Encyclopaedia Biblica/Astad-Baal Zephon

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search



(actaa [A]), I Esd. 5i3 RV=Ezra2i2.



(mntrr), Dt. l 4 ; RV Ashtaroth. ASTARTE. See AsaroKETH.


(ACT&e [BA] ^zfAA [E]). i Esd. 838 = Ezra 8 12, .\zc;ad.


(Dan. l2oetc., ^if^). RV En- chanter; and Is. 47i3t (u^P'J' ""l^'n), RV"'*f- 'divider of the heavens.' See Stars, 5; also Divi.NATiON, 2 (5) and M.\Gic, g 3 (4).


(actyafhc [BAQ]), according to Theodotion's text of Bel and the Dragon {v. 1), was the predecessor of Cyrus in the kingdom of Persia. See CviiLS.


(i Ch. 20 17. n*S3.^^; eic TO <\CA<l)eiN [A], e.r. ececj). [B] ; Toic AC&cJjeiAA [E]; r. 15 'NH n^3, oiKoy &cA(t)eiN [A], O. ece(JjGiN[B], o. &C<\ct)[L]; 1^ ^ .^ fPesh.l; RV in each case ' the storehouse.' In Neh. 1225t AV renders thesameword ' the thresholds '[marg. 'treasuries,* ' assemblies '] ; bnal, fV jQ (Twayayeiv fie [different vocalisation]; RV 'the storehouses'), a word used by the Chronicler to describe certain storehouses situated at the temple gates {.\eh. I225), perhaps specially the soutiiern gate (i Ch. 2615). See Temple.


(AC0YP[B-^]), I Esd. 531 RV = Ezra25i.HAR-HUR.


Though mentioned by name only once or twice in OT (see .\snapi'KK), Asur-bani-pal is important to OT literature from his deportation of troublesome populations to the region of Samaria (see Samaria, Samaritans, and cp below, 12) ; also from references to his camp.aigns in Egypt and Arabia in the prophecies (see Is.MAH, ii. 9, and Xaiilm, 2). He was one of Assyria's greatest kings, and famous not less for his devotion to art and literature than for his extensive concjuests. His name, which is best read .Asur-bani (or bani)-apli, means ' A.sur is the creator of a son.' He was the eldest son of Esarhaddon, and ascended the throne in 668 B.C. His succession had teen secured by his having been publicly proclaimed king before his father's death, while his brother, Samas-sum-ukin, was installed in Babylon as viceroy or tributary prince.

From the moment of his accession he was plunged into a prolonged war in Egypt, for Tarku (Tirhakaii), king of Ethiopia, in the words of A.sur-kani-pal, ' forgot the might of Asur, Istar, and the great gods my lords, and trusted in his own strength ' : that is, he raised a large army and descended upon Egj'pt. The prefects and governors appointed by Esarhaddon fled at Tarka's approach. He captured Theljes, descended the Nile to Memphis where he lixed his capital, and pro- claimed himself king of Egypt. On receiving the news of this disaster, .^sur-b.ani-pal determined to recover Egypt. During the p.assage of his army through Syria and along the coast of the Mediterranean, reinforce- ments in men and ships, in addition to the customary tribute, were received from twenty-two subject kings of

1. Ist Egyptian campaign.

3. 2nd Egyptian expedition.

4 Sietre '^^^^'^ '" ^^^ midst of the sea' Of Tyre *^!=scription of the ^ ' his predecessors,

Palestine and Cyprus, among whom Manasseh, king of Judah, is mentioned (cp EsakhaudoN). Tarku, hearing of the advance of the Assyrians, sent out his own forces from Mcmijhis. At Karbaniti, within the Egyptian lx)rder, the forces of TarijU were utterly routed, while the king himself abandoned Memphis and escaped by Iwat to Thelxis, leaving his capital and the whole of Lower I'^gypt in the hands of the Assyrians. The various governors and petty kings, who had formerly been tributary to Esarhaddon and had been expelled by 'larkfi, now returned, and joined their own forces to those of the Assyrians, upon which the combined armies ascended the Nile in a fleet of boats to dislodge Tarku from Thelies. In forty days the journey was accomplished. Tarku abandoned the city without striking a blow, and retreated into Ethiopia, leaving the whole of I'.gypt in the hands of the Assyrians, j He did not, however, abandon his designs upon | Egypt, and, as his former attempt at open opposition '

n T) li. li'i<J proved unsuccessful, hij now resorted I supprelsed. ' '"^^'^i^^: I'^^rceiving th.t the native |

^'^ Egj'ptian prmccs were far from contented

under the military sway of the Assyrians, he ojiened secret I negotiations with them, Nikfi (Niccno), Sarruludari, and I'akruru leading the conspiracy on the Ej;yplian side. It was agreed that they should transfer their allegiance I to Tarku, who in return would leave them in undisturbed possession of their principalities, and that, while he attacked Egypt from the south, they would raise a revolt in the interior. The Assyrian generals, however, sus- pecting that some treachery was afoot, intercepted their messengers, and learnt the full e.xtent of the plot. Niku and Sarruludari were bound hand and foot and sent to Nineveh, while their fellow-conspirators were slain. Tl,o ; revolt, thus prematurely hastened, was ciuelled without ! difficulty. Tarku was once more driven from Upper j Egypt, and soon afterwards died. j

A5iir-k"ini-pal, in restorin}; the country again to order, appears [ to have mitigated liis former rigour, seeking to conciliate rather than to suppress the native rulers. Niku was ikikIijiumI. He u.is j clothed in costly raiment ; a ring was set upon lii> (i!i',-tr, and .a | fillet of gold about his head (as an emblem of his rc-.un.iti.jii) ; and ; with presents of chariots, horses, .and mules, lie returned to j Kijypt, where he was once more installed as governor in Sais, wiule his son Nabu-sezibanni was appointed governor of Athribis.

Ethiopia, however, could not long keep her eyes from I Egypt ; and, although Tarku was dead, the ambitions

of his country did not die with him. | was not long tefore Urdamane, his

successor, marched northwards and took I'jiper Egypt (cp Egypt, 66). He advanced from Thelx;s to meet the Assyrian expedition sent against him, but was worsted in the battle, returned to the city, and thence fled farther south to Kipkip. The Assyrians marched on Thelies, and the city itself, together with immense booty, fell into their hands, 'fhey carried back with them to Assyria two huge obelisks, and thus set the fashion, adopted by all the later conc|uerors of Egypt, of perpetuating their victory by means of the monuments of the conquered country itself. 'With full hands,' writes .^sur-bani-pal, ' I safely returned to Nineveh, the city of my rule. ' This

successful exjxjdition, however, had no lasting effect. Egypt was too far off to remain for any length of time the vassal of .Assyria. Psammetichus, the son of Nikfi, obtained the supremacy over the whole country, and permanently shook off the .Assyrian yoke.

After his second Egyptian campaign Asur-bani-pal directeti his forces against Ba'al, king of Tyre, ' who

good city (see Tyre). Like

Asur-bani-pal failed to capture a stronghold so favoured by nature. He erected towers and earthworks, however, and attempted to cut off communication from the sea as well as from the land, and ntaintained so effectual a blockade that Ba'al, at Last reduced to extremities, sent Yahi-milki to

6. Elam.[edit]


ask for terms. A5ur-bani-pal contented himself with levying tribute on the city, and with demanding the kings daughter and niec-es for his harem, together with their dowries. After humbling Tyre, it was

no hard matter to obtain the submission of the less imjxjrtant princes of the Mediterranean coast. .\mf)ng these were Vakinlfi, king of the island-city of Akvad, Mugallu, king of Tabal, and Sandasarmu, king of Cilicia (Cil.lciA, 2).

Gyges ((jugu), king of Lydia, also apjx^rs to have heard of the success of the Assyrians, and to have .sent p -in his submission. Eor some years he

. ,r maintained these friendly relations, and

uy la, etc. ^^ ^j^j^ j^,^^.^ attributed his success over the Cinmierians, in proof of which he sent to Nineveh two captive Cimmerian chiefs bound hand and foot with fetters of iron. Towards the end of the reign of Asur- bani-pal, however, Gyges severed his connection with Assyria, and aided Psammetichus (Psametik) in his struggle for I",gyptian indei>endence (cp Egvi-t, g 67).

Asur-bani-pal was now free to turn his attention to the eastern borders of his kingdom.

During the absence of the Assyrian army in its distant camp:ii.;ns, the E. frontier of Assyria had been coiistanlly vi.>l:ited by the king of Mannai (see Mi.nm). Asur-bani-pal determined to chastise Al)5eri. He marched northwards, and foiled an attempt of his opponent to surprise the Assyrians by a niL;ht attack. A|)scri fled to his capital Izirtu, while .A.s'ur- bruii-pal laid waste the country. On his death in a revolt he was succeeiled by his son Ualli, who bought terms of peace from A5ur-bani-pal.

The most warlike nation on the E. of Assyria, how- ever, and indeed her most powerful enemy, was Ei..\M ((/. '. ). Urtaku its king had shown his hostility to Assyria already in the reign of Esarhaddon, by attempting to stir up a rebellion in Chaldea ; and although, when his people were suffering from famine, he had received assistance from .\sur-bani-pal himself, he now proposed an invasion of Babylonia, hoping thereby to cripple the .Assyrian power.

Acting on the advice of his general, M.arduk-?Suin-ibni, he formed an alli.uicc with P.cl-iklsa, king of Gambulu a coiuiir> situated in the lower b.asin of the Tigris, on the shores of the Persian tnilf and having won over to his side Nabfi-5um-Iris, a governor in Chaldea, he crossed the Babylonian border. On news being brought to Asur-bani-pal that the Elamites h.id advanced like a flight of locusts' and were encamped against Babylon, he set on foot an expedition, and, marching southwards, drove Urtaku beyond the frontier.

On the death of Urtaku, shortly afterwards, the throne was seized by Teumman, who immediately sought to rid himself of the sons of the former kings, Urtaku and Ummanald.as I. His intended victims, however, escajjed with their friends to the court of Asur-bani-pal, where they were in kindliness received, and protected. This incident caused a renewal of the war between Elam and Ass}Tia. An interesting fact, which throws light on Assyrian prophecy, is related. On theeve of the campaign Asur-bani-pal prayed solemnly to the gotidess Istar, who to encourage him appeared in a vision to a seer, and promised victory to the Assyrian arms. ^ Confident of success, Asur-bani-pal set out for Elam, and pressed on up to the walls of Susa. Here, on the banks of the Eula;us, there was a decisive battle, in which the Elamites were utterly routed.

'The land of Klam," writes .Asur-bani-pal, 'through its extent 1 covered, as when a mighty storm approaches ; I cut off the head of 'I'eumman, their king, the rebel who had plotted evil. Beyond number 1 slew his warriors ; alive in my hands I took his fighting men ; with their corpses as with thorns and thistles I filled the vicinity of Susa ; their blood I caused to flow in the Eulseus, and I stained its waters like wool.'-

.Asur-bani-pal divided the land, proclaimed as vassal kings Ummaniga.s and Tammaritu, the two sons of Urtaku who had cast themselves on his protection, and,

1 See the striking p.-iss.-ige in the annals (Smith, J/ist. 0/ Assurb. 123-126).

  • (5 K 5, 43, a^rvp klnta nahdsi. A'a^rjjw =' red - coloured

woo!.' The adverb, nabdsfi, 'like red wool," ace. to Ruben, JQR 10 SSI, is an Ass. loan-word in the Song of Deborah, corrupted in our text.]

returning by way of Ganibulu, exacted a terrible venge- ance from that land.

7 Revolt of Babylon[edit]

We now approach the greatest crisis in the history of Asur-bani-pal. On ascending the throne of Assyria he appointed his younger brother Samas-sum-ukin king of Babylon, without re-

suppressed. V

nouncing his own suzerainty. Samas- sum-ukin, however, was dissatisfied with his dependent position, and resolved to revive, if possible, the relations between .Assyria and Babylon. His own resources being insufficient for subjugating Assyria, he began to form a coalition of the neighbouring nations, all glad of an opportunity to strike a blow at their powerful neighbour. The Chaldeans and the Aranirean tribes of the coast gave assistance ; Um- manigas, king of IClam, threw over his patron Asur- bani-pal, and joined the revolt ; Arabia, Ethiopia, and possibly Egypt, sent help. Asur-bani-pal did not lose an instant, but set out with the whole of his force to the SE. , where he successfully kept his enemies in check.

Fortune favoured him by neutralising to some extent the assistance which Samas-sum-ukln expected to receive from Elam, his most powerful ally. That country was thrown by internal revolution into a state bordering on anarchy, Ummanigas and the whole of his family having been slain by Tammaritu, who in turn was dethroned by Indabiga.5, and only saved his life by flight to Assyria.

Asur-baui-pal hastened to attack the allied forces, easily defeated them, and proceeded to besiege the four cities Babylon, Borsippa, Sippara, and Cutha in which they had sought shelter after their defeat. The defenders held out stubbornly for some time. When all was over, Sama5-sum-iikin, to avoid his brother's vengeance, set fire to his palace and perished in the flames.

8 Subiueation of Elam.[edit]

After stamping out the rest of the rebellion and restoring order throughout Babylonia and Chaldea, ^^^""""bani-pal directed his forces against ^f r-if Elam, where for the next two or three , , , T T years he carried on a war with Ummanaldas II., who had ascended the throne of Elam after slaying Indabigas, his predecessor. It is true that for a short time during this period Ummanaldas was driven into the mountains by Asur-bani-pal, who set Tammaritu on the throne of Elam in his stead ; but, as soon as the Assyrian army had withdrawn, Um- manaldas came out from his retirement, gathered his forces, and compelled Asur-bani-pal again to take the field against him. On the appearance of the Assyrian army Ummanaldas retired, allowing Asur-bani-pal to capture the cities and lay waste the country on his march. At length, however, he hazarded a battle. He met with a signal defeat and was again driven to take refuge in the mountains, while Susa and its ac- cumulated riches fell into the hands of the conquerors. ' Uy the will of Asur and Istar,' boasts Asur-bani-pal, 'into its

r daces I entered and sat myself down rejoicing. Then opened their treasure-houses, within which silver and gold, furniture and goods, were stored, which the former kings of E:iam and the kings who had ruled even to these days had collected and placed therein, whereon no other foe besides myself had set his hands : 1 brought it forth and as spoil I counted it.' He recovered also all the treasures with which amas-sum-ukTn and his predecessors had purchased Klamite support. Susa itself was rased to the ground ; the royal statues were carried to Assyria ; the groves were cut down and burnt, and the temples violated.

After the subjugation of Elam the annals of Asur- bani-pal relate a series of conflicts with Arabia (.Smith,

9 Arabia[edit]

^^"^- f ^^^^'^^- 256 #) This was the last great war in which this monarch is known to have engaged. At the beginning of his reign he apjxiars to have had friendly relations with the Arabian king Uaite' ; but on the revolt of .Samns-sum- ukin the latter joined the coalition against Assyria. Uaite' himself attacked Palestine, overrunning Edom and Moab, and penetrating almost as far N. as Damascus. Here, however, he was defeated by the Assyrians.

Leaving his camp standing, Uaite' fled alone to Nabataea. He appears, however, to have surrendered to ASur-bani-pal, who threw him into chains, and kept him a prisoner in a kennel with his hounds .'\diya his wife, and the king of Jsedar, his ally, sharing the same fate. The other division of the Arabian army, which had joined the forces of .Samai>-sum-ukin, shared his defeat and perished in Habylonia. Abiyate", their leader, surrendered to Asur-bani-pal, kissed his foot in token of submission, and was appointed king of Arabia in the place of Uaite'. No sooner, however, had he returned to his country, than he associated him- self with the Nabataeans in a series of joint attacks on the frontier of Assyria. Asur-bani-pal, therefore, crossed the Tigris with his army, and embarked on a difficult march through the -Syrian desert. The Assyrians, after some minor conflicts in which they were successful, eventually engaged the main body of the Arabian army in the mountains of Hukkuruna, to the SK. of Damascus. The Arabians were defeated, Abiyate" and Ayamu were taken, and A5ur-bani-pal set out for Assyria with immense numbers of captives and herds of cattle ; on his return camels were distributed throughout Assyria ' like sheep."

10. Closing years.[edit]

The annals conclude their record of the wars of Asur-bani-pal with an account of his triumphal procession through Nineveh in celebration of his victories.

Ummanalda.?, the Elamite, who had shortly before been captured, Tammaritu and Pa'e, two other captive Elamite kings, with Uaite', the king of Arabia, were fastened to the yoke of the chariot in which he rode. He then entered the temple of his gods, offering sacrifices and praising them for the triumphs they had vouchsafed him over his enemies.

Asur-bani-pal probably reigned till 625 B. c. ; but of his later years the royal records do not speak. It is im- possible to assign with certainty a reason for this silence. Possibly the kingdom, which had been shaken to its foundations by the revolt of Samas-sum-ukin during these years, showed signs of its approaching end. It is certain, at any rate, that the Medes, whom Asur- bani-pal had earlier in his reign defeated, again showed signs of activity (see Per.sia) ; and it is probable that during his reign the wild hordes of the Scythians descended from the N. and the NE. , slaying and plundering and carrying all before them. The question whether the empire of Assyria declined only under Asur- bilni-pal's successors, or had already become disintegrated before his death, is one that cannot be answered with certainty.

11. Policy and buildings, etc.[edit]

Turning from foreign politics to the internal condition of Assyria during the reign of Asur-bani-pal, we find tl

country superficially, at least, prosper-

^,'- ^Though the constant wars of Asur-bani-pal must have been a great drain on the manhood of the nation, his almost unvarying success resulted in a great accumulation of wealth ^the spoil of the conquered cities. Not only did his generals carry off" the gold and silver, and anything else of value that was portable ; not only did they drive to Assyria the flocks and herds of the whole country : the population itself they deported. It was the Assyrian policy (see above, i) to weaken the patriotic feeling of the conquered races in this way, and so to lessen the chances of revolt. A secondary object of the conquerors, however, had reference to Assyria herself, for huge bands of captives were brought back in chains to replenish the labouring populace at home. Many of these wretches found their way into the possession of private owners ; but the majority of them were retained as slaves by the king himself, who, like his predecessors, sought to gratify his desire for splendour and to perpetuate his name by the erection of huge buildings in the capital. The most important of these buildings of Asur-bani-pal was his own palace, which he built to the north of that of his grandfather Sennacherib the remains exist at the present day in the mound of Kuyunjik opposite the modern town of Mosul. The walls of its chambers he lined with sculptures in relief, representing his own exploits on the field of battle and in the chase, in which the details are most carefully and elaborately carved, while the designs themselves mark the acme of Assyrian art. Asur-bani-pal restored the palace of Sennacherib, strengthened the fortifications of Nineveh, and built or restored various temples throughout Assyria and Babylonia.

It was the custom of the classical historians to represent Asur-bani-pal as of an effeminate and luxurious disposition, spending his life at Nineveh in idleness and dissipation. The Assyrian records have dissipated this illusion. Though it is probable that many of his campaigns wore conducted by his generals, the king's personal valour in the field and in the hunt is undoubted. His skill as an administrator is testified by his organisa- tion of the inuiiense territory actjuired in his victorious campaigns. His palaces and buildings, even to this day, boar witness to his love for art and architecture. It is for none of those things, however, that his memory is honoured alxne that of other kings of Assyria. He was the first of his nation to make a systematic and universal study and collection of his country's literature, and it is to the lii^rary he collected in his palace that we owe the greater part of our knowledge of Babylonian and Assyrian literature and language. L. w. K.


, a sanctuary, within whose precincts those who take refuge may not be harmed without sacrilege.

1. General principle.[edit]

In early times, holy places, as the homos or haunts of the gods, extended over every- thing in thorn the protection of their own inviolability. Wild animals, and sometimes even domestic animals which strayed into them, shared this protection with debtors, fugitive slaves, and criminals, as well as the victims of unjust pursuit or violence. Manslayors sought refuge in them from the sword of the avenging kinsmen, and the right of asylum had an especial importance among those peoples in which the primitive law of blood vengeance was most persistently maintained.^ The right of asylum was possessed by different sanctuaries in various degrees, depending on proscription, the holiness of the place, and other circum- stances ; it sometimes extended to an entire city, or even to a mark beyond its walls. Even within the same sanctuary it was, of course, a greater sacrilege to drag the suppliant away from the altar or from the image of the god, or to slay him there, than merely to violate the sacred precincts. In later times the abuse of those privileges led to legal regulation and restriction (cp, c.j(., Tac. Ann. 860-64 414).

2. Early practice.[edit]

In Israel the oldest law (Ex. 21 12-14) recognises the riglu of asylum, but denies its protection to the murderer wUh malice aforethought : ' from

lx.'side my altar thou shall take him to die. ' Doubtless every altar of Yahwe (Ex. 20 24/. ) was an a.sylum ; but not all wore equally venerated, nor would the village high-place protect the suppliant as securely as the more famous sanctuaries. The only historical instances in the OT in which men who fear for their lives take refuge at God's altar are those of Adonijah (iK.l 50-53) and Joab (iK. 228-34; on the text cp and Klo. ). Adonijah was i^orsuaded to leave the asylum ; Joab, by Solomon's orders, was slain at the very altar.

3 In Dt[edit]

When the drastic reforms of Josiah (621 B.C.) destroyed and desecrated all the old holy places of

^^'^^^^ '" ^'^ kingdom except the temple in Jerusalem, one of the necessary measures of the reform laws was to provide a substitute for the asyla thus abolished ; since it was obviously impossible that manslayors from the remote parts of the land should escape to Jerusalem. Accordingly, six cities of refuge are appointed three E. of the Jordan (Ut. 441-43),'^ three W. of it (Dt. 192/) with eventual provision for three more, in Philistia, Phoenicia, and Coi'le-Syria (Dt. 19 8-10). The distinction between manslaughter and murder is clearly defined and illustrated , the case is

1 So, e.g., in Greece ; whilst in Rome, where blood vengeance was early abolished by law, the right of asylum was almost exclusively reserved for slaves.

2 These verses are out of place, and probably secondary ; sec Dec riiKONo.MV, f 20.

tried at the place whore the offence was committed, and if the verdict Ix; nmrdor the elders of the city in whose territory the defendant resides arc emjxjwered to take him from the asylum and deliver him to the next kinsman of the murdered man, as the natural executor of the sentence. '

The post-exilic law also (Nu. 359^, cp Josh. 2O-2-6) appoints six cities of refuge (ci:t:.i "^y), and defines the y _ crimes in substantially the same way ; but it differs radically from the Deutoronomic legisla- tion in providing (i) that the manslayer shall bo brought from his asylum to be tried l)ofore tlio ' congregation ' ('eddh) i.e., the religious conmiunity of the post-oxilic Jerusalem (Nu. 351224/ ) and (2) that at the deatli of the high priest the manslayer may without peril return to his home and estates (z'z/. 25 28).^* Further, it is ex- plicitly forbidden to compound the crime by taking a bloodwite, or to allow the homicide upon payment of a fine to leave the city of refuge before the death of the high priest.


The cities designated are, E. of the Jordan, Bezer, Ramoth in Gilead, and Golan in Bashan (Dt. 441-43 5 C"f f Josh. 208); W. of the Jordan, Kodesh in Galilee, Shechem, and Hebron (Josh. 2O7).

The last three wore all venerable sanctuaries, older, indeed, than the Israelite invasion, and wore probably chosen not only on account of their location, but also because they wore already asyla of established sanctity. It may bo assumed that this was the case also with the cities of refuge E. of the Jordan, of which, with the exception of Kamoth, we know little. Jewish scholars, with some plausibility, maintain that, besides those, all the other Levitical cities, of which there wore forty-four, many of them .seats of ancient sanctu- aries, possessed the right of asylum in a lower degree. * Whether this system was ever actually introduced in its whole extent is doubtful. Neither in the brief years between Josiah's reform and the fall of the Jmhvan kingdom nor after the restoration did Judah pos.soss more than a small jjart of the territory contemplated by these laws.

In the (jrook poriiKJ, and later (under Roman rule) many Hellenistic cities in Syria enjoyed the privileges of p ,, . asvlums. Not to speak of the famous b. raxaiieis. sa-^;ju_.^ry of Apollo and Artemis at Daphne, near Antioch, where the Jewish high priest, Onias, is said to have taken refuge (2 Mace. 433^, cp Strabo, .xvi. 26), the title dcn'Xos appears on coins (jf Ctv'sarea, Panias, Dioca;sarea (Sepphoris) in (ialileo, Ptolomais(.\cco), Dora (Dor), .Scythopolis (Beth-sheanI, Gadara and Abila in the Decapolis, and others. .\c- cording to Josephus [Ant. xm.'l^), this character was conferred on Jerusalem by Demetrius I. ; but i Mace. IO31 knows nothing of it. C'p. Ashtokkth, ^\siii;k.\ii. There is no recent and adequate work on this subject. / I'lc Law 0/ Asylum in Israel, by A. P. Rissell (I.eipsic, 1882) is a lalioured attempt to prove that the laws must all have originated in the age of Moses. See also S. Ohlenburg, DU Inl'lischcn Asylc in talmudischem Gnvande, 1895 ; and compare .Stengel, art. 'Asylon' in Pauly-Wissmva, Keal-encycl. der class. AllertuiHswiss. On the wide diffusion of the fundamental con- ception of asylums, and on its possible origin, see J. ( :. Frazer's article on ' i'he Origin of Totemism and Exogamy ' in J-'ort. Ret'., April 1899. G. V. .M.


(AcyrKPlTOC [Ti.J, -yNK. [WH]) is one of live who. with the brethren that are with them,' are saluted in Rom. 16 14. They seem to have been Christian heads of households, or perhaps class leaders of some sort.

.\syncritus figures in the list of the ' seventy disciples ' by the

1 In all these particulars there is a striking and instructive resemblance to the Athenian code of Draco (624 B.C.).

-In this provision it is evident that the sojourn in the city of refuge is regarded as a species of exile, a punishment which was removed by a general amnesty at the ascension of the new high priest, the real sovereign. Accordingly, in the Mishna, and in Jewish jurisprudence generally, residence in the city of refuge is railed .iWr?, 'exile,' cp e.g. Makkoth,^\.

3 See Mainionides, Yad IJazaka, Hilkoth Roseah, ch. 8.

Pseudo-Dorotheus as bishop of ' Urbania," and in that of the Pseudo- Hippolytus as bisnop of ' Hyrcania ' ^doubtless the preferable reading). In the great Greek Merura he is com- nicinorated aloiit; with Herodion and Agabus on 8th April.


(TJXn), Gen. 50 lo. See Abel-Mizkaim.


(atap [A]), I Esd. 528 RV = Ezra 242. Ater. 2.


(HTJi;, 'crown'; atara [BL], erepA [A]), seioiui wife of Jerahmeel (iCh. 226). In genealogical phraseology this signifies that the clan occupied a new region (cp Caleb's wife Ephrath ; and see .\zrBAii, Calkh), and presumably, like Caleb, it moved farther N. , in which case we may compare Atarah with .\ rkOTH-BicTH-JoAB, mentioned along with Bethlehem, etc., in iCh. 254-

ATARGATIS, Temple Of[edit]

(to ATeprATiON [AV]). 2 Mace, rjjo; cp i Mace. 543 A In the walled enclosure of this trans- Jordanic temple the Ammonites and Arabians defeated by Judas the Maccabee, after throw- ing away their arms, took refuge (see Ashtakoth, i). It was in 164 B. c. , the year after the re-dedication of the temple at Jerusalem, which had animated the foes of the church-nation to a deadly {persecution (i Mace. 52). Judas had already acted with the severity of the old Israelitish law of war, dealing with the trans-Jordanic towns and the heathen part of their peoples as Joshua had dealt with Jericho (i Mace. 5s 28 ; cp Josh. 624, JE), but with the added zeal against idolatry justified by Dt. 75 123. Naturally, this champion of monotheism, like his successor Jonathan at Ashdod (x Mace. 10 83), had no scruple in violating the temple precincts. The unarmed multitude he slew (2 Mace), and the temple- buildings, with all the objects polluted by idolatry, he burned ( i Mace. ).

Atargatis (nnjnny; cp Vogii^, Syr. Cent. n. 3; also injnny ; cp ZD.\IG ['52J 6 473 / ), to whom the temple l)clonged, is in The Spfaker's Commentary (n. on I Mace. 526) identified with Astarte. This is a natural error, for Carnaim is no doubt Ashteroth-Karnaim so called from the addiction of the town to the worship of various forms of Ashtoreth or Astarte. We know, how- ever, that these deities were different ; for at Ascalon there were temples of Astarte and of AtargAtis (DerkCto) side by side. All that is true is that the first part of the name .Vtargfttis {i.e., ^rlv) is the Aramaic equivalent of the Phoenician and Heb. [n]inr;' without the fem. end- ing (see PiiffiNici.A) ; but the religious significance of this Atnr ('.Vttar for 'Athtar) is profoundly modified by its union with 'Athe (usually written ,iny or tiv)' a Palmyrene divinity whose name is well attested, and occurs in many proper names. ^ AtargStis is, in fact, that form of Astar[te] which has absorbed into itself the characteristics of another deity called 'Athe (cp Ashtar- Kamosh in the inscription of Mesha). Lucian, in his De Dea Syra, has left us a minute account of the temple and worship of the Syrian goddess (who was no doubt Atargatis) at Hierapolis (Mabug), which illustrates the Jewish hatred of it.

The connection of this 'omnipotent and all-producing goddess' (Apiileiu.s) with sacred life-giving waters has been studied by Prof. W. R. Smith (^RS(^) 172-175). See also Prof. W. Wright, TSBA 6438/.; Haethgen, Beitr. 68^. 256/; Baudissin, art. ' Atargatis,' in Herzog-Plitt, PRE vol. i. (who notices the differ- ent forms under which the goddess was represented) ; Puchstein, ZA !) 420 ; Roscher, Lex. s.v. 'Astarte,' 4 (a). t. K. C.


(niTOi;, 'crowns' or 'wreaths,' cp Is. 28 1 Zech. 611 14, etc. ; aVapcoO [BAL]).

1. iCh. 254. See Atkotii-Beth-Jo.\b.

2. Ataroth-Addar (tin ni-ipy. Jo.sh. 16s, aa-rapoiO Kai tpoK [R], ar. k. aSap [A], ar. a8ap [L] ; 18 13, AV Ataroth-Adar, fiaarapioOopfX [B]. ar. aSdap [A], ar. (Soap [L], called also simply Atakotii, Jo.sh. 16 2, Xarapwdei [B, where x 's all that is left of 'Dnw]), perhaps the present 'A/drd on the high road from

1 The oldest centre of the wonship of 'Athe is thought by Hommel {PSBA, 1897, p. 8 1 ) to have oeen the E. of Asia Minor, whence the cult spread to W. Asia Minor and N. Syria.

Jerusalem to Bethel, 3^ m. S. of Bethel, and 6 E. of the upper Beth-horon (see Gu6rin, Judie, Ztf. ; but on the other side Robinson, 2 314). As it is a lien- jamite locality, we might plausibly identify Aduar with the Benjamite clan-name Aduar, Aku [y.f.].

3. An unknown site (ni-c;;. Josh. I67, affrapwd [B]) between Janoah and Naarah, on the north-eastern frontier of the territory of Ephraim.

4. A city of Gad (ni-.oy, Nu. 32334, arapuv [A] 34, aarapwO [F<1]), mentioned in the inscription of Mesha (/. II, TOO]}) as recontjuered by him, along with a ' land of 'Ataroth (/. 10) dwelt in from of old by the men of Gad.' The name survives as that of a mountain, and a ruined site 'Attdrus, at the top of the Wady Zerka Main, 10 m. E. of the Dead Sea. (Tristram, .\/oiib, 272-276.) The US (Eus. 21451, acrrapwO : Jer. 87 17) wrongly identify with no. i, presumably confusing Joab with Job, whom tradition associates with Ashtaroth- Karnaim. See Atroth-Shophan. g. a. s.


("IPK, 66 ; athp [BA] ; ' left-handed ' ? cp Judg. :ji5 Heb., and the Lat. name Sca;vola).

1. The B'ne Ater of Hezekiah (l^'pin"'? "ICK:2 ; arrjp tu e^ia

[RKA]), a family in the great post-exilic list (see Ezka, ii. 8 9, 81:), Ezra 'J 16 (a^fp tw e^eict |L])=Neh. "21 (a^rjp tu t^exia [L]=i Esd. 615 (oT7;f> eftov [A], a^-qp t. [B], a^rjp t<j) t^cKia

(L), Aterezias, RV .'^tek of Ezekias. Atkr Hkzkkiah, AV Atbk Hizkijah ('Tptn IBK), appears also among the signa- tories to the covenant (see Ezra, i. 7), Neh. 10 17 [18] (airip t. [BN], arrip e. [A], a^rip efexias [L]).

2. The B'ne Ater (viol arrip (BKA], vioi of.jp [E]), a family of doorkeepers in the great post-exilic list (see Ezra, ii. 9) (C"l>.'L"'rt '32), Ezra 2 42 (iiiot arr. [A]) = Neh. 745 (viol arTjp viov arrjp '[B])=iEsd.5 28, Jatal, RV Atar (om. B, arap [A]


(to AreprAXiON [V.\]), 2 Mace. I226 RV, A\' Ataugatis.


(^THTA [A]), i Esd. 528 RV = Ezra242, Hatita.


("^jnr, 'inn'?[Ges.]; noo [B], nomBc [TR], Ae^r t'^]' NAreB [L]), one of the towns of Judah to which David sent a part of the Amalekite spoil (iS. 3U3ot). According to Wellhausen, Driver, and Budde, it is the Ethek {i/.i:) of Josh. 1042 {lOaK [B], adtp [AL]), 197 (tfOfp [BJ. (ifO. [A], ecrep [L]) ; these scholars decline to decide which of the variants is correct, though Budde retains -;n>' in the text of i S. The voo, voixfie, and vaytfi of certain MSS may, however, point to a various reading Nob. Gu(5rin visited a place called Nulhi, near Khai-ds, and \\'. of the Kh. K'lld (Keilah), which, he thinks, may be meant by vofi^e {/udi'e, 8349). That there must have been several places called Nob is generally admitted. Klostermann suggests 2:y, yi.v.iB (Josh. 11 21), a place near Hebron (Hebron follows), and the question arises whether Nob itself may not Ix; a shortened form of Anab (see Nob). In Josh. 11 21 (5" gives ava^o}0 = r\2:i!. out of which both pn Tociien [17. T'.] and -^nv Athach may perhaps have arisen by the loss of one letter and the transposition and slight corruption of other letters. It so happens that there are to-day two 'Anabs S. of Hebron called the great and little. These may represent the Anaboth or Grape- towns. T. K. c.


( n^nr, 39, meaning obscure ; cp Gray, //PN297: A0eA[B]. -Ai [A], -ee[N]. AGAPAceAcCL]; y4Ti/^JA.'i), in list of Judahite inhabitants of Jerusalem (see Ezra, ii. 5 [b], i5[i]), Neh. 11 4= iCh. 94t. Uthai Cn-li; ; rooe[e]i [BA], oyei [E]). where differ- ent links are given Ijctwecn him and Perez.


(in^^nr, nhrsa, 39. 5=: -vahw^ is great' ; cp with Che., Ass. etellu, 'great, high,' also ' lord,' used of gods and kings [Del. Ass. HWli, J.t'.]). I. {yodoKia. [BAL], but -BOX. [A vid. in 2 K.lli3]). Daughter of .Ahab and Jezebel, and wife of Jehoram, king of Judah (2 K. 81826 11 1^13*0). The death of AilA/.iAii (</.?., 1) (lc[)nvf<l Athaliah of her proud position as qiit-en- mother (nya;). Having apparently no other son whom she could place on the throne, she dottrnnni'd to put to death all the surviving nuile nicnilxrrs of the royal family, and to govern in her own name. For six years (841-836 B.C.) she maintained herself on the throne a singular fact which raises cjuestions more easily asked than answered. We hear of nothing done by her for her adopted country ; but whose interest was it to preserve the memory of this ? On the story of her deposition and violent death, see JoASM (i). Observe that the massacre of the royal princes by Athaliah, adopted by the Chronicler in 2 i li. '22 10. is inconsistent with the massacre attributed to Jehoram in 2 Ch. 21 4 and the captivity of all Jehoram s sons but Ahaziah, imagined in 2 Ch. 21 17.

2. In a geiiealocy of Uk.sjami.n [ 9 ii. ft], i Ch.836 (oyoSoAia [Bl, yo9oA.a|Al. owa[l.l).

3. .-V family in Kzra's caravan (see Kzka, i. 2, ii. J 15 [i] if), K/r.iK; (afl.Att ll!|, a0\ia [A], yotfoKiou [L])=I Ksd.833 JuTimilAs lA' (yoeoAiou [UA], -liov. [L]).


RV Attiiakias (&TeApiAC [HM)- ^ Ksd. ;".4.j- ]:zia26!, Tikshatha {(/.v.).


(anriN), in the expression 'NH TQl (Nu. 21 it I is t.iktn by R\' for a place-name (' by the way of Atharim ' ; so qAon AOApeiN [ HJ. O. -el^^ [AFL]) ; by AV and R\'"- (following 'I'arg. and Syr.) as equivalent to C'fn { ' [the way of J the spies '). That onnun should have been substituted for nnnn is. however, highly im- probable. Dillmann has suggested that the word may be connected with the .\rab. athnr, ' vestige' or ' footprint,' and proposes to translate ' the caravan path. ' The expression may Ije corrupt (see Kadic.sh, 3 i. ).


(aGhnoBioc [AN\];, friend of An- tioclms \'1I. SidCtes, and his envoy to Simon tlic liigh I'ricst I I Mace. 15 28-36).


(a0hnai). \\'e nmst repeat the words of

Sir.il) d\\d 7ap t's ir\i]Oo% eiJ.wiirTii}v tGjv irfpl rrjs

1 Its art '"'^^f'^^ Tai'Trjs vpLvoi'/ji.^vuvTeKaldiafioo)-

unappreciated. ^""' T*"? '^^^'""if" (P- 3?6). There IS, mtieed, an essential unpropricty involved in making Paul's visit to Athens the occasion for a ri'sumif of the architectural and artistic treasures of the city.i 'V\hat the apostle might have seen we can learn from I'ausanias ; what he did see may safely be reduced to a minimum. ' .\ Hebrew of the Hebrews,' who, 'after the most exact sect,' 'lived a Pharisee," could at txjst feel only indifference to the history of the heathen, and his spirit could not fail to l>e ' stirred ' at the fre<juent signs of ignorance of (jod visible on every hand in their cities, even though he had been brought up 'at the feet of a Kabban Gamaliel, whose liberality of sentiment is, after all, largely problema- tical. Not one of the associations which are valuable to us crowded into the apostle's mind as he landed at PhalOrum or Pira:us. And the many-sided art of Athens had no message for a man of his intensity and whole-hearted devotion to the task of destroying the paganism in which that art was rootetl.

Much more valuable, and more difficult also, is it to realise the spiritual atmosphere in which Paul found 2 Intellectual '^'"^'^"'^- The ixjriod of Athenian great- atmosphere. IT '" P'" ^^ '""S ^^" P""^'- .Athens now only a free city of the Iirovince of Achaia was not even the seat of the governor (Str. 398). In art and in literature also she was no longer the schoolmistress of nations ; in every depart- ment of mental activity the creative faculty was dead. In the domain of philosophy alone the manipulation of the dry Iwnes of logical science continued to give the semblance of life. Here also the spring of Athenian wisdom had run dry. The masters of the schools Still more would this remark apply to the only places in the or where Athenians are referrcU to (2 .Macc.O i 9 15) : on the reading (Vg. has Aniiockenum in 61) see Grimm, ad locc.

sprang from Asia, Syria, or the Eastern Archipelago ; (jrc-ec-e proper was representetl exclusively by third- or fourth-rate nien. Nevertheless, for centuries Athens continued to be regarded as the chief seat of Greek philosophy ; nor did she renounce her claim as a semin- ary of philosophy to the most imjwrtant place, even when she had to share that honour with other cities, such as .\lexandria. Koine, Rhodes, and Pauls own 1 arsus. The whole city, indeed, resembled one of our University towns at an epoch of intellectual stagnation. The so- called education of a Roman was incomplete unless some time had been spent in loitering through the groves and porticoes of Athens. ' Two schools in particular, markedly different and decided in their peculiarities, stood opiK)sed to each other the school of the Stoics \\\ ho insisted almost exclusivelyon the universal clement), and that of the Epicureans, who gave prominence to the individual element in man, pursuing happiness by looking w ithin. The Stoics regarded man exclusively as a think- ing being ; the Epicureans, as a creature of fc-eling ' (Zeller, The Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics, 27). Probably in no other city of the world at that time was it easier to meet ' certain philosophers of the Epicureans and of the Stoics' (Acts 17 18). A well-known and curious parallel to the ajxjstle's visit is afforded by the Life of .Apollonius of Tjana. On his way up from his ship to the city Apollonius met many pliilo-soijliers. some reading, some perorating, some arguing, all of whom greeted him {Phdoi. lit. 4 17). In a word, Athens at the time of Paul's stay, and more notably afterwards, was a city of pedagogues ; and 'le pedagogue est le moins convertissable des hommcs ' (Kenan, .S7. I'aul, 199). In the midst of this academic element Paul found himself alone (i Thess. 3i). For his inner life at this time we must look to the Epistles, not to Acts. He was more attracted by the eager artisans of Thcssalonica and the earnest men of business in Coriiuh than by the versatile anti superlicial schoolmen of .\theiis (cp 1 I liess. I9). Still, it would be unfair to attribute his fa. lure entirely to the Athenian character' (Dcmades said that the crest of Athens should have Ix-en a great tongue) : allowance must l)e made for the inevitable exaggeration of the reformer, whether in morals or in politics : his perspective is distorted. Nor is it fair to count it blame lo .\thens that she was regariled as ultra-religious, bn.iJiha.i)xoviaripo\<%, Acts 1 7 22 (this opening compli- ment of the apostle's speech admits of rich illustration;. -' It would be a mistake to see in the altar dedicated to the unknown god (.Acts 17 23) a desire to include in their Pantheon any and every deity that might possibly be worthy of honour (see Unknown (iou). Worship found expression in art, not in the minutiiv of formalism. Athens was, therefore, pre-eminently a city of statues, and Renan is right in remarking that the prejudices of Paul as a Jew blinded him : he took all the statues he saw for 'objects of worship' [aefiacr/xaTa, Acts 17 23 ) We are not guilty of ' corrupt Hellenism ' in attempting a true estimate of the a]X)stles altitude.

3. Paul's failure[edit]

.\n explanation of the disap[)ointing effect of Paul's teaching nmst be sought in the position of the Jewish

colony in Athens, and not solelv in

B^-ratetl commonplaces on .\thenian character and philosophy. The colony was evidently not a large one ; there would Ik; little to attract Jews thither in preference to Corinth. Paul s work among his countrymen in Athens was slight : he ' conversed ' w ith them {5t(\^yfro, .\ctsl7i7). No trace of any building which could have lxH;n a synagogue has been found, w ith the exception of the nuuble {/nscr.yt. A'om. A tit. 404)

1 Qtiotations might be multiplied to illustrate Athenian loquacity (Acts 17 21; cp Thuc. i. 70, i^wT(poiro<ot ; Ar. t.q. 1263, Tjj K<x>}i'atwi' iroAei = ' Gapcnians ' ; Dciiiosth. t'kil. \. 10, 43 ; Mcnand. />. Geoix- 9 ; Plutarch fiaaim).

  • I'aus. i. 17 1, 0to\)% iv<Tt^ov<Tiv aAAwy trAror : f.^., they

erected an altar lo .Mercy ; i.l.'4 3 ' KOrfvuioi^ trtpKrvoTtpov ti ij Toiv oAAotf ii Ta Otia i<TTi (7irov>)( : I'hilos. / it. vi. 2, i^tAo<h>Ta( : ^ul. A/isa/>. ^iA6ot ; ytl. f^ ar. Hist. v. 17, Toaovror V AOiifatoit Jcio-ifatfiofias.

containing the words avrr) ij wvXr] rov Kvplov (Ps. II820); this might have iMjlongcd to the entrance of a synagogue. The Hellenic belief &ira^ davJvTOi ovth (crr dvaffracris was not, in Athens, reduced by the powerful solvent of Judaism. Hence, the moment the apostle uttered the words ' raised from the dead ' his audience revolted. Elsewhere his difficulties centred round another point whether Jesus was the Messiah or not. In Athens, where Jewish thought had no hold, the idea of the resur- rection of the body was unfamiliar least so to the Stoics, although it would ! an anachronism to quote here the remarkable approach made by such Stoics as Seneca to Christian modes of thought. Little wonder, then, that Paul's work at .Vlhens was a comparative failure, and that he felt it to be so (Acts 17 34 i Cor. 23). His visit to the city was a mistake ; and perhaps it was from the first due to accident. In the hurried departure from Heroea (.Acts 17 10^), there would be little time for making plans or for choosing modes of transport, and the apostle's abode in Athens seems to have Ijeen largely, if not entirely, due to the necessity he was under of waiting for his companions (Acts 17.5/.). W. J. w.


c^r^v = n;7nr, 39, 52, athah.vh, ,/. v. ),

in list of those with foreign wives (see Ezra, i. 5, end), Ezral028 {da\L | H], -/x [X], o(^a\t [A], 0eXea [L];


l I-:sd. 9 29 .\MATIIKIS, RV E.MATHKIS

(efxaeOis [H], -aOeis [A], OeXeei [L]).


(ATect^A [BA]). I Esd.532 = Ezra254. HA-TIIMI A.


(^33, e5iAACKeiN ; "123, (5 e5iA(\CM(\; NT kataAAaph)- The e.x- [)ression ' to atone ' (nBs) generally describes the effect of the sacrifices in removing guilt. The pure religious idea of atonement, however, as \V. R. Smith remarks (OTVCCi 439) is to be found in the Prophets (and, surely, in Ps. 51 ; see in: i [2] 2 [3] 7 [8] 9 [10] ; also, with nsD in 603 7838 799). There it has no relation to .sacrificing, and we cannot fail to see the appro]jriate- ness of this scholar's explanation of ^^^ kippei- as mean- ing primarily ' to wipe out." This is in accordance with Syriac usage ; but the only OT passage in which the sense of 'wipe out' is possible is in Is. 28 18, where the reading is much disputed (Houbigant, Lowth, Du. [but not Di., Che.] read nrni instead of isdi), and where it is at any rate open to us to obtain the sense ' wiped out ' indirectly from the common reading ( ' covered over' ; cp Gen. 614). The usual view is that a propitiation is ex- pressed by kipper metaphorically, as a ' covering ' (cp Ar. kafiira : in i. stem tt'xU, in ii. expiavit), as when Jacob, fearing Esau's anger, says, ' I will cover his face with a present' (cp Gen. 20 16 Job924). The Hebraistic usage of the word is well set forth by Driver, Dent. 425, 439. W. R. Smith's note in O 776' (^' 438-440 also deserves attention ; but OTJC^^ 381, etc., should here be com- ])ared.

In the NT ' atonement ' is given by .W for KaraWayr], Rom. 5 11; but RV, with a proper regard to consist- ency, substitutes 'reconciliation'; cp 2 Cor. 5 18/^, 'the ministry, the word, of reconciliation.' Elsewhere KaroXXayij occurs in Rom. 5 10/. 11 15 ; cp Col. 1 21 ; it is hardly one of (5's words, being found only in 2 Mace. 020. See further, Atonemk.nt, Day of, Mkkcy- sic.vr, Ransom, Sacrifice ; and cp WRS, /^e/. SemJ"^' 237, 320, 437, etc. ; also We. CH 335/

See also Ritschl, Die christl. Lehre von d. Recktfcrtigting u. d. Vcrsfihnung,\\.; Weiss, Bihl. Theol. 0/ NT 1 4x9-452 J 202-216; D.-ile, flu Doctrine 0/ the Atonement; Wilson, Ilulscan Lectures on the Atonement (1899). The semi-popuKir literature is extensive.


(DnSSH DV ; later, l33ri DV ; in Talmud N2"} NO'r, 'the great day,' NOV, ' the day,' and N3T X01V, ' the great fast ' ; cp Acts279, H NHCTeiA ;^s the only fast enjoined by the law).

The law relating to this day (Lev. 1(!), which as it now stands connects with the story of .Nadab and

1 Ana.lvBiB '^'^'^" '" Lev. 10 1-7, is not in its present ' fi ^ form a homogeneous unity.' This is evident, not only from the duplicate verses 6 and 1 1 , and from peculiarities of the arrange- ment, but also from the contents of the law.

The chapter as a whole treats of two quite distinct subjects : viz., (i) the warning of the high priest that he is to enter the Holy of Holies not at pleasure, but only under certain specified precautions ; (2) the ordering of a yearly Day of Atonement, for which an exact ritual is prescribed, i. is contained in 71V. 1-4 6 12 13 34 <5, and belongs to Po ; 2. is itself composite, (a) ft'. 29-34 a give complete directions for the annual observance of a day of fasting and humiliation, on which the sanctuary and people are to be cleansed by ' the priest who shall be anointed ' (cp8i2) i.e., the high priest of the time; the atonement is supposed by the lawgiver to Ix: carried out in accordance with the ritual (which, originally, immediately preceded it) of Lev. 9, an.', with the law of the sin-offering laid down in Nu. 1624. On critical grounds this law also must be held to belong to Pj. {b) v~j. 5 7-10, 14-28, on the other hand, by which the quite peculiar ritual of the Day of Atonement is prescribed, are the work of a much later hand.

Why and when these various portions of the present law were combined into one are questions that will be discussed elsewhere (see Leviticus, {5 6/., and Hexa- teuch) ; the important fact, gained from critical analysis, is that the Day of Atonement, as far as its ceremonies are described in Lev. 16, is of comparatively recent origin, and the result of a very interesting development.

This conclusion is supported by a variety of con- siderations, [a) That the pre-exilic worship knew of . - no such day as is descrilxid in Lev. 16 is evident, not only from the alisence of all mention of it (an omission which cannot be accidental, the other high days being referred to), but also from the fact that consciousness of sin and sense of need of a propitiation, which are the necessary conditions of such an institution, first became prominent in the time of Ezekiel (see Fea.st.s, 11). {b) The earliest trace of public days of fasting and humiliation in the exilic period ajjpears in Zech. 735819; the four yearly fasts there mentioned were com- memorative of the national calamities at the fall of Jerusalem, and appear to have been still observed in post-exilic times.

ICzekiel, in this as in other respects the forerunner of the priestly law, had enjoined two atonement-days (the first day of the first month and the first of the seventh, 4u i8-2o).2 A young bullock as a sin-offering was to be brought, and with its blood were to be smeared the posts of the house, the four corners of the altar, and the posts of the gate of the inner court 'so shall ye make atonement for the house'; together with this, certain sin-offerings for prie.st and people are enjoined for the passover-day (Ezek. 45 22).

(<r) When we turn to the detailed account of the reading of the law in Neh.8/, we find mentioned a joyous celebration on the first day of the seventh month, and a celebration of the Feast of Taljernacles on the fifteenth, without any reference to a Day of Atone- ment on the tenth.* On the twenty-fourth day, on the other hand, a general fast with confession of sin was held, by no means in accordance with the ritual of Lev. 16 14-28. This makes it clear that what stood in the Law-book used by Ezra (P) was not the Levitical ritual (Lev. 16 14-28), but only a precept of a yearly fast- day with sabbatic rest in other words, the precept laid down in Lev. 16 29-34.

The change from the tenth to the twenty-fourth at the first celebration is intelligible enough on the a.ssumption that the fast-day was not at first so prominent in the law-book as it afterwards became in Lev. 1(> 14-28.

Even in the still later list of high days in Lev. 2827 and Nu. 297 we do not find any reference to the specific ritual of Lev. 16 14-28; the tenth day of the

1 .See Benzinger's .study, ZATW ^ts/. ['89), and cp Stade, Gl'l ! 258, and Lkviticis, g 2.

2 The text of Kzek. Vi 20 should lie emended in accordance with (SBAO, gr,n3 <y3tr3-

3 Cp Keuss, Gesch. dcr heil. .?tAr.(2) v^oof. (Holzinger, Hex. 750, note, differs).

seventh month is simply marked by fasting, sabbath ri'st. and the usual sin-offerings. I'he Day of Atone- m<'nt fioscribed in Lev. 16 must have lx?en the result of a long [iroccss of development, and the ])ericope formed by Lev. 1(55 7-'o 4-28 niust lelong to the very latest portions of 1'. The precept in Kx. 30 lo is, of course, a still later adtlition to the ritual, enjoining that the blood of the sin-offering should also be applied to the altar of incense.

3. Fundamental principle, etc.[edit]

It is a significant fact that, as the later title proves (see aljove, i), the Day of Atonement became the '"" in^'ortant in the ecclesiastical year ; Jewish feeling in the later age inevitably led to tliis. Now :is to the meaning of the law. The terms of Lev. 16 permit no uncertainty. The law has reference to the thorough purilication of the jxiople and sanctuary. The sin- offerings throughout the year have left many unknown or 'secret' sins; and since the people, the land, and, above all, the sanctuary are rendered impure by sin (Lev. l.'isi Nu. 19i3-2o Kz. 45 18 Lev. 16io), there was a danger that the sacrificial services might lose their eflic.acy and e\en that Yahwe might desert his defiled sanctuary. This was the re.ason for the institution of the Day of Atonement that the Israelites might annually make a complete atonement for all sin, and that the sanctuary might Ije cleansed (Lev. I633). The leading idea of the entire Priestly Law found here its best expression. The Day of Atonement cjuickened, on the one hand, the {xjoi^le's sense of sin and dread of Vahwe's avenging holiness, and, on the other hand, their assurance of reconciliation and of their renewed holiness. This holiness was guaranteed by their re- ligious system, the etTicacy of which, marred by sin, was again restored by this solenmity of expiation. It is the key-stone of the whole system, the last consequence of the |)rinciple, ' Ye shall be [ceremonially] holy, for I am holy. '

If we turn to the ritual, we can without difTiculty discover its fundamental ideas. The liigh priest, after bathing, puts on i)lain white linen garments instead of his elaborate vestments, for he is to appear as a humble suppliant before the Holy One whom only the pure may ajiproach. Of course, before lie can make atonement for the people he must first do so for himself and for his 'house' i.e.. for the entire priesthood. On entering the Holy of Holies he is to envelop in a cloud of holy incense-smoke the place of God's personal presence, lest he die. The ritual of blood-sprinkling, as far as it is peculiar to this day, is only an elaboration, recjuired by the extreme closeness of the approach to (Jod, of the usual procedure in sacrificial offerings. The conception has been explained by Roljcrtson .Smith * as an inherit- ance from primitive ideas about sacrifice. See Sacki- FlCK, 22. I. B.

The Day of Atonement has been called by Delitzsch the (;><)(1 lYiday of the Law. This can hardly be

4. Propitiatory '=^'.[edit]

"'f'"e'l ^^ith regard to its earlier

Character. P*-;"a- ^^^ocxX Friday was not in- stituted to restore the impaired cere- monial holiness of the community ; it had from the first a reference to the individual and to spiritual religion. It w.as otherwise with the Yom Kij^piirim, even if its institutors were not personally opjxjsed to the supple- menting and counteracting agency of teachers of a nobler religion. We will not deny that the poetic prayers composed for the ' great ' day ' during the Dispersion touch the Christian deeply from their extra- ordinary spiritual dejith and their sense of individual religion. These prayers, however, are no evidence of the spirit of the original institution. It is not necessary to dwell on the A/azel-ritual. The ritual of the Day of Atonement has grown (this can Ix: shown by literary analysis as well as by archaeological con-

1 Rtl. St->,t.{-2) 40/: 25 38s

siderations),^ and the Azazel-ritual is the latest portion of it. 'We might perhaps supixise tli.it those who con- tinuc-d Lzra's work were not up to his level ; but when we look at Lev. 1629-34rt, which is the earliest part of the law (cp 9y_^.), we still hnd in it provisions op|x>sed in tendency to the pure religi<jn of the greatest prophets and psalmists. I'he procedure with the blood may Ije arch.i'ologically explained so as to minimise the shock which it causes us ; it may also \xi spiritualised, so as to assume a totally new appearance ; but it is, as has been stated, out of harmony with that prophetic religion which is restated in I'ss. 40 50 51. It is also in this part of the law that we find an expression which, when correctly explained, condenses the uns|jiritual elements of the law into a nutshell. It is the expressirm sabbath iabbdthon, which may well Ix; more ancient than the day to which it is api)lied. k\' renders I-ev. l(J3i thus : ' It is a sabbath of solemn rest unto you, and ye shall afflict your souls; it is a statute for ever.' Jastrow {Amer. Joiirn. Theol. \^\i ff. ['98]) has made it probable that Sabbaik and sabba/Jion answer the latter more exactly'- than the former to the Haby- lonian ceremonial term hibatlum, which means a day of propitiation with reference to the dies itefasti of the kings. If so, the terms iabbath and lablathCm, which are derived from nar, to rest, imply that by the usages on the day to which these terms are applied, rest is given to an angry (jod.^ The expression 'to afHict the soul' {'inrid nfphesh), used in the same verse, is not less archaic in spirit, even if much later in use ; * it was adopted by late theologians as a synonym of the old word D1S. 'to fast.' This, too, implies an un- spiritual doctrine viz., that by denying the body certain generally desired goods the mind of a deity can be inlluenced by his worshipper.

To examine the full force of the ceremonies of the Day of Atonement, archa'ologically viewed, is not our purpose. Our purpose is to emphasise their strictly propitiatory character. That same character liclonged, according to the Jewish liturgy, to the ritual of New Year's Day (AW has-Sauah). It was belie\ed,* through the influence of Babylonian mythology, that the fate of man was decreed on Ntnv Year's Day (the festival of Creation), and that on the Day of .Atonement the decree was 'scaled.' No wonder that the nine ilays which intervened Ixjtween the first day of the seventh month (New Year's Day) and the tenth (the Day of Atonement) were regarded by the Jews as penitential days. Precisely when this view of New Year's Day as the Day of Destiny began to l)e taken, we know not. Probably it began among the Jews of the Eastern Dispersion. It gives a new force, however, (i) to the collocation of Yom K'ippiirhn and RoS /Ms-Sdndh in the same month, and (2) to the designation of both days (see Lev. 2^24) as iabbdthon. To what extent, if at all, the ritual of these days is a revival of primitive custom, is obscure. It is quite possible that in primitive times Israelitish ritual, at any rate in certain places, approxi-

1 The literary .analysis of Lev. l(i is passed over in SBOT (Heb. ; 1894); m the article ' D.iy of Atonement ' in Hastin^is, Dli\-2ooh \'ofi\, the omission has l>een supplied from Ben- zinger. Driver's moderating remarks, however, do not affect the position taken up by Stade and i'.enzinger, who are both fully awake to the incompleteness of merely literary analysis of ancient laws. The deficiency noted in SIH ' /' is also to be observed in the Leviticus in Kautzsch's new translation (NS). Cp Lkviticcs.

2 Sabbath, acc. to Jastrow, ' is the distinctively Hebrew name given to a particular Sabhdthfn ' (c/*. cif. 34^/.). .4abbathon = liab. iahalium; the terminations corresjwnd (Jastrow, 332X

3 The most common term for ' propitiation ' was * //M/' (lit. ' rest of the heart ') ; iliii ( = CV> ' day ") niih libhi has the sense of ' day of propitiation ' ( lastrow, 330).

It occurs in Is. 68^510 Ps. 3513; also in Ix;v. I631 282732 Nu. 297. That the historical Isaiah, in disparaging fasts, does not use the phrase (Is. 1 13, but cp ) is significant.

5 See KBZn/. (Marduk comes at Z.-igmuk, the beginning of the year, 'to destine the fate of my life'); cp Karppc on 'Jewish New Year' in Rev. S/tn., and Jensen, KosmoL 84- 86, 238.

mated rather more to Babylonian than was afterwards the case. One could wish this to be true, for it would then be easier to account for the ceremonies of the Vom Kippiirim, so archaic in spirit, and so contrary to the tendency of I er. 31 31-34 Kzek. 8625-27 Mic. 719.

At any rate, the propitiation-days of the post-exilic Israelites were nobler than those of the Babylonians, in _ , . as far as they were for the benefit of

6. comparative ^j^^ =[edit]

^^^^-^^ people, and not merely for nobiUty. jj^^j ^f j,^^ xxAcxs. The Babylonian regulations of the 'days of appeasement' {mbattum = }in32') bear upon the conduct of the king ; but, since ' the whole congregation is holy," those of the Yom Kippiirim necessarily touch the conduct of all faithful Jews and even of 'sojourners (Lev. I629). In this respect the Jewish religion has a much closer affmity with the Zoroastrian than with the Babylonian or the Assyrian. If the provision for giving the uneducated populace a visible sign of the forgiveness of all its sins and the removal of their punishment appears to us barbaric and unspiritual (see .Vzazki., i) if, too, the populace was only too likely to misinterpret the comprehensive ex- pressions of Lev. 16 162130, and to think that all sins whatever were cancelled by the ritual we must remember (as regards Azazel) the compromising spirit natural to large educational churches, and (as regards the other point) the difficulty in an l-Lastern language of guarding against all possible misinterpretations of phrases. A misinterpretation it certainly is when a Mishna treatise declares that

' The goat which is di.smi.ssed atones for all (other) trans- gressions, as well the light as the grave, the intentional and the unintentional, those foreknown and tho.se not foreknown ' {Shebiioth 1 6).

The analogy of Lev. 4213 etc. Nu. I524 distinctly shows that in such propitiatory ordinances it is accidental transgressions (,ij;e'3), not deliberate transgressions (ncn "vy), that are referred to ; and in Yomd%() we read, ' He who says, I will sin, the Day atones ; to him the Day will bring no atonement. ' ^

In NT times the Jews had advanced religiously beyond the contemporaries of Ezra. In the Epistle to the Hebrews and in that of Barnabas we meet with a Christian gnosis ; but there was, no doubt, also an allegorising gnosis that was Jewish. There must have been both poetic symbolisers (cp Ps. 5l7[9]) and typologists. What Barnabas says (78) about the scarlet cloth tied on the neck of the scapegoat ' is absurd ; but it is an exquisite allcgor}' that the I'^pistle to the Hebrews suggests in the words (Heb. 10 19-22)

' Having therefore holdness to use the entrance into the holy place with the blood of Jesus the entrance which he dedicated for us a fresh and living way through the vail, that is to say, his flesh, and having a great priest over the house of God, let us approach,' etc.

Christians are, strictly, no priests (Christ is the 'great priest'); but the rending of the flesh of Christ, which brought him, the perfect one, near to God, enables his followers to make a nearer approach to the divine presence than the greatest priests and prophets of the age before him could make. The entrance of Christ into the heavenly regions through death is likened to the entrance of the high priest once in the year into the Holy of Holies. Of these two entrances the same epistle speaks thus (Heb. 9i2):

' Nor yet through blood of goats and bulls, 2 but through his own blood, he entered once for all into the holy place.'

The Jewish high priest entered the holiest through the blood of goats and bulls. The goat was the offering for the people ; the bullock for the high priest himself (Lev. 16 11 15). Christ entered through his own blood. The high priest went in once in the

J So Heb. 9 7, ' not without blood which he offers for himself and for the errors (iyi'orjuaTui') of the people.' 2 So the best MSS (ABKD).

6. NT references.[edit]

year ; Christ once for all, as the representative of his people, that they might ever after have free access to God. ' Once for all ' (^^Ciirat) is to be e.xplained by 925, 'the high priest enters the holy place every year with blood not his own ' [iv aifxari. aXKorpiif)).

The point is not how many times in the day the high priest entered the holiest, but that he entered on one day in the year. Of course, he went in more than once on the 'great day'; the Mishna says four times (1) with the incense ; (2) with the blood of the bullock ; (3) with that of the goat ; (4) after the evening burnt -offering, to bring away the censer and the -plate. Lev. 1613-15 also implies more than one en-

There is a reference to the ritual in Heb. 13 n, where the death of Jesus outside the gate is compared with the burning of the remnants of the sin-offering without the camp. This, however, as Davidson has shown, ^ dis- joints the ritual, and is really a mere isolated analogy.

The treatise y'(>?nd (cp also Jos. Ant iii. 10 3 and l-",p. Barn. ch. 7) throws much fresh light on the details of the

.. -n X -1 ritual ; we must not, however, suppose

7. Details in , ... ,, ,. ,,[edit]

. , that It IS \n all respects literall}' accurate.

^^ In the Cambridge MS (Palestinian re- cension) it is called Massekeih A'ippnrim, which is its true title, as the commentarj^ of Maimonides on the Mishna also proves. J. Derenbourg has attempted a restoration of the oldest recension (see below, 8).

The minute directions for the purification of the high priest need not detain us. Three confessions of sin {umidfiy) form the most beautiful part of the ritual ; they are preserved in Yomd 3842 and O2, and have passed with slight changes into the Jewish liturgy. In each of the.se confessions the sacred Tetrngrammaton (,^^n) occurs ; altogether it was pronounced ten times, and as often as the high priest came to the name those who stood near fell on their faces, while the multitude responded : ' lilessed be the Name, the Name of the glory of his kingdom, for ever and ever.' The first part of the service (including the blood-sprinkling) was gone through close to the Most Holy J'lace. the rest was performed close to the worshippers, in the eastern part of the court of the priests, north of the altar, where stood two goats and an urn with two lots. The high priest drew the lots, and it was held to be a good oinen if his right hand drew forth the lot 'for Yahwe.' To the horn of the ' goat for Azazel ' a ' tongue ' of scarlet cloth was tied.

The high priest then went to the bullock, over which he had already confessed the sins of hini.self and his hou.se, and now confessed tho.se also of 'the .seed of Aaron, thy holv tribe.' Hearing the censer and the incense, he was seen to disappear within the sanctuary. There he stood alone ; he rested his censer on a stone called pTflt" ^ which stood in the place of the ark. Outside the Holy of Holies he uttered a prayer ; it had to be a short one, lest the people should become anxious.* Again the rite of blood-sprinklii g is performed in the Holiest, and then the 'goat for Yahwe' is sacrificed. A third time the high priest enters the Holiest, and again there is blood- .sprinkling in all parts of the sanctuarj-. Forty -three such sprinklings have purified the sanctuary. But the people at large have to receive the visible sign of forgiveness. The ' goat for Azazel ' now becomes prominent. A widduy or ci>nfe.ssion is uttered over the animal's head, which is now to be led to the precipice marked out for the destruction of the goat. Men of rank from Jerusalem accompany it ; cries and curses hasten its progress (see Azazki., 4). Meantime the high priest puts on his 'golden vestments' ;* then he puts them oflf again, and a fourth time (see above) enters the Holiest.

The evening of the ' great day ' closed with a banquet for the high priest and his friends, and with dancing in the vineyards for the maidens of Jerusalem. Prob- ably this dance was primitive ; it attached itself to the Day of Atonement, as a natural mode of relief to tired human nature ( Taanith 4 8). See, further, Dancing, 8 ; Canticles, 8.

8. Literature[edit]

The treatise Vptitd i^Mishna by Surenhusius ; Yomn alone ed. Strack ; cp Wiinsche, Der hab. Tabu. 1 340 J?;) : J. Deren- bourg, ' Essai de restitution de I'anc. redaction de M.ass(;chet Kippourim," R FJ no. U

^1-80 ('83); Maimonides, Hihhnth yom hak- kippuriiti, in Dehtzsch, Hebrcivs 2 464 _^ ; Kuenen, Hex. 86, 312; Oort, r/i/" 10 142-165 ('76): Benzinger, Z.r/'/KO 65-88 ('8g); articles by Delitzsch in HU'BC^), and mZKlVl 173-183 ('80), reviewed by Kuenen, ThT 17 207-212 ('83); Spencer, De

1 See his instructive essay, Hebrews ('82), 196-202.

2 Commonly explained ' foundation,' and illustrated by Job 386. *

S Such a 'short prayer' is given in Jer. Yomd, gb (Del. Gesch. (ierjud. Ppesie, iZj/.).

  • Cp Ecclus. 50 9 II, and the verses from the Abodah in

Del. Jiid. Poesie, 21/.

Up. rit. iii. Diss. viii. ; D. HoflTmann in Berliner's Magasin f 76), \ff. ; Adler, ZATW Z xi^-iij, ('83) ; Stade, CVI 2 182, 258^?:; Schultz, or Theol. 1 367/, 2402^ ; KUershcim, The '1 empU ('74), 563-288; Driver, 'Atonement, Day of,' in HaNtings, DB 1199-201, and 'Leviticus' in SliO T (V.n^.'); Di. on Lev., and Nowack's and lienzinger's Arch;cologies.

1-3 1- : 4-8 T. K. C.


( Nu. 3235 AV). See ArKOTJi-SHornAN.


(nSV H'? Tiysq)ii.e., ' crowns of the house of Joab ' ; ATApcoG OlKOy ICOAB [B], A- o- icoBaB [A], ATAPCO K. BHeiOJAB [!']') '1" unknown locality, mentioned in i Ch. "254 along with Bethlehem and Netophah, in a Calebite connection ; its people were sons of Salma b. Hur b. Caleb (see jABli/). Salma was the 'father' of Beth-lehem, the burial-place of Joab's father Zkruiah [g.v-]. Meyer (/i/. 147) suggests a connection with the valley of Charasiiim.


AV Atroth, Shopman

(\z:vc' n'nqr ; cco(t)Ap Lu.vj, -an LK], co(t)AP [l],

Eus. 21454). a town of Gad (Nu. 8235) ; perhaps one of the two localities in Moab still called 'Attarus. See Atakoth, 4.


('rir, perhaps abbrev. of Atiiaiah).

1. Son of the Kgyptian Jarha by the daughter of Sheshan the Jerrihintelite : his son was Nathan; iCh. 235/; (eeOei [I!J, i.eec (LI, u9e[e]i [A]). See Jarha, Jkrah.mkkl.

2. One of David's warriors; i Ch. 12ii (eeoi [BN], f06[f]t [AL]). See David, ..,, iii.

3. Son of Kehoboam ; 2 Ch. 11 20 (ie9e[e]t [BAL]).


(ATTAAeiA [-ia Ti. \VH]). A town on

the coast of Paniphylia, fouiulcci by .\ttalus Philadelphus, king of Purgamus, for the Syrian and Egyptian trade, which it shared with Perga. There has been some discussion about the site, as Strabo (p. 667), enumerat- ing from west to east, mentions Olbia, the river Catar- rhactes, and then Attalia ; from which it would seem tliat Attalia must be the modern Laara. Ptolemy, however, is more e.xact : he puts it west of the Catar- rhactes. Thus, it is equivalent to the modern Adalia, which is still a port with considerable trade. The town has a picturesque appearance, being perched on the long line of cliffs created by the calcareous deposits of the Catarrhactes, which pours over them in torrents to the sea. The remains are almost entirely Roman. The apostle Paul passed through the town on his return from his ' first missionary tour ' in the interior (Acts 1425). It is still a bishopric. [See Pkkga, and Ramsay, Hist. Geogr. of Asia Minor, 420.] w. j. w.


(attaAoc [ANV]). Three kings of PerganuLs bore this name ; but we are here concerned with the last two .\ttalus IL , Philadelphus, 159-138 B.C., and his nephew Attalus IlL, Philomctor, 138-133 B.C. The Pcrgamene kings were all allies of Rome, and the last made the Roman people his heir (see Asia). In I Mace. 1.5 22 we read that 'Lucius, consul of the Romans,' wrote letters in favour of the Jews to Ptolemy, Attalus, Ariarathes, and others. Attalus II. is probably meant; but, as the date of the letters falls in 139-138 B.C., it is possible that they were sent to his successor. Attalus III. was the son of Eumenes by Stratonice, the daughter of Ariarathes, king of Cappadocia, who was a close ally of the Romans, sharing the fate of Publius Licinius Crassus in the war with the Pergamene pre- tender Aristonicus, 130 B.C. Josephus {Ant. xiv. 10 22) c|uotes a Pergamene decree in favour of the Jews about the time of Hyrcanus. W. j. w.


(attapath {V>\ atGapathc [A], AeApACBAC [!>]), I E.sd. y49::=Neh. 89, Tirshatha.


(atGapiac [B.\]). iEsd.540, RV = Ezra L'bi, Tikshatha.

1 After L we may assume a separate place-name Ataroth ; see Atarah.


For Ezek.23.5 (c'Sno. fhfillm) see Turban; for Jer. 232 (nnrp. kiHurim) see Girdle; for Prov. 7io (ny, nth) scc'dres-S, i (4).


(attoyc [AL]). i Esd. 829, RV=Ezra82. Hattush, I.


(ayKeIia [BAL]). i Esd. 538. Not in |1 Ezra 26i = Neh. 763. .See Barzillai, 3.


('one who practises augury," R\' Lev. 19-'6 IH.IS1014 2K.2I6; AV 'observer of limes,' pir^). See Divination, 2 (2).


(AYroyCTOC [Ti. ^^T^]), an honorific title lx.'sto\ved upon Octavi.in (27 B.C.), and from him handed on to his successors. It is applied to him. along with the title of Ci4-:.SAR {q.v.), in Lk. 2i EV. For his reign, in as far as it concerns Jewish history, see Hkrodian Fa.mii.v, i, and Israp:i, ; and for the dilTiculties rai.sed by Lk. 2i w ith regard to the census, see j Chronology, 59/

In Acts 262125 the AV 'Augustus' for aefiaaroi should rather be, as in RV, simply 'the emperor,' or, as in RV"'a-, 'the Augustus.' The reference is to Nero (see C^K.SAR). For 'Augustus's band,' or rather (as in RV) 'the Augustan band' (.\cts 27 1 aireipyji TlejiaaTTJ^), see Army, 10.


(AYPdNOY [^"-^l : cp Avaran), leader of the Assassins in Jerusalem in the time of Lysimachus ! (2 Mace. 440).

AUTEAS (aytaiac [BA]), i Esd. 948 = Neh. 8 7,

j IIOI;l.\H, 2.


(e^OYCiAi. iPeL322). Sc-e 

Angels, 1,9.


(j;-U'), 2 K. 1724 AV ; RV AvvA.


(ayapan [AXV]), i Mace. 25. See Eleazak, 7 ; NLvccAHKKs, i. 3 ; cp Auranls.


(JIN; CON [B.VQP] in Hos. 108 Am. 1 5, but hAioy TJoKeCxiC [B.VQ] in Ezek. 30i7t). i. In Ezek. 3O17 the reference is doubtless to the I'^gyjitian Heliopolis (see O.n).

2. In Hos. 108 (EV ' the high places of Aven ') Targ. Jon. has '?Nn'2, Bethel, which explanation is given by all .ancient and most modern interpreters ; but, in con- sideration of the well-attested use of pn (aven) in the sense of ' false worship,' ' idolatry' (see, e.g., Hos. 12 12 [11]), it is a question ( i ) whether we should not render with G. A. Smith, ' Destroyed are the high places of idolatry, the sin of Israel,' and (2) whether, when we have regard to the parallel passage Am. 79, and to the probably not infrequent occurrence of glosses in the MT of the pro- phetic writings (see, e.g., Mic. I5/.), the words riNcn |U< should not lie either omitted or printed in a different type as an editorial insertion. The passage, as Well- hausen remarks, gains greatly by this omission. Vg. 's reading, e.xre/sn idoli, favours the view here taken of j\y. Ibn Ezra paraphrases c'Sya niC3 ' the high places of the Baals. '

3. In Am. 1 5 M.aundrell (1697), Grove, W. A. Wright, and G. A. Smith (with Hitzig) are inclined, in com- pany with (S, to identify the ' plain (or broad valley) of Aven' (Bikath-Avkn ; so AV"'S) with the great plain between Lebanon and Antilibanus (the so-called Bcka), in which the famous temple of the Syrian Helio- polis (Baalbec) was situated. The vocalisation jijj will then imply a play on the name not On, but Aven. This, however, is a far-fetched supposition. On ( = Egyptian Ann) represents ;he secular, not the re- ligious, name of the Egyptian Heliopolis (see Bkth- Shemesh. 4). It is very doubtful, moreover, whether the second Heliopolis (Baalbec) was an Aramtean city in the time of Amos, and it is a plausible view of W'ell- hausen that [ik, ' false worship,' has been substituted for the name of some god. Cp Winckler, A T Unter- such. 183, n.


(^SiK Nu. 35 12. See GOEL.




(n')v, in i ch. Kt. nvv \ reeeA[i]M

[R.\1)I::L]), the city of Hadad I., king of Edoni, Gen. 3635 I Ch. I46 (reee<\M [A], eyie [L])- 5's reading of the Hebrew must have Ijeen c'nj. Cjittaim, which is clearly correct. 'Ihc city of the next king had a name of similar meaning (Masrekah). See GiTTAiM. T. K. C.

AWA, AV, AVA[edit]

(Xiy or H-ir ; Vg. AvaA) ; 2 K. 1724 (&IA [HA], AIAN [Lf). RV ;' also Iwah, AV IvAH, 7\W (omitted or only represented in corrupt form in & ; Vg. jr.i). 2K. 1834(<\YA [A]; not in '"-), 19i3 (oyAoY W' AYTA [A], om. L) = Is. 37i3 (oyrAYA [BXOg"'*.'j. erroyr^YA f^]- oyre or oyxA [Q*]).

In the latter group of passages the punctuation implies an exegetical mistake (see commentators on Is. ) : the name throughout should be Avva or Avvah, and it used to be thought that the city referred to the same as that from which the king of Assyria brought colonists to the 'cities of Samaria' (2 K. 1724)- It is clear, however (Wi. .IT rntcrsuch. 101/ ), that 2 K. 17 24 31 have been interjjolated by some one who supposed Sei'HAKVAI.m [y.i'.] in 2K. I834I913 to be the Baby- lonian city of that name. It is only in the speeches of Sennacherib's envoys that .\vva has a right of existence ; 'Avva or 'Avvah, however, is surely a corruption of 'Azzah (,ny), 'Gaza.' Tiglath-pileser, when he con- quered Gaza in 734 B.C., appears to have introduced the cultus of Asur (Wi. GBA 228, 333). 'Where,' then, ' are the gods of Sepharvaim and of Gaza? ' (So Che. Exp. Times, June 1899.) T. K. C.


(D-'!y, so RV ; AV AviM, AviMS, Avites [Avvites, K\']). i- According to Dt. 223, the Avvim inhabited the Philistine coast 'as far as Gaza' before they were ' destroyed ' by the Caphtorim i. e. , the Philistines. The same late writer, in whom the anti- quarv's interest is prominent,^ states that the Avvim dwelt in villages or settlements {xS'-yin ; see Hazok) ; (S and Vg. , however, read o'lnn. ' the Hivites ' {01 evaioi [BAKL] ; //-/). In Josh. 132-6 (an editorial insertion which expands the simple statement of J E in z'. i) we find the Avvim again introduced, and described (if RV is right) as belonging to the S. of Philistia ; prob- ably, however, ' on the south ' belongs to the whole region defined in vt'. ib 3. Here and \'g. once more read 'the Hivites.' Sir G. Grove (in Smith's DB) suggests that the Avvim may be identical with the Hivites (cp Vg. above) ; but the latter name is imifornily found in the singular ('in.T)- The word might, to a Hebrew ear, mean, yet probably does not mean, 'ruins' (cp Iim). Not improbably it is a mutilated form of ca-iy, ' Arabians ' (Che. Exp. Times, June 1899). The Avvim (so-called) were Bedawin who had begun to adopt a settled life.

2. E"!'^' ^'i'^ def. art., 'the ruins' (aniv [B], aueifi [AL], Vg. Aviin), an unidentified place in Benjamin (Josh. 18 23). It is mentioned in immediate connection with Bethel and Parah, and on this account has been conjectured by Knobel to be the same as Ai.

3. In Josh. 15 29 (Sal reads ' Avvim ' for ' Iim." See IlM (i).

4. The people of Avva (^.7'.), 2 K. 17 31. again oi fvaioi IBAL (there is a second rendering, aiioi/et^ in L)] ; Vg. Hevtei.

T. K. C.


(rV^P, lit. -borer'; 'onHTlON [BAFL]). An instrument for boring, mentioned in the description of the 'law of slavery' (l':x. 216 Dt. 15 17)- It prob- ably resembled the Egyptian boring instruments de- picted in Kitto (s.v.), or those more recently discovered by Bliss at Tell el Hesy (see A Mound of Many Cities, 81). Such instruments were used by workers in leather (see l-:rman. Life in Ancient Egypt, 450/.). Cp SLAVERY.


(HDSp. cp Gen. 813). Ezek. 27; RV, cor- recting the punctuation C^IDDD, AV ' that which covered thee'). Cp Dress, i (4).

1 Cp Kue. Hex. 117-119 ; Mey. GA 1 217 (8 179)- 391


From the rude stone chisels and hatchets ('celts') of palaeolithic man, bronze and iron axe, hatchet, tomahawk, and adze were gradually developed. Various early forms of these implements (needed alike in war and in peace) are found in our museums of Egyptian and Babylonian antiquities ; the monuments also give ample evidence of their existence. See Handi- crafts and Weai'ONS.

Of the or words for ' axe, ' three at least may be nearly synonymous :

I- \^^h gat-zen (securis); Dt.lSs (iftVr)); 20 19 (ixiSripoi) ; I K.67 (jr'Aeicus) ; Is. 10 15 ('a^iinj), everywhere an implement for felling trees or hewing large timber for building. The word is used thrice in the Siloam inscription (//. 2 4), in the .sense of a quarryman's or miner's pick. On2S. I231 2 K.65, cp Iron, 2.

2. DT\p,^ar</di,'ai^iyr,,seairis(]udg.948Ps.'Hs iS.132oy: Jer. 4622!), perhaps specially used for felling trees; if so, it would have a heavier head than the garzen.

3. '?'B'3, kaihi, ire\KVi, securis, P.s. 7461; in Tg. Jer.4622 for Heb. DTIj7. RV gives 'hatchet,' apparently to suggest a diminutive axe. (D, Sym., Pesh., however, read, not lI'n^BB ' its carved work," but ?J'5? 'its gates.' The rather improbable word ' iJ'3 should perhaps be ('3ij* 'knife' (Che. Ps.i"^), and in the light of the Tg. we should emend msVo to nVB'?!^ ' two-edged ' (Herz, Che.P), ' with two-edged axe ').

Somewhat different from these, and probably adze- shaped, is :

4. l:iyO> vta'sAd, xuivfv\La. [B'^AQ, reading npS1D?l, ascia in Jer. IO3 Is. 44i2l(<ricTrap'u), //wrt, AV ' tongs '), and by emenda- tion of the text in Is. 10"35-' (Duhm) and Zech. 11 3 [2]) (see FoKEsr). Kimhi understands something lighter than the kardom, or 'axe.' In Jer. IO3 maasad is a tool suitable for fashioning or carving wood.

Two Other words are doubtful.

5. ain In Ezek. 269, EV 'axe,' an insecure rendering. The text is possibly corrupt (see Co.; rais naxaipan [BAQ], tois ojrAois [Qn'U]).

6. !;.'.;!?, 2 S.I231 (vnoTOiievi [A])=i Ch.203, TtliO, which Berth, and Kittel conform to Sam. The text, however, perhaps needs more extensive emendation. Che. reads 'jnan nilJCS a marginal correction of the mjD3 (after cc'l) which found its way into the text (ICxp. Times, x. 1899, p. 285). See Saw.

Of the NT names the afiVij of Mt.Sio Lk.39 is the wood- man's axe ; but Rev. 2O4 (ireAeicifecreai ; cp 1 K. 5 18) refers to the axe of the headman (Trt'Aeicus).

Axes were among the emblems of high rank in Egypt and at Mycenas (see the axe figured in Erman, Egypt, 73 ; Schliemann, Mycena, 252). In the O T it is rather the mace that is the favourite emblem of sovereign power (see Rod). There is, however, a sarcastic passage in Bar. 615 which suggests that the axe could be an emblem of divinity ; and we may perhaps illustrate it by Frazer's learned note on Paus. x. 14i. The double- I headed axe is characteristic of so-called Hittite sculptures. j The Labrandean Zeus of Caria also is represented on ! coins as carrying a double-headed axe {labriis = a.\e in Lydian ; Plut. Quccst. Grcrc. 45). There appears on the coins of Tenedos a similar axe, which, being generally accompanied by a cluster of grapes, may be a symbol of the worship of Dionysus. Cp also Ohnefalsch- Richter, Aypros, 1 257.'^ Of course, the bow and the sword, not the axe, are the emblems of Yahwe, though in Ezek. 92 the supernatural agents of Yahwe carry mauls (or like weapons). See Ba Tri,i;-.\XE.


(D2T), the rendering of R\"^'- in 2 S. 16 14, where the text has, 'and the king and all the people that were with him came weary." So C 4K\e\vfji^i>oi [BL], 6 iKXeXvfidvos [A]. The name of

1 nsJ^D as it stands does not make sense. For proposed emen- dations see Che. {.'iSOr. Isaiah, Heb.), Duhm, Di.-Ki.

2 'With a terrible crash' (ninyjis) only a conjectural rendering of MT.

3 Perhaps, however, the axe was depicted as a survival of the time, before the introduction of coined money, when it may have been the unit of barter (Ridgeway, OH^-in 0/ Metallic Currency, etc., 317/)- Perhaps too the 'tongue' (jirS) ^ gold in Josh. 7 21 was in the shape of an axe ; see Exp. Ti

some place seems to Ix? rfquired by the context. If Aycphini l)e indeed a placo-nanR-, the locality it indi- cates remains unidentified. On the other hand, it may Ik; a corruption, or the place-name may have dropjx-d out. Cp \Vc. in liK. ; ' adds irapd rbv 'lopddfT/c.

G. A. s.


(n;y [liii. (Ji.]), 1 Ch. r^St RV"'K=AV G.\z.\ [./.7. , 2 J. Sec .\l, I.


(azahAoy I'^AJi, i Ksd. 9i4 = I>-ral0is.

AS.MII.I., 4.


(azahAoc Ll^J). i Ksd. 9 34=Hzral04.,

RV .\Z.\KKKI., 5.


or rather RV AzKi, (*?>*>? : l&COA [BNr]. ACAhA I-\Q]*. ihti point to which the cleft of the moun- tain is to rc.ich when Yah\v6 descends ujxjn the Mt. of Olives in battle (Zech. 14 5)- This place, presumably situ:ited near Jerusalem, is often identified with the eciually obscure Hkthkzkl. Kohler, Wright, and others (after Vg. Symm. ), with less probability, take ':!"'? to Ix: an adverbial expression, ' very near, hard by" (cpOlsh. 167^; but sec also Konig, 330 / [7]). Clermont (ianneau thinks of the Wady Yasul, a little valley on the right of Uie '.\in el-Loz, in the Wady en- Nar (/'/. V-V"-. iSyi.p. loi).


("in^S'N*. ecceAiOY [-^L]), father of Shaphan the .secretary, 2K. 223 (eAloy [H]l = 2Ch. 318(ceAi&(HAl).


(n;3TN, 32, Yahui' weighs,' cp Jaazan- iah ; AZ&N[eli& [BA], -nihA [N], azaioy ni). a Levite si'^natory to the covenant (see I'.ZK.V, i. 7), Neh.lOQl...).


(ACC&<t)eicoe [B]). lEsd.Sjj AV = Ezraiiss RV, Has.soI'HKKKTII [(/.;'. J.


RV AsAKA (ac&RA [BA]), a family of Netiiimm mentioned after Phinees ( = P[h]aseah) in the great post-exilic ILst (.see KzKA, ii. 9), i Esd. Ssif. Unmcntioned in || ICzra249 Neh. 7 51.


(ozeiHA [BA]), Neh. I236 AV, RV Aza-

RKF.I., 4.


AVSakaias, i Esd. 81 (azaraioy [B], CAPAIOY |AL]) = Kzra7i, Skkaiaii, 7.

2. .\\" .AzAKiAS (2 Esd. 1 1) ; see Azakiah, 3.


or rather, as in RV, Azarel ('PNITIJ. 28 ; ' (iod helps ' ; ezpiHA [AL], cp Azkikl).

1. One of David's warriors (iCh. 126; o^/)u|A. [BK], At>jA [A]; fi^A(Ll). .See David, $ 11, a. iii.

2. One of the sons of Heman (see Lkvi), i Ch. 25 18 (a^apta IB); o^c>)AlI,]; cp Uzziel).

3. .V D;uiite 'prince' under David (i Ch.27 22 ; a.^a.(>a.T\\ [B], afp.,A|l,l). .See David, 8 M, <-. i.

4. A priest in list of inhabitants of Jerusalem (see Ezra, ii. I 5 [*1. % '5 fO a), Neh. 11 13 (<j-5pi7|A [BK]); in the procession at the dedication of the wall (see Exka, ii. 13 i'), Neh. 12 36, AV Azakaei. (oi'et.jA [HK*A], o^pecTjA [N'^'^p superscr.]).

5. In list of those with foreign wives (see Kzka, i. 5, end), Ezra 10 4 1 (^pr,A [P.], e<rpi7,A [])= i Esd. 934 (Esril, RV EzKil., fp(e|iA |H.\1, e<7-piT)A [L]), apparently repeated as Azaki.. s (//.. o.C,a.r^K [A], -o [I'.l, oni. L).


(nnrr, 28 84 [or innri?; in nos. I, 2, 6, 7, 8, 13, 15, 19, 20 ; cp Baeron i Ch. 238], ' Yahw6 helps' ; cp Elkazar, Azkikl ; azariac [B.\L]).

1. b. Zadok ; priest, temp. Solomon, i K. 42 (afapi [B]). See Bkn-hur.

2. Chief priest, temp. Uzziah (2 Ch. 2617-ao).

3. Chief priest, temp. Hezekiah (2 Ch. 31 10-13).

In I Ch. 69-14 (535-39) the name of Azariah is borne by the twelfth, the fourteenth, and the twentieth in descent from .Aaron in the line of Eleazar (it. 9 n i3ofapta[B]) ; of the fourtc-enth it is said that he ' executed the priest's office in the house that Solomon built in Jerusalem ' (iCh. 610/ [.I36/. ]). Omissions and transpositions allowed for, the three Azariahs in this series may be held to lie identical with nos. i. 2, and 3 above; at the same time, it is difficult to su|)ix>se that the Hilkiah of iCh. t5i3/. (539/) should Ije distinguishe<l from the Hilkiah of i Ch. 9ii and EzraTi (fa/)toi^ [BJ; ; if we identify these, .\zariah (3) was a contemporary of Josiah, not of Hezekiah. This name ap|x;ars also as Azarias, .\zaraias, Aziei, Ezerias, and ICzias.

4. Expounder of taw (see EzKA, ii. f i-^/. ; cp i. | 8; ii. | 16 [5I, iShb). Neh.87(om. BKA)= i Esd. fl 48 (Azarias), and signatory to the covenant (see Ezka, i. $ 7), Neh. 10 2 I3I (ai^a.ju.a. [BK<:-3AJ, l;a.xo^'.<y.^ [*]). See also Neh. 3 23 (a^ap.a [BKA]), 24 (^T)fla^ap(t]ia (liKA], oikov of. [L]). He is apparently the Ezka of Neh. 12 i 13.

5. A Kohathite Levite (i Ch. 6 36 [21], o^opa [BL], cp 2 Ch. 2S> 12, l.Tiiy). In I Ch. (i 24 [9I his pl.ice is taken by U/ZIAH, 2.

6. 1). Nathan, su|)ervisor of .Solomon's twelve prefects (i K.4 5). Probably he had to see that the contributions of the diflTtr- ent departments were punctually furnished. His father was most likely the well-known prophet who in 2 S. 12 1 is called simply Nathan (so Ew., We., Klo.). Others (e.g., Biihr) make Azariah Solomon's nephew ; cp 2 S. 6 I4( opclejia [B*L1). See, however, ZAnUD.

7. \ son of King Jehoshaphat, twice enumerated (as Azariah and .Azariahu) in 2 Ch. 21 2, out omitted in (B jl'l.

8. A son of Jchorani, king of Jud.ih in 2 Ch. 226 (oxo^cliat I [BAL]) ; but it is clear from 2 K. 8 29, as well as from 2 Ch. 22 i, [ that Ahaziah [2) is meant. In 2 Ch. 21 17 he is called Jkjio- (^.7'., 3).

9. King of Judah ; otherwise known as Uzziah (f.v., i).

' 10. One of the ' three children,' companions of Daniel ; othcr- ' wise called Abkdnego [f.7>.] (Dan. I671119 Song of Three I Children, v. 66 [, Theod. Dan. 3 88], Azaki as, 7).


11 A Judahii of Ethan, iCh. 28 (^apeia [B]; a^apia

12. A Jerahmeelite, i Ch. 2 38_/C (a^apia [B]).

13. b. Odkd, a prophet of Judah, whose prophecy to King .A.sa is recorded in 2 Cn. 15 1-8. The prophecy is attributed to Oded in f . 8.

14. Son of Jeroham ; one of the captains who were associated with Jehoiada in deposing .\thaliah (2 Ch. 23 i).

15. Son of Obed ; another of the captains associated with Jehoiada (2 Ch. 23 i ; cp i Ch. 2 38/.).

16. Son of Hoshaian ; an opponent of Jeremiah, Jer. 43 2 (a^axou>ias [*]). Cp Jaazaniah, i.

17. Le.ider (see Ezka, ii. 82) in the great post-exilic list (//. ii.9), Neh. V 7 (a^apia [BN], -pea [A])=Ezr322, Sekaiah ; see Ezka {apaia<: [B.\*J, crapaiai [.\a!L]).

18. In procession at dedication of wall (see Ezka, i. i^g), Neh. 12 33, faxapiat [BN] (see B.-ier), cp (4).

19. An Ephraimite, temp. Ahaz, who took part in restoring the captives of Judah, 2 Ch. 28 12 (ovSeia [Ii]).

20. b. Jehallelel, a Merarite Levite, 2 Ch. 29 12 (fovopiat IBA]).


(azarIAC [BAL]), the Greek form of Azariah.

1. I Esd. 9 21 = Ezra 10 21, Uzziah, 3.

2. In list of Ezra's supporters (i Esd. 943), wanting in || Neh. 8 4 ; see Be. ai^ loc.

3. I Esd. 9 48 = Neh. 8 7, Azariah (A

4. RV AzAKAiAs (2 Esd. 1 i), b. Helkias ; see Azariah (3).

5. The name assumed by the angel Rafhaei. \q.T.\ when accompanying Tobit (Tob. 5 12 O613 78 9 2).

6. A captain in the army of Judas the Maccabee, i Mace. 5 18 5660 (in 7'. 56 ^axopiat [.\K]).

7. .Song of I'hree Children, 66 ( Theod. Dan. 3 88); see Aza- kiah (10).


(azaroy [B]). i Esd. 5 15 RV; AV Azlra.s.


(TTr, ozOYZ [BA] ; but L gives lojAZAZ . Joazaz) : cp .\zaziah, a Reulienite name (i Ch. 5 Sf).



1. Levitical practice.[edit]

Of the two goats set apart for the great Day of Atonement (see Atonement, Day , y ... , ok), one was chosen by lot for a sin- offering for Yahwe, the other for '.Aza'zel

^^^. jgg.,^) i^^^^^ j^e sin-offering had 

been made in behalf of the people, the high priest was to lay both hands upon the head of the goat for '.\zazel, and confess over it all the sins of the Israelites (cp the confession of sin in Mishna, Vdrnd 62), laying them on its head and sending it out into the wilderness to Azazel (y. 21/.). The meaning of this act, which is further described in the Targum of pseudo-Jonathan, is clear. The goat symbolically bears away the sins of the people. Something analogous is found in I^v. 14 4^, where, for the purification of the leper, one bird is to be killed, and the other, charged with the disease, is to be let loose 1 AV renders 'scapegoat.' For the renderings in , see col. 395, note 7.

into the open field. Cp also Zech. f>%ff., where sin is carried away bodily into the land of Shinar.^

2. who was Azazel ?[edit]

,, , \^r^^^\ ,^ 

The meaning of Azazel is much disputed ; it is, of course, a subject closely connected with the incjuiry into the origin of the custom. It is at least certain that, as Azazel receives one goat while Yahw6 receives the other, both must be personal beings.

The theory of the Jewish interpreters (Tg. ps.-Jon., Rashi, Kimhi ; cp Ibn Ezra's references to current views), that Azazel is a place in the wilderness, is inadmissible ; and equally so are the views of Aq., Syinm., Jer., AV, that it means the goat itself (rpo-yov !ntep\cni.tvo<i and oAitfi'co?, capfr emissarius, ' the scape-goat'), and of Mer.x in Schenkel's Bib. Lex. 1 256, and others, that it is an abstract term = ' complete removal or dismissal ' (from \?ij;), a view probably taken by .2

It seems most natural to connect the belief in question with the demonology and angelology which developed so largely in the post-e.\ilic age (^wocA 678 196IO4). One group of interpreters, on this view, take Azazel as a prominent memlier of the class of se'irim, or demons of the field and the desert, to whom sacrifices were offered in post-e.\ilic times (Lev. 17? ; see Satvr, 2), to whom possibly all the sins of the people with their evil effects were symbolically sent every year (so, with various modifications, Ew. , Di. , Dr. \_Iixpos.\ Now. , Benz. ). We need not, however (with the first three scholars), regard the conception as a primitive one, or as having been taken over by the religion of Yahw6 from an earlier stage ; and least of all is there any imitation of the symbolic vengeance taken by the Egyptians on Set-Typhon^ (see Brugsch, Rclig. u. My f hoi. d. alt. Aeg. 710). On the other hand, Cheyne ( ' The Date and Origin of the Ritual of 'Aza'zel ' in ZATIV 15 i53-'S6 ['95]) considers it to have been one of the objects of the ritual ' to do away with the cultus of se'irim by sub- stituting a personal angel for the crowd of impersonal and dangerous se'irim.* His arguments for this very attractive view are (a) the form of the name (deliberately altered from '^Niiy, ' God strengthens' ; cp ^n'lij;, i Ch. 15 21), which seems to be akin to that of the other names of angels; and (/) more especially the passages of the Book of Enoch referring to Azazel as a leader of the evil angels (Gen. 6124). ' Azazel is therefore of literary not of popular origin ; he is due to the same school of speculative students of Scripture to which we owe the other names of angels, good and evil, in the later literature.' In any case, we nmst admit that the old interpreters w'ho identified Azazel with Satan * had some plausibility on their side (Orig. c. Ceh. 6305; Iren. H<vr. 1 12, followed by Spencer, Hengstenberg, Kalisch, and Volck). We may at least venture to say with Reuss that ' the conception of Azazel lies on the way which led later to that of the devil. ' For Azazel is certainly described as in some sense a being hostile to God. 1. B.

It is strange that so many modern critics should have failed to comprehend the ritual of the scapegoat, and "R cfint ^^^^ rejected with much positiveness the '... . only natural explanation of the name

cn icism. ^^aj,cl, so that it has become a kind of dogma that "^mtj; is not from "^j* jiy, but either a weak- ened form of SiViK, meaning ' averruncus," or ' porro abiens,' or ' amolio ' (Ol. , Merx, Stade, Kautzsch-Ges. , Volck), ^ or else a broken plural of difficult interpretation

1 P'or extra-biblical parallels, see below, g 3; also Ew. Ant. 158 ; WRS, Ret. Set.w 422 [and for an Assyriological explana- tion of the reference to the wilderness, see Ritual, 10].

2 Cp, however, below, note 7.

3 This view has left a trace in Smith, JJB(^) 1 297, but has received no sanction from Di. or Dr., whose names are mentioned. Against it see Diestel, jZt./. hist. '1 lieol. ('60), pp. 159^

< I'rof. G. F. Moore suggests a reference to Nachmanides on Lev. 168.

  • The Rabbinic identification of .Satan with Sammael as ' chief

of the Satans' (Midr. R. on Dt. 11 3) may here be chronicled.

8 Gesch. (ier Schri/ten des A 'H^l, 501.

7 Some critics refer to a.s having initiated the theory of an abstract formation. Certainly in Lev. 10 10 <5, bafi. renders VtKiyS i '"I" oiroirojijnji' ; and in v. 26, ets at/wo-ic. What the

(perhaps some particular class of unfriendly demons ; see Steiner in Schenkel, Bid. Lex. 5599, and Bochart). ' The truth is that the old derivation of Azazel from <^/iij;, 'to Ix; strong' (see Tg. ps.-Jon., Saadia), needed to assume a new form in order to commend itself. The explanation of the name as 7K TKjy (which was retracted by Diestel its author) implies an un-Hebraic mode of formation, says Di., and the names of angels compounded with 7K belong to the later Jewi.sh theology. The former objection is not absolutely decisive ; the name .\birel \n Jubilees seems to be h T3K (see Abrech). Still, there is no neces.sity to follow Diestel ; the later Jews could form names correctly, and the ex- planation offered above, which, with the connected theory, may claim to be virtually a nevv one, is not open to iji.'s objection. Di.'s second objection points the way to the true reason why modern scholars have often given such far-fetched and improbable (however learnedly justified) etymologies. They felt that a name formed on the analogy of Michael and Gabriel must be late ; but their theory compelled them to suppose that Azazel was early, and that the name Azazel in Enoch (like Belial and Heelzebub, Delitzsch ventures to add) was simply borrowed from the OT.* Thus the light thrown on the name by the 15ook of Enoch was missed. Nor was sufficient u.se made of the Mishna treatise called i'dmd, with its strange but not imaginary details, although the description comes from a time not very far removed from that of the later portions of the priestly code. Nor did critics give heed enough to the facts of comparative folklore, which illustrate certain details in the 1 'Oiiui.

The more we study the Priestly Code, the more we are struck by the combination of firmness and laxity which its compilers display. They are firmness itself as regards the essential principles of the law,'* but very compliant to minor popular superstitions. Nothing, therefore, can be more probable than that the legal authorities to whom the later portions of Lev. 16 are due gave their sanction to a custom which it had perhaps been found impossible to root out, on condition of its being regulated and modified by themselves. Assum- ing this to have been the case, we can explain the name Azazel, and even account for the spelling, which has struck many scholars as inconsistent with the ety- mology h ny. From the point of view here adopted viz. , that the priestly code is not Mosaic, but a com- bination of diverse elements due to many different persons in the exilic and the post-exilic periods, and framed in a statesmanlike, compromising spirit there can he no doubt that the view here mentioned is correct. There is no uncertainty as to the meaning of the name Azazel, and very little as to the origin and significance of the rite.

4.Jewish super- ^^^^^^J ^.[edit]

To supplement the account of the present writer's theory given above, it may be said that, like Diestel , - . , formerly, he opposes the widely

^^. ^^^^ ^^-^^j ^^.^^ ^

KaKodai/JLUV to whom the sin of the jjeople and the resulting calamities were sent, and that the belief goes back to pre-exilic times.

The first part of this view was that of Benzinger (Arch. 478) in 1894 ; it is, however, scarcely tenable. The sultan of they/, to whom the se'irim propitiated by the Jews in post-exilic times correspond (see Satvk, 2), has no personal name ; he and his subjects are impersonal. If Azazel were a demon we should hear of him in other parts of Leviticus. Nor is it likely that even a later legislator would have adopted Azazel as an evil demon.

translator meansbythi.s,however,isa7roir/x7ro/iiei'os(soTheodoret, Qutest. 22 in Lev.), in short, he agrees with Aq., Symm., Jer. in deriving the name from Ij; and 7jJ?. This gives the right in- terpretation of airoTroMn-oios [R.^FL], which answers to Azazel in V. loa. Aj/erruncus, in this view of the facts, is not the equivalent of 's term, as Ew. (Anf. ^63) supposes.

1 Del. is ^ot happy in his explanation, ' Defier of God." He traces the name to Arabic mytnology: 'azz is used of a horse which successfully resists its rider (ZA'/K 1 182 ('80]) ; but Konig is no more successful ' fortis decedens' is his rendering {Lehr^eb. 2 a, 417).

2 So Driver (Expositor, 1885, b. p. 215). In Hastings' DB (art. ' Azazel ') no very definite conclusion is reached ; but reference is duly made to the too generally neglected analogies of other popular religions.

I Kalisch rightly says that, 'although Azazel and his goat are a stain on the Levitical legislation, they do not taint the_ main principle of Judaism Ckxl's absolute sovereignty' {Leviticus, 2 804).

Az&zcl' to the Jewish theulugiaiis (including the authors of the scajx'Koat-ritual) was a fallen angel , evil no doubt, yet not altogether unfriendly to man, for he was the true TulKiI-cain, one of the ' sons of KlOhim ' mentioned in (icn.61/. 4^ (sf'e Enoch 6 6/! 81 and es|>ecially 10 4-8 l:}i). lie was said to have been Ixjund hand and foot, and placetl in ' an opening in the desert which is in Dudael ' ; rough and jagged rocks have Ix^n laid up)n him. Now, DudaCl is not ' God's caldron ' (Di. ), but (Cjeiger, Charles) a fant.istic modification of Hadudo in llcth H.adudo, where w;is the crag (p'^j) down which, according to Yoma (0 4 ; cp Tg. ps.-Jon. Lev. IG22), the goat for Azazel ' was pushed, which crag Schick * identifies with nuxl. Bet-hudidun, on the edge of a chalk cliff, overhanging a rocky chasm, at the right distance from lerusalein. The coincidence seems too striking to permit a doubt as to the true character of Azazel.

It w.as this personal angel (the later Jews gave a quasi-pcrsonality to the angels) that the author of the sea I )egoat- ritual substituted for the crowd of se'irim (or earth-denjons) to whom the people sacrificed ; just as the scafjegoat was the substitute for the sacrificial victims.^ The need must have been great indeed. In the marriage songs of the Canticles we twice find (it is probable) the strange apjx.'ai, ' I charge you, O ye (iauijiUers of Jerusalem, by the fairy-hosts and by the tree-spirits. ' * In such a poem the name of Yahwe could not be lightly used : all the world, however, knew of the su(jernatural beings who haunted thickets and some- times inhabited trees, and like the Jinn to-day, were sometimes friendly to man, sometimes unfriendly." The substitution apjxiars to have produced an effect : at least, the Chronicler, in the third century, represents the custom of sacrificing to the scirhn as pre-exilic (2 Ch. 11 15). Certainly, too, we may infer from the details resi)ecting the n'7rcon TVS' ( ' the dismissed goat ') in Yomd that the popularity of the institution was great. The cries, 'Take (tlioin) away and get out,' ^ reported by the Gemara on Yomd 6 4, show how intensely the lower classes (Rabylonians thoy are disparagingly called) believed in the removal of their sins by the goat. Sec also lip. Barn. 7 ; Tertull. adv. Marc. 87 ; adv. J lid. 14; Just. c. Ttyph. 40. That the 'goat for Azazel ' was really pushed over the precipice ( Yomd, G), we have no reason to doubt. It is instructive to notice, however, that the scrilje who inserted the directions in Lev. 16 could not bring himself to put down all that actually happened. WTiat we re;id is that Aaron was to confess all the sins of the Israelites (there is great emphasis on ' all ') over the goat, and to send him away in the charge of a certain man into a solitary land (pr^\ fnx v. 21/.). This is explaineti in Tg. ps.-Jon., "and shall send him away by a man prepared from the preceding year, to take him into a rocky desert which is Beth-hadure ' (see above). In compensation for this, it is Leviticus that gives us one detail not preserved in Yomd. In v. 10 it is said that the goat for Azazel is to be presented alive before Yahw6, that atoning rites may be performed over him ("133^ vSy) ; which recalls the direction about the ' living bird' (see i) that forms a parallel to the scapegoat in the law of cleansing the leper (Lev. 14 6/ ).

  • Another form of the name may have been Uzziel (cp Tg. ps.-

Jon. on (len. 64 with Enoch 0). The form Azael also is found.

  • It is not worth while to e.\amine the Jewish interpretations

of this strange pcussaRe (see Enoch, Tg. ps.-Jon., Jude).

3^r/)/T3i,4^. CSo].

< Sec WRS, Rel. 5 (2) 418, 422, 468.

B Cant. 2 73 5, ni'j'K^^ ni>3i:3. The change in the pointing is very slight : Sk should be \. The usual explanation is very fanciful (see Budde). The sacred trees (especially the locust- or ..-irob-trees)are still reverenced in Palestine as being possessed.

8. See WRS, Rtl. Sfm.fll i3'-i33; Haldensperger, PEFQu. St., July 93, p. 204^ Some of the jinn are believed to be dangerous to newly married people. Don't play with love, says the passage (Cant. 2 7), for fear of the //>..

^ KS1 '?'IB KS1 ViD-

To resume and to supplement : the usages described in YOmd are a combination of a primitive s-icrifice to the demons of untilltxl or (especially) mountainous country with a superstitious custom still widely prevalent, accord- ing to which evils of all kinds were sought to Ix- got rid of by the device of lading them on some .inimal, which was thereupfjn driven away from the community like the scajiegoat (see Lyall, Fortnif^htly Jinirw, 1872. p. 131 ; IVazer, Golden Hough, 2189-193; K. F. Knight, Wlure Two l-.mpires .Meet, 221/). Such customs, as Frazer points out, tend to become periodic, like the rite of the sca|x.'goat. See, further, Atunemknt, Day ok.

Diestel,' Sct-Typhon, Asasel, und Satan ' in 7.t./. hist. Theol.

i860, p. 159^.; Oort, Th. T 10 150-155 |'76); Haiidissin,

.Studd. zur setn. Kfl.-gesch. 1 iSoyC ; Drlvir,

Literattire. K-tpos. 1885/-. pp. 214-217; chevne, /..-nn-

'^ '5.1 ff- I'QSI'. and articles by Driver in Hastings Dli, and by Voick in Herzog, PRE^'^), Cp also DL and Kalisch on Leviticus, and Nowack, Hebr. Arch. 2 166. 1/ L B.; 3/. T. K. C.


(-in^TTl?, 29, ' Yahwfe is strong,' or

' strcigtlK-ns ; pzleJl&C [HKAL]).

1. A l.cvite inusici.nn, temp. David (see Lkvi), i Ch. l!>2i.

2. An Kphrainiitc, leinp. Davi.l (i ( h. 27 20).

3. A Lcvitc, temp. Hezckiah (2 Ch. :il 13 ; OX [A]).


(AcBACApeG [A]), i Ksd.569 AV.

R\"'t.' .-\SHA( APHATll.


(,>13rr ; azaBoy \>^\ X ['*] AzBoyx [A]. ezAoYK [L] .i/.noc], father of .\f,iii;miah [2] (Neh. 3 16 i). Possibly of non-Jud;ean origin ; cp Mcy. Ent. 147 167.


(HipTr, azhka [BNAQL]), a town in the lowland of Judah (Josh. Ij ;5, 'laj'TjKO [H]), not far from the supposed scene of Davids combat with (ioliath (i S. 17 i). This was in the Valk hk Ei.ah ( II '. es-Snnt, on the upper course of the Sukcieir) near Socoh (Shu- weikeh), which is about 12 m. S. from Aijalon and 2 m. S. from Jarniulh. .\zekah is mentioned as one of the points to which the pursuit of the five kings by the Israelites e.Mended after the battle of Beth-horon (Josh. 10 10). Ii was fortified by Rehol>oam (2 Ch. 11 9, ' k^iKO. [L]), besieged by Nebuchadrezzar (Jer. 847), and re- inhabited by Jews in post-e.\ilic times (Neh. 11 30). Perhaps an echo of the name survives in lUr ez-Zdg, N. of Socoh (cp Buhl, Pal. 90, n. 92 ; and see, on the other hand, Seylxild, MDPV, 1896, p. 26).


(H'N). 2ech. Hs RV = AV Azai,, q.v.


(?V^it. 50; abbrev. from Azaliah. q.v.\ eCHA [RA], acahA [I-]), a descendant of Saul, in a genealogy of Bknjamin [q.v., 9, ii. [/i]), i Ch. 8-57/ (aCCAHA [L]) = 943 (eCAHA [HS]). 944 (ecAHA [N]).


(D>*r), Josh. 1529 AV. RV Kzem.


RV Aksii'hlkitii (Apcei(})OYpeie

[BJl. I Esd. r)i6=l':zra2i8, JOKAll.


(azhtac [B.\J, om. L), a family in the great post-e.\ilic list (see Ezra, ii. 9, 8 c) in i Esd. 615, but not in || l"zra'2 16= Neh. 7 21 ; perhaps the name owes its presence to some mistake (Mey. E.nt. 155 n. ).


(natr, 43/. e. , strong is CJad ' [cp Azbaal. 67.S' 1 118, and see Gad], or, 'fate is hard' (?) ; AZTaA [AL]). The B'ne Azgad, in the great post- e.xilic list (see Ezra, ii. 9I, Ezra2i2 (reckoned at 1222: affyad [B], a/37. [A], aataS [L]) = Neh. 7i7 (reckoned at 2322 ; affyad [B], ayerad [A], a<rTo5 [N]) - I Esd. 5 13. AV Sadas, RV Astad {afr/ai [H, where the numlier of the family is given as 1322 J. affxaa [-\]). A band of no males of them came up with Ezra, Ezras 12 (see Ezra, ii. 5 ; 3) {aaraS [B]) = i Ksd. 838, EV A.STATH, RV'i.'- Azgad (aaraO [BA]), and they were represented among the signatories to the covenant (see EzKA, i. 7), Neh. 10 15 [>6] {aayaS [B], affrad [K]).


(ozeiOY [])

UZZA, 2.


AV Ezra 2 49,


(4 F,s(l. 1 2) in the genealogy of Ezra, see



(^ii'tV. I Ch. 1520). See Jaaziei,.


{HyW. 83 : -strong' ; ozei [L], -a [BK], oft^o [A], in list of those with foreign wives (KzuA, i. 5, end), Kzra 10 27=t Ksd.H28, Sakdel'S, RV Zakueus {itpaXia, (I?), fapfiaiat [A], os'tt [L]).


(niDTy, perhaps ' Death is strong' [cp Cant. 86j, a possible name for a hero [sec AniMOTH, and cp Gray, HFN 231]; ace. to Kittcl the ending should Ix; -moth or -muth {SHOT i Ch. 1 20] ; oni. BA, AZMCoe V^"'- "'*^-]. ACM- [I-])- A lienjaniite place near Geba (Neh. 1229), usually identified with el-ljizmch, a village 4 m. XH. of Jerusalem, between Jeba' and "Anata ( ZDP / ' 2 155 ; PEF Mem. 89).

The b'ne Azmaveth occur in the great post-e.xilic list (see EzKA, ii. 9), Ezra 'J 24 (uioi aa/itufl [ lij . . . af. [A] . . . a^ud [L])=Neh. 728 (iffipc? |3r;Co(r/iia>9 [RN], a. ^tfi' . [.\], uioi OL<T6)i.mB [L]), Bethaz.mavi;th (moiy n'2)= i Ksd.5i8, RV 1!iimas- MOTH, which is preferable to AV Bethsamos (jSaiTao-^ui' [B], Bai#a(T/aiu0 ^a^;uaj6 |.\1).


(nipm,! see above; acmooG [BL], AZ^^ [A]).

1. One of David's thirty mighty men, 2S.2331 (acr^ud [B*], O-HU). [Bb], -as /nue [A], afeA,ui<oi'[L])=i Ch. 11 33 (a^^a>r [BN]), anativeof lUiiUKi.Mlv'.i'.lC.pnna [iCh.]and -Sri-ia [2S.] being both miswritten for 'P"in3 [We. Dr.]). Azmaveth, the ' father ' of

Jeziel and Pei.et, 2 (i Ch. I23; a<r/tx(o0 [N]), two of David's warriors, may, however, be the place-name; cp above. .See David, II (a)ii.

2. b. Jchoadah or Jar.ah ; a descendant of Sanl in a genealogy of Benjamin ( 9, ii. [^]), iCh. S36 (craA/Aui [B])=:942 (ya^aiuS [BN]).

3 b. Adiel, one of Davids ovevseeis (i Ch. 2725). See David, 11 (r) i.


(I'lD^T), an unidentified site, marking the western ])ortion of the southern frontier of Judah liefore the point where ' it went out at the brook of I'^gypt ' (Josh. ir)4 Xu. 344 5t). <5 has Atre/uwfa [iUl], iieX/xojj'a [B-V], kc^Kp-uiva, [AFL] ; Targ. has cDp. on which last precarious reading Trumbull bases his identification of Azmon with 'Ain el-Kaseme in the W. Kaseme. With .\zmon cp Ezem (dsj;).


(inPI niJ^X /.k, 'ears, or outliers, of Tabor' 99 ; cp Uz/.i:n-Sheek.\h), a land- mark of Xaphtali, doubtless near Mt. Tabor, Josh. 1934 (eNAG e^Boop [B], AZANOOe 0. [A], AZCoG e. [!>]) According to Onom., a^avojff (O.S"-> 224, 88) lay near Diocnesarea or Sepphoris ; cp Chisloth-Takor, and see Taiujk.

==AZOR== ( Aztop [Ti. WH]), Mt. 1 13 ; see Genkalogies, ii. 2.


(azcotoc [AXV], Jos. .f ;//. xii. 11 2, ezAC 

[ed. Xiese], azAC AZARa). the 'mount' to which Macchides pursued the Jews in the battle (Apr. 161 B.C. ) in which Judas the Maccabee lost his life (i Mace. 915), is unknown. Michaelis has very plausibly conjectured that the expression may be due to a mistranslation of the Heb. inn nncx (cp Ashdoth-Pisgah), meaning the slopes where the hill country of Judah descends into the Shephelah. Ewald (GwcA. ( 4 422, n. 2) compares Atara W. of Bir ez-Zet, a small hill.

2. The Azotus (a^wros [Ti. 'WH])of Acts84o i Mace. 4 15 568 1077 f- 84 11 4 1434 16 10 Judith 2 28 is Ashuod [i/.v.]. Some (including Buhl, p. 188) also identify with Ashdod the Azotus of i Mace. 915.


("PXnrr.^ perhaps ' help of God,' 29).

' On the vocalisation and (S's readings cp Hazarmaveth.

2 "^tj; is an Aram, pronunciation (cp '?N'^7^'), and it is note- worthy that here, contrarily to its usual practice, prefers the Hebrew vocalisation (cp Kittel, SBOT ad loc).

1. One of the chiefs of Manas.seh-beyond-Jordan, iCb. 5 24t (.ap.,A[Bl, ^p. IA], *fp. [I.]).

2. \ Xaphtalitc, i Ch. 27 igt {t<rpn.r\K [B] ; but some Hebrew MSS have UzziEl., a reading supported by al o^itjA).

3. Father of Seraiah [2), Jer.3026t (e<rpi>)A [BN], ecrf. [A), <rfip. [Q]).


(Di^nm, zpiK*M [AL]).

1. Levite, in list of Judahite inhabitants of Jerusalem (KzKA,ii. 8 5 W, 8 15 [']), Nch.ll i5(e^p(i[B], XP" Ik* "JJ. e^piKav [nc.aj, ecr^pt [A])= i Ch.i>r4 (ea-ptiKav [B], a^iKo^ [L]).

2. A descendant of Zerubbatiel, iCh. 823 (egptiKav [B], fo-piKoii [A], a<Tp. 1 1-1).

3. Descendant of .Saul in a genealogy of Benjamin ( 9, ii. [p]), iCh.S38 (efpat [B"], efp [BabJ)= i Ch.944 (^fvSpeiKav

4. 'Ruler of the house' under Ahaz, 2Ch.2S7 (eySpeixav m,,ip,Kay[A]).


(na-ITi;, 'forsaken-; AZOyBA [BAL]). I. Wife of Cm.ku [f.v.] in iCh. 2i8/. {ya(;ov^a ( B, .\ in T. 19], a/Soi/fa [L]). The names in this passage are as peculiar as the constructions. Kittel {SHOT) renders an emended text thus : ' And Caleb b. Hezron took Azubah (deserted one) to wife, and begat Jerioth (tent-curtains) ; and these are her sons, Jesher (up- rightness), Shobab (backsliding), and Ardon. ' As to the names of tliese sons, Jesher may be read Jojashar (Vahwe is right), and Shobab Jashub (one who turns to (jod), and Ardon Oman ( opva). But -,b" can hardly be thus used of God (in spite of Dt. 324 Ps. 119137), and Oman, or (iCh. 821 MT) Arnan, has a suspicious aspect. Hence Klostermann [Gesch. 115) takes V. 18 to be a record of a shortlived colony of Calebites, founded on the spot where there had been a pastoral settlement. He renders ' Caleb b. Hezron made the deserted one the woman of tent- curtains to bear children, namely. Upright, and Back- slider, and Destruction ' (reading riiy'T nc'N, Tk?*, and p3x). The colonists began well, but ' left the paths of uprightness ' (Pr. 2 13), and were given up to ' destruc- tion ' (=She5l, Pr. 15ii). Wellhausen also (Z)? Gent. 33/) notices the symbolic character of the names; nr\ according to him, =|nc, Jeshurun ; rni^"n3 (so he reads) is a tent-dwelling woman ; n3Mj?. the desert region inhabited at first by the Calihibites.

2. Mother of Jehoshaphat, i K. 2242 (dfae^a [B]) = 2Ch. 2031. T. K. c.


(>VTy), J(

AzZLK[^.t.., I/].

Ezek. Ill AV; RV Ijetter


RV AzARU, RV"?- Aztira (azaroy [B].

-^oup. [A], om. L), family in the great post-e.\ilic list (see Ezra, ii. 9, 8 c), in I Esd. 5 15, but not in || Ezra 2 16 = Neh. 7 21 ; probably identical with Azzuk, 2(Xeh. 10 17 [iS]). Note in each case the occurrence of the preceding names, Adin, Ater, and Hezekiah.


AV Gaza (H-Tr, pAiAN [B], pAZHC [A], aAia [L]), iCh. 728RV. Many Hebrew MSS here read .tj? (Ayyah ; cp (P"), a reading recommended by the context. The place was apparently N. of Shechem. See Gaza.


(I^y, ' gifted with strength ' ; oz<J [BAFL]). father of Paltiel, 2 (Nu. 3426t).


4"V1W [1-ri; in 2], helped [by God] ' ) ; see Names. 56, and cp Azuri of Ashdod.

1. Father of Hananiah, the prophet, of Gibeon, Jer.28 [(B ch. 35] I (a^(op [BNAQD; AV Azur.

2. Father of Jaazaniah [4I, Ezek. Ill (.^p [B], lo^ep [A], aiovp [Q], a^ [Q'nff], iffep [I'Ll) ; AV AzuR.

3. One of the signatories to the covenant (see Ezra, j. 87); Neh. 10 17 (aSovp [B], of. [NAL]) ; AV Azuran ; perhaps also a Gibeonite?


1. Meaning of name[edit]

(7i'3 ; often h BaaA. indicating that the reader is to substitute aicxynh ; ihe substitute has

"'""' '^^ ''>' '"'" ""-" '^^^ '" ^ ^ 

^*"9 25. as the corresponding flt^'S

local numiiia. ^'^ '" "**-' '^'^^- '*^- ^'f Jer. 324 and elsewhere; see Di. A/B/i.l Phil. -hist. Kl. 188 1 ) is a word common to all the Semitic languages, which iJriniarily signifies owner, proprietor, possessor. It is used, for example, of the owner of a house, a field, cattle, and the like ; the freeholders of a city are its l>t'\i.'im. In a secondary sense ba'al means husband ; but it is not used of the relation of a master to his slave or of a superior to his inferior ; nor is it synony- mous with the Hcb. and Pha.n. ddon, Syr. mar, .-\rab. rabb, in the general sense of lord, master. When a divine being (<V) is called baal it is not as the lord of the worshi[)per, but as the proprietor and inhabitant of some place or district, or the possessor of some distinctive character or attribute, and therefore a comple- ment is always required. Each of the multitude of local B.i.ils is distinguished by the name of his own place. There was a Baal of Tyre, a Haal of Sidon, a Baal of Harran, a Baal of Tarsus ; a Baal of the Lebanon, and a Baal of Mt. Mcrnion ; a Baalat of Byblos, and so on.- We know that in some cases the Baal of a place had a proper name : the Baal of Tyre w as -Melkart ; in Southern Arabia Dhu Samawi was the Baal of Bakir, '.\thtar of Gumdan, and so on. In other cases the local Baal was distinguished in some other way. The god of Shechem was Baal-berith (ix.-rhaps as presiding over an alliance; but see B.\.\i.- hickiph) ; Baalzebub (to whom was ascribed control of Hies ; cp B.V.m./.khuh) had a celebrated oracle at Kkron ; a /3a Vapvws, Koipavos kui/jluv (Baal-markod), is known from inscriptions found near Beirut ; a kjjto ^]}2 {sanatorf) in Cyprus, and so on. In Baal-gad and Baal-zephon the second element seems to be the name of a god (see F(jktunk. B.\al-Zi;i'hon). On Baal- hanunon and Baal-shamem see below, 3/ There is nothing in these jjeculiar forms to shake the general conclusion that Baal is primarily the title of a god as inhabitant or as owner of a place.

There were thus innumerable Baals as many as there were towns (Jer. 228 11 13), .sanctuaries, natural objects, or qualities which had a religious significance for the worshippers. Accordingly, we frequently find in the OT the plural, Baalim, the Baals, which we must interpret not, as many still do,=' of the multitude of idols, or of local differentiations of one god, but of originally distinct local numina. The Baals of different places were doubtless of diverse character ; but in general they were regarded as the authors of the fertility of the soil and the increase of the flocks (Hos. 25 12), and were worshipped by agricultural festivals and offerings of the Ixiunty of nature (IIos. 2 8 13). An interesting survival of this conception is the Talmudic phrase, field of the baal, place of the baal, and the Arab ba'l, for land fertilised, not by rain, but by subterraneous waters (cp A'el. .Sew.*-) ^7 Jf.). Proper names of persons such as Hannibal (Favour of B.aal), Hasdnibal (Help of Baal), Baal-yatan (Baal has given), Shama'-ba'al (Baal hears), compared with similar Yahwfe names, Hananiah. Azariah. Jonathan, Shemaiah, show that Phoenician parents acknowledged in the gift

J See WRS, Rel. Sem.f^ a^ff. 2 Cp ill the OT Haal-hazor, B.aal-i and the like. ' For e.xample, Baethgen.

meon, Baal-peor, Baal-tamar,

of children the goodness of Baal, as Israelite parents that of Yahwe.

2 Not sun-[edit]

That B.aal was primarily a sun-god was for a long time almost a dogma among scholars,' and is still often

*^I'*-^^^- ""s doctrine is connected with theories of the origin of religion which are now almost universally akindoned.

The worship of the heavenly bodies is not the Ijeginning of religion. Moreover, there was not, as this theory assumes, one god Biuil, worshipped under difllerent forms and names by the Semitic peoples, but a multi- tude of local Baals, each the inhabitant of his own place, the protector and benefactor of those who worshipfx;d him there. Even in the astro-theology of the Babylonians the star of BCl was not the sun : it was the planet Jupiter. There is no intimation in the OT that any of the Canaanite Baals were sun-gods, or that the worship of the sun (.Shemesh), of which we have ample evidence, both early and late, was connected with that of the Baals ; in 2 K. "23 5 cp 11 the cults are treated as distinct.

3 Baal-hammon[edit]

The hammdiuvi (c'wn). included in the inventory of places of idolatrous worship with massibas and ashuras

^^' '^^^ '^"'^ elsewhere), have indeed, since 

v.ow,^^J Rashi, Ijeen connected with the late biblical hammon. ., . . - , ^ .

and Mishnic hamma (.i^n). sun, and ex- plained as sun images (RV), sun pillars;- and it has further l)een conjectured that the hammdnim belonged specifically to the cultus of Baal-hammon, whose name occurs innumerable times in Punic inscriptions. ^ and is commonly explained ' the glowing Baal ' i.e. , the Sun.* This translation, however, can hardly be right : the article would be expected : according to all analogy, liammon should be a genitive. ' The deity which dwells in the sun-pillars ' would be formally possible ; but w ith the direct connection of Baal-hammon with the sun, one of the chief arguments for interpreting hammdnim to mean ' sun-pillars ' falls to the ground. In this state of the case we cannot be sure that Baal-hammon was a solar deity ; and if fresh evidence should prove that he was, it would Ije unwarrantable to infer that the Baals universally bore the same character.

4 Baal shamem.[edit]

Another Baal, whose cultus was more widely diffused than that of Baal-hammon in later times he rose

'^'^^^ ^1' ^'^c local Baals, and perhaps in

"^'^"y places supplanted them was I5aal- 

shamem, whose name we must interpret, not ' Lord of Heaven,' but ' The gotl who dwells in the heaven,' to whom the heavens Ijelong.' Philo of Byblos identifies B.aal-shamem (ci'ytos ovpavov) with the Sun ("HXtoj ; see I'ragm. Hist. Gr. 3 565/ ) ; Macrobius says that the god of Heliopolis was at once Jupiter and Sol (Sal. 1 23) ; a PalmjTene bilingual (Vog. , no. 16) seems to give "HXtos for prH'^. hi" the reading is not quite certain. The Greeks and the Hellenised Syrians identify Baal-shamem with Zeus \e.g., Z. fi^yiffros Kepai'fios), which is better in accord with the obvious significance of the name. *

When the Israelites invaded Western Palestine and

1 See, for example, Creuzer, Symb. u. Afytk.i^) 2413; Movers, Phdrt. 1 169^

'^ It is singular that this interpretation did not suggest it.self to any of the ancient translators. See further, Ma^^eba, | 6.

  • In Phoenician also E!-hammon.

In a Palmyrene inscription a /lammdnd is dedicated to the sun ; De Vogui, no. 123 a.

  • The name is equivalent to Dhfi .Samawi in Southern Arabia.

8 liaal-shamem in Dan. 12 11 (perverted by Jewish wit to Sikkils Somem, ' the appalling abomination ') was probably a Roman Jupiter (see Abomination, ii.).

passed over from a nomadic to an agricultural life, they learned from the older inhabitants not only

R *1 ^ ^'^ * plough and sow and reap, but also

  • the religious rites which were a part of

Canaanite agriculture the worship of the Baals who gave the incre;\se of the land, the festivals of the husbandman's year. At first, probably, this worship of the Baals of the land went side by side with that of Yahw6, the God of their nomadic fathers. When Israel came into full possession of Canaan, however, Yahwe himself tx^came the Baal of the land. Names like Jerubaal (Gideon), Eshbaal (son of Saul), Baal- jada (son of David), prove that Israelites in whom the national spirit was strongest had no scruple in calling Yahwe their Baal. The worship on the high places was worship of Yahwe in name ; its rites were those of the old Baal cult. The prophets of the eighth century, especially Hosea, denounced this religion as pure heathenism. In whose name it is practised is to them immaterial : it is not the name but the character of God that makes the difference between the religion of Israel and that of the heathen.

In the preceding century Elijah had roused the spirit of national Yahwism in revolt against the introduction of the worship of the Tyrian Baal (Melkart) by Ahab, and Jehu had stamped out with sanguinary thoroughness the foreign religion ; but this conflict was of a char- acter wholly different from that in which the prophets of the eighth century engaged with the Canaanite Baal- religion practised in Yahwe's name. In the seventh century, with the introduction of Assyrian cults, there was a marked recrudescence of the kindred Old Israelite and Canaanite religions, which provoked the violent measures of Josiah, but was only temporarily checked by them, as we see from Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

With the cultus of the Baals in Canaan we are acquainted chiefly through the descriptions which the prophets give of the Baalised sif venia

6. Baal cultus.[edit]

-,^,.^^_worship of Yahwe. The places of worship were on the hill-tops, under the evergreen trees ; they were marked by asheras, masscbas, ham- mdnim. Images were not always, perhaps seldom, present : an image required a shrine or temple. At the altars on the high places, offerings of the fruits of the land and the increase of the flocks were made ; ^ beside them fornication was licensed nay, consecrated. The Baals had their priests (Chem.^rim, q.v.) and prophets. At the great contest on Carmel they leap upon the altar, and cry, and gash themselves with knives ' after their manner. ' We may supplement these scanty notices by descriptions of Phojnician worship, especially of the Tyrian Baal, Melkart, and of the Punic ' Kronos,' in Greek authors. See, further, High Places, Idolatry, and, with reference to human sacrifices, Molecil

.Selden, De Dis Syris, 1617 ; Movers, Die Phdnizicr, i. ;

M (inter, Religion iter Kart/niger ; Oort, Worship of Baalim in Israel, translated by Colenso, 1865;

Literature. l^audissin, art. ' \\z.:x\; PR (?); Pietschmann, IVidnizier, 1889, I'ii ff. \ Baethgen, Beiir.z. seinit. Rel.-gesch. ; K. Meyer, art. ' Baal ' in Roscher, Lexikon derGriech. u. RSm. Myth. 2867^ w. R. S. G. F. M.


(Sl?3. ' Lord ' ; cp "rjSo, i Ch. 835).

1. In a genealogy of Rkuisen ; i Ch. 55 {iwrjk [B], /SaaX [.\], /9aXa [L]).

2. In a genealogy of Benjamin {q.v. , 9, ii. ^) ; i Ch. 830 (/3oaXa/fat/tt, i.e. ^aa\a /cat? [B], /3aaX [/cat vrjp] [A], /iaeX[/cai .-aSa/S /cat vrjp] [L]) = 936 (/3aaX [BA], /3aeX [L]). It is more probable that MT, followed by some ancestor of , dropped Ner (31:1 [131]) in i Ch. 8 than that it has been added elsewhere (so SBOT). The conjecture (We. TBS 31 n. ) that Baal and Nadab are to be read together as a compound name is thus unsupported ; it is also unnecessary, since Melech

1 Punic temple inscriptions defining the dues of the priests for v.irious kinds of sacrifice (so-called Tariffs of Marseilles and Cartha!,'e) show that both the animals offered and the classes of sacrifice were closely similar to those of the Hebrew laws.

(tI^o) likewise occurs (i Ch. 835 etc.) alone as a proper name. See Names, 42.


(/I'll), I Ch. 4 33t. See Baalath-beer.


(n7j?3, 96). i. See Kirjath-Jearim.

2. A city in the Negeb of Judah, Josh. I529 (/3aXa [B], paaXa [AL]). In Josh. 19 3 the name is written Balah (n^a; (iuXa [B], /3eX/3wXa [A], jioXa [L]), and the place is assigned to Simeon. In i Ch. 4 29 it appears as BiLHAH (nri^; a/SeXXa [B], jSaXaa [A], (iaXaaS [L]). The reading is uncertain and the site unknown.

3. Mt. Baalah, a landmark on the bound.ary of Judah between Shikkeron and Jabneel, Josh. 15 n (8pia iirl Xi^a [B], fipoj yrjs /3aXa [A*], o. y. ya^aXa [.A" *'], o. T?js fiaaXujv [L]). The site is unknown, unless with Clermont-Ganneau (J?ev. Crit. '97, p. 902) we should read n,-i: for n,n, and identify the ' river of the Baal ' with the Nahr Rubin (see Jabneel, i). More than one river in Palestine, doubtless, was dedicated to Baal.


See Kirjath-Jearim.


("IX? nSl'3, Josh. 198 B&pK [B*], BAXeK [B^]. BAAXeepHppAMtoG [A], B<Jk<\Xe0 BHppAGMcoe [L]) or Baal (i Ch. 433). also called Ramah of the South (333 DOT, Josh. 198) or Ramoth of the South (i S. 30 27 pafxa. [BL], , -^ [A] vbTov) ; perhaps the same as the Bealoth (nvr3, fiaX/jLaivav [B], ^aXwd [AL]) of Josh. 1.^24 (and V K. 4 16 ; see Aloth), an unidentified site in the Negeb probably its most southern part of Judah. The name implies that it had a well and was a scat of Baal-worship.


(fin? hv2-Le., the [protecting] Baal of the covenant '),i a form of the Canaanitish Baal worshipped at Shechem (Judg. 94). called El- berith (n"l!l ^N, 'God of the covenant") in Judg. 946 RV.

has in Judg. 94 BooA^epie [B], paaX Sioe^foj? [A], /3aaA- /3p[ei9] io0>)/CT)s [L]; in v. 46 /Sai^p PepcO [B], /SooA fiiaerjicris [A], r,\ Sia0. [L]; in 833 /3aaA /Setp [A], ^ooA/Sepete [L], ^aoA Sia0riKr}v [BJ.

The covenant intended was probably that between Shechem and some neighbouring Canaanitish towns, which were originally independent, but were at length brought under Israeliti.sh supremacy (Ew. , Rue. , We. ). Of the rival views viz., {a) that the covenant was between Baal and his worshippers (Baethgen, Sayce in Smith's DBi'^^), and {6) that it was between the Canaanitish and the Israelitish inhabitants of Shechem (Be. , Ki. ) the former gives an undue extension to a specially Israelitish idea, and the latter misconceives the relation of the Israelites within Shechem to the Canaanites. Gen. 14 13 cannot possibly establish the former (Baethgen), nor can the name of Gaal's father, or the speech of Gaal (q.v.) in Judg. 928, be used to support the theory of an influential Israelitish element in the population of Shechem. Any Israelites who might be dwelling in Shechem would be simply Dnj or protected strangers, and not parties to a covenant. The temple of Baal-bcrlth had a treasury from which the citizens made a contribution to Abimelech (Judg. 94). It was there that Gaal first came forward .as a leader of the rebellion (927), and within its precinct the inhabitants of the tower of Shechem (the 'acropolis,' We. ) fipund a temporary refuge from Abimelech at the close of the revolt (946). The deuteronomic editor mistakenly accuses the Israelites of apostatising to Baal- berith after Gideon's death (Judg. 833; see Moore's note). T. K. C.


See Kirjath-jearim.

1 ' Or may not B.-uil-berith, El-berith, simply mean " God of the community" (cp Cuvknant, 5)? The origin.-il story probably gave the name of the god of Shechem' (Prof. N. Schmidt).


(13 bv2. ' Lord of Good Fortune' ; cp Guduh;il--(;u<l H;iiil [ Hoffnjann. Ueifr eiHij^v ph6n. Inschrr. 27J ; BaaAfaA L"LJ, and through corruption BAA(&)rAA(&) IMAJI.i 'in the valley of I^ebanon, under Mt. Hc-rnion,' is thrice mentioned in Joshua (11 17 127; 135 ToXvaa [H], 7a\7a\ [A], fiaeXyao [L]) as marking the northern limit of Joshua's contjuests. 'though Sayce and others identify it with Ba'albck iK'cause it is descril)ed as in the nypa of Lebanon, it is much more probably the Baai.-hekmon of 1 Ch. ;'<23 (cp also the 'mount Rial-hermon ' of Judg. 83), now known as nrinids ; sec C>i:SAKliA, 7 /. , and Uan, ii.


{'i'\^r\ 'pya ; BeeGAAMtoN [B], BeeAA- [N]. BeeA. [AJ). a place where, according to a marriage song of no historical authority (Cant. 811), Solomon had a vmey;ird which he entrusted to keepers. Some (f..^"-. , Del., Oettli) have identified it with the Balamo(n) of Judith 83, which seems to have been not far from Dothan. It is obvious, however, that some well-known place is meant, and the ieferences to N. Israelitish scenery elsewhere in the Song of Songs give some weight to Griitz's conjecture that for ' Baal- hamon ' we should read ' Baal-hermon ' (Judg. 83 i Ch. 523). If Socin (BciedJ^^ 331) is right, Baal-hermon and Baal-gad are the same, and are to be sought at the mod. Ila.sbeiya (see, however, C^k.sarea Piiii.ipi'i) : on the luxuriant terraces on both sides of the valley vinos and other fruit-trees are still cultivated. Most probably, however, ' in Baal-hanion ' is due to a corrupt repetition of ' to Solomon. ' Bickell is right in omit- ting it. T. K. c.


(p^n-'pr?. 42. 'Baal has been gracious' ; tpjohanan, Ph. 7r23n, and the well-known 'Hannibal,' also Ass. Baalhanunu, COT, I89).

1. Ben Achbor; one of the kings of Edom, according to Gen. 8638/. (^aXaevvuv [A], /3a\ae'a' [D], ^aXaefvwp [E], fiaaXevuv [L]) = i Ch. 1 49/ {(iaXaeuvuip [B], (3a- XaevvCJ [.\], fiaWevuv [L]). Strangely enough, the name of his city or district is not given. Moreover, the scrite's error c'nay ( ' Hebrews ' ) for c'"i3Dy ( ' mice ' ) in I S. 14 II (see Bu. SHOT) suggests that ma:;' p (ben Achlwr) in v. 38/^ may be a variant to niyn p in v, 32. Now, as Hadad II., an important king, (probably) the j founder of a dynasty, has no father's name given, it | seems likely that Baal-hanan is the lost father's name ; and thus the tc.vt should run, ' .\nd Saul died, and Hadad, ben Baal-hanan, reigned in his stead ' (so Marq. Fund. 10/.; see, however, Bela [ii.]). See Edom. 4, Hadad.

2. A Gederite ; according to the Chronicler, super- intendent of olives and sycamores in the Shephelah of Judah in the time of David ; i Ch. 2728 {jiaXavas [B], /SaXXam [A], ^aXaavav [L]). See David, iic.


(l^'n Sv?, 93. 96). 2 S. 1823. See H.\/,OR, 2.


(pDin "pyS; 93, B&lAeiM [B*], BaaAcim [B], BaaA epMtoN [AL]). 1 Ch. 523 ; see Baai.-(;ad. Baal-uamon. and. especially, CAESAREA PHILIPPI.


("hp:!). Hos. 2i6 EV ; mg. rightly 'my lord ' AV, RV ' my master.' See Hosea. 6.


(D^'pran). Judg. 2 II. See Baal, i.


(D'hvi ; B6A[e]iCA [BXc.aAQ], BeNeCA [X*] BaaAiC [Q'"^]. cp Sw. ad loc. ; Jos. Ant. x. 93. 164. Ba&Aimoc ie-. Dvl'2 as some Heb. MSS read), king of the Ammonites, the prime mover in the murder of Gedaliah (Jer. 40 [47]i4 ; cp 41 10). The name is interesting as an etymological problem. Some render ' .Son of exultation,' on the precarious supposition that in this name and a few others 3 stands for ja (see

1 Through confusion of X, a, and 8 in the uncial

Bidkar) ; while Baethgen {Lkitr. tur Sem. Rel.-gesch. 16) compares the Phoenician cni'^i^Cl^ 1, no. 308 ; CKi3V. ib. no. 50) and renders ' husband of Isis ' a still more precarious derivation. See Ammo.N, 8. W. R. S.


(jirn "Pra ; 93 96 ; Nu. 3238 Ezelc 2.')9 I Ch. .")8), otherwise Betb-baal-meon (Josh. 13 17), Beth-meon (Jer. 4S23). or Beon (i>2 ; .Nu. ^'l^).

(S's rc.idinRS are: in .\u.3-Ji8, ^tcA^tu)!- (HAL); in Ezek. J.'ig, .n-ai'ay.uyTjt [1!*], .ra^oj -nr^-i [Hat^AQ) ; 1 Ch. 5 R, ^A- p.a.(rav \\\\, -^auj)'[.\l, fxtoji-II-]; in Josh. 13 17, oikou fiA0<ofl 11!], 01. ^tKa.y.uiv\\\, oiKou? ^ttA/iu>e[L] ; in Jer. 4b 23, 01x01/ /xauc [P.AQl, 0. y.auS [K*], o. 7a^u)^ [K^a); { Nu. 323^aiof IBFviJ.L], ^o/aa lAJ).

The place is assigned in Numbers, Joshua, and Chronicles to the Reutenites. It is twice mentioned, once as lieth-baiil-meon and once as Baal-nieon, in the inscription of Mesha (//. 9 30), from which we learn that it was Moabite before the time of Omri and became so again under Mesha. It was Moabite also in the time of Jeremiah (Jer. 4823), and in that of Ezekicl, who names it with Beth-jeshimoth and Kiriathaim as ' the glory of the country ' (Ezek. 259). It is represented by the modern Ma'in, in the W. Zerka Ma'in on the Moabite plateau, 2861 ft. alxjve sea-level, 5 m. SW. from Madaba. There are extensive ruins [BaedJ'^^ 177)-

It may probably be identified with the Maccab:ean Bea n- [q. V. ]. The Onomastica ( (95<-' 32 40 101 32) quote the Reubenite city under the forms (iatav, Basan, iroXis ToO 'Afioppaiov.


(nir? hl% BeeA(|)ertop BKAFRrL), or, rather, the Baal of Poor (so RV"'K- Nu. f:53 ; see Baal, 1), the Moabite god to v. hose cult Israel yoL-ed itself while in Shittim (Nu. I.e. JE, Dt. 43 Ps. 10()29 thrice in later writings abbreviated to PiiOR ['/.v., 2jl. The name occurs in Hos. 9 10 as a pUnf-itaiiw^'n. abbreviation, it would seem, for Beth-Baal-Ptor (see Beth-Peor). The nature of the worship of this god is unknown, although it is not improbable that it was a local cult of Chemosh (Gray, Hi'N 131). lor the old speculations, based mostly upon precarious et)- mologies, see Selden, De Dis Syris. See, furilicr, Pedr, and cp Baudissin, Sfudien, 22,2, Bacthg. Beili: 14/. 261, and Di. Num. ad loc. , Dr. Icut. mi loc.


(D'>"J?-^r3, 89), a place men- tioned in connection with a battle between David and the Philistines in the valley of Rei'HAIM [q.v.), hard by Jerusalem, 2S. 020 (eTrdfw [or, tTr'dvw] SiOAOirilj' [B.\L]);i I Ch. 14ii ^/.f (<^aX(/)a^icrfiM . . SiaAOTTTj (papiffiv [B], <f>a\aaS' tpadeiaei . . . SiaKoirriP (papKiv [{<], ^aaXcpapafffLV . . . SiaKOTri] (fjapaafif [.\], fia(\- (papaaiv bis [L]). According to the mrrator, the name was so called because David had said. ' Yahwe has broken through my foes before me as at a breaking through of water," Baal-perazim (i.e., ' Lord of acts of breaking through ') being regarded as a title of the God of Israel. The same event seems to be referred to in Is. 2821, where the place is called Mt. Perazim {6poi dcreiiQv [BXAQ], tbj 6p(i diaKoirruv [Aq. in Q J. if ri^ 6p(i Tu)v diaKOTTuif [Sym. Theod. in Q'"2]). This form of the name suggests the most complete explana- tion of David's question, ' Shall I i;o vp against ihe Philistines?" (I'.ig). He asks whether he shall come upon the Philistines from the chain of hills which bounds the valley of Rephaim on the east (in v. 20 read, ' And David came /n> B;ial - perazmi , ' with and Klo. ) ; he starts, be it remembered, from Jerusalem (see David, 7). On the next occasion he did not ' go up' (on the hills), but came upon his foes from the rear (r. 19). In spite of this narrative, which is written from the later Israelitish point of view, the name Baal-perazim must have existed long before David. It is analogous to RiMMON-PKRKZ, which means ' Rimmon (RammSn) of Perez.' and belonged properly to some point in the chain of hills referred to, which was specially honoured ss^VD, being preceded in v. 20a by tmv.

by Canaanitish Baal - worshippers. David, however, beyond doubt took Haal as synonymous with Yahw e ; the name gave him a happy omen, and received a fresh significance from his victory. Whether ' Perazim ' was originally a name descriptive of the physical appear- ance of the hills E. of the valley of Rephaim, or whether it had some accidental origin, cannot be determined.


(BaaAc*.moc [BA]), i Es(1.'943 RV

= Nfh. 84, .\iAASKI.\H, 15.


RV Baal-Shalishah, {hv2. n^'^^, BAiecAp[e]lC&[B*Al(ras(ra A?)], Bh0C&A|- c& U-]), in Ephraim, evidently near Gii.GAL (2 K. 442), doubtless identical with the Bethsalisa and B<m9- CApiCAG of Jer. and Eus. (O5107ii 23992), 15 R. m. N. of Diospolis (Lydda). These conditions seem to be met by Kh. Sirisid, which is exactly 13 Eng. m. , or about 14J R. m. from Lydda (PEFQ, '76, p. 68). Four miles farther on is the village Kh. Kefr. Thilth, with which Baal-shalisha is now identified by Conder {FEFM-2'2'&s). In illustration of 2 K. i.e. the Talmud {San/i. 12 a) states that nowhere did the fruits of the earth ripen so quickly as at Baal-shalisha. See Sha- i.isii.\, L.\ND OK, and cp Zi;i.zah.


("iDn hv'^i.e. , ' Baal of the Palm,' 96 103, Ba&A GAAAdikP [BAL]), an unidentified locality in the neighbourhood of Gibeah, where the Isr.aelites put themselves in array against the Benjamites (Judg. 20 33). Some think of ' the Palm of Deborah ' (Judg. 45), which, however, was too remote (Moore). Eus. (05 238 75) speaks of a Beth-thamar near Gibeah.


1. Not Fly-god.[edit]

{1^1] ^^3 ; eN To^ [eN th A

V. 2, B.\ 77'. 6i6; ^id, Toy. T. ?. i/.] B(\<!kA MyiAN [B.\], taking Zcbub or MyiA =^s the name of the god

Jos. Ant. ix. 2i), a god of I'^kron, whose oracle was consulted by Ahaziah king of Israel in his last illness (2 K. \2f.6i6-\). The name is commonly explained 'lord of flies.' True, there is no Semitic analogy for this ; but Pausanias (viii. 267; cp J. G. Frazer's note on v. 14 I ) tells us of a Ze(>s dirbfj.vio'i who drove away danger- ous swarms of flies from Olympia, and Clement of Alexandria attests the cultus of the same god in Elis {Protrept. 238) ; and we may, if we will, interpret the title ' a god who sends as well as removes a plague of flies ' (so Baudissin), which lifts the god up a little. Let us, however, look farther.

Bezold [Catalogue, K. 3500) thought that in an Assyrian inscription of the 12th cent. B.C. he had met 9 M t jtaH with Baal-zabubi as the name of one of the

f 7phuh sods of the Ebir nari (on which see Ebkr, i), in which case Baal-zebub was a widely known divine name, adopted for the god of Ekron. The restoration of the final .syllable -bi, however, is ad- mittedly quite uncertain, and the reading Baal-sapuna (see Baal-Zephon, i) seems much more probable.^ Winckler, therefore, suggests that Zebub might be some very ancient name of a locality in Ekron ^ (no longer to be explained etymologically), on the analogy of Baal-Sidon, Baal-Hermon, Baal - Lebanon. No such locality, however, is known, and Ekron, not any locaUty in Ekron, was the territory of the Baal. It

o n_i 's, therefore, more probable that Baal-

3. Real name[edit]

, , . , , r . ; u- u

Baal zfibfll ^s"^^", ' lord of flies (which occurs only in a ' very late ' narrative, one which has a pronounced didactic tendency), is a contemptuous uneuphonic Jewish modification of the true name, which was probably Baal-zebul, ' lord of the

1 \Vi. GI 1 223, 225 ; Hommel, AHT 196, 255. Halivy has made a similar mistake (see next note).

2 \\A\ii\y (R,-,i. shn. 1 23) thought that he had proved this; but in Am. Tab. 174, 16, to which he refers for an Ekronite Zabubu, the right reading is .Sapuna.

3 Kuenen, Ond. 1 409 ( 25', n. 8).

high house' (cp i K. 813, and Schrader's note in COT). This is a title such as any god with a fine temple might bear, and was probably not confined to the god of Ekron (in the Panammu inscription of Zeiijlrli, /. 22, the god Rakubel bears the title n'a h]!^, ' lord of the house'). The second part of it strongly reminds us of E-sagila, the 'high house' of the god Marduk (see Babylon, 5). ' High house ' (zebul) would at the same time refer to the dwelling-place of the gods on the -\ii)0 "(.t or ' mountain of assembly ' in the far north 1 (see Congregation, Mount ok). There is some reason to think that the Phoenicians knew of such a dwelling-place. The conception is implied in the divine name Baal-Saphon, 'Lord of the north' (see Baal-Zephon), and in the Elegy on the king of Tyre (Ez. 28 12^) ; and theSemitised Philistines also probably knew of it. At any rate, the late Hebrew narrator or, if we will, an early scribe may have resented the application of such a title as ' Lord of the high house ' (which suggested to him either Solomon's temple [n'3 "^^T I K. 8 13] or the heavenly dwelling of Yahwe [}ij;c, lit. 26 IS Ps. 686]) to the Ekronite god, and changed it to ' Lord of flies,' Baal-zebub. See Bkki.zebub. This explanation throws light on three proper names, Jezebel, Zehul, and Zebulon also on Is. 6815, ' from thy zi'/'ul (high house) of holiness and glory.' The same term s3ii/ could be applied to the mansion of the moon in the sky (Hab. 3 11, We. ). T. K. C.


(pS>* hv^), or, no doubt more accurately, Baal-Zaphon (pS^' '3).

1. The name of a Phoenician god, formed like Baal- Gad, Baal-Hermon, and meaning "Baal of the north." Though not mentioned in OT, it is important as enabling us to account for certain ancient Israelits proper names (Zaphon, Zephon, Zephonites, Ziphion), and also for the enigmatical reference to a mountain abode of the Elohim, situated "in the recesses of the north" (Is. 14:13; see Congregation, Mount of). The latter conception was evidently believed by Ezekiel (2813/) to be familiar to the Phoenicians, and is clearly connected with the divine name in question, which describes and designates 'the Baal whose throne is on the sacred mountain of the gods in the north' (Baethg. Beitr. 23, 261). The Assyrian inscriptions contain several references to this god. A text of Esar-haddon speaks of Ba.il- sapunu as one of the 'gods of Ebir-nari ' (see Ei'.er, i), and more than one mountain-district nwy have bone the name of Baal-Zaphon.'^ The chief seat of the god, however, must have been in the centre of Mount Lebanon. Elsewhere (Copper, 3) other texts are referred to in which Ba'ali-sapuna is described as rich in copper, which appears to have been the case with Lebanon. Altogether we cannot be wrong in identifying Baal-Zaphon with Baal-Lebanon, "the Baal of Lebanon." The relation of this national deity of the Phoenicians to the Baal-Zaphon of Goshen requires separate consideration (see 2). On the question whether Baal-Zaphon was known under another of his names in Philistia, and even perhaps among the Israelites, see Beel-Zebul, 2. T. K. C.

2. ^eeXffeircpbjv : so most MSS, but many MSS ^ P\ff<f>i>)v ; Vg. Beelsephon (sejon in Jer. OS; Targ. pss-'j^ya, cp Syr. Bg'el-SCphftn ; Arab. Walton, ' Safun, the idol,' safun at-fdgiith), a place near the point where the Isrjjelites crossed the Red Sea, and opposite their encampment (Ex. 14 2 9 Nu. 33?). The name is usually understood to point to a national Phoenician god of the

1 This is .ikin to the theory of Movers, who makes Baal-zebul (' Lord of the he.avenly dwelling ') originally a name of Saturn, a theory which lacks evidence.

2 TigIath-pileserIII.(A'A'ii. 26/) speaks first of the mountains of Lebanon and then of the land of Ba'ali-.sapuna as far as the mountains of Ammana.

3 E.^., AF 7 10, perhaps L. This form also seems to be Hexaplaric (see the Boheiric version ; the older Sahidic text has ir0 for <^).

same name ; but the Egyptians who mention a goddess Ha'alt(i)-sapuna as worshipjK-d at Memphis ^ connect this cultus, very significantly, with that of Sa/>ii\u), a local god of Western Goshen (see GosJiKN, 2). This divinity was, therefore, evidently not a I'hoinician deity ; her domain, at any rale, was either in or near the region of (joshen. Conse(|uently, the Haal whom this local Ha'alt or Hettis implies was not also the Phoenician Haal-Zephon, though whether he had an independent origin or not, cannot as yet be determined. Like most of the local names of Goshen, Haal-Zephon (or rather see (1) -Haal-Zaphon) is clearly Semitic-

The honour accorded by the l-".gyptians to the consort of ' Haal-Zephon ' no doubt proves the importance of that town of Goshen. It is difiicult, however, at present, to determine the situation of the place (see Kxouus, i. 6). The expression 'be/ore Haal-Zephon, over against it" (obscured in Nu. 33?/. ) need not signify ' eastward of," which in ordinary Hebrew would be the most natural meaning ; it seems rather to indicate here some point not yet touched on the NIL. (or S. ?).

Such iiltiitifications as that with Heroopolis (Forster), 'Ajrud (Niebuhr), etc. had to be given up even before the

Goshen and Heroopolis was determined by Naville's tions. For the value of more modern theories (Hrugsch, = Mount Casius ; Kbers, on the 'Atuk.-i mountain, SW. of Suez; Naville, on Lake Tinisah, near Sheikh en-Nedek), see Exodus, i. t J/'. I, T. K. C. 2, \V. M. M.