Encyclopaedia Biblica/Doeg-Ecclesiastes

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search



3X1, I S. 21 7 [8] 229, but m, i S. 221822 [Kt.], :xn, Ps. 522 ; AcoHK [BSARTL], but AcoHf. i.S. 22 9[.\]; Jos. An/.\i. 12 i, AcoHrOc)- An Edomite (for the reading 's-in, 'Syrian,' presupposed [except in Ps. 522] by (S^^ [but not L] and Jos., is certainly wrong) who filled some minor post among the servants of Saul ; most probably he was ' keeper of the saddle asses" (cp Judg. IO4 i S. 93 a S. I62 i Ch. 273o), i S. 21 7 [8] 22 9. He had been detained (so one tradition tells us) ' before Yahw6 ' i.e. , in the sacred precincts at Nob (or Gibeon ; see Nob) by some obscure religious prescription (see y?5W 456). and had cunningly watched David in his intercourse with the priest Ahimelech (see David, 3). Soon after, he denounced the latter to the suspicious Saul, and when the king commanded his ' runners ' to put Ahimelech and the other priests to death, and they refused, it was this foreigner who lifted up his hand against them (i S. 229-18).

1 See also under Daniel, 4.

The two passages in which Doeg's office is referred to are no longer in their original form in MI . In 21 8 [AV 7] he is called ' the mightiest of the shepherds ' (D'jh TSK), a strange descrip- tion of a shepherd, and still stranger when we observe that T3N occurs nowhere else in Hebrew narratives. The conjecture 'the mightiest of the runners' (C'sn, Gratz, Dr., Ki., Bu.) gives an e.xsier but still not a natural phrase, and disregards the renderinjj of hai. in -Jl 7 |8), ffiiaiv ra^ r)ni6i>ovi iaouA. There can be lutle doubt that Lagarde {iVlittheil. 3 350) is right in reading Cn^V ':"3iK, which he renders 'driver of the mules,' a less natural rendering than that given above, but still possible. Words like n;y and V'aiK are flexible. For the former see Lagarde {I.e.) ; for the latter, see Abki Almost as certainly we should also re.id "TV for ^-\2y in 229 (see (S). We.'s ob- jection to following (S here (TBS 125) falls to the ground as soon as it is recognised that 21 7 [8] is a later insertion in the narrative.

The reference to Doeg in the title of Ps. 52 is due to the thirst of later Jewish readers for biblical justification of their idealising view of David. The Psalm was written for use in the temple (see v. 8). T. K. c.


(3?3, a name, of unknown origin, common to all Semitic dialects; KycoN. canis [but Mt. 15:26-27= Mk 7: "^^ kynarion, fa/<?//H).

1. References.[edit]

No dogs of any noble type are mentioned in the Bible. The Israelitish kings were not, like the Assyrian,' great hunters, and even the Hebrew legend of Nimrod the hunter (but is ' hunter ' meant literally? see Nimrod) in Gen. IO9 says nothing of his dogs.'-^ According to EV the greyhound is referred to in Prov. 30 31 as one of the four things which are ' stately in going' ; but this is doubtful (see Cock, Grey- hound). The shepherd's dog is mentioned in Job 30 1, and dogs which guard the house may be intended in Is. 56 10; but neither passage vouchsafes the dog any friendly words. The OT references are in fact almost entirely to the pariah dog, such as may be seen in any of the ' Bible lands ' to-day. They seem to have gone careering in packs round the city at night (Ps. 596 14/.) ; it was dangerous to stop one of them (Prov. 26 17). Doubtless, however, they were useful as scavengers. They were ready to devour even human bodies (i K. 14ii I64 21 23/ 2 K. 9 10 36 and similarly Jer. 153 cp I K.. 21 19 2238 Ps. 6823[24]), and to them flesh that men might not eat was thrown (Ex. 2231 ; contrast Mt. 76). Prom Mk. 728 (.Mt. I527) some have inferred a sympathy between men and dogs in the time of Christ ; but this is hazardous. Paul has no such sympathy (Phil. 82), and a certain Rabbi dissuades from keejiing fierce dogs in the house, apparently because they would frighten away the poor (Shabb. 63 a). Most dogs, then, were fierce. Yet Tobit, according to the Greek text, makes a companion of his dog on his journeys (Tob. 5i6 II4) ; see Tobit.

1 On the breeds of hunting dogs known in Assj-ria, see Houghton, rSB.A 652-62 ['77].

'2 On the four 'dogs' of Marduk (Mero<lach) see below. So in some legends the Tyri.-in Heracles (or Melkart) is accompanied by a dog {R'l- Sem.fi) 292).

3 Thomson, Z,^ (ed. '94), 202; cp Doughty, Ar. Des. 1 309 337/ 526-

2. Pariah dog[edit]

The pariah dog referred to above is a variety of the cosmopolitan dog (Canis familiaris), though the breed has probably been intermixed by crossing with jackals or wolves. The dogs live in companies, each dog having its own lair (sometimes two), to which it returns for rest during the day. Those that frecjuent the towns act as scavengers, living on offal ; but in the country they are trained by the shepherds and fiirmers to act as sheep-dogs (cp Job 30 1 1. Not much good, however, can be said of the latter : they are 'a mean, sinister, ill-conditioned generation,' whose use consists in barking at intruders and warning the shepherds of any possible danger. In appearance they resemble the Scotch collie, and are said to be intelligent, and sagacious when trainctl. Rabies is almost, or entirely, unknown among them.

3. Exegetical details[edit]

The stress laid in Judge 7:5-7 on the way in which Gideon's three-hundred drank, lapping with their tongues like dogs, probably indicates that they were fierce uncivilised men (Moore, ///(/^rj, aoa). The mention of 'dogs' in company with 'lions' in I's. 2'2 as typical of the fierce enemies of pious Israel, is surprising. There is no OT parallel for the use of the pariah dogs of Eastern cities as symbolic of the enemies of Israel. In later times the Gentiles were called "dogs' (XiMaA, 77 ti; liiibii Kama, 49, etc.) ; but the Talmidic use has no biblical authority; Mk. 7 27 surely does not express what may be called biblical doctrine. Moreover in Psalm 22:21 only lions and wild oxen are referred to. (however see Psalm 22:16,20)

Aq.. Theotl., and Jer. evidently read C'2^5 'hunters' ; this is a clever attempt to get over a real difficulty. In v. 17 (lA' 16) we should certainly read 0^*33 D'l<3\ and D-ON-1 nij;. The sense then becomes, 
Greedy lions in their strength surround me,
A troop of wild oxen encircles me.

Similarly in v. 21 (1--V 20) we should read 'n^n K'3^, and render (reading td:3 for aire).

Snatch my soul from the young lion,
My life from the clutch of the greedy lion.

We now pass on to a group of five passages which have been much misunderstood.

  • 1. 2 K. 81J ' Wlut is thy servant, the dog (0 has 'the dead dog'l, that he should do this great thing?' RV, par:i phrasing, ' which is but a dog.' .W incorrectly, ' Is thy servant a dog,' etc.
  • 2. a S. Iflg 'Why should this de.id dog [C- 'this cursed dog '] curse my lord the king?'
  • 3. 2 S. '.>8 ' What is thy servant that thou should'st look upon a dead dog like me ? '
  • 4. I S. ".'4 14 [15] ' After whom dost thou pursue? after a dead dog?'
  • 5. 3 S. 38 'Am I a dog's head that belongeth to Judah?' (EV).

As to (i) AV is quite wrong. Hazael does not revolt in horror from the description of Elisha, but only affects to think it too j;rLat an achievement for him. 'Dog' is here an expression of servile humility towards Klisha, as in Assyrian ('we are the king's dogs,' /.^. his humble servants).! In (i) 'dead dog ' (TO 373) cannot be right, as l- indicates by the substituted epithet (>ej above). The text must be incorrect. We want some word which will be eijually suitable in (2) (3) and (4) ; and if possible some word which will make letter sense than 'dead ' (,-c) even in (j) and (4), where it has hitherto been plausibly tak.ii as an Oriental exaggeration. The word which we seek is KCO 'unclean'; 'dead dog should be 'unclean, despised, pariah dog." To explain his see Doughty's striking description of the treatment of their hcKuids by the Bedouin, who ' with blows cast out these profane creatures from the beyt.'2 As to (5) the text is evidently not quite correct (see Klo.) ; there seems to be a play on the name of Caleb the dog-tribe (s<-e 1025, n. i ; Nabal). To read 'Am 1 a dog's head' (omitting the next words), with Prof H. P. Smith, can hardly be called s;itisfactor)'. This idiom may ca.st light upon Dt. '23 18(19] where 'dog' appears to be applied to the class of persons elsewhere called kfdHlm. It was natural to cxplam the word as a term of com- tempt (see Idolatrv, g 6). If, however, ' unclean do^ ' or some similar phrase was a common circumlocution indicative of humble deference used in addressing superiors, as kalbu is in Assyrian (especially in the Ainarna letters), kelrb need not, as applied to these temple servants, h.ive been a term of contempt : it may have been their ordiriary name (so RS^A 292). The word appears in fact in Phoenician, applied to a class of servants (03'73) attached to a temple of Ashtureth in Cyprus (CIS 1 no. 86 B, 1. 10).

1 The explanation of RV, therefore, is not quite correct.

/Jr. Dts. I337.

RS^ 291, referring to Fthrist, 326, and other passages.

4. The dog in religion[edit]

There are not wanting indications that the dog was held in religious veneration. A river running into the sea a few miles N. of Beirut is called the dog river (Xahr-fl-Kelb. lycus flumen), and al-Nadim informs us that the dog was sacred among the Harranians. ' They offered sacrificial gifts to it, and in certain mysteries dogs were solemnly declared to be the brothers of the niysta;.

This seems to be connected with primitive Babylonian mythology ;' my lord with the dogs ' (a divine title at Harran) ix)ints o Martluk .mil his four dogs. It is jxjssible th.it the dog may have Ix-en among the animals worshipjHxl by the earliest Semites as a totem ' (as, e.g., among some .\. American Indians and in Java). Robertson ."^mith refers to Jusiin (I8110). who stites that Darius forlxide the Carth-aginians to sacrifice human victims antl to eat the tlesh of dogs (in a religious meal, it is implied). There sc-ems also to Ijc an allusion to sometl.ing of this kind in post-exilic Palestine to a custom, chielly prevalent perhaps among the mixed Samaritan pt)pulation,* of sacrificing the dog' on certain occasions (Is. ii'Si). T. K. c. 3.


(D*nK), Is. 13 21; see Jackal.


(KYPiOTHTec). or rather 'lordships,* Col. 1 16 ; cp i;ph. 1 21 jude 8 2 I'et. 2io. See Angel, i.


(n'P'n, eyPA.* eYPt*JM&. etc. [BAFLJ. perhaps from ,^"^1, ' to swing,' or cp .Ass. eclilu, ' to bolt, bar').

The Hebrew deleth is used of the doors of a chamlwr (Judg. 323_^), or of a gate (1 S. 21 13 {14]), and even of the gate itself (Dt. 35, KV 'gates'). The difference between pttliah, which may lie any ojieiiing or entrance (e.g., of the ark. Gen. 6 16 : Lattick, g 2 I7]), and deUth, is clearly ilhistratetl by (.en. l'.>6, where Lot stands in \\\t pctliah to keep back the men of .Sodom from approaching the deUth (cp also i K. C31). For 'I'C' (' door ' Ex. 33 17 Job 3S 17 AV) see Gatk.

However necessary for ventilation doorways were in the East (see LArriCK, i), the doors themselves were not employed so much as in less trojjical regions. ' The lock was doubtless like those now in use in the East, so constructed that the l>olt pij-jc Cant. 65 Neh. 83 etc. . RV ; 'lock,' AV) was shot by the hand or by a thong; the key (np&O. 'opener') was only used for unlocking the door' (Moore, SBO /' [Eng.], Judges, 60). For descriptions of keys and locks, see Wilk. .-/^.\t;^. I3S3; Moore, ytt<4'. 99 ; Che. Is.SBOT, ET, 159/

The Hebrew terms for the component parts of the doorw.-iy are (i) "j3, saf'h, the thrchoKl (n-poOupoi', irvAuir, etc., aiiAi) [BN'Al, Jer. 3.J4, ot,6% ,b.H^-^'(i, oTatfMiK Aq. Sym. Thcod.), also jPSO 18.547;; *** Thresholi), and cp Tkmplr. (2) ^Tn^, tti'zuzdh, door post, Dt. C9 11 20; on deriv.ition cp Schwally, ZD.MGhi\T,t/. ; see Frontlets. (3) ^^^crt, maikopli, lintel, Ex. 127, 22^(<^Ai<i[RAL]); cp MH r^-,xi. (4) Ts, j/r, hinge, Prov. 'lis 14 <TTp6<t>'yi ; cp also pi. nins 1 K. " 50 (if correct, Ovput- nara lli.\L]). See Ga IE.

1 There is still, however, some obscurity. Compare also such proper names as K^Sr. cSk3'?3 (Phoen.), U'Ss. n3"'?3. K3'?3 13^3 (Nab. and Sin. inscr.), j-->'^ t (Cur. Akc. .'^yr. Doc. 156), A'a/i., plur. A'i/iib Aklul>, arnl dim. Kulaib among Ar. tribal names, and the Heb. 373 (cp Kin. 200, Joum. Phil. 989 ; though N'Old. ZDMG, 1886, 164, n. i, throws doubt on the identification of Caleb and 3^3 ; see Names, { 88).

a See Che. Intr. Is. 367, and cp RS(^ 357, and (on breaking the neck) Kin. yx)/.

3 Note that both the Sam. text and the Sam. Targum of Ex. 2231 omit the contemptuous reference to the dog, and speak. simply of casting away.

  • #upa is the usual word in NT ; cp As 5 1923 etc.

On the origin of die name cp Ges. I kts. 331.


(Hi^a-l; pa<1)&ka [BAFL], -an [A after eU in ; . 12]), one of the stages in the wandering in the wilderness (N'u. 33i2/. ). Sec Wanderi.ngs, 12.


(in, Acop [BAL]; Josh. 1223, eAAcoM [B], aSSutp l.\] ; Judg. 1 27 and 1 Ch. 7 29 Swpa [I,]

1. Name[edit]

also written njn, cp Ph. -iKi below, Josh. 17 11, &<up [B-ilJ nik'-JX more fully Maphath-dor (i K. 4 n RVrng. ; n^j 1K1 ; yt<f>a6S<op [A], represented by ai-a ^xtdet atojp [U], and PaOavarj o ktuk^ti ai-rfp f I.l ; Josh. 12 23 RVrnj; -,,-, 'j Tov if)ei'y(&6iup [I?, for variants sec Sw.J t. xu^tSiwp [.\], t. lv]a,^u,p [L]), and Naphoth Dor (Josh. 11 2 RVmtf., -in nir:, if>tvci,6So,p [BJ, va4,t&,p [A*], -66. (AiFL]), the modern Taniurah,^ lay on the Mediterranean coast about midway between the promontory of Carmel and CsEsarea, at a distance of alxjut eight miles from the latter.

The fuller form of the name is explained by Sym. as the irapaXia of Uor, or as Awp ij irapaXla (cp O.S'*"^* 11522 2r056, (/or nafeth, 5ihp tov va<paO, 14'2i3 2883, nefeddor, i>a<t>e05u)p} ; it probably includes the undulating plain of Sharon lying inland. The exact meaning of n?:. n'lBO (KV 'height,' AV 'region, coast, border, country') as well as that of 'Dor' is very uncertain.^ Outside the OF the shorter form of the name is usual. It is frequently mentioned by (ireek writers and appears as Si^poi, SQpa (Sujpd in i Mace. 15 11 13 25 .W , Dora), also 5ovpa (I'olyb. ), Durum (I'liny), and 'J'Aora {'l\\\). Pent. ). In .\ss. Iht-ru (by the side of Megidilo) occurs only once, in a geographical list (2 R. 53, no. 4, /. 57). The nicaning of the name is obscure (see E.\-uuR, and for H.\M.M.\TH-ni)K see H.\m.m.\tii).

2. OT and other references, etc.[edit]

Dor is tirst mentioned in the Pap. Golenischeff (temp. Hri-hor, circa 1050 B.C.), where D-ira belongs to the Tabara, a race which entered Palestine along with the Purasati, and occupied the sea-coast (cp WMM.-/j. u. hur. 383, and see CAPHTOR, 2, 4 ; Philistinks).^ Their prince bears the name Ba-d-ira, which appears to repre- sent a theophorous name (.-\bd-il, 'servant of El' or Bod-el). That Dor continued to remain in the hands of a non-Israelite people seems highly probable.

Later writers, with Deuteronomic sympathies, supposed that Dor joined the northern coalition against Joshua (Josh. 11 2), and they include its king among those who fell (//>. 12 23). In the same spirit Dor is assigned to Manasseh (Josh. 17 11 ; cp 1 Ch. 729).'* A more historical view is presented in Judg. 1 27, where Beth-shean, Ibleam, Megiddo, and Dor (in MT the order is disturbed) form a belt of Caiia;inite towns stretching from E. to W., whicH must have separated Ephraim from the more northerly trii)es. In the time of Solomon, it is true, the ' heights of Dor ' was under one of his commissaries ; but it is hardly probable that the town of Dor was itself included (i K. 4 II ; see Uk.n-abinwdau).

3. Later history.[edit]

For the next few centuries Dor drops out of Jewish history. It was well known, however, to the Greeks, the earliest authority in which the name occurs being Hecatteus of Miletus [cii 500 B.C.). It is not improbable that it ought to be identified with the AcDpos which, in the fifth century, was tributary to the Athenians (Steph. Byz. s.v. Aui/)os), and this agrees with the view that the Takara (the earliest known occupants of Dor) were from Asia Minor, and, therefore, might have been in close touch with Greece. At the beginning of the fourth century Esmunazar relates that Dor (hnt) and Joppa ('2"), rich corn-lands (jn riinx) in the field of Sharon (pc ira). were handed over to Sidon by the king of Persia (Artaxerxes Mnemon ?), probably (as Schlottmann conjectured) in return for their help in the battles of Cnidus (394) and Citium (386). * Hence perhaps arose the belief of later Greek geographers that Dor was originally a Phoenician colony. It successfully resisted two sieges, one by Antiochus the Great (Anti- ocuus, i) during his war with Ptolemy Philopator in 219 B.C. (Polyb. 566), and the second by Antiochus Sidetes (.Xntiochu.s, 5) in 139-8 k.c. , when the siege was raised in consec|uence of the flight of Trypho (i Mace. 15 11^.). It was afterwards held along with Strato's tower (C/Ksarka, i) by a tyrant named Zoilus, on whose subjugation by Ptolemy Lathyrus it became part of the Hasmonaean dominions (Jos. Ant. xiii. 1224). Front Pompey's time it w.as directly under Roman rule. Gabinius restored the town and harlxjur (56 B.C.), and it enjoyed autonomy under the emperors \ih. xiv. 44 XV. 53). It possessed a synagogue in 42 A. D. {Ant. xix. 63). At a comparatively early date after this its prosperity declined, and in the time of Jerome ((^5<'-l 11522 14214) it was alre;idy deserted, and soon scarcely anything was left but its ruins which were still an object of admiration and the memory of its former greatness (cp Plin. 517: memoria urbii). Down to at least the seventh century it continued to give its name to an episcopal see.' Its prosperity was largely due to the abundance of the purple-yielding murex on its rocky coast, and to its favourable jxjsition (I)ut see Ant. XV. 96). The modern village consists merely of a few hovels.

The ancient remains which lie to the N. of the modern village are inconsiderable {/i<ied.<^> 271 /, F/!/ Mem. 2(> ff.), the most conspicuous object, to former travellers, being the ruins of a tower (of the time of the Crusaders) which crowns a rocky eminence. The tower (el- Burj ; cp Pirgul [ = irvp^os] in Foulcher de Chartres) has since collapsed (/"/'(>, 1895, P- "S)-'*

S. A. C.

1 Wholly obscure is nB3n nxhv Josh. 17 11 which (to Tpirov T17S fiau^eTo. [B], . . . vcufteOa [A], . . . vcxfxO [L]) treats as a place-name (note that i gives only t/tree names). Sym. here again has at rpeis n-opoAiai. Slav. Ostrogothic adds the gloss Tpia kXitt).

2 On the identification of the Takara town Dor with the Ass. Zaklcalu (4 R 34 no. 2, /. 45); see Hommel, PSBA 17 203 ('95); A II r 236.

3 The passage in Josh, is hardly sound ; Addis corrects after Jude. 1 27. See also Asher, 3.

For Elimunazar's inscription, cp Schlottmann, Die Inschrift Esehmunazars ('68), and see CIS 1, no. 3. Skylax assigns Dor to ^don and Ashkelun to Tyre during the Persian period.


(AopKAC [Ti. WH], i.e., 'gazelle,' 68), the Greek name of the Christian disciple (yiio^Tjrpia) at Joppa, whom Peter, by prayer, raised from the dead (.Acts 936-42). She was manifestly a Jewess, her Greek name being simply a translation of that by which she was known in Aramaic, 'labilha (xri'Dp, i.e., 'gazelle,' = Heb. -aii ; see Gazellk). A handmaid of R. (jamaliel was called Tabitha ( IVayyikra R. 19).

In the so-called Acts 0/ I'rochorus, dating from about the middle of the fifth centtiry, Tabitha figures as the hostess of John and Prochorus during their three days' stay at Joppa on their way to Egypt.


(AopYMeNHC [ANV] ; in 2 Mace. AcopOYAAeNOC L^']). father of Ptolemy Macron [see I'Toi.K.Mv] ; I Mace. 838 2 Mace. 445.


(AaiCieeoc[B*.AV], Aoc. [BbL^V]).

1. A caiJtain under Judas the Maccabee ; he and his fellow- officer Sosipater had 'limotheus in their power after the action before Camion, but allowed themselves to be persuaded to let him off (2 Mace. 12 1924).

2. A mounted soldier who distinguished himself in battle by a brave though unsuccessful attempt to take Gorgias prisoner (2 .Mace. 12 35).

3. .\ lenegade Jewin the camp of Ptolemy Philopator (3 Mace. 13)-.

4. ' Said to be a priest and Levite,' who, with his son Ptolemy, carried to Egypt the (translated) letter of Mordecai respecting the feast of Purim (Esth. 11 i, ; Aoo-tdeof [A], Suxrti. [N]).


(AC0T6A [A]), Judith 89 AV-e- ; AV Judea, RV DoTyKA. See Dotha.n.


(jnM, Gen. 37 17 2 K. 6.3, and pn*1. Gen. 37 17 [Names, 107]; Di. (/ loc.) thinks the latter a vocalic modification of the former. This is doubtful (cp Ba. NB, 194 f .) ; but in any case the termination ['- is very ancient, occurring in the Palestine lists of Thotmes III., sixteenth century B.C., tu-ti-y-na (WMM As. u. Kiir. 88). It is possible, therefore, that jnil i^ merely a defective form of J'n [Audaetfx [BNADEL], in Judith 89, Aturata [BN] ; Awrea [A] ; Eusebius has Atudaci/i, Jerome Dothai>ii\).

1 Bapuyiof Aupuf ^n-i<rtoJro is mentioned in the Acts of the Council ot Constantinople (381 A.D.).

2 See, further, for coinage, etc., Schiir. G/l^', 2j, i. lo.

S Also, independently, a few days later, by Robinson [/.BR 1 22]. Rabbi Parohi had noted it in the fourteenth century ; see Asher s Benj. c/Ttuie/a, 2 434).

Eusebius placed it 12 R. m. N. of Sehast6 (Samaria). The site was identified by Van de Velde' (1364^) with Tell Dothdn 10 m. N. of Sebastiyeh. It is a green mound lying on the .S. of a plain, sometimes called after it (Judith 4 5 [6], Tb nt5iov rb ir\t)alov Scodaeifi, Dothaun), and sometimes called Sahl '.Arrabeh, which lies some 500 feet above sea-level, and drains to the Mediterranean by the W'ady Selhab, afterwards W'ndy '.\bu Nar, and is connected with Esdraelon by the wide descending valley of Bel'ameh, the ancient Ible.\m [(/.v.]. Thus it carries the great caravan mail from Damascus and Gilead to Egypt, which is still in use, as it was when the story of Joseph and the com[)any of Ishniaelite traders passing Dothan with spices from Gilead for Kgypt was written (GASni. //(/' 151/ 356). Van de Velde found the re- mainsof a Jewish road crossing from Ksdraelon to Sharon. At the S. foot of the Tell is a fountain called Kl-Haf ireh ; there is a sc*cond fountain and two large cisterns (cp the cistern into which Joseph's brethren are said to have lowered him). There is very fine piisturage on the sur- rounding plain, which the present writer found covered with flocks, some of them belonging to a camp of nomad Arabs. From its site on so ancient a road through the country, and near the mouth of the main pass from the N. into the hills of Samaria, the Tell nmst always have been a military position of importance ; note the de- scription in 2 K. &\iff., and the frec|ucnt mention of it in the IJook of Judith (advance of Holofernes). Cp FEFMein. 2169 215; Thomson, LB., ed. 1877, p. 466/.; Huhl, Fal. 24/.. 102, 107. G. A. S.


For Nu. 152o/. Xeh. IO37 [38] (np'TT; RVnitf. 'coarse meal'), see FOOD, 1, aiA for 2 S. is'a RV (Pm cp BREAD.


The word dove is somewhat loosely applied to certain members of the suborder Columbte or pigeons ; and, as no sharp distinction can be drawn, it is proposed to treat the doves and pigeons together in this article.

1. Hebrew terms.[edit]

Three Heb. words come under consideration : (i) njV,^5rt//, probably derived from its mournful note (n-fpKrrepa [iS]) ; (2) "lirii TB, tor (prol>ably onomalopcwtic, cp Lat. turiur ; -rpvyuav [1), EV ' turtle-dove ' ; and (3) Vjij,^(JcJ/, EV ' young pigeon ' (Gen. 159, II Tin. ntpKTTtpa. [.AOL]), properly any young bird ; cp Dt. 32 iif (with reference to the IPJ).

2. OT references[edit]

Apart from its occurrence in P and Gen. 159 (see below), -nn is found only in Cant. 2 12 (where allusion is made to its ' voice '), in Jer. 87 (a migratory bird; cp. s 4, v below; EV in both turtle), and in Ps. 74 19 (not). In the last-quoted piissage mn, as the harmless, timid dove (cp Hos. 7" 11 II .\It. IO16), is usually thought to be symbolical of Israel. The te.xt-reading. however, is doubtful. 1 l^lsewhere it is to the n:r ( ' dove ' ) that Israel is compared (see JON".\H, ii. 3). This is the most common term, which appears notably in the Deluge- story, Gen. 88-12 (Dki.ugk, 17). Allusion is made in I's. 5r)6 (7] to its plumage, in Is. 3814 59 11 to its mournful note.- Its gentle nature makes the dove a favourite simile or term of endearment in love poems (Cant. 1 15 4 1 52 12 69). That doves were domesticated among the Hebrews may be inferred from Is. 608 (see Fowls, 5), and it is of interest to recall that carrier- pigeons were well known in F.gypt, and that at the coronation ceremotiy four were let fly to carry the tidings of the newly-made king to the four corners of the earth (Wilk. Anc. l-'.g. 8320).

1 'Deliver not the soul of thy turtle-dove" is a strange ex- pression. Sym. Tg. Jer. find an allusion to the Law (Tg. ' the souls of the teachers of thy Law') ; but Pesh. read I'jif ; so Gunkel, Che. : ' Deliver not the soul which praises thee,' be- comes the sense.

s Cp also Nah. 2 7 [8] ; on the text of Ezek. 7 16 see Co.

3. Sacred character.[edit]

Are there reasons for supposing that among the Hebrews the dove ever enjoyed a reputation for sanctity ? Conclusive evidence in support of this view is absent ; but it is remarkable that the dove, although a ' clean " bird, is never mentioned in the OT as an article of diet. It was a favourite food of the Egyptians, and is commonly eaten in Palestine at the present day. Moreover, we have to note that the -lin and Siii are mentioned in an old covenant ceremony by E (Gen. I59), and that in P's legislation 'turtle-doves' (omn) and 'young pigeons' (j2 nav) are frequent sacrificial victims in ceremonies which, however, do not involve a sacrificial meal (Ixv. 5; 128 etc. ; in NT Lk. 224).' This exceptional treatment of the dove suggests that originally the Hebrews were wont to ascribe to the bird a sacrosanct character, snnilar to that which it has obtained among other branches of the Semites. In Palestine ' the dove was sacreti with the Phoenicians and Philistines, and on this superstition is based the conmion Jewish accusations against the Samaritans that they were worshippers of the dove.' There were holy doves at Mecca (the custom is hardly indigenous), and according to Lucian \^Dea Syria, 54, cp 14) doves were taboo to the Syrians, he who touched them remaining unclean a whole day.* On the symlxjlism of the dove in .NT (Mt. 3 16 etc.) and in early Christian times, sec Smith's Diet. Christ. Ant., s.v.

4. Species[edit]

The following species occur in Palestine :

  • (i.) Cotuntba fialumhus, the ring-dove or wood-pigeon, common in England and throughout most of Europe. large flocks of these assemble in the winter months and do much damage by feeding on the young leaves of cultivated plants ; some migrate in the autumn, but many iiass the winter in I'alestine.
  • (ii.) C. arnas, the stock- dove, smaller and darker than the alx)ve and rarer in Palestine ; unlike C". paluiiihtis it docs not build on branches of trees, but lays its eggs in holes or in burrows,
  • (iii.) t". Inua, the rock-dove, is abundant on the coast and uplands ; it is the parent stock from which the domesticatetl varieties have been derived,
  • (iv.) C. schinipcri, closely allied to the preceding, which it takes the place of, m the interior and along the Jordan valley. It is elsewhere found in Egypt and in Abyssinia. It nests in crevices and fissures of the rock (cp Jer. 48 2K).
  • (v.) Turtur communis or auritus, the turtle-dove, which prol>ably represents ~fj^ (see | 2), is a migratory species whose return is very cunstant (Jer. 87, Cant. 2 12) alxjut the beginning of April, when they become very plentiful and are to be found in everj* tree and shrub. This species is the most abundant of all the Cotumhir in Palestine,
  • (vi.) /'. risorius, the Harbar>- or collared dove, which extends from Constantinople to India. Around the Dead Sea this species is a permanent resident, being found as a rule in small flocks of

eight or ten.

  • (vii.) /'. senegitUnsis, the palm turtle-dove, has been regarded by Tristram as the turtle-dove of the Hiblc. h lives amongst the courtyards of houses in Jerusalem and seems to be half tame ; it especially frequents palm groves.

A. i:. S. b. A. C.


(D'3Vnn or D'JV nn, Kt. [Ginsb.]. D^yrn'n.^' Kr. ; Konpoc nepicrepooN [HAL]). In a graphic account of the siege of Samaria, side by side with ' an ass's head ' appears ' the fourth part of a kab of dove's dimg ' {/fare yon im) as a food only to Xm bought at a very high price (2 K. 625). Much has Xnxn written to account for this strange -sounding detail ; Josephus {Ant. ix. 44) even suggested that the dung was a substitute for salt ! The reference to it, however, is doubtless due to an error of an ancient scrilx;, which is precisely analogous to one in I's. 1'234 (MT).

In that passage a questionable word (rendered in EV ' the proud ') is represented \n the mg. as being really two words, one of which is c':v. It is more than prolwble that ' an ass's head '* (lICrrCK-l) should be C'c'ny "C.^, 'a homer of lentils," and 'doves' dung ' (C':i' "in) should be C'3'~n, ' jkxIs of the carob tree ' (see Husks). That the ancients agreed with MT and that the correctness of the reading can be defended (see Post in Hastings' />'/>, s.v.) by observation of the habits of pigeons is no reason why we .should acquiesce in it ; similarly we might defend the painful figure of the 'snail' in Ps. 588(9] (* .Snail, 2). For the attempts of modern writers to mitigate the unpleasantness of the expression ' dove's dung ' by finding some plant which might have been so called, see articles in Smiths and Hastings' dictionaries. Two illustrative pa.s.sages(2 K. 18 27 Is. 1 20) have, we may believe, been recovered by similar corrections of the text, one certain, the other highly probable. See HcsKS.

T. K. C.

1 In NT times doves for such purposes were sold in the temple itself (Mt. 21 12 Mk. 11 15 Jn. 2 14 16).

' On the whole subject see Bochart, Hiero-. ii. 1 1 and WHS Kin. iqd/. ; RSfl) 2 19 n. 2, 294, etc. Cp also, for ' dove " oracles, Frazer, Paus. 4 ng/. The white dove was especially venerated ; Tibullus, 1 7 : 'alba Palastino sancta columba Syro.'

' I'his is a euphemistic substitute. Some authorities recognise C>3V> 'doves,' as an element in the phrase (so KOn. Lektycb. I 2 102) ; others take ji to be simply a termination (Ginsb. Introd. j 346, ' decayed leaves '),

4 Such ' unclean ' food was not likely to be exposed for sale ' even during a siege. And why specially the head ?


For Gen. 34 12 Ex. 22 17 [16] i S. 1825t ("no, mdhar; (f>fpin^ ; dos [in S. sfionsalia]), see Marriage, i. For Gen. 30 sot C^J. zcl>c<i), see Zkiiulun.


RV Drachma (Araxmh), Tob. Sm 2 Mace. 4 19 10 20 1243. See Money.


(nnrODp), Hab. 1 15/ See FISH, 3.


(pan; Arakcon)- For Dt. 3233 KV P<. 01 13 (RV 'serpent') see SERPENT, S i II ; and for Ps. US 7 (RV'iui.'. ' se.-i-monsters ' or 'waterspouts'). Serpent, 3 (/) n. For the ' dragons ' (D'jn, |'3ri, nijn [sing. |n] : in Lam. 43 AV ' sea-monsters,' AVmg. ' sea-calves ')of Mai. 1 3 etc. see JACKALS (so RV).

1. Mythological allusions in OT and NT.[edit]

In addition to the passages in which the term tannin is used of a natural species of animals (such as Gen. 1:21 RV ' sea -monsters,' AV WHALE [q.v.]; Ex. 79/. EV SERPENT) there are various longer or shorter passages in which a mythological or semi-mythological e.xplanation of the term may be reasonably sup|X)sed. Some of these have been, with more or less fulness, treated elsewhere, and may therefore be here considered more briefly.

The passages are as follows (for discussion, see 3yC) (a) Is. 27 I (see BEHEMOTH AND LEVIATHAN, 3 [yT]) ; ip) Is. 61 9 (see RAHAB); (c) ler. 51 34 (see JONAH, ii. 4); {if) Ezek. 29 3-6, ' I will attack thee, Pharaoh king of Kgypt, thou great dragon,! which liest in the midst of thy streams, which hast said, Mine are the streanis,2 1 have made them. I will put hooks in thy jaws, and cause the fish of thy streams to stick to thy scales. I will bring thee up out of thy streams ... I will hurl thee into the desert, thee and all the fish of thy streams ; upon the open country shall thou fall ; thou shalt not be taken up nor gathered. . . .' (e) Ezek. 32 2-8, '. . . as for thee, thou wast like the dragon 3 in the sea, thou didst break forth with thy streams, didst trouble the water with thy feet, and didst foul its streams. Thus saith Vahwe, I will spread my net over thee, and bring thee up into my snare. I will lay thy flesh upon the mountains, and fill the vallejf with thy corruption.'* . . . I will cover the heavens at thy setting, and clothe its stars in mourning. . . .' (/") Job 7 12, ' Am I the sea or the dragon, 3 that thou settest watchers against me?' (^) Neh. 2 13, ' before the dragon-well.' These are probably all the passages in the Hebrew OT ; for Ps. 4419(20], ref^-Tred to by Gunkel in this connection, is certaiily corrupt; but (/i) Esth. 10 7 [4] lie [5], (J) Bel and the Dragon, and (jc) Ps. Sol. 2 28-34 have to be grouped with them (see 3).

3. NT references.[edit]

The N T references are all in Revelation, viz., in (m) 12 3-17, (n) 13 2 4 1 1, (o) 10 13, (p) 20 2 ; cp 12 9.

These last require to be treated separately, but with due cognisance of that old Babylonian dragon-myth, uncomprehended fragments of which circulated in the eschatological tradition of ANTICHRIST {q.v.). The dragon which souglit to devour the child of the woman is the very same development of Babylonian mythology which lies at the base of Jer. 51 34. From a Jewish point of view the woman (cp Mic. 4 10) is either the earthly or the heavenly Zion, and the dragon (originally Tiamat) with its seven heads* is Armilos, or Kyc'l (' the wicked one ' ; cp 2 Thess. 23 8), i.e., Rome, the new Babylon, which is identified with ' the ancient serpent," en: "Onp'T (cp Rev. I29, and see Weber, Jiid. Theol. 218). The storming of heaven by the dragon is also Baby- lonian ; it is the primeval rebellion of Tiamat (see Cke.\tion, 2) transferred to the latter days^ (cp Eph. 612, the spiritual hosts of wickedness iv roh iirovpavloii). The additions of the apocalyptic writer do not concern us here.^ On the affinities of Rev. 12 4 to a Greek myth see HELLENISM, 8.

1 Reading p3? for C'^n of MT.

2 Reading Cnk; (0 Gunkel).

pan (.W 'whale,' RV 'sea-monster').

Reading "H^'l (Symm., Pesh., Rodiger, Gunkel).

  • Cp the ' great serpent of seven heads ' in a primitive Sumerian

poem (Sayce, Hibb. Led. 282).

6 Cp Charles, .Secrets 0/ Enoch, 9 (note on chap, i) ; Brandt, ManddUche Schr'/ten, 137^ (the latter cited by Bousset).

7 Cp Bousset, Der Antichrist, T 173, and the same writer's conmientary on the Apocalypse ; see also Ai-OCALVI'SE, 41.

3. In OT Apocrypha.[edit]

We pass on to (A) Esth. 10 7 [4] 1 1 6. Two dragons come forth to fight against tiie 'righteous people,' i.e.. the Jews (cp Jer. 51:34). These are interpreted in the story as Mardocheus and Aman, and the justification of this is that they fight together as Mordecai contended with Haman. This is evidently a late modification of an uncomprehended traditional story. The connection of the dragons with water is eviUefitly .in echo of the Tiamat myth. The writer, however, did not uiKierstand it, and explained the 'much water' of Esther, {i) Bel and the Dragon sirikes us at once by its Babylonian colouring. That it is D.aniel, not a god, who kills the Dragon, is an alteration natural to Haggadic stories, to which, as Ball has shown, this story belongs. No trace remains of the old myth beyond what is found in Jer. 51 34. {k) Ps. Sol. 228-34 is a picture of the fate of Pompey, the profaner of the temple, which would be liy|>:rbolical if it were not obviously coloured by a semi-mythical tradition.

4. OT allusions[edit]

Resuming the consitleration of {a) i.e.. Is. 27 1 we notice that the two Leviathans and the Dragon in the Sea are distinctly mythical forms (the two former, differentiations of Tiamat; the latter, Kingu, Tiamat's husband) ; they are identified by the apocalyptist (see Intr. Is. 155) with the three great jxiwers hostile to the Jews, Babylonia, Persia, and I-gypt. The reference to the sea confirms the mythological origin of the e.xpression, for Tiamat is the personification of the primeval ocean. ^ On Yahwe's sword see Gen. 824, and cp Marduk's weapon, called in Creation tablet iv. /. 49, abiibtc, ' storm ' (cp //. 30 39). As to {b), note again the two conquered monsters (Rahab and the Dragon), and the connection with the sea in v. 10. The old myth is ap- plied to the passage of the Israelites through the Red Sea ; but the api>lication would have been impossible had not the destruction of Rahab and the Dragon been equivalent to the subjugation of the sea. The poet does not say, but obviously supposes, that Rahab and Pharaoh are in some sense identical, just as in Rev. 12 the impious power of Rome is identified with the Dragon. The ' shattering ' of Rahab is repeated from the Babylonian myth.

Of (c) nothing more need now be said (see Jonah) ; but (d) and (e) require to be clearly interpreted. It is not to an ordinary crocodile that Pharaoh is compared. The 'hyperbolical' language would, in this ca.se, be intolerable. It is the despotic and blasphemous dragon Tiamat. The blasphemy is at once explained when we remember that Tiamat was originally a divine beings older in fact than the gods. The denial of burial to Pharaoh is of course explicable out of mere vindictive- ness ; but it is a worthier sujiposition that we have here a somewhat pale reflection of the outrages infiicted on the Ixjdy of Tiamat by the young sun-god Marduk. T he ' hook' reminds us of Job 41 1 [4025] (Leviathan) ; the net, of a striking detail in Creation- tablet iv. , ii. 95, 112.- The 'setting' of the dragon implies that there was a constellation identified with the dragon (cp Lockyer, Dazvn of Astronomy, 137, 146). In (f) the combina- tion of 'sea' and 'dragon,' and the occurrence of references elsewhere in Job to Rahab and Leviathan, sufficiently prove the mythological affinities of the passage. The Dragon was, according to one current version of the old myth, not destroyed, but placed in confinement (cp Job 38 41). Cp the stress laid in Job 388-11 Ps. 10j59 336 [7] 657/ on the long-past subju- gation of the sea by Yahwe.

1 Rashi, on Is. 27 1, remarks that the ' coiled ' Leviathan encompa.sses the earth (c'?lj'n '^3 TIN fi'po). Cp Griinbaum, ZD.MGZ\ 275. The 'coils' of the Egyptian Leviathan (ApOpi) were in heaven (Book of Hade.s, RP 12 13). ApOpi seems ulti- mately identical with Tiamat ; but the details of the myth are i:gyptian.

2 Cp Lyon,/5/. 14 132.

3 Schick and Baldensperger (PEFQ ['98], p. 23 ; ['99), p. 57) state that long worms and serpents abound in and n.ar the Birket es-Sultiin ; the latter writer suggests that this may have helped to fix the n.ime to ihe locality.

One passage only remains {g). The term ' dragon-well ' suggests a different class of myths those in which the sui-)ernatural serpent is a friendly being. Primitive sanctuaries were often at wells (EN-ROGEL), and serpents love moist places.-* Serpents, too, are the emblems of healing (cp Nu. 21 5-9). and sacred wells are often also healing wells. The intermittent character of St. Mary's Well (connectccl with the lower Pool of Siloah) is accounted for in folklore by the story that a great drajjon who lies there makes the water gush forth in his sleep. Cp also the dragon-myth connected with the Oronles. the serix.-nt's pool, Jos. lij v. 82, and the serpent myths of the ancient Arabs (WRS Rel. Sem<^\ 131. 171). and see Zohkleth.

5. Babylonian origin of myth[edit]

Thus we have two views of the dragon represented, as a friendly and as a hostile being. Into the wider subject suggested by this result we cannot enter now (cp SERPENT). It is important to consider the question, how came these" only half-understood myths, represented by Behemoth, Leviathan, Rahab, and the inclusive appellation 'Dragon', to be so prominent ? We have already seen that they are not of native Palestinian growth, but (apart from the myth of the Dragon's Well) of Babylonian origin. Not that every important Dragon-myth in Asiatic couiitries must necessarily be derived ultimately from Babylon this would be an unscientific theory but that for the myths now under consideration the evidence points unmistakably to a Babylonian origin. If we ask how these myths came to be so prominent, the answer is that a great revival of mythology took place among the Jews, under Rabylonian influences, in e.xilic and post-exilic times. Jewish folklore became more assimilated to that of the other nations, and the leaders of religion permitted what they could not prevent, with the object of impressing an orthodox stamp on {X)pular beliefs. This has long since been noticed, especially by the present writer in a series of works (see also Ckkation, 23), where it is pwinted out that the Dragon-myth comes from pre- Semitic (Babylonian) times, and where several explana- tions are indicated as perhaps equally historical. ^ Like other interpreters who used the mythological clue, how- ever, he was not clear enough as to the nature of the conflict between the God of light and the serpent, referred to in Job9i3 Is. 51 9 ctc.'^ Continued study of the new cuneiform material has done much to clear up his difficulties, one of which may be expressed thus. The Babylonian epic spoke of Tiamat as having been de- stroyed by the God of light, whereas certain biblical passages appeared to descrilx; the dragon as still existing ' in the sea,' as capable of being ' aroused' by magicians, and as destined to be slain by Yahw^'s sword. Hence it seemed as if there was a Hebrew myth (of non- Hebraic origin) which re[)resented the war between the God of light and the serpent of darkness as still going on, and Kgyptian parallels seemed to teach us how to conceive of this.^ The defeat and destruction of the gigantic serpent Apopi and his heli^ers, when chaos gave way to order and darkness to lit;ht, was not absolute and final. They still seemed to the Egyptians to menace the order of nature, and in his daily voyage the sun is threatened by the serpent, and has a time of anguish. When they see this, human folk seek to frighten the monster by a loud clamour, and so to help the sun. The sun's boatmen, too, have recourse to prayers and spear-thrusts. At last, paralysed and wounded, Apopi sinks back into the abyss. Gunkel, however, has shown " for the first time that Babylonian mythology will account for all the details of the biblical descriptions which an accurate exegesis will admit.

1 For a Phoenician dragon-myth, see Daniasc. De print, princ. 133, and ! us. Pnup. Kv.\\o (ap. Lcnormant, Les Origines, 151.V535. 55>)-

2 Proph. Is. 1 159 231 ; Jofi and Solomon, 76-78: cp Crit. Rr:\, July 1S95, p. 262.

3 Jo/> ami SoL'ition, 76 : cp Maspero, op. cit. 90 /. 159. Book 0/ the Dead, 15 39 ; Book 0/ Hades, transl. by Lefibure, RP, 12 13.

  • Sclu'ip/ung u. Chaos, 41-69. This is not the place to discuss

the points in which the present writer differs from (junkel (see Crit. Rev., 189s, p. 256^), whose general view of the earlier period of Israelitish belief is perhaps too much in advance of the evidence.

We need not suppose a reference to the myth of the daily struggle between the Light-god and the serpent. The Tiamat story, as known to the Jews, was briefly this. At the commencement of cTeation, Tiimat was, accord- ing to some, destroyed, according to others, completely subdued and confined in the ocean which encompasses the earth. Without God's permission he can henceforth do nothing. Only Ihe angelic powers, commissioned by God to keep watch over Leviathan, can 'arouse' him and even they 'shudder' as they do so (see BEHEMOTH AND LEVIATHAN).

6. Later biblical times[edit]

This form of the story became popular in later biblical times, because it met the requirements of apocalyptic writing. It was a necessity of biblical idealism to anticip.Ue a return of the ' first things,' of Paradise and its felicity. Evil seemed to have been intensified ; the reign of Tiamat was renewed, as it were, upon the e;irth. A deliverance as great as that wrought by Yahw6 (a greater Marduk) of old must therefore be anticipated, and the struggle which would precede it would be as severe as that which took place at the creation. Then would ' the old things pass away, and all things Ijecome new.' It is not improbable, as Budge long ago pointed out (PSIiA, ['83], 6), that Tiamat in course of time acquired a symbolic meaning ; certainly the serpent of Kg)'ptian, and not less of Jewish, belief acquired one. The moralisation of the old dragon-myth is recorded in the mysterious but fascinating story of Antichrist [q.v.^ On the twofold representation of Tiamat (dragon and serpent), see SERPENT, 3/.

Into the dragon-myth.< of non-Semitic peoples frequently adduced to illustrate Job 38, it is not necessary to enter. The Semitic material has been growing to such a considerable mass that it is wise to restrict ourselves at present to this. Otherwise we might discuss a striking passage in T/u' Times, Jan. 24, i898, on the cry for alms in Hindu quarters for the recovery of the sun from the jaws of the dragon Rahu. Jan. 22, 1898, was the day of a solar eclipse. Cp Kci.ihsk, S 2-

7. Artistic representations.[edit]

In early Babylonian art the dragon does not represent Tiamat the chaos-dragon, but a destructive demon of pestilence or tornado. The sex of the dragon is not as a rule indicated in the primitive representations, even when the dragon is given together with a god (or godtless) ; an exception however is figured by Ward, in which the dragon appears to be male. In the Assyrian period, to which the representations of the conflict between Alarduk and the Dragon belong, the dragon is of the male .sex, which reminds us that the evil serpent .\hriman in Persian mythology is male. It is very possible that in the oldest Babylonian representations the dragon was female (cp Dkki', Till-;). With regard to the view (implied in parts of the OT) th;it the chaos-dragon was not slain, but only sulxlued by the Light -god, we may compare some Babyloni.in cylinders, older than Hammurabi, which represent the dragon as h.irnessed in a chariot and driven by Bel while a goddess stands on his back and wields the thunderbolt ; or else the god stands on the back of the dragon. The Assyrian representations do not, it is true, show that the dragon was slain ; but the natural supposition is that the conflict ended in his destruction.

8. Literature.[edit]

The fullest English investigation of the different forms taken by the mythic dragon is to be found in \V. H. Ward's article 'Bel and the Dragon" {Am. Journal 0/ ^</. Lang, and Lit., Jan. 1898, p. 94^).

See also Gunkel, Schdp/. u. Chaos; Toy, Judaism and Christianity, 162, 195, 200 (n.), 375 ; Maspero, Struggle 0/ th* Nations; Brugsch, Religion u. Mvthologie der alten Agypter ; Wiedemann, Kgyptian Religion ; housset, Der Antichrist {'^), pp. 04, 97 ; and, for a popular summary of facts on the Dragon- myth, A. Smylhe Palmer, Babylonian Jnjiuence on ike Bihlt ('J7)- T. K. C.


{\'l7\r\ pr ; nnrH TtON cykojn [BX.\1. n. TOY ArAKONTOC [L] ; fons draconis; ^A^^k >r *>- ) N'eh. 2 lit- For topography see GiHoN, Jkrusalem, and for folklore see Dkagon, 4 (.^)-


RV Daric. The rendering of two late Hebrew words: {a) D*33"llS, iCh. 29 7 Kzra 827t /.f. , apparently AarcIKOC (^yr- )jaJJ*>?. MH paOTl, pi. niyiS'l'il [Dalman]), or cp Ass. dariku (pi. darikanu) piece of money ' Muss-Amolt ; and (i) D^JlilD^'l^, dark'monim, Ezra 269Neh. 77q^,tapparentlyApAXAAH-^ Possibly a loan-word (Asiatic) in both Heb. and Gr. , see Ew. GGA, 1855, 1392/:; 1856, 798; and cp BDB, S.V.

The Vss. give SpaxinaC [L], d'riktlria [Pesh. except iCh.], soliiius [Vg., ill Neh. drachma]. But in i Ch. xpv(iov'i[\i\\, SpaxfiaC [HP '93), jmT, Targ. (see Lag. //a^. 23), Pesh. apparently connected 'K with TJON 'lead.' In Ezra 827 ei? rriv oSbi/ xaM""M ['^1 SpaxH^di [AL] agree in presupposing D'3D3 + 3TlS i-e-yi; II i Esd. 857 [56] BAL cm. Ezra 269 ixvii [BA] il I Esd. 545 [44] /Ltrat [BAL]. Neh. "70-72 BNA cm., but vop.iap.a.TO'; [Sixt.] v. 71, and vop.ia'ti.atj-i.v [N '_ ] v. 72.

According to the commonly accepted view a and b are identical and mean 'darics.' Against this two objections may be urged : (i) the ^in b is left unexplained, and (2) the form a, which alone supports this meaning, is untrustworthy. In i Ch. it is doubtful (i3T D'^DIINI ^^V '^^ ^ g'oss : the amount of gold has been already mentioned), and in Ezra 827 the better reading is Q-jlODin (see above). The form pSDIl {^po-XM) '^ preferable, not for this reason alone, but also on account of its identity with the Pha:n. cja^-n (pl.),^ which, as the analogy from Gk. inscriptions shows, must represent Bpaxt^a^i- . The occurrence of this Gk. (or Asiatic?) word in Ezra- Neh. is due perhaps to repeated glosses: cp Ezra 827 with i Esd. 857 and observe that in some of the passages (above) BA omit. See further Money, Weights and Measures. 3 s. A. C.


(niO^H), Zech. IO2, etc. ; see DIVINATION, 2 (vi. ).


A complete discussion of the subject of ancient Israelitish dress (including toilet and ornaments) is impossible with our present limited knowledge. It is true, the Assyrian and Egyptian artists had keen eyes for costume ; but trustworthy representations of Israelites are unfortunately few. It might be tempting to fill up this lacuna by noting the usages of dress in the modern East. This, however, would be an uncritical procedure. We might presume on obtaining more than analogies from the customs of the present ; but common sense shows that to look for a Hebrew equiva- lent to every modern garment would be unnatural. Consequently, in spite of the scantiness of detail in the OT, we must base our conceptions upon O T evidence (viewed in the light of criticism) treated by the com- parative method.

1 Cp, e.,^., Torrey, Comp. Ezr. Neh. 18: 'the one obviously corresponding to iapeiKos, the other to hpa.x^")

2 A Phoenician inscription of the first century B.C. from the Piraeus : see Lidzbarski, Handh. d. Nordsevi. Epi^r. 160.

3 See also Meyer, Entst. 196/, Prince, Daniel, 26s ('99). From Ezra 269 (Neh. 770-72 [see i-]) compared with i Esd. 545 it would seem that 6i D'3DD"n=' '*"" ('^P '^^ """y^' maneh of 60 shekels). In , however, the Heb. 'ipe* is repre- sented by SiSpaxfiOu, and Spaxinrj represents the ypa or half- shekel ; cp Gen. 24 22 Ex. 8826.

1 So Gerber, //e6r. Verb. Denom. 2/. The verb 133 is found only in E, and later. See, e.g., Ex. 2I7 Judg. 923 ; i S. 1433 is probably no exception.

1. General terms.[edit]

There are several general terms in Hebrew for 'dress,' 'garments,' 'attire.' It is needful to give details, as there are distinctions of some importance which could not be brought out otherwise.

1. nj2, begi'd (cp perh. Ar. bijad ; we cannot assume a root meaning ' to cover ' ; the verb n:n known to us means ' to deal treacherously ' ; it is perhaps a verb denom. ),* may be used for a garment of any kind ' from the filthy clothing of the leper to the holy robes of the priest,' for ' the simplest covering of the poor as well as the costly raiment of the rich and noble' [/>'/>/?]; for women's dress (Dt. 24 17; cp Gen. 8814), for royal robes (i K. 2^30), and apparently once for the outer robe or Mantlk (2 K. 913); also for the coverlet of a bed (i S. 19 13 i K. li), and for the covering of the tabernacle furniture (Nu. 46-13 P. ).

2. uh^, g'lo7n, Ezek. 2724, AV 'clothes,' RV 'wrappings,' mg. ' bales.' Prof Cheyne writes : ' The existence of an old Hebrew root d^i ' ' to roll together " is not proved by 2 K. -JS Ps. 139 16; both passages are very doubtful, and can be emended with much advantage. DiSa plainly = p'?3 in Is. 823, which Peiser identifies with Bab. gulinu, a kind of garment ' ( ZA T IV [' gy], 17 348). Cp Chest.

3. '^3, k'ii, a word of the widest signification, is (like the German 2^ug) used of garments in Dt. 22s ("15J d) Lev. 1849 ("liy'^).

4. niD3, k'sfith, 'covering,' Ex. 21 10 2226 etc., restored by Gratz, Ball, and Cheyne in Gen. 49 n ^ (MT n?D II B'U'7, irepi^oXr], pallium), and by Cheyne in Ps. I'Ad Prov. 7 10 (MT n-TSr EV 'garment,' 'attire'). C]) .^D^p Is. 23 18 (EV ' clothing ') ; see Awning.

5. v^zh, I'bt'J (the root ca"? ' to wear, put on ' is found in all the Semitic languages), a general term (not so frequent as i . ) ; used of the dress of women (2 S. I24 Prov. 31 22), etc. Cognates are c^oSa, 2 K. IO22 (EV 'vestment') etc., and T\^lhn Is. 59 i7t ' clothing.'

2. Special terms[edit]

We turn now to the Hebrew terms denoting particular articles of dress. It is one of the defects of the EV that the same English word is often used to represent several distinct Hebrew terms, and that, vice versa, the same Hebrew term is rendered by different English words (promiscuously). This is due partly to the difficulty of finding an exact equivalent for many of the Hebrew terms, partly to our ignorance of their precise meaning, and the uncertainty of tradition as represented by the versions. Rabbinical exegesis,-* etc.

Of the numerous Hebrew terms denoting articles of dress, those referring to the feet are discussed under Shoe. For the various head-dresses {-\nz, <"j'JS. etc. ) see Turban. One of the special terms for garments worn about the body is niix, 'ezor, ' kilt ' or ' loin-cloth ' (see Girdle).'* Out of this an evolutionary process has brought breeches (cp Ar. mi'zdr), which, however, among the Hebrews appear first as a late priestly garment (viz. o'DJ^a) ; see Breeches. For the ordinary under-garment worn next the skin (njhs), see Tunic. The over-garment (corresponding roughly to the Gr. Ifxariov and Roman toga) varied in size, in shape, and in richness, and had several distinct names [simlah, etc. ), for which see MANTLE.

1 Others cp Ph. n^lD and Heb. n\00 (Ex. 34 33 where Che. reads HD^s).

2 Others vocalise n;^ {ZDMG 37 535 ; properly ' that which is set ' upon one).

  • So for the obscure Aram. z'^S (Dan. 3 21 Isre) we find such

remarkable variant renderings as 'hosen'(AV), ' tunics ' (RV), and 'turbans' (RVmg.).

  • We may compare the sak of camel's or goat's hair which,

like other primitive garments, long continued to form a garb of mourning. The sak was perhaps identical with the kilt of the ancient Egyptians, for which see Wilk. Anc. Eg.i"^) 2322.

5 Che. (^^.(2)) reads "laisn 'JS^'??/, 'on the surface of the desert.'

On 2 S. 208 see next note.

7 In2S.208^lJ^should probably be cancelled ; note the Pasek, so often placed in doubtful passages. Read I'lO &,y7. See Lohr and cp We. ad he. For other views see Klo., H. P. Sm.

3. Special garments[edit]

Certain classes and certain occasions required special dresses. The clothing of ambassadors is called cna {meddwi7n?), 2 .S. IO4 = i Ch. 19 4, EV. A kindred word ' mad' (fem. middah, if the text of Ps. 1332 is correct) ^ is used of the priestly garb in Lev. 610 [3], Ps. I.e. (^vSvfxa) ; of the outer garment of the warrior (plur. only)" in Judg. 3 16 (EV 'raiment'), i S. 4 12 (EV 'clothes'), 1738 (AV 'armour,' RV 'apparel'), 184 (AV 'garments,' RV 'apparel'), and 2 S. 208 (AV 'garment,' RV 'apparel of war'); "-^l in all passages fiavdvas, except i S. 4 12, where ifidrLa. The mud of the warrior was perhaps some stiff garment which was a (poor) substitute for a coat of mail. In Ps. 109 18 mad is used of the dress of the wicked tyrant who is cursed (but the whole passage is in disorder ; see Che. Ps.'-^). In the Tahn. kid is a robe distinctive of the JVdsl' or prince. On the priestly head-dress, see MlTKE ; the priests in later tinies indulged in sumptuous apparel.' In Talinudic times Rabbis wore a special dress, and were crowned until the death of Eliezer b. Azarya {'Fosifta, Sotah, 15). In Habylonia a golden ordination robe was used at the conferring of the Rabbinical dignity. A festive garb was worn at the creation of an lilder {zdken)\ the Nasi' had a speci.-il mantle, the Exilarch a girdle.'-* For the king's regalia see CoRON.vnoN, Ckown, 2. On the warrior's dress we can add very little. R\'"'f- finds the military boot (['ikd) in Is. 94 [3] ; and a reference to the distinctive outer garment [maddim) of the warrior, and to his shoes, has been conjectured in Nah. 24a [3rt].' See also Hki.MKT. For bridal attire (cp Is. 49i8 61 10, (v5v/M ydfiov Mt. 22ii)see M.\rriaue, 3, and for the garb of mourning C^aK .icjro Is. 61 3, 'j< nJ3 2 S. 142), see Mourning Cistoms.

With the exception of the swaddling-clothes of the new- born b.dje (/iiif/i//l/uk, Job 889 ; cp verb in Ezek. 16 4 ; awdpyavof , W'isd. 7 4 \ cp Lk. 27 12), children seem to have hail no distinctive dress. The boy Samuel wore a a small ;</7 (see Mantlk), and if the lad Joseph possessed a special kuttoneth (see TiNic), it was regarded by the narrator in Genesis as exceiJtional. In Talmudic times boys wore a peculiar shirt (Kpi:'T p-hn Shabb. i34<0--'

4. History.[edit]

In ancient times, dress depended to a large extent on climatic considerations. The simplest and most primitive covering was the loin-cloth (see GIRDLE), a valuable safeguard in tropical climates, adopted perhaps for this reason rather than from the feeling of shame to which its origin was after- wards traced ((jen. 87). The use of sandals in early times was not looked upon as an absolute necessity (see SHOES), and although the TURBAN in some form or other may be old, the custom of wearing the hair long was for very many a sufficient protection for the head. It is iiiij)ossible to say how early the ordinary Israelite assumed the two garments (tunic and mantle) which became the common attire of both sexes. The garments of the women probably differed in length and in colour from those of the men Dt. 22 s leaves no doubt as to the fact that there was some distinction. Several terms are conmion to the dress of both sexes {beged, kuttCmeth, simUih, etc. ) ; for some distinctive terms see Vail, and cp Tunic, Mantle. The Jewish prisoners pictured on the marble-reliefs of Sennacherib are bareheaded and wear short-sleeved tunics reaching to the ankles. This costume differs so markedly from the Assyrian, that the artist seems to have been drawing from life. Jehu's tribute-bearers on Shalmaneser's obelisk wear Assyrian dress and headgear, due probably to the conventionality of the artist. The Syrian envoy in a wall painting in the tomb of Hui at el-Kab wears a dress so unlike the Egyptian that we seem once more in presence of an autlientic record.

1 The exact meaning of "niJ'n na3 Ex. 31 10 35 19 39 4it (AV 'cloths of service," RV 'finely wrought garments') is very uncertain ; see I)i.-Ky. ad loc, Ges.(13). It is pussilile that the words are a gloss to enpn nj2 (//.), for which cp Ex. 2S2-4 Xmv. 11)32, aiitl the enumeration in Lev. 1(54.

2 Cp Brull, Trachten der Juden(V:\nW\X.wi\^.

S Che. JBL 17 106 ('98), where D"nO or VJD is detected in the obscure dhnO. and D'Vj':nOi 'put on their shoes,' in

  • Possibly the Israelite boys shaved their h.iir and only left

curls hanging over the ear. This was done in ancient Egj-pt, and the custom prevails at the present time among the Jewish boys of Yemen.

The overgarment of this envoy, which is long and narrow, and is folded close to the body, is of blue and dark-red material richly ornamented ; he has yellow underclothes with narrow sleeves and wears tight breeches. In the OT, however, there is no indication that such a costume was ever prevalent among the Israelites. For simplicity of attire it would not l>e easy to surpass the dress of the Sinaitic IJedawin (see W.M.M As. u. liur. 140), and this simplicity once doubtless marked the garb of the Hebrew.' Later, life in cities and contact with foreign influences paved the way to luxury. The more elabor- ate dress of the Canajinite would soon be imitated. Sevend signs of increasing sumptuousncss in dress are met with in the later writings. The dress at the court of Solomon is aptly rejjresented as an object of ad- miration to an Arabian queen (pizSo 1 K. lOs). One notes that it is in the later writings that several of the names for articles of dross apjx^ar for the first time. ICxtra garments and ornaments were added and finer materials used. The traditional materials of garments were wool and flax woven by the women ; but now trade brought purple from Phoenicia, byssus from I'gypt, and figured embroideries from Babylon (see E.mhroiuery). That silk was known in the time of Ezekiel (Ezek. 16 10 13) is doubtful (see Cotton, LiNKN, Sii.K, Wo(Ji,). New luxurious costumes (cp V1V30 'tra'?, Ezek. 23 12 884! ; C'SSpo. ib. '11 2^ f.) are a frequent subject of denunciation in the later prophets, partly because of the oppression of the poor involved in the effort to extort the means of providing them, and partly Ijecause of the introduction of alien rites and customs encouraged by contact with foreign merchants.

In later times intercourse with other peoples led to the introduction of fresh articles of apparel and new terms. Such for example is the essentially Grecian veraffos (if correct) of 2 Mace. 4 12 (see C.-\p). Three obscure words denoting articles of dress, most probably of foreign origin, are mentioned in the description of the three who were cast into the fiery furnace (Dan. 821).^ For Talnmdic times Schiirer ((f/r23g/.) notes the mention of CUD {sagian) worn by lalxiurers and soldiers, n'V::!;K [stola), ]miD {aov5apiov ; see Napkin), p-Sji (inXiov), N'SsON {ipLirlXia). Among under-garments are the P'P'cd'jt [dalmattca), according to Epi])hanius {hirr. 15) worn by scribes ; and the -flyya (paraguudion), of which the equivalent paregot is used in the .\rmen. \'ers. for X^Tijiv. To these may be added picpo {mactorcn) an outer garment, \-:hy'p (ko\6^iov), n'Sn a fringed garment of fine linen (see Frincjks). Gloves are mentioned (fp .Top Chelin, 16 16, etc.); but they were worn by workmen to protect their hands (cp also pn"u Targ. on Ruth 47).=*

6. Ornaments, toilet.[edit]

Increased luxury of dress among the Israelites was accompanied by an excess of ornaments. Ornaments of many kinds were worn by both sexes - primarily for protective purposes (as AMULETS); at a later time (when their original purpose was forgotten) to beautify and adorn the person. The elaborate enumeration of the fine lady's attire in Is. 8, though not from the hand of Isaiah (see Isaiah, ii. 5), is archaeologically important. Here the Hebrew women (of the post-exilic period?), following foreign customs, wear arm-chains, nose-rings, step-chains, etc., in great profusion. For these cp ORNAMENTS, and see the separate articles.

On the manner of treating the hair, see Beard, CUTTINGS OF THE FLESH, 3 ; Hair, MOURNING CUSTOMS. Women crisped their hair, bound it with veils (see Vail) and Garlands {</.;. ), etc. Later, the Roman habit of curling was introduced (Jos. B/ iv. 9 10).

1 In the Roman period simplicity of attire almost amounting to nakedness ; Talm. Sank. ^^/') was enforced in the case of criminals, whilst persons on trial were expected to dress very soberly (Jos. Anl. xiv. 94).

a For a discussion of the terms see Cook, /. Phil. 2f, y^ff. Cpp).

8 On these points see BrQll, of>. ci\, and l-evy, SHH 7>, under the various term.s. For later Jewish dress see .Xbrahams, Je^visk L'/e in the Middle Ages, chap, xv.y!, and einries in Index, 440.

Washing the body with water was usual on festal occasions, at bridals (Ezek. I69), at meals (Gen. 25a 19 10 Lk. "44), before formal visits (Ru. 83), before officiating in the temple, in ritual purifications, and so forth. Rubbing the body with sand or sherds was also practised. Unguents prepared by female slaves (i S. 813) or by male professionals (npn) were used after washing ( Ru. 3 3 Amos 66 etc.) i; see Anointing, 2, CONFECTIONARIES. After the Hellenistic period such festal customs became more and more elaborate.

The eye-lids of women were painted to make the eyes larger, kohl being used for the purpose (see Paint). It is doubtful whether henna dye was placed on nails and toes.

6. OT Referenes[edit]

The references in the EV to dress are so frequent and the symbolical usages so familiar that a passing glance at them may suffice. Food and clothing are naturally regixrded as the two great necessaries of life (e.g.. Gen. 2820 i Tim. 68). An outfit is called m:3 -nj; (Judg. 17 10). In Talmudic times it consisted of eighteen pieces (Jer. Shabb. 15). Clothes were made by the women (Prov. 31 22 Acts 939), but references to sewing are few (nsn, Gen. 37 Job 16 15 Eccles. 3? Ezek. 13 18, iirippaTrru Mk. 221).

Clothes were presented in token of friendship (i S. I84 ; see WRS A**-/. Sem.^-^ 335). as a proof of affection (Gen. 4,') 22), and as a gift of honour (i K. IO25 ; cp Am. Tab. 270). Garments were rent (pip, ms) as a sign of grief, of despair, of indignation, etc. (see Mourning Cusro.vis). Shaking the clothes was a sign of renunciation and abhorrence (Acts 186 ; cp Neh. 513). Promotion was often accompanied by the assumption of robes of dignity (cp Is. 22 21). So Eleazar takes the robes of Aaron (Nu. 20 28), and Elisha the mantle of Elijah (2 K. 2); see also Corona- tion. Conversely, disrobing might be equivalent to dismissal (2 Mace. 438). Rich people doubtless had large wardrobes ; the royal wardrobe (or was it the wardrobe of the temple?) had a special ' keeper ' (i K. 2214). The danger to such collections from moths (see Moth) and from the so-called ' plague of leprosy' (see Leprosy) was no doubt an urgent one. The simile of a worn-out garment [rhz, cp Dt. 84) is often employed (cp Is. 5O9 516 Ps. 10226 [27]). Rags are called D'jnp (Prov. 2321 EV) ; cp also cnSp ""^3' n'nnpri ".i'?3 'old cast clouts and old rotten rags ' (Jer. 38ii/ RV), all apparently containing the idea of something rent (cp poLKos Mt. 9 16 Mk. 22t).

7. Legal.[edit]

To cast a garment over a woman was in Arabia equivalent to claiming her.^ Robertson Smith [Kin. 87) cites a case from Tabari where the heir by throwing his dress over the widow claimed the right to marry her under the dowry paid by her husband, or to give her in marriage and take the dowry. This explains Ruth's words (Ruth 89) and the use of ' garment ' to designate a woman or wife in Mai. 2 16 (Kin. 87, 269). A benevolent law, found already in the Book of the Covenant, enacts that every garment retained by a creditor in pledge shall be returned before sunset (Ex. 2226) ; the necessity of this law appears from Am. 28 Ezek. 18 7 16 ; see Pledge.

1 Amos (66, see Dr. ad loc.) speaks of ' the chief ointments ' (EV), or rather 'the best of oils.'

2 Hence some explain n3 11033 >n Ex. 21 8 to mean that the master could not sell his female slave ' seeing that (he had placed) his garment (Jiegtd) over her.' See Slavery.

3 See Dr. ad loc., Frazer, Paus. 8197, Ashtoreth, 2. It may be doubted whether in ancient times dressing boys as girls was due, as among later Orientals, to a desire to avert the evil eye.

D's injunction ' a man shall not put on the sitnlah of a woman,' 'a woman shall not wear the appurtenances ('S3) of a man' (Dt. 225) may have been designed as a safeguard against impropriety ; but more probably it was directed against the simulated changes of sex which were so prevalent and demoralising in Syrian heathenism.' Quite obscure, on the other hand, is the law prohibiting the layman from wearing garments made of a mixture of linen and wool (vjo^a, Dt. 22 11 Lev. 1919; see Linen, 7. n. i). Such garments were worn by the priests ; ' and the law, which may, like the term itself, be of foreign origin, is at all events later than Ezek. 4-1 18. Another law, which ordered laymen to wear tassels or twisted threads upon the skirt of their sitnlah, seems to go back to a former sacred custom (see Fringes). See, further, Shoe, 4.

8. Dress and Religion[edit]

Garments had to be changed or purified upon the occasion of a religious observance (cp Gen. 802 Ex. 19 10) or before a feast (cp nii3?n, 'changes,' nisVnn, 'festal robes,' and see MANTLE). Primarily, however, all festive occasions are sacred occasions, and there is therefore no real difference between best clothes and holy clothes. When a garment comes in contact with anything partaking of a sacred nature it becomes ' holy,' and, once ' holy,' it must never be worn save on ' holy' occasions.^ This is why in early Arabia certain rites were performed naked or in garments borrowed from the sanctuary (We. Heid.^^^ 56, no). The same prin- ciple illustrates the command of Jehu to ' bring forth vestments for all the worshippers of Baal ' ; the vestments were in the custody of the keeper of the meltdhdh (2 K. 10 22; text perhaps corrupt : see Vestry). That certain rites among the Hebrews were performed in a semi- naked condition seems not improbable. The Ephod itself was once perhaps nothing more than a loin-cloth (cp 2 S. 614 16 20, and see EPHOD, i).^

Elijah's kilt {^ezor) of skin and the prophet's customary ' hairy mantle ' (see Mantle) in later times often falsely assumed (Zech. 184) remind us of the priests of the Palmetum who were dressed in skins (Strabo xvi. 4 18 ; for other analogies see RS'(^^ 437 f- ) '< * but there is always a tendency in cults to return to ancient custom in the performance of sacred rites, and, as Robertson Smith has shown, later priestly ritual is only a develop- ment of what was originally observed by all worshippers when every man was his own priest. The dressing of worshippers in skins of the sacred kind (cp Esau) implies that they have come to worship as kinsmen of the victim and of the god, and in this connection it is suggestive to rememl>er that the eponyms of the Levites and Joseph tril^es are the 'wild-cow' (Leah) and the 'ewe' (Rachel) respectively. See Leah, Rachel.

Again, we note that clothing may be looked upon as forming so far part of a man as to ser\-e as a vehicle of personal connection. The clothes thus tend to become identified with the owner, as in the custom alluded to in Ruth 39 above. The Arab seizes hold of the garments of the man whose protection he seeks, and ' pluck away my garments from thine ' in the older literature means ' put an end to our attachment. ' So a man will deposit with a god a garment or merely a shred of it, and even to the present day rag-offerings are to be seen upon the sacred trees of Syria and on the tombs of Mohammedan saints. They are not gifts in the ordinary sense, but pledges of the connection between worshipper and object or person worshipped (^"5(2) 335/). Thus garments are offered to sacred objects, to wells (ib. 177), but more particularly to trees and idols (see Nature Worship).' So 2 K. 287 speaks of the women who wove tunics (so Klo. ) for the asherah.

' This is distinctly asserted by Jos. Ant. iv. 8 u- . 'To pray for a blessing on the flax and sheep,' says Maimonides. This prohibition in the case of laymen was re-enacted under the Prankish emperors (Caf>itularium, 646). It is just possible that the law aimed at marking more distinctly the priest from the layman.

2 Cp Lev. 627 Hag. 2 12, and, on the contagion of hohness, cp Ezek. 44 19 and see Clean, 2. On Is. (55 5 (where point thePi-el)see/?5(2)45i, n. 1.

3 Verse 14^, however, may be an addition. For Ex. 20 26 cp Breeches, 3.

4 In Zeph. 1 8 the wearing of ' strange garments ' (nDJ 137P) IS associated with foreign worship (cp v. 0).

  • Cp Bertholet, Israel. Vorstcllungen v. Zustaml nock d.

Tode ('99).

The custom is not confined to the Semitic world, and instances of draped images in Circece arc collected by Frazer {Paus. 2574/). The Greek images,' he observes, 'which atv hihiorically known to have worn real clothes seem generally to have been remarkable for their great antiquity. ' The custom does not seem to be indigenous ; it was probably Ixjrrowed from the East. ' The counter- part of the custom of offering a garment to the sanctified object is the wearing of something which has been in contact with it. At the present day in Palestine the man who hangs a rag upon a sacred tree takes away, as a preservative against evil, one of the rags that have iKJcn sanctified by hanging there for some time (see FEFQ, 1893, p. 204). The custom of wearing sacred relics as charms is clearly parallel. Now, just as the priests had their special garments, so particular vestments were used for purposes of divination. Thus a magician wears the clothes of Kr-ti i.e. , Eridu, a town mentioned often in Babylonian incantations ( Del. Ass. //WO 371^). Another instance of the wearing of special dress is cited by Kriedrich Uelitzsch in Haer's Fsei'. p. xiii. An important parallel to this custom ap[jcars in Ezekiel's denunciation of the false projjhctesses '^ and the divination to which they resorted (i-^zek. 13 17-23). Two sp'cial articles are mentioned: (a) mnC3. ICsathoth, 'bands' or fetters'^ worn upon the arms (cp the use of Fronti.kt.s [17. ^'.]), and {h) ninsos. ' long mantles ' (evi(i6\aia [BA(^J, irfpt)3. [At-. 21], Pesh. taksitha, mand, EV incorrectly KERCHIEFS), which were placed over the head of the diviner.* It becomes very tempting to conjecture that these garments were not merely special garments, but the garments actually worn by the deity or sacred object itself, since it is plausible to infer that they would be held to be permeated with the sanctity of the deified object and that supernatural power might be thus im- parted to the wearer.* It is true, the link is still missing to connect the diviner's garb with that of the clothed image ; but such a conjecture as this would seem to explain how the use of ' Ephod,' as an article of divination, in its twofold sense of image and garment (in which it has been clothed), might have arisen (cp Bertholet on Ezek. 13 18) ; see Ephod.

See Weiss, Ki'stumkunde, i. ch. 5 ; Nowack, HA, 20 ; Ben- zinger, H.\, 16; and the special articles referred to in the course of this summary I. a. S. A. <, .

J The brazen statue in Elis bears the title of Satrap and seems to be of E.istern origin (Frazer, "J 575).

2 The importance of women in divination will_ not be over- looked. One notes how frequently the Grecian images, above referred to, represent goddesses.

' Sec Cuttings, 7, n. ; but '3 might also mean garments, cp Ass. kusUu.

  • It is surely wrong to suppose that the mantles were worn

by the enquirer. We have to read the fern, suffix in 'nSOO (r. i\a ; cp the fern, suffix in 'ninCD ^' 'o^) I there is a similar error in 03315; v. 19^. ,nD1p"'?3 (J'- 18) should probably be emended to ncpp"73, 'every diviner.'

Cp A'.VPl 438 and see Sacrifice. This may have given rise to the ficurc ' robe of righteousness' and other well-known u.sages, cp also Job 29 14, ' I put on truth and it clothed me ('iraS'l) . became, as it were, incarnate in me.


("^D:), Gen. 35 14; see SACRIFICE ; cp RITUAL, I.


The word nn3"l3. kirkdroth, is rendered 'dromedaries' in Is. 6620, RV- (so Boch. , Ges.,Che.,Di. ,Duhm. ; ci)"13"l3 to whirl about' and EV ' swift beasts ' ). The rendering ' panniers ' (cp /ierd oki- aSiuv [BXAQ]; Sym. ^1/ (popeioi^) has little in its favour.

For Jer. 223 (nnqS) and Is. 606 (/>/. plur.) EV 'dromedary,' RV mg. correctly 'young camel' see Camel, | i, n. For 1 K. 4 28 (f.R] (r21) and Esth. 8io(D'3S>T '32) see HoRSK, i [4].


(ApoyciAAa [Ti. WH]). Acts 2424- See HERODIAN FAMILY, 10.


had not yet become a title when the AV was made, but was still employed in its literal sense of any dux or chief: cp //c. /'. iii. 223 : 'Be merciful, great duke (viz., Fluellen), to men of mould." With but two exceptions (.see i, below) this now misleading term has given place in RV to a more modern equivalent.

I. I'?!*' (^(woi' [UAL]), a title applied to the Kdomite chiefs '(so RVniif. only) in Clen. 8615^. 1 Ch. 151^. (cp Ex. 15 15 EV, and see Euo.M, | j); but also (rarely-) to the 'chief- tains' (so RV) of Judah (Zcch. 97 12s6,a O xiA^yxo*. AV 'governors'). The tribal subdivision of which the allUfh is the head is called I^K 'eleph.

2. 1'03, in pi., of the 'dukes (RV 'princes') of Sihon (Josh. 1821). Elsewhere the word is always tr.tnslatcd 'princes' or 'priiiciiKil men' (Fs. S3 11 [12J Ezek. 3230 Mic 64 [5]).


(n':B01D), Dan. 851015; see Music.


(n-n). I. In Gen. 2.. i4(t3oi/Ma['][ADE]. 5ot'/ia [L]) and 1 Ch. 1 30 (tSof/xa [B.\L]) Dumah appears as a son of Ishmael. The form t3oi//xa = rrinK suggests comparison with Adumu, the ' fortress of the land of Aribi ' [KD1\},i), which, as Esar-haddon tells us, Sennacherib had conquered.

2. If the Dumah of Gen. is the same as Adumu, it may be tempting to suppose with Winckler {A T L'nt. 37) that the heading ' oracle of Dumah ' (Is. 21 11) also refers to this ' fortress. ' 'I"he prophecy itself, however, seems to forbid this ; it begins ' One calleth to me out of Seir.' More probably not Adumu but Udumu,^ i.e. Edom, is meant (Che. Proph. Is. 1 130) ; in other words, 'Dumah' is a corruption of 'Edom' (t^s 'ISoi'/tatoj [BX.AQ ; see Sw. ]), facilitated perhaps by the neighlxiur- hood of Massa [massa, v. 11, being misunderstood) and Tema(f. 14); see Gen. 2014/ It is a less probable view that ' Dumah ' (' silence ' i.e., desolation) is a mystical name for Edom ( t^j 'ISoi^/xatds). See also ISHMAEL, 4 (4), Edo.v^ (footnote on name of Edom).

3. There is another (apparently) enigmatical heading in Is. 21 1 ( ' Oracle of the wilderness of the sea '), which should probably be emended into ' Oracle of Clialda;a' (o'nra Ni;D ; see SHOT). Both headings are un- doubtedly late.

4. In Josh. 1552t the reading followed by EV is found in some MSS and edd. (see Ginsb. ), and being supported by the OS (Soi'/ui ; see below) is very probably more correct than the Rumah of MT (nDn fBii. p. 86,Gi.]; so Pesh. and , peMa I'*] /><"'Ma [-^J-])- In favour of this is the fact that the name is assigned to a town in the hill country of Judah, mentioned in the same group w ith Hebron and Beth-tappuah. For there is still a place called ed-Domch, 2190 ft. above the sea- level, 10 m. SW. from Hebron and 12 SE. from Beit- Jibrln, a position which coincides nearly with the definition of Jer. and Eus. [OS II64 25068), 'a very large village now in the-Daroma,' 17 m. southward from F.lcuthcropolis. T. K. C.


("lian), Gen. 40 15 41 14 ; Dungeon House C^ian n'3), Jer. 37i6 ; see Prison.


(niSL"Nn nyj' [Ba. Gi.]; Neh. 813 niSV'n [Bii.]). N'eh. 2 13 813/ 12 31. See Jerusale.m.


(N'l-n, TOY nepiBoAoY \.^^\ nepiBoAoN [Syr. mg.], AeeiRA [Theod.] = N^^), the name of a plain ' in the province of Babylon ' where Nebuchadrezzar's golden image was set up (Dan. 81). If the word is Aram., it should mean 'dwelling-place' or 'village'; but 65's rendering, even if a guess, may suggest that the name had come down from old Babylonian times and means 'wall.' In fact, three localities are mentioned in the tablets as bearing the name Duru, wall" or 'walled town' (Del. Par. 216), and several Babylonian cities had names compounded with Dur.^ That the writer of the narrative knew any of these places, appears improbable. Possibly the old name Duru had attached itself in his time to the plain adjacent to the remains of the walls of Babylon. At any rate, the scene of the dedication of the image must in the writer's mind have been close to Babylon.

1 In all the pas-sages quoted there may have been a confusion between '] and ']^K.

2 In Zech. written defectively )Vk. The St. Petersburg MS, however, points l^**-

3 Udumu, as Wi. now reads (but cp CI 1 189), was the name of a city in the land of G.ir, which may be identical with the Adumu of Esar-h.-iddon, and from this city the land of Udumu may have derived its name. Still the remark in the text appears to be sound.

1 Oppert finds an echo of Dura in the Nahr Dur and the Tfilrd Dfirai^Expid. en Mcsop. ['62] I238).


(1BV)' ^*^"- 2? 18 27 etc. See ASHES.


mentioned among those who were forbidden access to the temple (Lev. 21 20), is the EV for p^, which has been variously rendered 'freckled' (e<t)HAoc L"'^'"-], lippus, 'blear-eyed' [\'g.]), 'short-sighted, ' ' weak-eyed, ' ' affected with a cataract ' ( Rabb. , cp Targ. Jen). The literal meaning of t.ie word, viz. 'shrunk,' 'withered' (Ges. , Kn., Ke. ), seems most natural.


(D^'?np), Ezek. 23.5EV; RVg-'dyed turbans' ; see TURBAN.


For Judg. 5 30 R Vn'e- (D^rny) see COLOURS, col. 86q, n. 2; and for Is. 63i AV (^^-IDn) see COLOURS, 10




(AyceNTepiON), Acts 288 RV ; AV ' bloody flux.' See DISEASES, 9, and cp EMERODS.


The eagle of EV, the Great Vulture of RVmg. (נֶשֶׁר ; ἀετός), is identified by Tristram with Gyps fulvus, the Griffon, not a true Eagle but a member of the family Vulturidæ. Griffons are still very common in Palestine, which is about the centre of their area of distribution, whence they spread across Asia, around the Mediterranean area and through Northern Africa.[1] They are noble birds of large size, and form conspicuous objects in the landscape as towards evening they perch on the peaks of rocks or cliffs (Job 39 28 29), or when soaring. The comparison of invaders to a swooping vulture is often employed in the OT (cp Dt. 28 49 Job 926 Hab. 18 Jer. 4840 etc.). They are carrion feeders and sight their food from afar. Their head and neck are bald, a fact which did not escape the notice of the prophet Micah (Mi. 116). They nest in colonies, some of which contain a hundred pairs of birds. They are said to be remarkably long-lived, probably attaining a century or more (allusions in Ps. 103 5 and perhaps [see G] in Is. 40 31). The Himyarites had an idol nasr which was in the form of a Vulture (cp ZDMG 29 600), and the same worship among the Arabs is attested by the Syriac Doctrine of Addai (Phillips, 24). [2]

The Gr. ἀετός may be applied to vultures, and the Romans seem to have classed the eagle among the family Vulturidæ (see Pliny, HN 10 3 13 23). Is there any connection between ἀετός and עֵיִמ (see Bird, § 1)? Possibly the bird found on the Assyrian sculptures (see the illustrations in Vigouroux, s.v. 'aigle') and on the Persian (Xen. Cyr. vii. 1 4) and Roman (Plin. HN 13 23) standards is meant to represent not the true eagle but a vulture. In Christian art the Egyptian phoenix appears as an eagle and becomes a symbol of the resurrection (see Wiedemann, Rel. of Anc. Egyptians, 193). In the fifth century A.D. the eagle became an emblem of John the evangelist (see Dict, of Chr. Antiqq., s.v. 'Evangelists') A. E. S. — S. A. C.




(MANHC [BA]), i Esd. 9 21 = Ezra 10 21 MAASEIAH, ii. , n.


(&PP&BCON). the warrant or security for the performance of a promise or for the ratification of an engagement, is used thrice in NT (z Cor. 122 5s Eph. Ii3/. ), but always in a figurative sense of the gifts of the Holy Spirit bestowed upon the apostles and Christians generally, as a pledge that they should obtain far greater blessings in the future. See PLEDGE.

1 For hieroglyphic picture of vulture see EGYPT, 9, n. 12.

2 Cp the Syriac name anniW C" NSR " gave ), and see We. Held. 20 (Heid.W 23), and WRS Kin. 209, Rel. Sem.V) 226, n. 3 ; ZDMG 40 186 [ 86].

38 1145


For Judg. 824 Prov. 25 12 etc. ( D , nezem} and Ezek. 16 12 etc. (^jy, dgll) see RING, 2, and for Prov. I.e. cp BASKET. For Is.32o etc. (em 1 ?, IdhaH) see AMULETS, RING, 2, and MAGIC, 3(3).

The tip of the ear (Tmn, tenuklf) was specially protected by sacred rites (see SBOTon Is. 66 17).


The conception of universe is usually expressed in OT by heaven and earth (e.g. , Gen. li 2i 14 19), though there is a still more complete expression : heaven above, earth beneath, and the water under the earth 1 (Ex. 204, cp Gen. 4925). So in Assyrian eldti u Saplati things above and things below, or (Creation -tablet, i. if.) the heaven above, the earth beneath, to which 1. 3 adds the ocean. There is also (Is. 4424 ; cp 45?) a general term ^3, everything (iravra), corresponding to Assyr. kullatu, gimru.

1. The 'earth'[edit]

Earth of EV represents three Hebrew words. ( i ) jnx ( <?res), properly the earth, including Sheol ; hence either the visible surface of our earth (Gen. 26, and often) or the nether world (e.g. , Ex. 15 12 Is ^^ 2 9 4 ). ( 2 ) HCTN (dddmdh), [i.] the soil which is tilled, Gen. 2s 817 etc., [ii.] the ground, Gen. 125 620 etc. (3) ~\ sy( dphar), properly earth as a material (Gen. 27), then the earth (Is. 2 19), then dust (Gen. 814), then the nether world (Job 17 16 Ps. 30g [10] etc. ). @ renders (but not universally) all three words by 777.

2. The 'world'[edit]

Whilst the AV uses world as a synonym for earth both in OT and in NT, it is only in NT (see below, 3) that it occurs in the sense of universe. The reason is that Jewish writers had adopted a much more convenient term than heaven and earth to express an expanded conception of the universe.

First, however, let us note the Heb. words rendered world.

1- Tj$i heled, Ps. 17 14 49 2 [i]. If the text is correct, we have here a singularly interesting transition from lifetime to the world of living men ; for the primary sense of heled (if the word exists at all) is life-time (Ps. 396 [5], 8948 [47], Job 11 17 and emended text of 10 20).! Unfortunately heled in Ps. 17 14 is certainly corrupt. From men of the world whose portion is in life is an expression both obscure in itself and unsuitable to the context. In Is. 38 ii heled is read only by critical con jecture ; the text has hedel, which means neither world nor any thing else : there is no such word.- The true reading is doubtless tcbel world, and so too we should read in Ps. 49 2 [i]. Hymn- writers do not generally select the rarest and most doubtful words. There is but one pure Hebrew word for world (see 3).

2- !!!?, hedel, Is. 38 ii, on the assumption that cessation (the supposed meaning) is equivalent to fleeting world. Many critics, with some MSS, including Cod. Bab., read "Pn, heled. See, however, no. i.

3. 73B, tebel, mother-earth ? a word of primitive mytho logical origin (Gunkel, Hommel), hence never occurring with the article. Once it is used in antithesis to midbar, desert (Is. 14 17) ; but generally it is quite synonymous with /res, earth. Thus in i S. 2 8 (RV)

For the pillars of the earth are Yahwe's,
And he hath set the world upon them ;

And Prov. 8 26 (RV),

While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields,
Nor the beginning of the dust of the world. 1

In Job 37 12 RV we have the strange expression the habitable world (AV the world in the earth ); and in Prov. 831 RV his habitable earth (AV the habitable part of his earth ). The phrases are the same, and are due to corruption of the text. ^ <& impartially renders both rn and ^n sometimes by yij sometimes by rj oiieou^ie n/.

4- D^iy. oldm, a difficult word, meaning (i) antiquity, (2) indefinite length of time. The etymology is doubt ful. Most connect it with c^y, to hide ; but probably D- -dm is a noun-ending (so Earth). Compare Ass. tillu, remote, in the phrase ultu ulld from of old ; ulldnu far-off time, i.e. , past time (Del. Ass. HWB f>4/.). For a less probable view, see Lag. Uebers. 115. Twice rendered world in AV : Ps. 73 12, Behold these are the ungodly, who prosper in the world, RV (better) and being alway at ease (D^iy 1^?n) I Eccles. 3n (so also RV), Also he hath set the world in their heart (<5 H , cr6/j.iravTa. rbv aiwva), a riddle which admits of more than one solution (see Che. Job and Solomon, 210). However, even if man is a microcosm we cannot expect to find this advanced idea in Ecclesiastes, and the occurrence of oldm, world, in Sirach is improbable. Ha oldm needs to be emended. 3 We must give up the micro cosm and the desiderium seternitatis and take in exchange an assurance that the travail of the student of God s works is good : I have seen the travail which God has given to the sons of men to exercise themselves there with. He has made everything beautiful in its time; also he has suggested all that travail (pprr^STlK ; attests Va) to the sons of men (read Q-JN 33^, not ^30 Da^a).

1 In Job 11 17 it is an improvement to read "]~J:>n T3 , the days of thy lifetime (shall be brighter than noontide), and in 10 20 iVn, Are not the days of my lifetime few ? but we should most probably read -tart and Vart, thy fleeting days. (Che. Exp. Times, 10381 [ 99]).

2 Cp Ps. 39 5 [4], where EV has how frail I am, but where the Hebrew has, not frail, but ceasing (Dr. Parallel Psalter). "rin, hddel, too, is probably not a real word.

3. Meaning of olam in NT times[edit]

By NT times the word olam must have received the new meaning world, for aldiv = n^iy is used in this sense. We can doubtless trace this new development to the rise (under Persian stimulus) of a belief in new heavens and a new earth ^ see EscHATOLOGY, 88, and cp Che. Intr. Is. 370 ; OPs. 405), and the intercourse of educated Jews with Greek-speaking neighbours would confirm the usage. It is true the sense of time is not entirely lost ; but a new sense has been grafted on the old. This oldm is not merely this age ; but the earth which is the theatre of the events of this age, and the coming oldm is not merely the great future period in itiated by the Divine Advent, but the new earth which will be the theatre of the expected great events. Hence the author of Hebrews can even say (Heb. 12), By whom also he made the worlds (TOVS aiuvas ; Del. and Biesenthal niDSiynN), and again (Heb. 11 3), we under stand that the worlds (ol auDves) have been framed by the word of God. The phrase ol alwves means, not the ages of human history (as in Heb. 926, cp i Cor. 10n), but the material worlds which make up the universe 4 (iravra., Heb. 1 2 ; TO @\firofj.fvoi>, 11 36).

On the Jewish references to the two olilmlin see Dalman, Die Worte Jesu (1898, pp. 121 ff.~), where it is pointed out that the famous saying ascribed to Simeon the Righteous (circa 280 B.C.), respecting the three things on which the world (aViyrt) rests, cannot be authentic. Dalman also denies that Enoch 486 49 idff. 71 15, where the creation of the world is referred to, belong to the original Book of the Similitudes. As to 71 15 there can be no question ; chap. 71 is most certainly a later addition (Charles). At any rate, 45 5 refers to the renovation of the heaven and the earth, on which see above. In 72 i 73 3 8 82 i 5 7, the conception of the created world no doubt occurs, and in 4 Ezra saeculum (Syr. NoVj?) occurs frequently. From the end of the first century A.D. onwards Q->IJ; is used so often in the sense of world that we cannot doubt its universality. It has even penetrated into the older Targums. Cp 6 TOU KOO>OU /3acriA.evs (2 Mace. 7 9); 6 xvpios TOU KOOOU (2 Mace. 1814); oWirdnK irdo-ijs rijs KTiVeus (3 Mace. 2 2). Lord of the world occurs in Enoch 81 9 ; Ass. Mos. 1 n ; Jubil. 2023. These and similar appellations are never found in NT (Dalman, 142).

1 The text needs emendation (see next note). Read probably, Ere he had made the land and the grass (-rxm) And had clothed with green (NBH<I) the clods of mother-earth. P See Che. JQR, Oct. 1897, pp. i6/

3 The latest commentator (Siegfried, 1898) holds that D7Jn means the future ; but this is hardly to be proved by 2 t6 3 14 96 12$. Somewhat more plausible, but still improbable, is Dalman s paraphrase, die unabsehbare Weltzeit.

  • Note also that oi/covjueVr) in Heb. 2 5 corresponds to alwv in

C 5 (Dalman).

4. Terms for 'earth' and 'world' in NT.[edit]

In the NT we find (a) 77 olKovpfrr), (6) 6 /cicr/xos, (c) Ktlbis

(a) TI OIK. is the habitable globe (Mt. 24 14 Rom. 10 18 etc.) ; also the Roman Empire (Acts 17 6) ; also = a l^ v (Heb. 2 5), see above ( 3).

(b) 6 KOO-/XOI is the earth, or its inhabitants (eg. Mt. 48 5i 4 Mk. 16i 5l Jn 129); also the universe (TO o\oi> TOUTO, JPlat. Gorg. 408 A), as in ctTrb <ca.Taj3oAi7 KOO-JU.OV (e.g., Mt. 1835 [not in best MSS.], cp 24 21) ; also with OUTOS= this oldm (Jn. 1 12, opp. to fwij aiwcios ; so Jn. 18 36 i Cor. 3 19, 5 10 and Eph. 2 2, where note the strange compound phrase Kara. TOV a uava. TOU xoV/xov TOVTOU). 6 KOO-JUOS without OUTOS in i Jn. 215^ 817; and in the derived sense of worldlings (cp the phrase, too probably incorrect, "lP CTlp in Ps. 17 14). With OUTOS in Jn. 1231 14 30 [not Ti.] 16 ii i Cor. 819; without OUTOS in Jn. 771 Cor. 1 21 and often. Hence the adjective KOO-JOUKOS ; in Heb. 9i, TO ayiov Koo>uK6V as opposed to the heavenly antitype of the tabernacle ; Tit. 2 12.

(c) KTi o-ts, the universe (cp Wisd. 617 19 6), Mk. 106 13 19 ; 2 Pet. 3 4 Col. 1 15 Rev. 3 14. In Heb. 9 n this KTI O-IS, and in Gal. 6152 Cor. 5 17, Kaiyri KTC O-IS. The latter phrase, however, is applied morally and spiritually (cp Jn. 857 Rom. 64, and the phrase /caivb? avSpiairos . . ., Eph. 215 424). In the sense of the coming oldm it does not occur in NT (but see Enoch 72 1 Jubil. 1 29 ; and cp Bar. 32 6 4 Ezra 7 75). We have the new heavens and the new earth, however, in 2 Pet. 813 Rev. 21 1 ; and if we had to render ev TTJ TroAiyyei eo-i. iji (Mt. 19 28) into Aramaic or Hebrew we should have to follow Pesh. which gives in the new world (KD*?y)- The Greek phrase quoted is, in Dalman's words, the property of the evangelist." On the elements of the world (thrice in NT) see ELEMENTS. T. K. C.


1. Quadruple divisions[edit]

Like the Babylonians, the Hebrews divided the world (i.e. , earth and heaven) into four parts. We find the phrase the four skirts (nisia, 1 TTT^pvyes) of the earth, Is. 11 12 Ezek. 7 2, cp JobSTsSSis; and in Rev.7i 208, the four corners (yuviai) of the earth. Probably, too, the four ends (nisp) of the earth could be said ; cp Jer. 4936, the four ends of the heaven. The four quarters could be described also as the four winds (as in Ass.): see Ezek. 37 9 (especially), Dan. 88 11 4 Zech. 26[io] iCh. 92 4 Mt. 2431. Similarly, to all winds means in all directions (Jer. 4932 Ezek. 61012, etc.). The east was called the front (en/:) ; the west, the back part (ninx) ; the south, the right (pp ; Aq. Sym., 5e%idv [Ps. 89 13]); and the north, the left (^XDK 1 ). The N. is called also pss, which is perhaps to be compared with Ar. saban (from sabawun, east wind, E). 2 The S. is also D vn (root uncertain) ; the E. usually rnip, the (region of the) sun-rising, and the W. either tr, the sea, 3 or mj?p, the (region of the) sunset ; sometimes also (^.^. , i Ch. 924), improperly, 3.3ji strictly the dry S. region of Palestine ; see, further, GEOGRAPHY, 2. We now turn to the appli cation and associations of the several terms.

1 Cp the Ass. phrase kippat same irsitim, usually, the ends of heaven and earth (Del. Ass. HWB, s.v. rps). The ideogram SAG-GUL, however, elsewhere =sikkftni, bar (Del.) or possibly hinge (Stucken). Perhaps the Ass. phrase means the bars (or hinges) of heaven and earth (Stucken, Astralmythen, 1 38), and consequently the parallel Hebrew phrase the bars (or hinges) of earth.

2 So Earth, Etym. Stud. 26 ; Ko. Lehrg. 2 128 ; but cp GEOGRAPHY, 2. At any rate fgs is to hide, not to be hidden. East in Hebrew may mean NE. The interchange of 3 and 3 is, of course, no difficulty.

3 <B nearly always renders D^, 6d\a<rcra., even where west is meant.

2. North and South.[edit]

North and south are applied (a) to quarters of tne heavens. So Job 26? (crit. emend. ) -

(Before him) who had stretched the north region (of the heavens) upon space,
Who has suspended the earth upon nothing. 1

The passage has been well explained (after Del. ) by Davidson : 2 The northern region of the heavens, with its brilliant constellations, clustering round the pole, would naturally attract the eye, and seem to the beholder to be stretched out over the " empty place, " i.e. , the vast void between earth and heaven. See DEAD, 2 (a) for an explanation of the context. The N. region of the heavens is the station of Bel. Also Job 37g (crit. emend.),

From the chambers of the south (comes) the storm,
And from the north-star cold,
(When) by the breath of God ice is given,
And the wide waters are straitened.*

There is no south pole in Babylonian astronomy corresponding to the north pole (cp Jensen, Kosmol. 25) ; but there is a region of Ea, and this is called in Job the south, as the region of Bel is called the north. The constellations in the region ( path ) of Ea are called the chambers of the south.

EV has in v. gl>, And cold out of the north. North = D lID, which Ges. Di. explain (after Kimhi) as the scattering a name for the north winds, which dispel clouds and bring cold. Not very natural. We evidently require a constellation. The Heb. m2zarii may perhaps be the Ass. (kakkab) inisri. Read IB D \ he corruption was caused by a reminiscence of mazzdroth.* The (kakkab) miSri, which we provisionally translate, with Hommel, the north-star, was associated with cold, hail (?), and snow by the Babylonians (Jensen, Kosmol. 50). Vg. ab Arcturo ; <@ 0.77-6 aicpwnjpiW (read apxTwait). On Ezek. 14 Eccles. 16, see WINDS.

N. and S. are applied (6) to quarters of the earth. Ps. 89 12, The north and the south, thou hast created them. Here north and south represent all the four quarters of the earth.

The N. was encompassed with awe for the Hebrew.

(1) From the N. came the invaders of Palestine, and the north is a symbolic term for Assyria (Zeph. 213), or Babylonia (Jer. 1 14 466102024 Ezek. 267 Judith 164).

(2) Religious considerations added to the feeling of awe. In the mountainous north th people localised the mountain of El5him, of which tradition spoke (Ezek. 14 Is. 14 13; some would add Ps. 48 2 [3]); and since God dwelt there, a poet says that manifestations of God s glory came from the N. (Job 37 22, crit. emend. : see CONGREGATION, MOUNT OF, and cp BAAL- ZEPHON, i). According to Ewald (Alterth. 59), this was the reason why sacrificial victims were to be slain before Yahwe 1 on the north side of the altar (Lev. In). Yet, according to the older Israelitish view, which lasted into post-exilic times, the sacred mountain of Yahwe was not in the N. but in the S. The mountain of God was Horeb (Ex. 3i 4 27, etc.); Yahwe s progress into Canaan was from Seir (Judg. 64 cp Dt. 882), or, as a late Psalmist says, from Teman (Hab. 83). See WINDS.

1 flD ^a is commonly taken to be a compound (Ko. Lehrg. 2418), but without any adequate grounds. The right reading must be D 73n ; the plur., to express intense vanity 1 (cp Eccles. 1 2).

2 Budde and Duhm, perhaps unwisely, follow Dillmann.

3 Che. JBL 17 io 5 /: [ 98].

4 Ibn Ezra (and so Michaelis) identified mezdrim with MAZZAROTH and MAZZALOTH (gq.v.). Aq. has u.a.Covp.

5 See Che. Ps.M, ad loc.

3. East and West.[edit]

Of E. and W. less has to be said. East and West, in Mt. 811, represent all the four quarters of the earth like north and south in Ps - 89:12 [13]. 'As far as the east is from the west' is a symbolic expression for an immense distance (Ps. 103 12). When all mankind unite in festivity, thou makest the outgoings of morning and evening to ring out their joy (Ps. 658 [9], Driver). The expression has been admired ; but it is only the morning sun that goes forth. The true reading, could we recover it, would probably be finer. 5 The Babylonians believed that the celestial vault had two gates, one by which the sun went forth in the morning, and another by which he came in in the evening. In the E. was the isle of the blessed, with Par(?)-napisti, the hero of the Deluge-story ; in the E. , too, was the Hebrew paradise (Gen. 28). The W. had no such pleasing associations, for there was the entrance of the realm of the dead ; * there, too, the great Lightgiver disappeared.

Still, a Psalmist in the full confidence of faith can declare (Ps. 1399, crit. emend.),

If I lifted up the wings of the sun, 2
And alighted at the utmost part of the west (D lit. sea),
Even there thy hand would seize me, 3
Thy right hand would grasp me.

He does not say (as MT and AV may suggest) would lead me to my own peace and happiness. At any rate, it is much that he is not cut away from Yahwe s hand. He whom God grasps cannot go to destruction. T_ K. C.




(B?in, ceiCMOC, cyNceiCMOC- Syria and Palestine abound in volcanic appearances (cp PALESTINE). Between the river Jordan and Damascus lies a volcanic tract, and the entire country about the Dead Sea presents unmistakable tokens of volcanic action and of connected earthquake shocks vaster and grander than any that are known, or can be imagined, to have occurred in the historic period. At the same time, the numerous allusions in the Bible to phenomena resembling those of earthquakes show that the writers were deeply impressed by the recurrence of severe seismic shocks. Not improbably some of these were recorded in the lost royal annals.

1. Real or supposed historical earthquakes.[edit]

i. Real or supposed historical earthquakes. (a) 1 S. 14 15 And there was a terror in the camp, in the garrison - and among a11 the People, and the raiders also were terrified- 4 This was on account of Jonathan s exploit. Suddenly the earth quaked, whence there arose a supernatural terror. Doubtful. (b] Am. 1 1 prophecy of Amos, two years before the earthquake. Doubtful. On this and on (c) see AMOS, 4. Josephus (Ant. ix. 104) draws on his imagination, (c) Zech. 14s Ye shall flee as ye fled before the earth quake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. A post-exilic notice, (d} Am. 4 1 1 I have wrought an overthrow among you, as at the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah. Historical, (e) Jos. Ant. xv. 5 2. In the seventh year of the reign of Herod, there was an earthquake in j udaea, such as had not happened at any other time, and brought great destruction upon the cattle in that country. About ten thousand men also perished by the fall of houses. The calamity encouraged the Arabs to acts of aggression (see HEROD). For later catastrophes see Renan, L Ante- christ, 336.

1 Cp Karppe, Journ. asiat. 9 139 ( 97).

2 MT has "in^, the dawn ; but of a bird of the dawn we know nothing ; and how does the dawn alight in the west ? Read surely Din (Job 9 7), and cp Mai. 3 20 [4 2].

3 Reading 3n^B (Gra., Duhm).

4 The text is corrupt. See SLING.

2. Unhistorical narratives.[edit]

ii. Unhistorical narratives. (a) Gen. 1925 and he overthrew those cities. Possibly implying a primitive tradition of an earthquake. See, however DiIImann and cp SODOM. (6) The giving of the Law(Ex. 19i8). (c) Story of Korah (Nu. 1631). (d) Elijah at Horeb (i K. 19n). It is the earthquake that the pious imagination constantly associates with a theophany. See ELIJAH, 2. (e) The crucifixion. The earth quaked ; and the rocks were rent ; and the tombs were opened, when Jesus yielded up his spirit (Mt. 27 si/. ). Not in the other gospels. Accord ing to Mk. , the cry which Jesus uttered when he gave up the ghost so impressed the Roman centurion that he exclaimed, Truly this was a Son of God (Mk. 1639 RV m &-). Mt. , however, explains this confession as the result of fear at the earthquake and the accompanying phenomena. Similar portents are said to have marked the death of Julius Caesar, revered as a demigod (Virg. Georg. \w\ff.} However, the evangelist may have thought not only of the divinity of Christ but also of the exceptional wickedness of those who put Christ to death. Shall not the land tremble for this, and every one mourn that ilwelleth therein? (Am. 8 8). (/) Paul and Silas at Philippi (Acts 16 26). The essence of the story is that I .ml and Silas were praying with such earnestness that all in the prison could hear, and that an extraordinary answer to prayer was granted. No stress is laid on the earthquake.

The references in prophecy and poetry are imagin ative in character and symbolise the dependence of the earth on its Creator : Judg. 64 Am. 88 Hos. 4s Is. 296 Ezek. 38 19/ Joel 2io Nah. Is Hab. 36 Zech. 144 Ps. 18 7 [8] 296 97 4 H4 4 Rev. 61285 Ili3l6 8.

3. Later earthquakes[edit]

Jerome (on Is. 15) writes of an earthquake which, in the time of his childhood (circa 315 A.U.), destroyed Rabbath Moab or Areopolis (see AR). Mediaeval writers also speak of earthquakes in Palestine, stating in that they were not only formidable, but also Palootino frequent. That of 1202 (or 1204) was among the worst. Baalbek, being so near the Lebanon and Antilibanus, has always suffered much from earthquakes; that of 1759 did great damage to the ruins. In 1834 an earthquake shook Jerusalem and injured the chapel of the Nativity at Bethlehem. The great earthquake of 1837 (Jan. i) did little harm at Jerusalem, which was not near enough to the centre of disturbance. Safed and Tiberias, however, were nearly destroyed. Cp Tristram, Land of Israel, 581.

T. K.C.


(Dlf) M3 ; 01 yioi KAe/v\ [BXAQ]) is a general term for the people, whether Bedouin or pastoral tribes, of the country E. (or NE., Gen. 29 1 AN&TOAcON [ADEL]) of Palestine, who were regarded by the Israelites as near relations, descended from Abraham by Hagar, Keturah, and other concubines (Gen. 256 D"l ]HN ; eic fHN ANATOAooN [ADEL]). For textual criticism see REKEM.

In Ezek. 264 ([5]i)[/x]rvid.) I0 they appear to the E. of Ammon and Moab (crj Is. 1114); in Jer. 4928 they are mentioned with the Kedarites. In Judg. 8 10 (aXKo$v\<av [B], viol ai aroAoii [AL]) the phrase has a wider reference, including all the Bedouin (Moore), and in Job 1 3 (riav a<f> TjAi ou avaroMav IBNA]), i K. 430 [5io](ira.i TiavapxaCtaviLV0p<aw<av[ B\L])lt seems to include the Edomites, for the Edomites of Teman were re nowned for their wisdom. Cp MAHOL. T. K. C.


(rn{n 1WJ>), Neh. 829. See JERU SALEM.


(TO TTACX&). Actsl2 4 AV. See PASSOVER, and cp FEASTS.


(DHjrn-n), Ex. 10 13. See WINDS, EARTH (FOUR QUARTERS), and GEOGRAPHY, i.


(?T|? ; plausibly connected with Bel by Wi. Gf 1 120 n. 2 ; Gray, Acad, aoth June 1896 ; r-AjBHA [BADEL] ; cp EBAL, MOUNT).

1. One of the sons of Shobal b. Seir the Horite ; Gen. 8623 i Ch. 1 40 (yao/3i)A. [A], ovjSaA [L]).

2. A son of Joktan i Ch. 122 (where eleven MSS [Kenn.] and Pesh. read "?aiN ; om. B, ye/xtai/ [A], r)/3j)A [L], Jos. Ant. 1.64 T)/3aAo ; HEBAL). In Gen. 1028 the name appears as OHAL (VjiV, Sam. n J?, om. ADE ; euoA [MSS ; see HP], ye/3aA [Compl., MSS], yai/3oA [L] ; EBAL). Halevy connects with the local name Abil in Yemen (Mtl. 86). Cp Glaser, Skizze, 2426. The name may be a miswritten form of ^ND^N, which follows (Che.).


?yu 1H ; O ROC r<MB&A [BAFL] ; Jos. Ant. v. 1 19 HBhAoc [> i fHBHAoc] ; Ant. iv. 844 Bo YAH ; MO.VS HKBAL}. Possibly Ebal should be Ebel ; -bel may be a divine name, ... of Bel. The dedication of a mountain to Bel in primitive times would not be surprising. Cp Ebal (above), Harbel (Num. 34 n, see RIBLAH). There is of course no connection between Ebal (i, above) ben Seir and Mount Ebal.

Ebal is a mountain 3077 ft. above the sea-level, which, with Gerizim (on the south), incloses the fertile valley in which Shechem lies. Both the mountains and the city were doubtless sacred from remote antiquity. There is an indication of this, so far as regards Ebal, in the direction respecting the solemn curse to be deposited there, ready to fall on the disobedient ( Dt. 11 29 cp 2713-26), and respecting the placing of the great stones inscribed with the (Deuteronomic) Law and the erection of an altar to Yahwe on the same mountain (Dt.2?4-8). The latter passage is specially important. As Kuenen (Hex. 128) and Driver (Dt. 295) have pointed out, there was an injunction respecting a national sacrifice on Mt. Ebal 1 in the older work (JE) upon which the late Deuteronomic writer builds. The view that any disparagement to Ebal was intended by Dt. 1129 is therefore in itself improbable, nor can it be said that the mountain is even now sterile to the degree which a popular prejudice demands.

Maundrell in 1697 observed that neither of the mountains has much to boast of as to their (its) pleasantness. Corn grows on the southern slopes, and there are traces of a thorough system of irrigation in ancient times. 1 Mt. Ebal is 228 ft. higher than Mt. Gerizim, and commands a more extensive view, which is fully described by G. A. Smith (HG 119-123). Its position was thoroughly but not unnaturally misunderstood by Eus. and Jer. On this and other points, see GERIZIM. In the Pap. Anast. (Travels of an Egyptian in Syria, Palestine, etc.), Chabas and Goodwin render (i. 21 6) Where is the mountain of Ikania? who can master it ? (RPN 2 1 1 1). This should rather be, Where is the mountain of Sakam(a) or Shechem? i.e., either Ebal or Gerizim (As. u. Eur. 394). In the fourteenth century B.C. the latter names do not seem to have been widely known.


("1217, i.e., servant [of God], 50; [AL]).

1. Father of Gaal (Judg. 926-41, i<o/3)A [B] v. 31 ajSeA. [A], 35 o-ajSer [A]) according to MT ; but see GAAL.

2. b. Jonathan of the B ne ADIN in Ezra s caravan (see EZRA i., 2 ; ii., 15 [i]<O Ezra 86 (a>/3r)0 [B], laftf, [A], [A/xii/] aa|3 [L]) = i Esd. 832 (OBETH, ou/V [B], <o/37)e [A], [A/our] aa/3 [L]).


( vP^^i servant of the king [i.e. God], 41 ; occurs also in Phoen. ; aBAe/weAex [BKAQ]). An Ethiopian eunuch at the court of Zedekiah, who obtained leave to draw up Jeremiah from the cistern into which he had been cast by the princes (Jer. 887^). He was rewarded by a prophetic assur ance that he would be preserved at the capture of Jeru salem (39 is/:).

Jewish legend reckons Ebed-melech among the nine (or, some say, the thirteen) who entered Paradise without passing through death (see Gaster in MGIVJ, 1881, p. 413).


(H2N), Job 926 AV n e-, RVe- REED(?.I/. 5).


pWrrjnK, the stone of help, ezep [BAL]).

1. The site of the battle in which the Philistines slew the sons of Eli and took the ark (i S. 4i 5i, afievve^tp [A]; in 5i, -vvrjp [B]). The battle seems to have been followed by the destruction of Shiloh (cp Jer. 7 12 14), and the subjugation of central Canaan by the invaders. This Eben-ezer was near Aphek, which lay in the northern part of the plain of Sharon.

2. The stone which Samuel set up between the Benjamite Mizpah and Shen in commemoration of his victory over the Philistines (i S. 7 12). This is quite a different part of the country from that in which (i) lay, and the two Eben-ezers cannot be made one without inventing a new Aphek. See APHEK, 3 (c\ On the other hand there is no reason why more than one sacred stone should not have borne so appropriate a name as the stone of help ; 3 the story of i S. 7 comes from a document of no historical value, and is probably an aetiological legend giving an innocent explanation of what was really a rude stone idol. w. R. S.

1 The Samaritan reading on Mt. Gerizim, adopted by Kennicott, is obviously a sectarian alteration of the text.

2 See Early Travels in Pal., ed. Wright, 433 ; Conder, Tentwork, 1 67 ; Rob. BR 3o6 ; Grove-Wilson, Smith s DBV\ 1828.

3 Cp Abnll, stone of El, RSV], 210, n. i.


("ay, eBep [BADEL]). i. That Eber is not an actual personage, but an ethnological abstraction, is shown elsewhere (see HEBREW LANGUAGE, i). He is in fact the eponym of all the Hebrew peoples all the sons of Eber (Gen. 102i ; tfiop [E]). Genea logically he is the father of Peleg and Joktan, and the grandson of Arpachshad (i.e. , the Hebrew peoples came from Chaldaea ; see ARPHAXAD), Gen. 1024/1 i Ch. 1 iS f. 24 f. ; cp Gen. 11 13-16. _The name is properly a geographical term in:n 13J?. Eber han-nahar i.e. , the farther (?) bank of the river which appears in Ass. in the form ebir nari (first indicated by Wi. GJ 1223, n. i ; cp Hommel, AHT 196, 255, 326), l and, Hommel thinks, was originally applied by the Canaanites to the region on the W. bank of the Lower and the Middle Euphrates, including Uru (or Ur) and Borsippa. The designation Eberites or Hebrews would naturally still adhere to those tribes which came westwards into Canaan. According to this scholar, the name Eber is also used once in the OT (viz., in Nu. 2422-24; ej3paiovs [BAFL], efiep [F a m -]) of Palestine and Syria with the exception of AshurorS. Judah (see ASSHURIM). His arguments are, however, not very solid. It is not certain that ebir nari in the inscription really denotes Palestine ; Hommel shifts his ground in the course of his book (see AHT 196, 326) ; and after all it is not a Canaanitish inscription that he gives us. It is even more questionable whether Hommel can claim i K. 424 [54] as proving an early Israelitish use of Eber han-nahar as an expression for Palestine. This passage, together with iK. 42i[5i], seems to belong to a late idealistic editor, who lived at a time when Eber han-ndhdr ( Abarnahrd], or, in old Persian, Arbciya, was the constant phrase for the region between the Euphrates and Gaza (see CCELESYRIA, i).

Hommel s restoration of Nu. i.c. may be sought in his book (AHT 245/1). He is not wrong in supposing that the text needs emendation ; but in deference to an archaeological theory he has unfortunately neglected the most important recent suggestion viz., that of D. H. Miiller(see BALAAM, 6) which makes Nu. 24 23^ an oracle on the kingdom of Sam'al (NE. of the gulf of Antioch). Starting from this, it will be plain that Assyria and Eber must be referred to in the little poem as the enemies of the N. Syrian kingdom. 2

The sense of Eber has to be obtained from the context. It may mean either the region beyond the Euphrates, or that on this side the river, near Aleppo (Ass. Halvan). In defence of the rival theory (that of Hommel) it is urged that the phrase Ibr-nahardn (pn: -nj?) in a Minasan inscription means the region E. and N. of Asur, practically therefore the trans- Jordanic country and Syria (Glaser). Winckler, how ever (AOF Is37/i ; (7/1 174, n. 2, and 192), thinks that the Mincean Eber han-nahar was the land of Musri (see MIZRAIM, z b), which received a second name from the stream that formed its frontier, whilst Marquart (Fund. 75) is of opinion that Ibr-naharan can only be the Persian province, Abar nahra (see above).

2. b. Elpaal, in a genealogy of BENJAMIN ( 9 ii. j3), one of the founders of Ono and Lod and its dependencies, i Ch. 8 12 (HSrji [BA], a(3p [L]).

3. A priest, the head of Amok, temp. Joiakim (EZRA ii., 6 6, n), Neh. 12 2o(aj3eS [N c a mg - inf L], om. BN*A).

4. AV HEBER (RV EBER), in a genealogy of GAD, i Ch. 5 13 (u>/M [B], ico/3. [A]).

5. AV HEURK (RV EBER), b. Shashak, a Benjamite, i Ch. 8 22 (u/SSij [B], wfrfi [A], a/3ep [L]). T . K . C.

1 Cp also Wi. Mu$ri, Meluhha, Ma tn, pp. 51^! [ 98].

2 See Che. Exp. T. 8 520 (Aug. 97), and 10 309 (June 99).


, Josh. 1920 RV, AV ABEZ.


(*)DN), i Ch. 623 [8], etc. See ABIASAPH.


(Kt. D^aiH ; Kr. D32n ; true vocalisation uncertain ; Egypt, heben [Lieblein, AZ,, 1886, p. 13], eBeNOC ( not in - but in Symm. Ezek. 27 15), HEBEN VM; a loan-word).

1 Its use.[edit]

The word occurs in MT only once (Ezek. 27 15) ; but there are traces of it in perhaps four other passages (see below, 2). From i K. 1022 we may almost certainly learn that Solomon imported ebony as well as ivory, and from i Ch. 29 2 that he was be lieved to have used it in the decoration of the temple. If our emendation of Is. 2i6 is right (below, 2^), ebony was especially used at Jerusalem in the construc tion of thrones, for Isaiah appears to threaten destruc tion to thrones of ebony. Possibly Solomon s famous throne (i K. 10 18) was made of ivory inlaid with ebony. The passage that needs no emendation (below, 2 a) occurs in Ezekiel s grand description of Tyrian commerce. Ebony, as well as ivory, was brought to Tyre by De- danite.or possibly Rhodian, merchants (see DOUANIM). The uses to which ebony was put by the Egyptians are well known. It was employed both for sacred and for secular purposes ; shrines, palettes, and many objects of furniture were made of it. From the time of Ti (tomb at Sakkara) to that of Ptolemy Philadelphus it finds frequent mention in the Egyptian records (Naville, Deir el-Bahari, 1 24 [ 94]). The Babylonians and Assyrians too knew this wood, if Jensen (AT? 837) is right in supposing that it is meant by the term usu, which is applied to a precious kind of wood, derived by the patesi, or priest-king, Gudea, from Meluhha, or NW. Arabia.

There seems no reason to doubt, notwithstanding Sir Joseph Hooker s hesitation, that the ebony of Ezek. is the heartwood of Diospyros Ebenum, a large tree of S. India and Ceylon, which has been exported from early times. It was no doubt one of the articles of Phoenician commerce through the Red Sea, like so many other products mentioned in OT.

2. Biblical evidence.[edit]

We will now examine the biblical passages in which reference is perhaps made to ebony.

(a) Ezek. 27 15 was understood in very different ways by the ancients. s bSovra.? eA.e<ai/T<.Vovs indeed supports n p ; but TOIS elo-a-yofie i/oi? implies some word beginning with *?, and Pesh. reads the whole phrase filJIp njiaSl JOBS horns of oil and frankincense. Still the ordinary text and the ordinary rendering are probably correct ; Smend, Cornill, and Bertholet are, on this point, agreed.

(b) The present text of i K. 10 22 cannot be correct. BL only gives (as its rendering of MT s Q"3ni D E1/?1 D 3njB ) * at Ai Swf TopevTwy K<xi TreAotijTO)! (an-cA. [L]) i.e., it read the first word D 33K- This is probably older than the reading substituted for it in <B A ; but although the Chronicler may have read DW 33N for D SniB* [see (c)], MT is probably nearer the true text. Only, following Ezek. 27 15, we should restore D }3ni |B i , ivory and ebony (see Gesenius and Rodiger, Thes.). It is not very probable, however, that Q"3nl D SID s correct, ingenious as the explanations given of these words elsewhere (Ai fi) certainly are. n"DH has probably arisen out of a dittographed rj 33,Yl (it is remarkable that in Ezek. 27 15 Tg. actually reads Q"3in instead of MT s G 33in) D Slp ma y in like manner have arisen out of an early scribe s correction of the text ; he probably wrote flWp- If so > we should read the whole phrase G 33ni \W DUIpl f]D31 3HI> gold and silver, and horns of ivory and ebony.

(c) In i Ch. 292 Dnfe" 33N, onyx -stones, which does not come in very naturally in the list of David s building materials, should rather be C 33W J2*. Perhaps 2 Ch. 9 21 originally made the ships of Tarshish bring cnty J3N, not Q3,tjtf. See Che. Exp. T. 10 240 (Feb. 99).

(d) In Cant. 3 10, where EV has, absurdly, the midst thereof being paved with love, we should certainly read its centre inlaid with ebony (o ]3n for rQnx). See LITTER.

(e) In Is. 2 166 monn nV3B" cannot possibly be right. The whole verse should probably be read thus (SBOT, Addenda),

f tprt nbDnX Sa Sj- l, and on all palaces of ivory,
D 33n niND3 -l 73 Vyi, and on all thrones of ebony.

Cp Am. 3 15, and, on thrones of ebony, see above ( i). A similar emendation seems to be needed in Ps. 48 7 [8], where rivw B> Ehn should almost certainly be D ytJH niaiD. Cp. OPHIR.

T. K. C.


(P?r), Josh. 1928f, RV. See ABDON.


(nrqr), Nu. 33 34 AV, RV ABRONAH.


RV ETHANUS (Ethanus), a scribe (4 Esd. 1424). The name possibly represents ETHAN [4].


(CKBATAN A [BNAVL]; Jos. Ant. x. 11 7 xi. 46) is the Gk. form of the name (i Esd. 622 Judith

1 1 f. 2 Mace. 9 3 Tob. 3 7 ) which appears in Aramaic (Ezra 5 17) as ACHMETHA. Its modern equivalent is Hamaddn. See further GEOGRAPHY, 22, and PERSIA.


  • Name (1)
  • General Character (2-3).
  • System of Thought (4-8).
  • Character of Author (9-10).
  • Date (11-13).
  • Integrity ( 14).
  • Canonicity ( 15).
  • Literature (16).

1. Name etc.[edit]

Koheleth, EV Ecclesiastes or the Preacher (Heb. J"l/np, Kohtleth, eKKAHClACTHc[HNAC], Jerome, Concionator), is a word of rather uncertain meaning being the fem. participle (in the simple form) of a verb usually employed in the causative and signifying to gather together an assembly. It possibly means he who addresses an assembly, as English, the Preacher. It was taken in this sense by the Greek translator and by Jerome. The name is applied to Solomon (lua). The fern, form of the word has been variously explained. By some it is supposed that Koheleth is -wisdom (which is/em.) per sonified ; but, Koheleth is construed as a masc. (7 27 should be. read dmar hak-Kohtleth, as 128), and wisdom would hardly say I applied my heart to search out by wisdom (1 13 ; cp 1 17 23). It is easier to suppose that ihe/em. is to be understood in a neuter sense, the subject which exercises the activity being generalised, that which addresses, with no reference to its actual gender (Ezra 25557), the form having possibly an intensive sense, as in Arabic. The book is written in prose, though inter spersed all through with poetical fragments, when the author s language becomes more condensed and elevated.

2. Interpretation.[edit]

It is only in comparatively modern times that any real progress has been made in the interpretation of Ecclesiastes. The ancients were too timid to allow the Preacher to speak his mind. Modern interpreters recognise a strong individuality in the book, and are more ready to accept its natural meaning, though a certain desire to tone down the thoughts of the Preacher is still discernible in some English works. One thing which has greatly con tributed to the misunderstanding of the book and the character of the Preacher is the introduction of Solomon. To consider all those passages where the Preacher refers to himself as king in Jerusalem and the like to be in terpolations (with Bickell) may be unnecessary ; but it is necessary to understand that, as in all later literature, Solomon is merely the ideal of wisdom and magnificence. It is in this character alone that he is introduced. Neither his idolatry nor his supposed licentiousness (the term skiddah, 2 8, RV concubines, is of uncertain meaning) 1 is alluded to ; nor is his penitence. The con ception of a Solomon in his old age, a sated and effete voluptuary, looking back in penitence upon a life of pleasure, and exclaiming Vanity I is wholly unlike the Preacher of the book. There is not a word of penitence in the book. The Preacher is anything but weary of life. He has the intensest desire for it and en joyment of it (11?), and the deepest horror of death and the decay of nature (122/1). Far from being outworn and exhausted, he complains throughout the book that the powers of man have no scope : he is cabined, cribbed, confined by a superior power on all sides of him. Neither his natural nor his moral being has free play. Indeed, in his consciousness of power the Preacher appears to demand a freedom for man nothing short of that prom ised in the words Ye shall be as God.

1 (Many analogies suggest that nilEM ,TTE> is only a mis- written repetition of niTO) D"W, men-singers and women-singers. ]

3. General character.[edit]

Amid all the peculiarities of the book certain things are clear, i. The book has a general idea running through it, and is no mere collec tion of fragments or of occasional thoughts. The connec tion of the reflections sometimes seems loose, the author was not a literary artist, but there is in his mind a general idea, which all his musings and examples illustrate.

2. From the name which the author assumes it is evident that he desires to play the part of an instructor. He has his fellow -men before him, and feels that he has a lesson to convey to them. True, there is a large personal element in the book it is the author s con fessions, and he takes his readers largely into his con fidence ; but he is not solitary in his perplexities, and he has social and religious considerations which he de sires to address to his contemporaries.

3. Further, the author is everywhere in earnest. He is not a mere clever dialectician playing intellectually with great problems or human interests, setting up opinions only to overturn them, or broaching theories only to reduce them ad absurdum. If he sometimes appears to speak on both sides of a question it is due to this, that the conditions and stations of human life such as poverty or riches, servitude or ownership, royalty or the place of subjects have two sides, and in his prac tical philosophy, which consists in inculcating a spirit of equanimity, he sometimes seeks to show the good that there is even in things evil, and on the other hand the drawbacks incident to those things which men covet most. He has also, perhaps, different moods. He is so overcome by the thought of the miseries that oppress human life that he thinks it better to die than to live, or best of all never to have lived ; but at other times his mood brightens, and he counsels men to throw them selves into whatever activity offers itself to their hand and to pursue it with their might, and to seize whatever enjoy ment is yielded by the labour or by its reward. The ground-tone of his mind is certainly sombre. He is oppressed by the intellectual and the practical limita tions to which human life is subject. Man cannot under stand either the world in which he lives or the work of God amid which he is set ; neither can he by his efforts accomplish anything which is a permanent gain either to himself or to the world, nor break the fixed and in exorable order of all things, of which order he himself is part. His chain is very short, permitting only the narrowest range of work or of enjoyment, and all he knows is that this work and enjoyment is the portion which God has assigned to him. This is the funda mental idea of the book, repeated many times, and the author s position appears to remain the same throughout. Although his mood varies, his verdict or judgment is stable (128). There is no evidence of a struggle in his mind between faith and doubt, in which faith achieves a victory ; much less are the apparent discrepancies of view in the book to be explained on the assumption that it contains the utterances of two voices, one doubting and the other believing.

4. Main principles[edit]

The book consists of what might be called the author's two philosophies, his theoretical philosophy and his practical ^ The theoretical principle is : All is vanitv : what gain, result, is there to man in his labour or life? The practical principle is really all that is left possible by the theoretical one : Life has no gain ; but God has given life to man, and he has to live it. Therefore, there is nothing better than that a man eat and drink and let himself enjoy good, for this is God s gift to him. Naturally there is a third thing. This enjoyment of good is the only sphere in which a man has a certain freedom : it partly depends upon himself and his own demeanour. Some principle to regulate his conduct and mind in life is therefore necessary. This regulating principle the Preacher calls wisdom. As a mental quality it is practical sagacity, insight into things and situations, enabling a man to act prudently ; as a temper it is equanimity and moderation. These three ideas or conclusions had already been arrived at before the author sat down to write his book ; they are constantly present to his own mind, and much of the obscurity of the book arises from his insisting upon them not separately but simultaneously.

5. Theoretical philosophy.[edit]

Without circumlocution the Preacher states his fundamental idea : All is vanity : what gain is there to man in all the labour in which he labours under the sun? , In other words, human life is without result. In this it is like the whole order of things, which goes on in an eternal round, accomplishing nothing. All things recur, and there is nothing new under the sun (1 i-n). Then, in chap. 1 f. , he gives an account of the experiments which led to this conclusion. He inquired into all that is done under the sun, by which he means not merely the whole variety of human activity, but also all the events that happen to man in his life, and he found that all was without result. He found, too, that the knowledge gained during the enquiry was equally result- less : In much wisdom is much grief (1 12-18). Then he tried pleasure, not as a sensualist, for his wisdom remained with him (23-9), but as an experimental philosopher, and he found pleasure equally barren of result : I said of laughter, It is mad, and of mirth, What doeth it? (22). Wisdom, indeed, carries a certain advantage with it ; but it is no permanent gain to a man, for as the fool dieth, so dieth the wise man. There fore, there being no profit or permanent gain in life, howsoever it be lived, the practical conclusion is, Let yourself enjoy good (224).

Such is the author s meaning when he says that all is vanity. It is not, as we are apt to suppose, that the world is unsatisfying and that the human soul craves something higher than the world can give. All is vanity because man is confined by a fixed determination of everything on all sides of him by God. All the events of human life are in the hand of God : man has no power over them more than he has over the wind (88). There is a time to be born, and a time to die ; a time to weep, and a time to laugh ; a time to love and a time to hate. All is in the hand of God ; whether it be love or hatred man knovveth it not all is before them (3 1-9 9 1). It is absurd to suppose that this means that there is a proper or suitable time for everything ; it means that there is a time fixed by God for every thing, a time, not when things should be done, but when they must be done. Even the injustice in the judgment seat and the oppressions against which men are helpless are ordinations of God. There may be a time for judging them -there is a time for everything ; but their object in God s hand is to bring home to man a true idea of what he is that he is nothing and that God is all. Their object is to prove men and teach them to fear God, and that they may learn that they are but beasts ; for one event happeneth to them and to the beasts : all go to one place, all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again (3 16-20) Who knoweth the spirit of man whether it goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast whether it goeth downward to the earth? (821 RV).

6. Practical philosophy.[edit]

Obviously nothing is left to man but to take what joy out of life is possible, for that is his portion (224 81222 5i8-2o 815 Qy-io llgfi). Even over this man has no power : it also is in the determination of God (7is/). Power to enjoy life is the gift of God (224/ 813 5 19) ; and, though it may generally be assumed that he desires men to have this enjoyment (9y), there are instances where he denies them the gift (226 62-8). The Preacher is, of course, no sensualist. The good, enjoyment of which he recommends, consists of the simple pleasures of life : eating and drinking, the consolations and supports of wedlock, the pleasure to be derived from activity in work or in business (9 7-10 11 1-6910). How could the pleasures recommended be those of riot and excess when they are the gift of God, the portion he has given to man in the life which he spends as a shadow ? It is just in these enjoyments that man comes nearest to God : he meets God in them, feels his favour, and knows that in them God is responding to the joy of his heart l (5 20). This is the old view of the Hebrew mind, which looked on prosperity and the blessings of life as in a sense sacramental, as the seal of God s favour. The Preacher is a God-fearing man (56/8 12), a man of righteous life (8 13), thoughtful, and dwelling by preference on the serious side of life (7i-6). He believes in God, and in a moral rule of God, who judges the righteous and the wicked. No doubt this rule is incomprehensible and full of what seem moral anomalies. It appears arbitrary (226) : under it all things happen alike to all, to the godly and to the ungodly (9 1-3): the race is not to the swift nor the battle to the strong (9n): there be righteous men unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked, and the contrary (814). Nevertheless, the Preacher will not abandon the general idea of such a moral rule (8i2/. ), though he laments that the delay and uncertainty of God s judgment encourages men in their wickedness (811), and increases the evil and madness which are in their hearts (9s) ; for, though God made man upright, man has sought out many inven tions (729). Such anomalies in Providence, however, always drive the Preacher back to his practical counsel : Wherefore I commend mirth ; for a man hath no better thing under the sun than to eat and drink and to be merry (815).

Man is speculatively unable to. comprehend the world (3 ii 724 817), and practically helpless to obviate its evils ; he is bound within an iron system which is un alterable. From a modern point of view it might be asked, Does the Preacher acknowledge the possibility of a progress of the individual mind within the bounds of the system which fetters him, of a culture or discipline within the limitations imposed on him by God? He does so in a certain sense. The evil of life, man s ignorance of what is to befall him, teaches him to fear God (814) ; and in his survey of the work that is done under the sun he acquires wisdom, or, to.use a common phrase, culture.

1 Probably we should render a difficult phrase thus with Delitzsch.

2 The use of the word spirit in the OT is obscure, (i) It means the breath, the visible sign, of life. (2) It is what we call the principle of life. Life and the continuance of life

7. Death.[edit]

But the vanity, the resultlessness of life, lies here : in that a man can neither retain these gains nor transmit them, and, after all, life is without profit. ( i ) Man cannot retain his gains, for death surprises him : the wise man dieth even as the fool, and there is no remembrance of either of them for ever (2i6 ; cp 217-23) ; in the grave there is no work, no knowledge, no wisdom (9io) : the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward (9s). The Preacher strikes here the saddest note of his feeling. It is obvious that his complaint that life has no profit because man cannot retain its gains is a complaint that man cannot retain himself What shall it profit a man if he gain the world and lose himself? The Preacher s cry is for continuity of the individual life, that he may still carry with him the gains which his spirit has accumulated. He appears to be aware that immortality of the individual spirit is believed in by some ; but either the ground-tone of his own mind is too sombre for him to accept the idea, or the evidence for it seems insufficient (819-21 9i-6). His book is unintelligible if this belief formed part of his creed. Hence he has been called a sceptic. The word is relative. All the OT saints, if they lived now, might be called sceptics. The belief in immortality was not until very late times an assured doctrine of the OT (cp ESCHATOLOGY, 33). We observe it in the process of arising, as the necessary issue of two things the living fellowship of man with God here, of which it is the continuance ; and the anomalies of providence, of which it is the reconciliation. The Preacher is unable to reach it on either line. 2 (2) Further, life is without result because the wise man cannot transmit the fruits of his labour or of his wisdom : the man that cometh after him may be a fool. The idea of an advance of the race through the accumulated gains contributed to it by individuals does not occur to the Preacher. The tide of personal life flows too strong in his heart to permit him to acquiesce in his own absorption into the race, even if the race had a great destiny before it. Of this, moreover, he sees no evidence. To his mind, in the mood in which we find him, mankind has neither a pro gress nor a goal. The analogy of nature oppresses him. Its monotonous daily round of sunrise and sunset, of veering winds and rushing streams, produces no result. The history of mankind is the same one generation goeth and another generation cometh. The universe has no goal; God has no purpose, and mankind no destiny. This general scope of the Preacher s logic (howsoever his heart recoils from it) defines the sense in which he speaks of God s judgment. He hardly has the idea of a general judgment, such as that of the day of the Lord of the prophets, when God brings in his perfect kingdom and bestows eternal blessedness on his people. The Preacher s individualism, common to him with all the writers of the Wisdom, makes this unlikely. Neither could he have spoken of the universe as a continuous flux without a point of attainment if he had thought of it as moving towards this great goal. The judgment is to him merely part of the moral government of God, which he maintains, howsoever imperfectly he is able to perceive it.

8. Principle of conduct.[edit]

We have seen already that besides his theoretical and his practical philosophy the Preacher had a regulative principle of conduct, which he called wisdom - Much of the book is devoted to showing the advantage of this principle. It teaches a man how to bear himself before God. Even in religion a man ought to be calm and meditative, and to restrain over -impulsiveness (5 1-7 7 16/. ). So in regard to rulers : even if despotic and evil, a wise man will not act hastily, seeing that power is on the side of the ruler ; nor will he rashly enter into plots or conspiracies. Discretion is the better part of valour. He who digs a pit may fall into it. Skill is better than force. If you have trees to fell, grind your axe rather than put to more strength (81-9 10i-n). And be not surprised if you are oppressed and plun dered. Society, or at least government, is an organised oppression : those who oppress you are oppressed by those above them, and these again by their superiors, and so on to the top of the pyramid (58). Wisdom, how ever, perceives the vanity of all this : for example, he that loveth money will not be satisfied with money, and he that increaseth his substance increaseth those who eat it (610-69). Wisdom, on the contrary, is as good as an inheritance, or better than that ; for it preserves the life of him who has it (7 12) ; it supplements the defects of righteousness, and avoids the falsehood of extremes (7 15-22) ; it is stronger than ten rulers in a city (7 19) ; and preserves men both from sentimental dreaming over the good old days and from over -anxious fore casting how their business ventures will turn out (11 1-6). There is much, however, that wisdom is not equal to even in human things (7 24), and no wisdom can find out the work of God (817). Moreover, the wisdom of the poor man is neglected or forgotten (9 13-16), and a little folly is stronger than much wisdom, even as a dead fly will cause a pot of ointment to stink (10 1), are the effect of a divine influence; the cessation of life is the withdrawal of this influence. The spirit in this sense is nothing but an effect. All questions where this spirit 1 goes when taken away by God are irrelevant. It goes nowhlre : taking away of it is merely the cessation of the divine influence of which it is the effect. (3) It is the immaterial subject (not substance) in man, which lives. The boundary lines between (2) and (3) are confused. The passage 3 21 seems to incline to (3), though without firmness (5 19), whilst 12 7 prob ably goes back to (2), being on a line with Ps. 104 20 f Job 34x4 cp, further, ESCHATOLOGY, ig/., and SPIRIT. Occasionally the author uses the term wisdom in the sense of comprehension of the universe or work of God. For this man is altogether incompetent (cp Job 28).

9. The man[edit]

The above analysis shows the Preacher s main ideas. The Preacher himself is more difficult to explain. The difference between him and earlier writers of 'the Wisdom' lies in his tone. To catch this truly would be to find the key to his book. The existence of the book is evidence of dissatisfaction, of a sense of want. The Preacher is driven to acknowledge that man is like a beast with lower pleasures : he could not have added with lower pains. His book all through is a cry of pain just that he has no portion but lower pleasures. His conclusions are in a way positivist; but his whole book is a protest against his conclusions not against the truth of them, but against the fact that they should be true. Job flung himself against the moral iniquities of Providence ; to the Preacher the crookedness of things is universal. Job raged ; the Preacher only moans and moralises. Job is an untamed eagle, dashing himself against the bars of his cage ; the Preacher looks out with a lustreless eye on the glorious heavens, where, if he were free, he might soar. He knows it cannot be, and he ventures also to murmur some advice to men : Enjoy good ; do not think (620). His admonitions to himself and others are quite sincere, not ironical ; they are the human soul s efforts to ancesthetise itself dull narcotics numbing pain. The Preacher s mood may be a complex thing : partly temperament, partly a mode of religion, and partly due to the wretched conditions of human life in his time.

10. A product of OT religion.[edit]

It was an evil time. Judges were corrupt, rulers despotic and debauched, the people oppressed ; and society was disintegrated. It is unnecessary to have recourse to Greek philosophy to explain the Preacher's ideas and feelings (cp HELLENISM, 6, and see below, 13). The practical wisdom which he recommends may have a certain resemblance to the unperturbed- ness," the mean, and the nothing too much of the philosophers ; but both it and all other things in the Preacher are a natural development of the native Hebrew Wisdom. There is nothing in Ecclesiastes which is not already in Job and the older Wisdom. Indeed, one may say that the OT religion was bound to produce, at some time and in some cases, a phenomenon like the Preacher. The OT religion consists of two things : first, ideas about God ; and, secondly, a living faith towards him and sense of fellowship with him. Without the latter the former brings little comfort to the human mind, even though certain fundamental beliefs such as the personality of God and the moral being of man be still retained. For, first, the

fundamental principle of Hebrew religion that God is in all things that happen, whilst in times of prosperity and well-being it gave unspeakable joy to the pious mind, with a vivid sense of its fellowship in life with God, when the times were evil and articles of a creed had taken the place of an emotional piety, gave rise to a sense of impotency in the mind. Man felt environed on all sides by a fixed order which he could do nothing to ameliorate. God became a mere transcendent force outside of human life, pressing upon it and limiting it on every side. The different feeling which the same conception of God produced in the pious mind and in the reflective mind, respectively, will appear if Ps. 139 be compared with Ecclesiastes. It would be false to say that God to the Preacher was nothing more than what the world or nature, or that which is outside a man, is to many minds now. His faith in a personal God is never shaken ; atheism or materialism is not conceivable in an ancient Oriental mind. At the same time, his faith is no more suffused with the life- colours of an emotional confidence, and he could not have said with the Psalmist, Nevertheless I am con tinually with thee 1 (Ps. 7823), nor with Job, I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that I shall see God (1925). Secondly, it was from piety, the sense of fellowship with God, not from reflection, that all the great religious hopes in regard to man s future arose. They were projections, corollaries, of an emotional personal religion such as the hope of immortality, the faith in a reign of righteousness, and the incoming of a kingdom of God upon the earth. When piety declined, and reflection took its place, these hopes of the future could not sustain themselves. They survived in the com munity, whose life was perennial ; but the individual ism of the Preacher felt them slipping from its grasp.

11. Date.[edit]

The date of Ecclesiastes cannot be determined with certainty. It is later than Malachi, for the priest called in Malachi messenger of the Lord (Mal. 2:7) is simply named the messenger in 56. It is probably earlier than Ecclesiasticus (circa 200), for, though many of the coincidences usually cited have little relevancy, Ecclus. 186 seems certainly a reminiscence of Eccles. 814, and Ecclus. 4224 of Eccles. 7 14. The book may belong to the oppressive times of the later Persian rule, or it may be a product of the Greek period. Perhaps the language would rather suggest the later date (see next ). In the beginning of the book the experiments on life are represented as being made by Solomon ; but this transparent disguise is speedily abandoned. Solomon is mesely the ideal of one who has unbounded wisdom and unlimited resources with which to experiment on human life a man whose verdict of vanity, therefore, is infallible. In the Epilogue the Preacher is merely one of the wise (129). The state of society amid which the author lived has no resemblance to the state of society in the times of Solomon. There was corruption in the judgment seat (3i6), cruel oppression from which there was no redress (4i^), and a hierarchy of official plunderers one above another (58), with a system of espionage which made the most private speech dangerous (102o). The author had witnessed revolutionary changes in society and strange reversals of fortune slaves riding on horses and princes walking on foot (104-7).

Such a time might be the late Persian period. It could not well be the early Greek period when the Jews enjoyed the beneficent rule of the early Ptolemies. It might, however, be the more advanced Greek period, when Palestine became the stake played for by Antioch and Alexandria, a time when the people suffered severe hardships, and when the upper classes, especially the religious leaders, were deeply demoralised and self-seek ing. On the other hand, the book must be earlier than the uprising of the national spirit in the time of the Maccabees. Gratz indeed places the book in the time of Herod (8 B.C.) ; but the date is part of his theory of the book, which has no probability. The most probable date perhaps is the latter part of the third century B.C. (cp, however, Che. Jew. Rel. Life, ch. v. ).

12. Language.[edit]

Both the language and the modes of religious thought in Ecclesiastes suggest that it is one of the latest books in the canon. The language has the peculiarities of such late books as Chronicles- Ezra -Nehemiah, and Esther. Indeed, it belongs to a much more degraded stage of Hebrew than either of those books exhibits ; and in the forms of words, in the new senses in which older words are used, and in the many new words employed, it has many similarities to the Targums and Syriac, especially to the Mishna (circa 200 A. D. ).

The characteristic forms of Hebrew syntax, such as the van conversing have almost disappeared ; constructions of classical Hebrew have given place to those of Aramaic ; and in general the language has lost its old condensed character, and become analytic, with a multitude of new particles. Details may be seen in Driver s Introd., and in the commentaries of Delitzsch, Nowack, or Wright.

13. Ideas.[edit]

The ideas and the mode of religious thought in the book also bear witness to the lateness of its date. In the Preacher the religious spirit of Israel is seen to be completely exhausted. It can no more, as in Job and Ps. 49 and 73, use the problems of life in order to rise to lofty intuitions of its relation to God. It sinks back defeated, able only to offer a few practical rules for ordinary life. The idea of Tyler, who is followed by Plumptre, that the book is a blend of the Stoic and Epicurean philosophies, seems extra ordinarily superficial, and is supported mainly by what appears misinterpretation of its language.

The passage 3 if., there is a time to be born (etc.), does not inculcate the doctrine of living conformably to nature, or teach that there is a fit time for doing everything : it teaches that there is a necessary time, for the time of everything has been determined by God. Even the most astute opportunist would have difficulty in securing that he should be born and should die at the fitting time. Again, the passages 19815 and many others certainly teach that there is nothing new under the sun, no progress in nature or history, that things recur ; but they teach nothing about recurrent cycles. Determinism is, of course, a prevailing idea in the book. That, however, is just the funda mental idea of the Wisdom, or indeed of the Hebrew mind that God is the causality in all things with the inevitable develop ment which time gave it. At first sight the phrase to do good in the sense of to see good, to enjoy life (3 12), has a startling resemblance to the Gk. e5 irpaTTeiv ; but, after all, the senses of the two phrases are somewhat different, and there is no reason to suppose the Hebrew expression to be an imitation ; though not occurring elsewhere, its opposite, to do badly (i.e., be sad), is used in early literature (2 S. 12 18, and perhaps Eccles. 5 i [4 17 (5 i)]), and possibly the phrase itself may be ancient. (H. Zirkel, Unters. iib. den Prediger, 1792, was the first to dis cover Graecisms in Ecclesiastes.)

There have been attempts to identify the old and foolish king (4 13^) and the city the siege of which was raised by the poor wise man (9 13^), and to verify the possible historical reference in the passage (104-7) about slaves on horseback and princes walking on foot, and in such passages as 810, with a view to fixing the date of the book more accurately ; but nothing has resulted beyond conjectures more or less plausible.

14. Integrity.[edit]

The ingenious theory of Bickell that the apparent want of connection in many parts of Ecclesiastes is the result of an accident which befell the book at some early time, and threw the sheets into confusion, has little probability: 1 the want of connection complained of disappears in many cases before a more careful study of the author s line of thought. In a book such as Ecclesiastes, however, the line of thought and (particularly) the tone of which diverge so greatly from the other OT writings it was to be expected that there would be some interpolations : qualifications which the reader or scribe felt constrained to add to the author s somewhat strong statements. The probability that 11 9^ is an addition rests not so much on the idea expressed as on its unnaturalness in the context ; for the view of some that the passage means that God will bring into judgment any one who neglects to enjoy the natural pleasures of life is too absurd. There is less objection to 817 (perhaps the last word of the verse should be read sdm, hath appointed ). 8 10 i2/. also are in some way corrupt. So, certainly, 12 1, Remember thy creator. The words disturb the connection between 11 10 and the rest of 12 1. The reading suggested by Gratz, Re member thy fountain ( = thy wife, Prov. 515-19). strikes a lower note than is heard anywhere in the book, and is to be rejected.

The Epilogue falls into two parts, 12g-i2 and 12 is/ ; and it is questionable whether either part (especially the second) is original. 2 On the one hand, the book reaches its natural conclusion in 128, where the burden of it is restated : All is Vanity ; and, secondly, whilst in the rest of the book the author speaks in the first person, in w. 9-12 he is spoken about. On the other hand, though the verses contain some peculiar expressions, their general style agrees with that of the rest of the book, and it is quite possible that the author, dropping his literary disguise of Solomon, might have added some account of himself in his actual character. The picture is certainly not just that which would have suggested itself to a mere reader of the book : it implies a fuller acquaintance with the author than could be got from his work. In w. 13 f. the whole matter is said to be : Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole of man. The last words may mean, This absorbs or should absorb man : all his powers should be directed toward this ; or they may mean, This exhausts man : his powers reach no further e.g. , to understand the work of God (Job 28). Verse 14, which says that God will bring every work into judgment, attaches itself better to the first sense. The judgment also seems a larger and more general one than that seen in God s ordinary moral rule of the world. Possibly, therefore, w. 13 f. come from the same hand as llej^. If the verses be an addition, they are still comparatively early, for they are referred to in the disputes of the Jewish teachers over the canonicity of the book.

1 The theory of dislocation was first proposed by J. G. van der Palm in his Ecclesiastes philologies et critice illustratus, Leyden, 1784. The theory and arrangement of Bickell is repro duced in Dillon, Sceptics of the OT, 95.

2 On interpolations in Eccles., see also CANON, 55, col. 671, n. 4.

15. Canonicity.[edit]

Ecclesiastes is not quoted in the NT( and even in the second century A. D. its right to a place in the collection of sacred books was a subject of controversy in the Jewish schools. The exact state of the dispute appears to be this : Practically the book had long been combined with the other sacred writings ; but voices which expressed doubt of the propriety of this combination continued to be heard. That this is the state of the case appears from the facts (i) that Ecclesiastes must be included in the twenty-four books of 4 Esdras, and in the twenty-two of Josephus, toward the end of the first century A.D. ; and (2) that in the time of Herod the Great and of Gamaliel it is quoted as scripture (Bab. Bathra, 43, Shabb. 30$), whilst the objections to it continued to be heard 100-120 A.D. (Yad. 85). The school of Hillel held that it defiled the hands (was canonical) ; that of Shammai rejected it. The former opinion finally prevailed. See CANON, 55.

16. Literature[edit]

In addition to general works such as Driver s Introd. and Kue. s Ond. ( 2 ) iii. may be named the comms. of Ew. Dichter des Alt. B unties ; Hitzig, Exeg. Hand., 47, ( 2 ), by Now. 83; Ginsburg, Cofieleth, 61 ; Gratz, Koheleth, 1871 ; Del. Hohesliedu. Koheleth, 1875 (translated); Plumptre, Ecclesiastes or the Preacher (Cambridge Bible), 1881 ; Renan, L EccUsiastc. 1882; Wright, The Book of Coheleth, 1883; Volck, Kurzgef. Kotnm. (Strack u. Zockler), 1889 ; Sam. Cox, in Ex. Bib., 1890. Helps of a more general kind : Nold. Die AliLit., 1868 ; Bloch, Ursprung, etc., des Buches Koh., 1872 ; Tyler, Ecclesiastes, 1874 [( 2 ) 99]; Taylor, Dirge of Koheleth, 1874; Engelhard, _ Ueber den Epilog des Koh. .S*. A>., 1875; Kleinert, Sind in B. Koh. ausserheb. Einfliisse anzuerkennen ? St. Kr., 1883 ; Bickell, Der Prediger, 1884 ; Schiffer, Das B. Koh. nach der Auffassung der Weisen des Talmud, etc., 1884 ; Bradley, Lect. on Eccles., 1885 ; Pfleiderer, Die Philos. des Heraklit, 1886 ; A. Palm, DieQohclet Literatur, 1886 ; Che.JobandSolomon, 1887 ; Jew. Rel. Life, Lect. vi. 1898 ; S. Euringer, Der Masorahtext des Koh., 1890 ; Wildeboer (in KHC 98). On the Gr. text, Di. SBA W, 1892 ; E. Klostermann, DeLib. Coh. Vers. Alex. 1892 ; Tyler, Koh. 1899. A. B. D.

Ond.ffl 104, 105 ( 93 ; Germ, transl. Einl., 93): note especially the discussion of proposed dates later than 200 B.C. ; Haupt, The Book of Ecclesiastes, Oriental Studies (Or. Club of Philadelphia, 94), pp. 242-278, holds that the contents have been deliberately disarranged, and that many glosses have in truded into the text ; he gives a translation of the final section as restored by himself.

Ko. Einl. ( 93), 432 jTt, and Leimdorfer (Das heil. Schrift- werk A ohelet, 92) ably plead for a date in the reign of Alex- ander Jannaeus.

Siegfried (in HK. 93) also thinks that Eccles. is full of con tradictions, indicating the work of at least five writers. A redactor attempted, with little success, to bring order out of chaos. He gave the superscription (1 1) and a concluding word (128); 129-19 is due to three epilogists. The date of the original book is placed soon after 200 B.C. The glossators may have gone on till nearly 100 B.C. ; allusions to the Essenes (see e.g., 9 2 /*) also point to this period. The kernel of the work may have been known to Ben-Sira (after 170 B.C.).

Che. Jew. Rel. Life ( 98), 183-208, favours Gratz s hypo thesis, and while admitting that the date of Ecclesiastes needs further examination, he finds no period which so fully illustrates the book as that of Herod the Great. He admits great disarrangement and interpolations.

It may be added that the text of Eccles. is in a bad state. There are still gleanings to be had in some of the most difficult passages, which may considerably affect the criticism of the book (see Critica Biblica, and cp KOHELETH). Bickell s emendations have hardly been appreciated enough. He has further done good service, not only by his suggestive rearrange ment, but also by his attention to the poetical passages, e.g., no one has made so clear to the eye the most probable meaning of 11 ioa and 12 la (cp Che. Jew. Rel. Life, 192).

Wi. s essay on Date and Author of Koheleth (AOFW 143- 159) gives a general sanction to Siegfried s analysis, and as cribes the kernel to ALCIMUS [y.v.]. The old and foolish king is Antiochus Epiphanes. The statement on p. 146 that the author must have been either one of the kings of the Herodian house or else one of the heretical high priests before the Hasmonaean dynasty is a valuable recognition of the period within which, as more and more critics think, the date of the original book must be placed. T. K. c.]

  1. For hieroglyphic picture of vulture see Egypt, § 9, n. 12.
  2. Cp the Syriac name נשריהב('"NSR" gave'), and see We. Heid. 20 (Heid.(2) 23), and WRS Kin. 209, Rel. Sem.(2)) 226, n. 3 ; ZDMG 40 186 ['86].