate and patriotic resistance to Damascus, was not unvisited by gleams of good fortune ; but the fact, which tradition itself records, that he was once actually besieged in his capital, cannot have stood alone. Of Ahab's other misfortunes in war tradition is silent ; but we can easily imagine that the fxswer which was too strong for Omri was at last able to force his son to send a large con- tingent to the army which was to meet Shalmaneser at Karkar.

That the siege of Samaria, at any rate, was before 854 n.C. is rendered probable b)' the criticism given elsewhere (see Jkhgr.am, i, 2) of the narrative in 2 K. 7. In particular, the kings of the Hittites and of Musri, who are referred to in f. 6, are just those with whom Benhadad would have to deal before 854 B.C., while Shalmaneser was still occupied at a distance.

The above solution of the historical problem is that of Winckler, which unites elements of Wellhausen's view and of that of Kittel.

_ The last-named critic deserves credit for an ingenious explana- tion ((JwcA. 2232) of the magnanimity attributed to Ahab in I K. 20 31-34. It will be remembered that, according to Kittel, Ahab sent forces to Karkar of his own accord, not as a vassal of Benhadad. This enables him to suggest that the king of Israel may have spared his rival's life in order to enlist him in a coalition against Assyria, the idea of which (according to this hypothesis) was Ahab's. It must be confessed, however, that this view ascribes more foresight to Ahab than, according; to Amos {q.v., 5), was possessed by the Israelites even at a later day, and it was certainly unknown to the compiler of our traditions, who makes no mention of the battle of Karkar.

We may regard it, then, as highly probable that the battle of Karkar was fought at some time in the ' three (?) years without war between Syria and Israel ' mentioned in I K. 22 I.

The numbers of the force assigned by Shalmaneser in his inscription to Ahab (2000 chariots, 10,000 men),

_ ., ,, as compared with those assigned to

7. AuAD s amiv. ,,.)>

other kings,- deserve attention. It

is possible, no doubt, as Winckler suggests, that contingents from Judah and Moab were reckoned among the warriors of Ahab. ^ This does not, however, greatly diminish the significance of the numljers. After all, the men of Judah were southern Israelites. Even if Moabitish warriors were untrustworthy against a foe such as Benhadad, there is no reason to doubt that the men of Judah would sooner see Israel free from Benhadad than swallowed up by its deadly foe. Ahab was 8 Hia death '^^'"tainly no contemptible anUigonist in respect to the number of warriors he could bring into the field. He himself, like David (2S. I83), was 'worth ten thousand," and the dread with which he inspired the Syrians is strikingly shown in the account of his last campaign. We read that

1 IJC 50 ; and and 3rd ed. p. 71.

2 Hir'idri (Benhadad) h.ns 1200 chariots, 1200 horsemen, o,ooo men (.Schrader, COT 1 186).

3 That Jehoshaphat's military support of .\hab was not altogether voluntary is surmised by We. and i>ositively .-usserted by Wi. That it only began at the expedition to Ramath Gilead is too hastily supposed by Ki. {Gesch. 2 232 (ET, 2 272]).

Benhadad charged the captains of his chariots to ' fight neither with small nor great, save only with the king of Israel," and that when they thought they had found him they 'surrounded him (0) to tight against him' (i K.2231/). It was not, however, by a device of human craft that the great warrior was to die. A chance shot from a bow pierced Ahab's armour. The grievous wound prompted the wish to withdraw ; but for the king in his disguise (t-. 30) withdrawal was impossible, for the battle became hot and the warriors pressed on from behind. The dying king stood the whole day through, upright and armed as he was, in his chariot. At sunset he died, and when the news spread ' The king is dead' (2 K. 2237, ), the whole Israelitish army melted away. In Micaiah's language, it became ' scat- tered abroad, as sheep that had no shepherd ' (2 K. 22 17). The dead body of the king was carried to Samaria and buried there. ^

A brief reference is made in iK. 2239 to Ahab's luxury, which confirms the reading of (5 in Jer. 22 15 : ' Art thou a true king because thou vicst with Ahab ? ' (if Axaaji [A], ey axaf [BSg], *ce5pw [g "'e]. Ml' iTxa). an indignant protest addressed by Jeremiah to Jehoiachin (so Cornill in SHOT, who enters into the te.\t-critical points more thoroughly than Giesebrecht).

2. (Axtd/3 [BNAg], perhaps the most correct form ; see N.\MES, 65. In Jer. 2922 anw is clearly a scribe's error ; Eastern MSS ha\e a Kr 3KnN. ) Son of Kolaiah and fellow-exile of Jehoiachin (Jer. 2O21 /. ). He and another exile (Zedekiah) fed the fanaticism of the Jews with false hopes of a speedy return. They were denounced by Jeremi.ih. who predicted for them a violent death at the hands of Nebuchadrezzar. We learn more about them from the writer (probably the editor of the Book of Jeremiah) who inserted z-v. 21b- 3i(Z. It was in his time, perhaps, a matter of notoriety that Ahab and Kolaiah had suffered the cruel punish- ment of being burned alive (cp Saulmugina's fate, RP"^) I77). Therefore, he makes Jeremiah refer to this, and at the same time accuse the false prophets of having led a profligate life, in accordance with the idea which underlies Gen. 8824 ; Lev. 20 14 21 9. Cp Cornill, Jeremiah {SHOT, Heb. text). T. K. c.


{Vrm, [Ba]), or Ahrah (mnN [Ginsb.]), third son of Benjamin ( 9 ii. /3), iCh. Sif. See



(^n-^riN ; &A6A(})0Y RhxaB [BA], APAihA AAeA4)OY PhxaB [L.] ; AUARnnEi.), a name in an obscure part of the genealogy of JuDAii ( r Ch. 48t).


, or rather as RV, Ahzai (*TnX ; in some MSS and edd. ^THN ; a shortened form of Ahaziah ; om. B.\, AZAXIOY [X='* ">-' '"f], ZAKXIOY [L]). a priest- ly name in a list of inhabitants of Jerusalem (see Ezra, ii. 5 \P\ IS [t]). Neh. Ili3t=l Ch. 9i2t Jahzkkah (J\-\\n\ leAeiOY [^l lezpiOY [A], ezepA [L]), which is probably a corruption of Jahzeiah (see J.'\h.\ZIAH).


('2pnt<), 2 S. 2834. See Ei.iphf.i.et, 2.


(Cnil^rnN ; in Kt. of Esth. 10., the edd., following the Palestinian reading, have BnUTlS). I. An Ahasuerus is mentioned in MT in Ezra 46 and Dan. 9 1 ; and in ILsther he is one of the leading dramatis person (P.

In MT of Esther he is mentioned in 1 if.^f. i^*/* 192 i* 12* 1621: Z\(iff. \i\ f.2 "5* 817*; io: 1292*2030*101*3.2 The readings of are : Ezra 4 6, ao-#7)pou [B], ao-crouJj. [.^1, airinrq.

t In 22 38, the words ' They w.ashed his chariot in the pool of Samaria and the dogs licked his blood,' etc., are an interpolation intended to explain how the dogs could lick Ahab's blood (which must have been dried up in the long journey from Ramah) and so fulfil the prediction of 21 19. But this was to happen at Jezreel, not at Samaria (We. C// 360).

2 The asterisks (*) indicate that (Pal omits the proper name, which is sometimes inserted by Kca hir. The double-daggers ({) indicate that the editions following the Palestinian reading omit the second v

[L] ; Dan. 9 i, avovyfpov [Thcod.l, but tfp(ov (87, i.e., the LXX ; also Syr. mg.j ; in Esther aatrviipou la text of '-, on which see below], but opTuftpfou [p text of l- and I'KA], .(,(. [W "d. once], aTap(tp(tts (.A* once], aprapitpifj^ (A thrice].

In Ezra 4 6, where he is a king of I'ersia whose reign fell between that of Koresh (Cyrus) and that of Artahsasta (Artaxerxes Longimanus), he can hardly be any other than the king called Khshaydrshd in the Persian inscriptions (Persep. , Elvend, Van), c'IKTH in an Aramaic inscription [481 B.C.] from Egypt (CIS ii. Ii22), and A^p^rji by the Greeks (cp above, readings of Dan. 9 1 ). This name, which to Semites presented difficulties of pronunciation, was distorted likewise by the Babylonians in a variety of ways. As I'rof. Bezold has informed the writer of the present article, we find on Babylonian tablets not only such fornis as Khishiarshu, Akhshiyarslni, Akkasliiarshi, Akkisharshti, but also Akhshiyaivarsliu, Akhshuwarshi, and Akhshi- ivarsku, with the substitution of ^u for/, as in pmcnK.^ In other cases also the OT uses 'c'rK to represent the Persian khsh, at the beginning of words. The inser- tion of () lx;fore the final sh rendered the pronunciation easier to the Hebrews ; but whether the vowel was contained in the original form of the Hebrew texts we cannot determine.^

The Ahasuerus of the Book of Esther is a king of Persia and Media (I318/. ), whose kingdom extends from India to Ethiopia and consists of 127 satrapies (1 I 89 930). He has his capital at Shushan in Elam. He is fond of splendour and display, entertaining his nobles and princes for 180 days, and afterwards the people of his capital for seven ((5'"**- six) days (I3-8). He keeps an extensive harem (2314/.), his wives being chosen from among all the ' fair young virgins' of the empire (22-412-14). As a ruler he is arbitrary and unscrupulous (38-ii, and/flw/w). All this agrees well enough with what is related of Xerxes by classical authors, according to whom he was an effeminate and extravagant, cruel and capricious despot (see Esther, i). This is the prince, son of Darius Hystaspis (Vishtaspa), whom the author of Esther seems to have had in mind. There has been an attempt to show, from the chronological data which he gives, that he knew the history of Xerxes accurately. He tells us that Esther was raised to the throne in the tenth month of the seventh year of Ahasuerus (2 16 /. ), after having spent twelve months in the ' house of the women ' (2 12). The command to assemble all the ' fair young virgins' in his palace (2 1-4) must, therefore, have been promulgated in his sixth year. But, in what is usually reckoned as the sixth year of his reign viz. 480 B.C. he was still in Greece. He could not, therefore, issue a decree from Shushan till the following year. This can be regarded as the sixth of his reign only by not counting the year of his accession, and taking 484 as the first of his reign. It is not impossible that the Persians may have taken over from the Babylonians the practice (see Chronology, 9) of reckoning the whole of the year, in the course of which a change of ruler occurred, to the late king ; but it is not known as a fact. In this uncertainty we shall do well to suppose that the author of F",sther has arbitrarily assumed his chronological data, and that his occasional coincidences with historv- are accidental merely.

2. Eor the Ahasuerus who is called the father of Darius the Mede in Dan. 9i, see Darics, i.

3. Tobias heard (Tob. ]4i5t) of the destruction of Nineveh by ' Nebuchadnezzar and Ahasuerus' (so RV. AV AssuERU.s : a<Tvi\po% [B], a<j<J\'. [N'^'^]. MOv. [A], but ' Achiacharus, king of Media ' [N*], cp AcHlA- CHARUS, 2). See ToBiT, Book of.

C. p. T.-W. H. K.

Cp Strassmaier, Actes du viiit congres dcs oricntalisits, sect. s^m. 18 / for a form corresponding to v^ysTM (Ahsha- warsh?) found on Babylonian contract tablets.

a See further Bevan, Daniel 149, where Ahas>-ar!> or AhSayarJ is proposed as the original Jewish form-


(XinX). a place (EzraSis; eyeiM [B], eyei [AL]) or, as in the parallel i I^sd. 841 (TuEKAS; om. H; Gf/Kif, accus. [A]; eeiA [L]) antl Kzra 82131 (eoye [H]. AOye [li'A ; in v. 31 sup. ras.]. Aa()YA6 [L])= I Ksd. 8 50 (' for the young men,' ron ytavianois [HAL], .<., apparently cini for ki.ik in:) 861 (Theras, GPa[RA], eiA[L]),ariver, near which Ezra assembled his caravan before its departure for Jerusalem. The site and the river remain unidentified. We know that both were in the Euphrates basin, and that CasiI'HIA {f.v.; cp. Jos. Ant. xi. 5 2 ; see He-Rys, sra, ad lor.) was not very far off. The form Theras (see al)ove) seems to have arisen from Kin(K) for kihk, which is the rc.-iding of some MSS for nlik in I-".zra8.


(THN, a shortened form of JKUOAIIAZ, the Jauhazi of the inscriptions: see h'B 22o). 1. (&XAZ

, _ T. . rBNAorLl see also below, is 4 Ssh wa^"" -" Jos.'Axar.. AcnAz[Vg. lA lusn war. ^^ ^^ ^^.^ ^ j^^^^ ^^ Jotham and

eleventh king of Judah (733?-72i, cp Chronology, 34 ^ and table in 37). He was young, perhaps only twenty years of age ' (2 K. 10 2), when he ascended the throne, and apJx^^rs already to have struck keen observers such ns Isaiah bya want of manliness which was quite consistent with tyranny (Is. 3 12a). The event seems to have lx;en regarded by Rezin (or rather Rezon) of Damascus as favourable to his plan for uniting Syria and Palestine in a league against .Assyria. Pekah, who had just become king of Israel by rclx?llion and assassination, was only too glad to place himself at the disposal of Rezin, who alone could defend him from Tiglath-pilcser's wrath at the murder of an Assyrian vassal. Rezin and Pekah, therefore, marched southward, being safe for the moment from an Assyrian in\ asion with the object of forcing Judah to join their league (2K. 16 5; Is. 81-9; cp Isaiah, i. 11). They could feel no confidence, however, in any promise which they might e.xtort from Ahaz. For Ahaz, who, unlike Rezin, had no personal motive for closing his eyes to the truth, was conscious of the danger of provoking Assyria. Let us, then, said Rezin and Pekah, place a creature of our own, who can be trusted to serve us, on t^ie throne of Judah (Is. 76). Tiieir nominee is called ten- Tahfl (see Tahkki,, i ), whom the language ascrilx-'d to the allies hardly allows us to identify with Rezin. ^ He w.as probably one of Rezin's courtiers, and thus (what a disgrace to Judah!) a mere Syrian governor with the title of king. The attempt to lake Jerusalem was a failure. The fortress proved too strong to be taken by storm, and to have prolonged the siege, in view of the provocation given to Assyria and the terrible prompt- ness of Assyrian vengeance, would have been imprudent. Ahaz, too, in his .alarm (which was fully shared by the citizens).' had already made this vengeance doubly certain hy sending an embassy to Tiglath-pileser with the message, ' I am thy slave and thy .son : come up and deliver me' (2K. I67 ; this verse should be read im- mediately after v. 5).*

1 In 2 Ch. 28i some MSS of and Pesh. read 'twenty- five' for 'twenly.' 'iliis is more natural, in view of the age assigned to Hezckiah M. his accession. The ' five ' may, however, have crept in from -'7 i 2'. i. (&"*'- reads ' twenty.'

2 Wi. W 7" Vntersuch. 73-75; cp, however, Israi:!., Hist, of, 832-

S See Is. 7 a 8 6. The latter passage is partly corrupt ; but it_ is clear, at least, that the people of Judah are reproved for distrusting Yahwc's power to save his people, anil 'desponding' because of ' Rezin and hcn-kenialiah.' The ' waters of Shiloah ' are a symbol of V'ahwe (cp I's. 4t> 4 ; Is. 33 21). Sec Che. ' Isaiah ' (SHOT). The interpretation of (B, which paraphrases "UK jrirp (.\V and RV, ungrammatically, ' rejoice in ') by SovAeo^ai <x">' ^a<rtA(a, is certainly wrong, though supported by .some eminent names (Gcs., Ew., Kue., St.), for it is opposed to Is. 72812. Even were the supposition that there was a large party in the capital favourable to Rezin and Ptkah more plausible th.an it is, it would still be unwi.se to b.-i.se the sup- position on a passage so strangely expressed and of such question- able accuracy as Is. 85.

  • If the statement of the compiler in 2 K. 10 3 that Ahaz

One man, Isaiah ben Anioz, had kept his head cool amid this excitement. He assured Ahaz on the _ - . , , authority of the God of prophecy that

  • f aian S ^j^^ attempt of Rezin and Pekah would

Ixj al)orti\e and that Damascus and Samaria themselves would almost immediately become a prey to the Assyrian soldiery (Is. 7 4-9 168 1-4 17 i-ii). He bade Ahaz be wary and preserve his composure (tspc'rii TOffn) to take no rash step, but quietly perform his regal duties, trusting in Yahw6. When the news came that .\haz had hurriedly offered himself as a humble vassal to Assyria in return for protection from Rezin, Isaiah changed his tone. He declared that Judah itself, having despised the one means of safety (faith in Yahw6 and olxjdience to his commands), could not escape puni.shment at the hands of the Assyrians. Under a variety of figures he described the ha\oc which those dreaded warriors would produce in Judah a description to which a much later writer has added some touches of his own {vz'. 21-25 '< see SHOT). Was .Ahaz right or wrong in seeking the protection of Assyria ? Stade has remarked that ' he acted as any _ ,, , ,. other king would have acted in his

3. Ahaz's policy.[edit]

p^^iji,^,^,. ^^ the other hand, 

RolKTtson Smith thought that ' the advice of Isaiah displayed no less political sagacity than elevation of faith.' ' If .\ha/ had not called in the aid of Tiglath- pileser, his own interests v.ouid soon have compelled the Assyrian t) strike at Damascus; and so, if the Juda-an king had had faith to accept the prophet's assurance that the immediate danger could not prove fatal, he would have reajxjd all the advantages of the Assyrian alliance without finding himself in the perilous position of a vassal to the robtx.'r emjjiru. As yet the schemes of Assyria hardly reached as far as Southern Palestine." "* There is some force in this. The sending of tribute to Assyria was justifiable only as a last resource. To take such a step prematurely would show a disregard of the interests of the poorer class, which would suffer from Assyrian exactions severely. It is doubtful, however, whether the plans of Assyria were as narrowly limited as is supposed. Tiglath-pileser did not, even after receiving the petition of Ahaz, attack Damascus instantly. First of all he invaded Philistia and Northern Arabia.

We shall have occasion to refer again to the important chapter of Isaiah which descril)es the great eni i;nter between the king and the prophet (see IsAlAH, i. Jj 2 (^). Suffice it to say that we misimderstand Isaiah if we connect his threat of captivity in chap. 7/. too closely with the foreign policy of Ahaz. It was not the foreign policy but the moral weakness of ,\haz and his nobles which had in the first instaiice drawn forth this threat from Isaiah (Is. 5 8-16). Nor can we venture to doubt that, if .Ahaz had satisfied the moral standards of Isaiah, this would have had some effect on the prophet's picture of the future. ' \'isions ' and ' tidings ' of men of God such as Isaiah are not merely political forecasts : they are adjusted to the mural and mental state both of him who speaks and of those who hear.

It is not to Isaiah or to a disciple of Isaiah, but to the royal annalist, that we owe the notice that the

. - tribute of Ahaz was derived from

4. Consequences.[edit]

^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ p^,^^^ ^^^ ^^ 

the temple, and that .Ahaz did not sjiare even the sacred furniture (2 K. 168 17).* It would be interesting to know whether he sent the brazen oxen on which the brazen 'sea' had hitherto rested (they were copies of Babylonian sacretl objects, and properly symbolised Marduk) to Tiglath-pileser, or whether he melted them offered up his son (l- and Symm. say 'his sons,' with 2 Ch. 2S 3) is correct, we may perhaps assigii the fearful act to this period.

1 CI 7 1 -^95.

WHS }'ro/>h.^ 26s ; cp Kittel, Hist. 1 346 (near foot).

On the text of z K. 1(5 17, which is corrupt, see St. ZA Tll^ 6163.

down for himself. It is more important, however, to notice that this time, apparently, the tribute for Assyria was provided without any increase in the taxation. Isaiah, we may suppose, would have approved of this.

Isaiah's forecasts were verified, not, indeed, to such an extent as much modern speculation about the prophetic books demands, but as far as his own generation re(|uired. Danuiscus fell in 732 ; Samaria had a breathing time till 722 ; and, according to Sennacherib, there was a partial captivity of Judah in the next reign. It was after the first of these events that Ahaz first came in contact with an .Assyrian kitig. In 734 the name of Jauhazi of Judah occurs among the names of the kings who had paid tribute to Tiglath-pileser ; but we have no reason to supiwse that he paid it in person. It was in 732, after the fall of Damascus, that he paid homage in [person to his suzerain. On this occasion he ' saw the altar that was at Damascus' (2 K. 16 10), and, on aesthetic grounds, liked it better than the bronze altar which had hitherto been used at Jerusalem for burnt offerings. It was probably an .Assyrian altar, for the Assyrians on principle introduced their own cultus into conquered cities. So .Ahaz sent a model of the altar to the chief priest Uriah (cp Is. 82), who at once made an altar upon the pattern, and transferred the old altar to a new position. This was, doubtless, against the will of Isaiah, who in his earliest extant prophecy so strongly denounces the love of foreign fashions. Possibly at the same time .Ahaz borrowed the sun-dial (if EV rightly para- phrases the expression, ' the steps of .Ahaz' ; see, how- ever, Dial). .N'or is it likely that .Ahaz paused here.^ A suggestive allusion to the addiction of .Ah;xz to foreign worship is traceable in 2 K. 23i2; but there is a textual difficultv in the passage (see Kamphausen's note in Kau. HS).-

The reign of .Ahaz was inglorious, but on the w hole peaceful. It was a severe blow to the connnerce of Judah when Rezin, on the accession of .Ahaz, attacked and captured l-'.lath (on the Arabian (nilf), and restored it to its former possessors, the Edoniites ; but at the close of .Ahaz's reign Isaiah was able to contrast the peace enjoyed by ' the poor of Yahwe's peo|)le ' with the chastisement inflicted by Assvria on the restless Philistines.


aclinj;s of <E5 are 
a-xa.^ [B often, A'? vcl I

A once, Qa once], -xaa^ [.A twice], axa/3 [.\, 2 Ch. IS). In Jer. 2215 tpHKQ '.Ahaz' takes the place of the true reading '.Ahab' of <pA(see .Ahau, i [eiKl]).

2. (xaaf [A] ; a^ai [L]), a descendant of .Saul ; i Ch. 835/ ( [li]) = 9 4i (om. KV .MT ba ; but correctly inserted by t- Pesh.), i>42 (axai [1?]). See Benja.min, 9 ii. p.

T. K. C. W. E. .X.


(-in^.TriX, iTTHN, ' he whom Yahw6 sup- ports '; 0X02[ejl<\C [B.AL] ; for other readings see end of no. 2). i. Son of .Ahab and Jezebel, and king of Israel (853-851 ? B.C. Cp Chkonoi.ogy, 28 and table in 37). A poor successor to the heroic Ahab. Once more Israel must have been de|x;ndent on Damascus, while Moab (see .Ahab, 2) continued to enjoy its recovered independence. The single political action reported of him is his offer to jKiiosiiAi'H.VT (q.v., i) to join in a trading ex- pedition to Ophir (i K.2250). The close of his life is described in a prophetic legend of very late origin (see Elijah, 3). He fell through the lattice of an up[x;r room in his palace in Samaria, and though he lingered on a sick-bed for some time, did not recover. The story (2 K. 1 2-17) is a painful one, and was used by Jesus to point the contrast between the unchastened zeal of his disciples and the true evangelical spirit ( Lk. 9 54-56). The one probably historical element is the consultation by .Ahaziah of the oracle of Baal-zebub of Ekron. To most of .Ahaziah's contemporaries his

1 Schr. COT\ 249 25 s ; Wi. GBA 234.

2 For CInS read CIn'^ ; cp the Kre. D*0nK1 for D'OIIKV

3 The heading of Is. 1428-32 is probably correct. See Che. Inir. Is. 80/ ; but cp Duhm ad loc.

action would have seemed tiuite natural ' (cp 2 K. 5 87./ )

2. Son of Jehoram (or Jorani) and Ahab's daughter Athaliah, king of Judah (843-842? u.c". Cp Chkono- LCKiV, 28 and table in <^ 37). He was only twenty- two when he ascended the throne,'- and only one event in his brief reign has lx.'en recorded the part which he took with Jehoram king of Israel in a campaign against Hazael of Damascus. The kings of Israel and Judah laid siege to Ramah in Gilead (the place before which Ahab lost his life in battle) which was still held by the Arama;ans. Jehoram withdrew wounded. Ahaziah also went to his home, but afterwards visited his sick kinsman at Jezrc-el. During this visit jKiiu {i^.v.) revolted, and the two kings (ec|ually obnoxious to Jehu) went forth in their chariots to meet him. Ahaziah saw his uncle Jehoram pierced by an arrow, and took to flight. As he fled in the direction of Hi;rii-iiA<;(;A.\ (q.v.; 2 K.927, 0) Jehu dashed after him with the cry, 'Him too.' .At the ascent of (iiir by Ibleain, on the road to Jerusalem, he too was struck by an arrow. Thereupon he turned his horse northwest, and reached Megiddo, but died there of his wound. He was buried in the royal cemetery at Jerusalem. The conflicting account in 2Ch. "229, from whatever late source derived, is of no historical value

(Otlier rc-idings 2K. S29!t2i oxo^et [B] ; 2 K. 14 13 nuavai [B], aa^.a [A], L om. ; i Ch. 3 11 ofe.a [B], o^.at [A].) In 2Ch. 21 17 he is called Jchuahaz, and in 22 6 Azariah. See



(i3nS, 45, meaning obscure, for form cp Eshban, 'brother of an intelligent one' [HUH], or less improbably ' brother has giv<'n heed,' so (iray, HI'N 83, n. 2, who suggests the vocalisation |5nv>). a Jerah- meelite family name, i Ch. 229t (ax&Bar [1^]. 02A [A],

NAAaB [I>. cp IT'. 2830], AHOHH.l.X).


(inX; ^ep [B], aor [A], om. [L Pesh.] ; .iiiHR), a very doubtful Benjamite name (iCh. 7i2t). See HusHi.M, 2 ; I)A.\, 9 ; Benjami.n, 9 ii. a.

Be. (/ he.') explains the name as meaning 'the other one,' and conjectures it to be a euphemism for Dan, the express niention of the name of this tribe seeming in more than one instance to h.-ive l)een dcliberatLly avoided. (See however Dan, 9.) On the other hand (pUAi. rc.ids ' his son ' for ' the sons of (133 f<Jr 'j^X and the name is entirely wanting in Ipt- and Posh., the former (and perhaps originally also the latter) connecting Hnshim (te<r(rou5, /;/) with what goes before (see Iri). See also .\HAKAH.


(^n^, 52, probably abbrev. from Ahijah).

1. In genealogy of Gaii, iCh. .Tist (Vg. wrongly trans- lates, fratres qtioquc; IVsh. and (P'oni. ; P"A CDmhines with the preceding name l!uz^|^a/3]ouxa/ii IB], axiOovi) |A1).

2. In genealogy of Ashkk( 4 n.), I Ch. V ;4t. (P'^A, attach- ing part of the following name (see KomjAH), produces Axt(ovpa) [.\], or Ax<(outa) [B] ; but i- has Tjfty.

AHI, names with[edit]

. See Am, Namks with.


frequently in AV and once (Neh. 10 26 [25]) inconsistently in RV. See .Amj All, 1/ 4.


(DX'nK, 65, for which we should i^obably point DX'riN, ' mother's brother ' [cp .Ahab], analogous to the Sab. pr.n. innxnfiX, ' sister of his mother ' ; cp fIPN6.\, n. 2), one of I )avid's heroes, 2 S. 23 ^3 (amnan [B.A], om. [L])=iCh. Il35t (AXeiM [BNJ, AXl&M [AL]). SeeDAVin, 11,2 i. ^


(}*nN. 65, 'relative, cousin,' cp M^l : l&AIM [B], AeiN [A]. &ei/v\ [E]; ^///v). a Mannssiie name ( i Ch. 7 i9t). See SllKMiDA.


(1Tl"nN, 44, ' the [divine] brother is help,' cp .Abiezer, P21iezer ; &x'2ep [BAFE]).

1. b. .Ammish-addai, chief of the Danites, temp. Moses (P) (Nu. I12 2 25x'- [fl: "6671 1025)t.

2. One of David's archers (i Ch. 12 3!). See Davih, 811a iii.

1 S^mmtl, AT Rel.-gesch. 157.

a .So 2 K. S26. In 2 Ch. 22 2 his age is given as forty-two (0BA 20) ; but this is clearly miswrittcn for twenty-two (so 9^ ; cp 21 5 20).


(lirrnX, 'the [divine] brother is praise.' cp Amiiui) ; AyitoB [A], -lop [HKL]. auihvd). an Asherite selected to assist Joshua and Eleazer in the division of Canaan (Nu. 342? P+).


(irrnjj: ; i&xeiXCoA [B]. -xixaA [A], OYA [L] ; .niiUD), in genealogy of BENJAMIN ( 9 ii. /3), iCh. 87t. Cp UzzA. 1.


(nnj<. 'Yahw^ is brother" \i.e., protector]; cp Abijah and the Babylonian name A-hi-ia-a ; Jastrow, JUL, 1894. p. 105 : AxWiA [BAL]).

1. b. Ahilub, priest at Shiloh, bore the ephod, temp. Saul ; iS. 143 (Jos. "Exio?, 'Axios, AV Ahiah). In 4 Esd. 1 2t he appears as AcniAs (.4cA/Vu [ed. Bensly]) between Ahitub and Amariah of Ezra 7 -i/., or i Ch. 67.

2. In genealogy of Benjamin ( o ii. 0), one of those who were 'carried captive (1 Ch.8 7 ; AV .\hiah), whose name should perhaps be read in v. 4 for Ahoah (ninK ; auio. [L], Ahoc ; but oxta [B], jLucf ; .^ oni.); see further Ahiihite.

3. The Pelonite ; a corruption of Ahithophel the Gilonitc, the name of his son (one of David's heroes) being omitted (iCh. 11 36; see E1.IAM, 1 ; Ahithoi'HEl).

4. b. Shi>ha (Shavsha), .and brother of Ki.ihoreph (^.v.); one of Solomon's secretaries of state (i K. 4 3 ; .W Ahiah). See Ben-hesei>, 3.

5. A Levite, who owes his existence to a demonstrable text- corruption (i Ch. -'620; read with B.\L, a5cA<^o't ovtwi', 'and the Levites their brethren").

6. .\ccording to AV (which with (8'- prefixes 'and "), the fifth son of Jerahmeel (q.v., i), i Ch. 2 25. But * gives cor- rectly a5eA(^6 a'v-tav, i.e., H'nN (so Ki.). We. iDe Gent. 15) prefers VriK, ' his brothers." (L ax"^.)

7. .An Issach.-irite, father of King B.a.-isha (i K. 15 27 33, etc.).

8. Signatory to the covenant; Neb. 10 26 [25] (apo [B] ; aio [{Tid. A], a.htia.% [L] ; F.CHAI.X). See EZKA, i. 7.

9. A Shilonite ; the prophet who foretold to Jero- boam {q.v., i) the disruption of Solomon"s kingdom (iK. II29, etc.; ax[e]'OS [B.\ twice]). In 2Ch. IO15 (xta A* but not in ], i K. 12 15), and in the storj' of his meeting with Jeroboam's wife (i K. 144i'7-i8), the name appears in the form r-rnx (Ahiyyahu), on which see Abijah (beginning).


(Di^'nX, 44. ' the [divine] brother riseth up,' cp .\clonikam and Phoen. Dp3X ; ax[c]ikam [BSAQL]; xeiK&M [N* once]: Jos. axikamoc, IK.. AHICA.m), like his father Sh.\phan [q.v.) a courtier of Josiah. He appears to have belonged to the party favourable to religious reforms. Hence he was included in the royal deputation to Huldah (2 K. 221214,= aCh. 34 20 ; cp Hui.d.\h), and was foremost in the defence of Jeremiah on a critical occasion (Jer. 2624). He was the father of Gedaliah [q.v., i] (2 K. 2522 Jer. 39 14 4O5).


(n-l'^'n^S. 45)- 1- Father of Jehoshaphat. Davids 'recorder' or vizier (2S. 816; axfa [B], ax'Mf^fX [A], ax'^aaitt [L], Jos. 'Ax'Xoj ; 2O24, ax[]Xoi'^ [BA], axi^aXaa [L] ; i K. 43, axetXiaS [BX], ox'Aia [A]; ax^^aXa/x [L] ; iCh. I815, oxeia [BS], ax'Xoi5 [.AL]). The name does not mean 'child's brother " (BDB with a ?), nor is it connected with the Ar. tribal name Laudhan (Hommel? see Exp. Times 8 283 ['97])- It is difficult not to suggest that niS-nK = nynK = ~':{a]"nK = -^himelech (cp above 2S. 816 [.\], and below [2], iK. 4i2 [B]). For his vizier David would naturally choose some one' from a family well known to him. (Dne son of .^himelech (.Abiathar) was a priest of David ; another might well have been his vizier. See Jehoshaphat, 2 ; Ahimelech, i.

2. Father of Baana, one of Solomon's prefects or governors of departments, i K. 4 12 (axf'/MiX [B]. fkovh [A], axta^S [L]). The governor of N'aphtali {v. 15) is called Ahimaaz no doubt the son of Zadok who bore this name. Probably therefore this Ahilud is the same as no. I. Solomon provided well for the families of his father's friends Zadok, Ahimelech, Hushai, and Nathan (cp Ahihaaz, I, 2; Baana, 2; Azariah, 6).

T. K. c.


()*yp*nK, 45, meaning uncertain, cp Maa/. ; AxlejiMAAC [BAL]).

1. b. Zadok; 2 S. 1627 (ax/"as [B]), 36 (axiM*- <ruios[.\*; (r2'*ras. A'*-]); 17i72o(oxf'Mas[B]), 18 19-29, and, according to the Chronicler, eleventh in descent from Aaron in the line of Eleazar, i Ch. 68/ , and 53 (axfKraytia [B]). Along with his father and brother he remained faithful to David during the revolt of .Absalom, and brought important information from Jerusalem to the king as to the enemy's plans ; he was also the first courier to reach the king after the battle in which Absalom was killed. Most probably identical with

2. One of Solomon's prefects (see Government, 18. end), governor of Naphtali ; 1 K. 4 15. Cp Ahuxd, 2.

3. Father of Ahinoam (i), Saul's wife; iS. Hsof (ax[e]u'aas [B]).


(p^riN,' 45 ; achiman, ahimas). ' Ahi,' as usual, is a divine title, and 'man' may be the name of a dt-ity (MCni ; see FORTUNE).

I. One of the sons of the ANAK(y. J/.; cpalso Sheshai, Talmai) ; Nu. 1322 (ax[]iM [BFL], ax'^a/u [.A]); Josh. 15 14 (ax[e>Ma [B.\L]) ; Judg. 1 10 (axfaaK [B], axW'Ma" [B-'"^-^'"*-'- L], tov axifJ^aan [A]).

2. One of the 'porters for the camps of the Levites' ; iCh. 9i7 (ai^a^ [H], -i'l.\i.] ; A/iiinam, Cod. Am. A/timan [i| Neh.ll 19 om. everj-where]) in list of those with foreign wives(EzRA, L 5, end)=Ezra IO24 (where he is called Uki)=i Esd.925 (EV oni.). The name in i Ch. is probably corrupt. See Uri, 3.


(^^p"^^<l, ' the [divine] king is brother, " see AiiiMKi.KCH and cp Phoen. "jTOn, Ass. Af^imilki ; a.y^i\fxt\ix [B.AL]).

1. Father of Abiathar, erroneously described in 2 S. 817 as son of Abiathar, also in four places in i Ch. , in the first of which, moreover, the name in MT is Abimi;i.kcii ; see Abiathar (last paragraph). For a conjecture that Jehoshaphat, David"s vizier, and Baana, Solomon's prefect, were also sons of this Ahimelech, see Ahu.ui), I and 2.

A reads ajii^cAex in i S. 21 \a 229 and a/3ifi. in i S 21 1/^2 ; B h.-is ajSeifieAcx invariably except in i S. 21 \a, and Ps. 52 title,'- a/3i^. ; and in 1 S. 30 7 and the five corrupt passages, oxfiM- '. ^'g- Achiiuelech, but in i Ch., though not in 2S. S17, Ahim. The Vg. and (5U read Ahimelech also in Ps. 34, title ; .see .\cHisH (end).

2. .\ Hittite companion of David in the time of his outlawry, I S. 2.>6t (ax[e]t,xeAex [B^L], ap[.]i^. [BA]).


(niD^riN, 45, AAeiMcoe [B], oxiM- [A], A/VMCO0 [I-]), fi name in the genealog)- of Kohath (i Ch. 625 [10]). If the reading of MT and Versions is correct, -7noth should \y& a divine name or title. Barton compares the cosmogonic Mwt in Philo of Byblus ; but this is too doubtful (see Creation, 7), and though mo, 'death," in Ps. 49i4 [15] and elsewhere is personi- fied, a name like ' Death is (our) brother " or ' protector,' is improbable. Possibly Ahimoth should be Ahimahath (see -. 35 [20], cp 2 Ch. 29 12) ; see Mahath, 1.


(2"7ynNI, 44; 'the [divine] brother apportions," but cp further Abinadab ; &XINA<^B [B], ainaAaB [A], axinaA&B [L]; AHIS-ADAB), Solo- mon's prefect over the district of Mahanaim beyond Jordan (i K. 4i4t). See Government, 18 (end).


(DymNt, 45, ' the [divine] brother is plea-santness,' Ax[e]iNA&M[B.AL]; Jos. axina; achi- NOA^t). I. Daughter of .Ahimaaz and wife of Saul, 1 Sam. 14 sot [a.-)^f\.vooy. [B.A]).

2. Of Jezreel in Judah (see Abigail, 2) whom David married during his outlawry. Like Abigail, she was carried off by the Amalckites when they plundered Ziklag. At Hebron she bore to David his eldest son, Amnon, I S. '2543 (axetvaai' [B]) ; 273; SOs (axeivooM [B],

1 A better pointing would be fDTIK ; the present vocalisa- tion, jO'nR, is based on a popular etymology; JD'nK, frater meus quis? (Jer. in OS'^) \hi\, etc.).

- Other readings here, o^cifi. []; Achimehch; Pesh. quite different.

ox"'aaM [A. o/x. sup. ras. A']), cp v. i8 ; a Sam. 2a {ax^foofi [BA]). 3 J (ax""/* [H]) ; r Ch. Sif.


(VnX, 24, 43, possibly, if MT is correct, 'brother of Yahwe,' or ' Yah\v6 is brother.' The analogy of other names ending in seems against this view ; Jastrow, //i/., 1894, p. loi).

1. 1). .\binailab, brother of I' zzAri (y.7'., i), aS. 63/; || i Ch. 18 7 has 'his brethren," and We. reads VriK, 'his brother'; see Dr. (in each case, however, bal has oi o3A^t avroO, i.e., VnK,

in 2 S.).

a. In genealogy of Bknjamin (89 ii. /3), one of the sotis of Ueriah, who put to flight the inhabitants of Gath, i Ch. S i4(arA- ^t aiiTou, ' his brother ' [B], oi aiAc/>ot aii., ' his brethren " [A], oi o. airrmv, ' their brethren ' [L] ; Be. and Kau. vnK ; We. VnK [DeCent. f. so]; Ki. OH'nK)- , ^. ,

3. In genealogy of Benjamin (8 9 u. P), son of Jehiel, the ' father 'of (".ibeon ; i Ch. 8 31 aitK^o^ auToO [B], -<;>ol av. [A], oi i5. av. [I.l) = i)37t ("A om. auroO).


[Vrrn^:, AxCelipe [BAFL]; -^^ : AHIK.4). A Naphtalite family-name reported in P (Nu. 1 15 229 77883 1027!). The old interpretation ' my brother is evil ' must be abandoned. Either y is mis- written for n (see the Palmyrene characters), in which case we get the good Heb. name Ahiram,' or we have here a half-Kgyptian name meaning ' Ra' (or Re' i.e., the Egj'ptian sun-god) is brother or protector' (so C!he. /m. 2144). The latter view is quite possible (cp the Egv'ptian name Pet-baal). The Canaanites, who were strong in the territory of Naphtali, were very receptive of foreign religious influences.^ Cp AsHUR, Hi"K, Haknepiikr. The reading of Pesh. (uniformly Ahida') is no doubt either merely a natural variant, or a copyist's substitution of a more normal for a rarer form ; cp Amioa. t. k. c.


(D"^*nN, 44, cp Jehoram ; AxCel'PAN [AL]. lAX. [B],' AXiAN [F]; aiuram). i. In the gcnealogj' of Benjamin ( 9 i. ); Nu. 2638 (where we have also the gentilic Ahiramite ; 'STnt* ; axf'pa" [1.], 10. . . vei [B], axipai [.\], -lavei [F]) = Gen. 4621, where ' .Xhiram, .Shei)hupham ' ought no doubt to be read for ' Khi and Rosh, Muppim ' (cEiErCTHN for C*rcrN-ivnN), cp Rosii. In the similar list in i Ch. 8 we find in ?. i .Aiiarah [i/.t.] (mnx), and in that in iCh. 76^ in I'. 12, Aher y.v.](^nK), cp Hushim, 2 ; Dan, 9.

2. Perhaps we should read Ahiram also for Ahir.\ (17. f.) in Xu. I5, etc.


("^^p^^^{, ' the [divine] brother sus- tains ' ; axiC(\mak[B], -max [AFL]; Jos. ic&maxoc, IC&XA'WOC). aDanite; E.x. 316 (axiCAMAX C^]) 3534 3823 [P]. See Dan, 9 n.


(in;"'nN, 35, 44, 'the [divine] brother is dawning light,' cp Abner, Shehariah ; d,\e\- CA^^AP [1^]. AXICAAP [A], ACCAeip [L]). in genealogy of Bkniamin ( 9 ii. a), 1 Ch. 7 lof- See Jeuiael, 1.


(">V"'nX, 44), Solomon's comptroller of the palace (iK. 46t). The name, however, is suspicious.

ipB gives the double rendering, oxi V o'lKovofiof, and eAiax o n'tK., and perhaps even a third rendering f\iap uib cra<f> iirX n't'i Trarpio? ; eKiax should be ayiTjA, which (P'- has, and may In: the true (S re.ading. But MT (a axio-op) has yet to be accounted for. For 1C"nj1_ we should probably read "ij? VriN. Zabud, who has just been mentioned, is descriljed as not merely a priest but ' the officer (placed) over the palace ' (so Klc). See Zabud, I. T. K. c.


(^Sh^HJ^, 45, meaning uncertain ; Ax[eliTO(})e\ [B.VL], -Aoc, Jos.), a Gilonite (see Giloh), a counsellor of David nmch esteemed for his

1 Aveip* in 3 K. 2 46 A [B] answers to Adoniram (cp i K. 4 6) of MT.

2 On names of foreign deities in Israelite names, see under Elidad, and Names, gg 4a, 81, 83.

unerring in.sight (aS. 15i2 16a3). His son Eliam {^v., i) was, like Uriah, a member of David's body- guard (2 S. 2334 ; cp David, ii a i), and since H.ith- sheba, the wife of Uriah, is described as the daughter of Eliam (2S. II3), it has been conjectured that Ahi- thophel was her grandfather, and that indignation at Davids conduct to Bathsheba led Ahithophel to cast in his lot with Absalom's rebellion. This, however, is a mere possibility, and ambition would Ix; a sufficient motive for Ahithophel's tri-ason to David, just as the slight involved in .Absalom's preference of Hushai's counsel to his own was certainly one chief cause of his final withdrawal from .Absalom. At first, indeed, he had full possession of the ear of the pretender. It was by his advice that .Absalom took public possession of his father's concubines, and so pledged himself to a claim to the throne, from which there was no retreat (2 S. 1620^). Ahithophel was also eager in his own person to take another bold and decisive ste[). He wished to pursue David with 12,000 men and cut the old king down in the first confusion and entanglement of his flight towards the Jordan (2 S. 17 1-4). This plan was defeated by Hushai, whereupon Ahithophel, seeing that all hope was gone, went to Giloh and strangled himself.

In iCh. II36 'Ahithophel the Gilonite' has been corrupted into 'Ahijah the Pelonitc," 'i^S:^ n^r.H for 'j'^i.T "?En'nK ; cp Klo. Sam., ad he. (axlejta [B.AKL]), and see Giloh, end.

W. E. A.


(AXeiTCoB [B], etc. ), i Esd. 82 RV, 4 Esd. lit RV. See below, Ahitub, 2.


(n-in^nX or n-"mnN [i S. 143 2292], 45 ; cp Ahi-labu KB 5, no. 11 14, aXleJitooB [B.AL]).

I. .A member of the family in which the priest- hood, first at Shiloh, then at Nob, appears for some generations to have been hereditary. He was grandson of Eli, son of Phinehas, and elder brother of Ichabod (iS. 143; cp4i9-2i). His son, .Ahijah, is mentioned as priest in iS. I43; another son, Ahimelech, api>ears as priest in i .S. 229 n 12 20. It is unnecessary with Thenius and Bertheau to identify Ahimelech with Ahijah ; but that .Ahitub, the father of Ahimelech, is identical with .Ahitub, the father of Ahijah, is clear from iK. 227, which implies that Abiathar, the son of Ahimelech (iS. 222o), was of the house of Eli. Nothing further is directly told of Ahitub ; but, if Wellhausen's suggestion that the destruction of .^hiloh (Jer. 7i2) took place after the battle of Aphek (i.S. 4) be accepted, the transference of the priestly centre from Shiloh to Nob (IS. 229-11), will have taken place; under him.

The description of Ahitub as father of Zadok (2 S. S 17 = i Ch. 18 16, iCh. 6 8 [634] 53 [38]) is due to an intentional early cor- ruption of the text in S.imuel, which originally r.in ' .Abiathar, the son of .Xhimelech, the son of Ahitub, and Z.-idok were priests ' (for the argiunent see We. TUS 176 /).

2 and 3. Father of a (later) Zadok, mentioned in 1 Ch. 6 i\/. [537/1, and in pedigree of Ezra (see Ezra, i. 1) Ezra72 = I Esd.S2 = 2Esd. 1 I (in the last two passages AV Achitob, R\' .AHnciii); and a priest, father of Meraioth and grandfather of Z.adok, in the list of inhabitants of Jerusalem (Ezra, ii. 5 {b\, 15 [r] a), iCh. 9ii = Neh. 11 11 (aira>/3<ux [li, ajro^toic [N], aTw/f [Al). These references, however, are probably due to inten- tion.al or accidental amplification of the original genealogj-, .ind do not refer to any actual person. Kyle, app.irently takes another view ; see his notes on EzraT 1-5, and Neh. 11 11.

4. Ancestor of Judith; Judith 8 if RV, AV following 0a <ueifla AciTHo, Ac/titoh ; so also It., Syr. ; om. B. g. b. g.


(n'pnX, .^., 'fat.' 'fruitful' ; Aa\a<J>[BAL], '. AaAA(}> [Clermont Ganne.au points out the place- name M.ahaleb, N. of Tyre (yV*^'. Crit. 1897, p. 503)]), a Canaanite town claimed by Asher (Judg. I31), and referred to probably in Josh. 19 29, at the end of which verse there appears to have been originally a list of names including (by a correction of the te.xt) Ahlab and Achzib.' See Helbah.

1 Josh. 1929 ends 'bus, na'nK VniTD nS'n, which AV renders ' at the sea from the coast to Achzib," and RV ' at the sea by the

Many(r.c-., Neubauer, Grove, Fursl) identify either Ahlab or Hdbah with the Gu5 Hnmb (aSn ri3. 'fat clods') of the Talmuds the Giscala of Josephus. But this place {el Jish), which is mentioned with Meron (AfeifUn), and Biri (h'e/r Blr'im), must have lain on Naphtalite ground. The statement inTalm. Mcnachoth 85 b, that tlush Halab belonged to Asher is a mere gue>s, suggested by the blessing of Asher in Dt. 3824. Fur a sounder view see Hklbah.


C^riX, ace. to Olsh. IHeb. Gr. (>\6\ = uti,uim. Del., Prol. 210, compares Bab. 'v\X^x].-'n^m^ Ahulalpia,

O that I at last. ' More probably the name is a cor- ruption of ?X*nX, or the like).

1. Son, or (.-in inference from -.'. 34 which comes from a later hand) daughter of Sheshan b. Isha, a Jerahmeelite ; i Ch. 2 31 (axai (H), aa&ai [A], ouAaei [L]). See Jehahmkkl, I.

2. Father (or moilier?) of Zauad (t^.Z'.); 1 Ch. n4it (oX""* (H). axea [K]. oAi |.\], <ra^aaAi [L], i.e., a combination of part of ^afXfxa or ^a/maia with aoAi). T. K. C.


. iCh. 84t. See Ahij.vh, 2, Ben- J,\.MIN, 9 ii- i3.

AHOHITE, The[edit]

("nnxn, i.e., a man of the family of Ahoah or AuijAii? (^.v., 2). The designation (i) of Zalmon (2S. 232St, awfiTtji [B], eXco. [A], a\-axt [L]; Jfcs.d joJ ^joj) = Ii.Ai [see Zalmon, 2] (i Ch. II29: avax^f(L [Is*], ax- I BN'], final x tieing con- founded with v ; ax^^p [A* sup. las. seq. ras.], aKaOi [LI; t,.sCU3 ^>).

Also (2) of Dodai, or of Elcazar b. Dodai (as in I Ch. 27 and in 2 S. and i Ch. 11 respectively ; see Dodai, Eleazar, 3), one of David's heroes (see Ei.EAZAR, 3) in the list iCh. 274 (f^'XwX [^J- "<-^^' [A], axcoxt [L]) = iCh.lli2 (apx^^"" [H S'X- W- ax^X' [A^. i6s Aw5at irarpad^Xcpov avrov [!-]) = 2S. 239 (that is, if with AV we treat -nnx-p as = nnxn of the parallel passages, and do not [with Marq. Fu/uf. 16/] correct the whole expression everywhere into 'cnVn na ' the Bethlehemite ' [cp v. 24], the corrup- tion in the Heb. text of Sam. being accounted for by the half-effacement of the letters, which the scribe lead in the false light of i: 28). evidently omits, since the forms aovati, [B], dovSei [B*'^^-L], awaei [A] must be corruptions for ^-n, Dod(a)i.


RV correctly Ohdlah (H^HX ; ooAa [B indecl. and decl., and, except f. 44, Q: but B, not B -KK. V- 4]. oAAa [A and in v. 44 g]). a symbolical name equivalent to Oholibah (see Aholibah), given by Ezekiel to Samaria (284/. 644!).


, R\^ correctly Ohdliab (aS'-briX ; cAiaB [B.M'L]), the associate of Bezai.ekl {i/.v.) in the work of the tabernacle in P (Ex. 316 3.") :?4 36 1 2 38 23 [(5 372it]). See Da.n. 8 n., and cp Hiram, 2.


, RV correctly OhOlibah (na^^HN, i.e.,

she in whom are tents ' alluding to the worship at the high places; cp Ezek. I618; ogXiBa [BQr], o\. [A, V. 22 Q, c>. 36 B]), a symbolical name, equivalent to Oholah (see Aikjlah), given by Ezekiel to Jerusalem (234 112236 44t )


, RV correctly OhOUbamah (npivHX, 61, /.<., 'tent of the high place," cp Phoen.

l^obnX C/S 1, no. 50, and see Hiram, 2.

1. Wife of Esau {oXi^efia [ADE] ; eXt/Sa^o [L] ; aXt.iafxrjv [}os. ; cod. Laur. oX.]); Gen. 862 (oXi^aifia [E]), 514 (eXt^ejua [A], 18 (eXi/3f/ua [A once], oXi^f/j-fxa and (Xi^afia [D]), 25t (oXt^a [E], eXi^efmO [L ; before 6vya.Tr)p]). See Bashe.math, i ; Anah, 3 (end).

2. An Edomite chief {eX[f]i^afiai [D><'L], eXt^fyuas region of .\chzib,' but in the margin 'at the .sea from He he i. to Achzib.' 0, however, points the way to a correction of the text (17 0a\a<T(Ta Koi anb Af^ " (XO^oP [H], rj 0. k. a. toO iTXOivCtriiaTOi (XioP t-^l. V- * 'CTai a- r. cr. oxafi|S [b]). This implies the reading zSnC- which is not improbably a corruption of 2h~H- n:*ipN, which should rather be 3'J3N1, was an attempt to make sense with 27np.

[A]), Gen. 3641. and (eX[e]a/3oAtas [BA], eXifiafia [L]), I Ch. 1 s't. See EuoM, 4.


('J?-in><,i65; AyeiMei [BA*]. aximai [A^ sup. ras. et in mg.], aXIMAN [E], ..v^.m/ ; Ahuiiiai [cod. am. AAimni]), the eponym of a clan of Judah (i Ch.4 2+). Should we read Ahiman (L)?


, RV correctly Ahuzzam (D-THt*. perh. = ' possession ' ; for pr. names in am see Names, 77), one of the sons of Ashhur ' father of Tekoa ' ; i Ch.



(nrriN, possession ' ; oxozaG [AEL], -ZAX W] <-'cnoy..iTH), the 'friend' (, wrongly, v\>ix<pa.'yii}'^'j<i) of Abimelech, king of Gerar (Gen. 2626t). ' Friend ' = minister ; cp 1 Ch. 2733, and see HUSHAI.

The name with the title 6 i^fK^o-ytuybs aiiToCis introduced al.so in (pAUL in the similar narrative of Gen. 21 22-34. For the termination -aih thereare parallels in Ba.semath (fern.), Gen. 2034 ; M.ihalath (fem.), (;en.2S9; Goliath (the Philistine), 1S.I74; Gciiuhalh, iK. II20; cp names in -ath in Aram, inscriptions (Cook, Gloss. Aram. Inscr. under n). Cp Dr. //T^^) 236, n. 2.


("THN), Xeh. 11 i3t RV, AV Ahasai {q.v. ).


(i) Cyn, always thus with def. article, i.e., 'the stone heap"; f^l [B.XL, etc.]; wriiicn Hai in Gen. 123]33tAV; Arr<>'l i^-"^^^])- ^^^ name appears also in various other forms.

AijA, or lather Ayya (N'j; ; om. BN*A, oiu [Nc-a mg. inf.], yai [L], Neh. Il3it); Ayvah, RV mg.(.i;j; [Ba Gil, not r\X]} as in most edd., AV Gaza \q."\_ 2], RV Azzah ; yaiaf [B], ya^ijs (genit.)[A], aaia[L];aca; bX.X; 1 Ch.728); Ai ath, or rather Ayyath (ri;j^: ayyat [BNAQ], Is. 10 28+).

As to the site of .-\i, we learn from Josh. 72 (in clause b 7TJI' [-AKL] ; in w. 3 701 sup. ras. [B-]) that it was situated ' beside Beth-aven, on the east of Bethel," and, from the account of Joshua's stratagem, that it lay on the S. side of a steep valley (Josh. 811), while from the description in Gen. 128, it appears that there was a ' mountain ' or flat ridge with a wide view between Ai and Bethel. That there was a close connection between the two places appears also from the expression 'the men of Bethel and Ai ' (Ezra228; aia [B.V])- With the position thus suggested, Isaiahs graphic picture of an .Assyrian invasion from the north (Is. 10 28/:; arya-i. [B'S'^-':b.\Q]; 0776 [X*] = Geha in V. 28) entirely agrees. Where, then, shall we place Ai on the map? Scarcely at et-Tell (Sir C. W. Wilson, PEFQ, 1869, 123-6, and Smith's /)/;i->) there are no signs that et-Tell was ever the site of a city but at some other spot in the neighbourhood of Dcr Drhin (a village twenty minutes .SE. of et-Tell). Robinson, with some hesitation, fixed on a low hill, just S. of this place, where there are still foundations of large hewn stones, and on the W. , ancient reser- voirs, mostly dug out of the rock. The spot (called Kliirbet Haiydn) is 'an hour distant from Bethel, having near by, on the N. , the deep Wady el-Matyah, and towards the SW. other smaller wadys, in which the ambuscade of the Israelites might easily have been concealed" (/?A'23i3). To Tristram in 1863, this con- jecture ' carried with it the weight of evidence," particu- larly because it would be difficult to assign a site to Abraham"s camp between Beitin and Tell el-Hajar (et-Tell), and because Robinson"s site affords such ample space for the military evolutions described in Josh. 8, over which, however, some uncertainty is thrown by the variations of in it\ 11-13. Both Gu6rin and the PEF Survey corroborate this view, which, if not proved, is at any rate probable.

As to the history of Ai : it was a royal Canaanitish city, and was the second city conquered by Jo.shua, who destroyed it and doomed it to be ' a mound for ever" (cSii'-Sn). By Isaiah"s time, however, it had been rebuilt (Is. 10 28), and after the Exile it was re- 1 See Gray, HPN62, 279, n. 10.

occupied by Benjamites ; Ezra228 (ota [BA]) = Neh. 732 {aXeta [HX], at [A])= i lisd. Sai (* and KV om. ; 7CU [L]). In the time of Kusebius (05 181, 76, Ayyai} it was once more deserted ; but its situation was still pointed out. Its name was jjrophetic of its history. Or had it some other name before its destruction by I oshua ?

2. ('g; without article ; Tat [Q] ; Symm. ^ Zo-xt's) an Ammonite city, if the text in Jer. 49 st is correct ((S'"** omits : Rothstein in Kau. //S and Co. in SHOT, after (Jraf, read ' Ar n^). T. K. c.


, more strictly Ayyah (H'X, 'falcon'). i. .\n Ixlomite tribal name individualised, Gen. 8624 (.W Aj.Mi ; Aie [AD], N. [l- ; N precedes], a^iAi [L]) = I Ch. l4o(i^ie [li], <MA [AL]). The tribe seems to have broken off from that of Zibeon, and to have been less important than that of Anau {q.v.). To identify this insigniticant Aiah with the 'goodly land' in which Se- nuhvt the ligyptian e.xile found a home, according to the 'old story (so Masjiero, RPC'^ 21723; PSBA 18 106 [96]) is unsafe. On the laa (Maspero, Aia) of the story of Se-nuhyt, see WMM As. u. Kur. 47.

2. Father of Saul's concubine Rizpah (28.87, 'a^ vel forte 10.0. [H*], io5 vel forte io\ [B'], Io\ [A], 2i^a [L], ^t,iJaTos[Jos.] ;218^, Aia [BA], Acrata [L]). To draw a critical inference (with Mez, Der Bihel dcs Jos. 35/-), from L's 2(/3a in 3 7 seems unwise. We must not assume that Ziba is the original reading rather than Aiah. k and ^; could very easily be confounded, and from 2ia to :it/3a was but a step. The name of one of Rizpah's sons was Mephibosheth (Meribaal), and the son of Jonathan, whose steward was Ziba, was also called Mephibosheth (Meribaal). The question as to the source or sources of the passages in which Rizi'Aii {q.v.) is referred to, lemains therefore where it was.


(n*y), Is. 1028t. See Ai, 1.


, Neh. II31. See Ai, i.


, or (Josh. 10 12 19 42; 2 Ch. 28i8+, all AV) less correctly AjALON (P?*X from ?*X 'hart'; mAooN [HALj).

1. A town in the Shephelah, assigned to Dan m Josh. 1942 {aiM/uiuv [li], laaXajv [A], eX. [L ; but with laXajj/ V. 43 for Elon]), and named as a Danite Levitical city in 2l24[P] (laXuv [A])=iCh. 669 [54] (corrected text, see Ball ad loc. in Ellicott's Bible; t-yKo-ii [B], 7j/\wi/ [A]). It is the modern Yalo, situated on a ridge on the south side of the broad level valley of Aijalon, well known, from Joshua's poetical speech (Josh. 10 12 ; a:\w/Lt [L]), and now called Merj (the meadow of) Ibn 'i'lnar. It is about 5 m. from Lower Beth-horon, and 14 from Jerusalem. In the time of the Judges it w\T,s still in the hands of the Amorites (Judg. I35; apparently misread ai dpKoi. [B.\L], and translated a second time fjLX'paivusv [B], which, however, stands for HKKK.S in L), but was afterwards occupied by Benjamites, iCh. 813 (aiXa/j. [B], aSafi [A], aXw>' [L]); cp. 2Ch. llio. The Chronicler states that Rehoboam fortified it (2Ch. llio, aXduv [B], aiaXuv [AL]), and that Ahaz lost it to the Philistines (2Ch. 28 18, aiXw [K]). o" whose territory it bordered. In I S. 1431, the occurrence of the word is doubtful. For 'to Aijalon' Klost. and Budde (SBOT) read 'until night." "'^- omits altogether. Some fresh references to Aijalon are derived from Egyptian sources. For instance, Shishak (Sheshonk I. ) mentions Aiyurun i.e. , Aijalon among the conquered cities of Judah in his Karnak list, and there is an earlier mention still in the Amarna tablets, where Aialuna appears as one of the first cities wrested from the Egyptian governors. A vivid sketch of the battle-scenes of the valley of Aijalon will be found in GA.Sm. f/G 210-13.

2. (Judg. 12 12 ; AiXwfi [B], -X[e]tya [AL]), a locality in Zebulun, the burial-place of Elon {^.v., ii. ly. ).

Its name ought probably to be pointed [iV'K (Elon), and etymologically connected with ps^ or ,iSk, ' oak ' or ' terebinth ' (see Tkkkbinth, i), indicating a sacred spot. Cp Al.l.ON, 2. T. K. c.


, RV ' set to Aijeleth hash-Shahax ("int|'n fl^'N, [Ow^p] t^s d^'TiXTj/xt/'ewj Tijs iujOiuTJs ^BSAj ; Atj. [virip] rij^ eXatpov ttjs dpOpcv^s), Vs. 22, title. If we consider the tendency of the phrase, ' Upon Al.AMOTH {i/.v. ),' to get corrupted, it seemshighly probable that ' Aijeleth ' should rather be read ' Alamoth ' (n and y confounded), while Shahar should perhaps rather be B'nn re', ' a new song.' (The article prefixed to Shahar may be in the interests of an exegetical theory. ) The latter corruption has very probably taken place in Ps. 579 (see Che. /^j. ('-'). A 'new song' would be a song u[)oii a new model.


(yV). I. If MT may be followed, this is the name of a city in the Xcgeb of Judah (Josh. 1032) assigned to Simeon (19?; cp i Ch. 432). According to Josh. 21 16 it was one of the priests' cities ; but the parallel list in i Ch. 659 [44] probably correctly substitutes AsuAN ((/.I'.) which is mentioned in Josh. I97 [MT @uALj alongside of Ain as a distinct place. The name being thus removed from this list, Ain always appears in close conjunction with Rinunon, and Miihlau {HIVB t^' s.v. 'Ain') suggests that the two places may have lain so close together that in course of time they joined. Hence he would account for the En-klmmon (pan pj; ; om. BNA ; k. ev pe/uLpnov [X'^- '"*>' '"^] ; k. tv pe/i/xiov []^]) of Neh. 11 29. But ifweconsider the phenomena of (see below), and the erroneous summation (if M T be adhered to) in Josh. 1532, it becomes evident that Bennett's thorough revision of the readings in his Joshua {SHOT) is critically justified (cp AsuAN), and that the real name is En-RIMMON ' {q.v.).

How, indeed, could a place dedicated to the god Rimmon (Ramman) have been without a sacred fountain ?

Josh. 15 32, leat epuDtnaQ [Bl, Kai pefi/xwi' [A], Kai aiv Kai. pefiixMv [LI ; Josh. 197, aiv K. pffifxcoS [\]. ai.u k. pe/x/iior [LJ, but epefifj-iov [B] ; Josh. 21 16, ao-a [B] which favours j-^'y ' Ash.\n ' ig'.?'.), ate [A], raeir [L], which h.armonise witli MT. In i Ch.432(it. pen/Ltoji' IB], K. r)i' [sic] I'e sup. las. [A-'V| followed by -fifiwr [.A] ; K. ei'pe/u./LLwi/ [LJ) we should also, with Ki., read En-rimmou.

2. (i'VlSl, the article being included ; (firl) irriyds [BAL] ; Vg. [contra) fontcm Daphnim ; Tg. Onk. as MT ; for the rest see below. ) A place mentioned in Nu. 34 1 1 to define the situation of one of the points on the ideal eastern frontier of Canaan : ' to Harbel on the east side of Ain ' is the phrase. Though both AV and RV sanction this view of j'y.i, it is more natural to render 'the fountain,' and to find here a reference to some noted spring. Jerome thought of the spring which rose in the famous grove of Daphne, near Antioch ; in this he followed the Targums of Ps. Jon. and Jerus. which render '(the) Riblah ' (.iSa-irj) by 'Daphne,' and 'the fountain' (pyn) by 'Ainutha. Robinson ^ and Conder prefer the fountain which is the source of the Orontes. Both these views rest on the assumption that Riblah on the Orontes has just been referred to, which is a pure mistake (see Rini.AH). The fountain must at any rate be not too far N. of the Lake of Gennesaret which is mentioned at the end of the verse. Most probably it is the source of the Xahr Hasbany, one of the streams which unite to form the Jordan (see Ribi.AH). From this fountain to the ' east shoulder ' of the Lake of Gennesaret a straight line of water runs forming the clearest of boundaries. If, however, we place Baal-gad at Banias, we shall then, of course, identify ' the fountain '

1 Except of course in Josh. 21 16 (see above). In Zech. 14 lot the first half of the name is omitted (see En-rimmon).

2 See A' A" 4534. Kob.'s view (p. 393) on the Daphnis of Vg. (connecting it with the spring at Djfneh, near Tell el-lf ady) seems erroneous.

with that which springs from the fiinious and romantic cavern at the southern base of the Hermon mountains. It sliouUl be added that it is not impossible to alter the poiniinii and read j-yS ' (eastward) of IjON,' Ijon being mentioned elsewhere as on the N. frontier of the land of Israel. But then why did the writer introduce it merely incidentally? T. K. C.


(lAipoc [A]), iEsd.531 AV = Ezra247 Reai.vii, 3.


(nN). Oen. 3624! AV=RV Aiah {q.v., i).


((iS'X), Josh. 10 12 AV = RV Aijalon, i.


I Esd. 838! RV=Ezra


(ii^V), Gen. 3()27t =

Acts 1 i9t RV, AV


(akatan [BA]).

812 HakKA TAN.


(akcAAamax i^])'



(akBcoc [B]), i Esd. SsSf RV = Ezra26i Hakki)/., I.


(^-Ipy, 'posthumous,' but the name seems corrupt ; AKOyB [BA], akk- [1>])- i- b. Elioenai, si.\ generations removed from Zerubbabel : i Ch. 824 {laKow [B], aKKovli [A], oiKovv [L]).

2. The B'ne ."Vkkub, a group of doorkeepers in the great post- exilic list (see Ezka, ii. 9); Ezra 'J 42 (axoufi [HA], a/cx. IL]) = Neh. 745 {<^ov [H), -um' [XA], -v^ [L])=i Esd. 028 (Dacoiu ; RV Dacuhi ; aaxou^i [A], KaKov^Tov [I!]). Akkub is a porter in the list of inhabitants of lerusalem (see Ezka, ii. 5 [/'], 15 [i]a\ iCh. '.>i7 (dKov^ lB|")=Neh. Uig (aKovfi [L]), cp Ezra 10 24, = I Esd. it 25 (where, however, the name is omitted between Shallum and Telem). He is mentioned also in Neh. V2,2$ (aicou^ KCa ing. sup.]; om. BN*A).

3. An expounder of the Law (see Ezra, ii. 13 [/.] ; cp i. 8, ii. g 16 [5], 15 [>] c). Neh. 87 (aKov^ [L], om. HAK) = I Esd. 948 (EV, Jacuhus ; laxou^os [A], lapaou/Soo? [B]).

4. The li'ne .\kkub, a family of Nkthinim iff..) in the great post-exilic list (see Ezka, ii. 9), Ezra245 (a.Ka.^u>6 [l!])=Neh. 748(aKou5[Al, -oua[N]; om. B with MT, EV)= i Esd. 53o(a(covS [BA] ; AV acua ; RV akud).


, RV ; AV incorrectly Ararattine I Mace. 5 3t, Jos. .-////. .\ii. 81 ; akraBatthnh [NA] ; -ATTANH IN^- V]; Acrahattene [Cod. Am.]; )^.ayXite'^P J^'^'^h 7 18, below), adistrict where Judas the Maccal>ec fought against the Edomites, situated 'in Idumaia ' [NV Jos.] or ' in Judasa ' [A]. The district in- tended is no doubt that to the SE. of Judnea, in Idumcea (see Akrabrim). There is no sufficient ground for the opinion of Ewald that the Edomites had settled as far N. as another Akrabatta, a toparchy or district in Central Palestine, to the N. of Juda;a [Akrabatta, aKpa^era, etc. [Jos. B/ iii. 3 5 II PI- //-V v. 14 iv. 939]; aKpa^^eiv [Eus. 05C2146i]), apparently represented by the modern 'Akrabeh, 8 m. SE. of Nablus. (The reading iv TouSat? in i Mace, must therefore be rejected.) See Schiir. Hist. I220 n. 2, 3 158.

Doubtless, however, we should identify with 'Akrabeh the Ekkerel {fype^rjX [BN], Kpe^i]\ [A] ; K..^;"ftv ). near Chusi, on the brook Mochmur (Judith 7 iSf), the names being almost the same in the Syr. (=Talm. na-pv)- T. K. c.

AKRABBIM, Ascent of[edit]

, so always in RV ; also Nu. 344 in AV, which has in Judg. I36 'going up to Akrabbim,' in Josh. 15 3t mg. '. . .to Acrabrim," text Maaleh-Acrahbim (D^3"lpy n7j?p, i.e., 'ascent of Scorpions," [npoc]ANABACic'^ AKRABeiN [BAL] ; as- census scorpion um), mentioned in Josh. I53 (akraBBGIAA [sup. ras. A'"], CKRABeiN [L]) as one of the localities marking the southern frontier of Judah.

It must have been one of the passes leading up from the southern continuation of the Ghor into the waste mountain country to the west. Knobel identifies it

1 Cp Bakbuk.

2 titavia for oiro Trjt ai^o^atreuf in Judg. 1 36 [AL ; Lag. points iw' an,\.

with the pass of es-Safa, leading up towards Hebron out of the W. el-Kikreh on the road from Petra. Robinson (/M'"*' 2i8o/. ) descrilies this pass as being ' as steep as a man can readily climb.' 'The rock is in general porous and rough, but yet in many spots smooth anil dangerous for animals. In such places a path has been hewn in the rock in former days ; the slant of the rock being sometimes levelled, and sometimes overcome by steps cut in it. The vestiges of this road are more frequent near the top. The appearance is that of a very ancient pass' (Z/A'<^'229i). Robinson, however, identifies this Nakb es-.Safa with Zephath or Hormah, and not with Akrabbim (see also Hai.ak, Mount). Scorpions arc of frequent occurrence throughout this neighbourhood.


(akoyA [B]), I Esd. 530 RV=Ezra245 Akkur, 4.


(aAaBactron [accus. Ti WH] Mk. 14 3, also with art., thn A. [W & H after BX'^]. TON A. [Ti. after N*A], jO A. [TR after G, etc. ; also F in Lk.737]: cp o aAa. [B], to a\a. [A] 2 K. 21 13 [for nnSs ' dish,' ' cup ']) was found in large quantities in Mesopotamia, and from it are made the huge bulls which are to be seen in the British Museum and in the Louvre. The alabaster of the ancients was a stalagmitic carbonate of lime hence called by mineralogists ' Oriental alabaster ' to distinguish it from the modern alabaster, which is the sulphate of lime. See ED*^^\ s.v. Alabaster. In Greek the word dXd/Sacrros or d.\d(3airTpoi is frequently used of vases or vessels made to hold unguents, as these were generally fashioned out of this material, which was thought by many (cp e.^., PL //A' xiii. 3) to preserve the aroma of the ointment : Theocritus (/</. 16114) is able to speak of 'golden alabasters.' Many alabaster vases have been found in Egypt, and the specialised sense given to nn':'! in the Egyptian Greek version of Kings (see above) is natural enough. The town of Alabastron, near the famous quarries of Hat-nub^ (cp Erman, Anc. Eg. 470, n. 3), was well known for the manufacture of such articles (in fact it seems to have derived its name from the material ).'- Many of these go back to nearly 4000 B. c. and often show fine workmanship. Similar articles have been found in Assyria dating from the time of Sargon (8th cent. B.C.).

Such a vessel was the ' alabaster cruse ' which was emptied upon Jesus's head by the woman at the house of Simon the Leper at Bethany (Mt. 26;= Mk. I43 Lk. 737t)- The expression 'brake' in Mark does not refer, it would seem, to the breaking of a seal or of the neck of the vessel ; the object was to prevent profana- tion of the vessel by subsequent use for any commoner purpose (cp Comm. , ad loc. ).


(HD^;?), i Ch. 78 AV, RV Alemeth.


, RV Allammelech ('^I'pO^N [Ba.]. '^N [Gi.], ^7^'PX [v.d. Hooght]; eXet^eXe/c [B], eX/ieXex [L ; om. A]), a place in Asher on the border of Zebulun (Josh. 1926t), the name of which is possibly echoed in that of the Wddy el-melek, which drains the plain of the Buttauf (Asochis), and joins the Nahr el- Mukatta' (Kishon). So Di., Buhl. The pointing of the Heb. is peculiar: tiSsVk is usually explained as if TiSp dVn, "sacred tree of Melech' ; but n can hardly have been assimilated to c, nor is this the best reading. Possibly the real name was ijSo "? (^J*), El Melech ; cp El Paran. The authors of the points may have wished to avoid confusion with the personal name Eli melech. Or the name might be a corruption of elammak (see Almug Trees), if Solomon was able to naturalise this tree. t. K. C.

1 Near Tell el-"Amama (see PSBAlGji ["04]).

  • The reverse supposition is sometimes held, viz. that the

material is derived from the place-name. The ultimate origin of the word is unknown.

ALAMOTH, Upon[edit]

{nVDbV'hv.). a technical musical phrase of uncertain meaning ; cp Mi;sic, 6.

(a) Ps.4t5 title [i] (ujrip rmv Kpv4>imv [IiKRTl = niD'?;r'?j;; om. A; Aq. irl i'a'iOTJTu>' = rii'p':'jr'7y ; Symm. vnip luv alutvitov) ; (/') I Ch.lSao (iitX aAai/iwfl [H], . . oAf/ui. [K], . . oAij/i. [A], wtpl Tiii' (tpiM^i'ioK [L]: two anonymous C.k. versions have iiri tuii/ avafiaeixujv [niVyc] nnd n'"i Tiii/ aloivCuv InicSvD- '" '*" other passages, (f) Ps. 9 title [i] (vnip r. Kp. [BNAK] ; Aq. vfaviortiTot, Syniin. ntpi toO 6avaT0U - n^D'*?]}, Th., Quint, vnip aKixiji;, Sext. i/a>'iico7T)) ; ((/) in Ps.48i4 [isKei? tou? oiuiia? [KAR'l], /.f., ap- parently niaH' f"l ""* *'^1- "^""<^<. Symm. tis to iiijuicei) it appears in the corrupt form n?S"'?{,', which Tg. talces to he n'D^J/ ' youth (?).

Thus we find it three times forming part of a heading of a psahn (for niB'^j; in d should be restored as nic'^fSy from its present position to the heading of Fs. 49, on the analogy of Ps. 4(.)). Of the two half-translations of AV and RV respectively ( ' upon Alanioth, ' ' set to Alamoth ' ), the former presupposes that the phrase denotes the particular instrumental accompaniment ; the latter, that Alamoth is the name of a tune. Most moderns explain 'for sopranos,' 'alamoth having the constant meaning ' maidens.' Whether soprano voices would be suitable for Ps. 46, the nmsical reader may judge. Gratz and Wellhausen suppose a reference to some Elamite instrument. There is, however, a more probable solution. See Psalms, and cp Muth-labben,