Encyclopaedia Biblica/Jannaeus-Jerah

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search



CW ; also -"N:* 1^0, and on bilingual coins "p^H jnjirp, showing that W* Jannai is a contraction of JDJV Jonathan ). 2 The first Asmonaean king of Judaea recognised on the coins, third son of John Hyrcanus, and successor of Aristobulus I. (104-78 B.C.), Jos. Ant. xiii. 12-15, #/! 4 . He has been supposed by some to be referred to in Pss. 2 and 110 ; but the general impression produced on the ancients by his character cannot surely have been very different from that which modern students receive from it. He was not a sovereign like Simon the Maccabee or John Hyrcanus, either of whom might conceivably have received a religious poet s encomium. He was during his reign of twenty-six or twenty-seven years almost constantly involved in foreign or in civil wars, which for the most part were provoked by his own vvilfulness, and resulted by no means invariably in his favour. 3 It could only be with deep-seated resentment that pious Jews could look on and see a wild warrior like Alexander Jannasus discharging the duties of high priest in the holy place, certainly not with the conscientious and pains taking observance of the ordinances regarded by the Pharisees as divine. 4

The bitter spirit of Is. 25:10-11. may seem to belong to an adherent of Alexander Jannaeus ; but here again Duhm s tendency to throw everything that he can into a very late period may lead him astray (cp Smend, ZATW, 84, pp. 209, 212). Much more plausible is the view that there are veiled references to Jannaeus in parts of the book of Ecclesiastes (see ECCLESIASTES, 11). The king spoken of was at any rate not unlike Jannaeus (who was called Thracidas for his extreme cruelty, Jos. Ant. xiii. 142), and the difficulty of placing Ecclesi astes in the Persian period is becoming more generally felt.

1 <8*N has lafiviav for for Persia in Judith 1:7.

2 Cp Bdba mcsi a, 85 b ; Midr. r. " - ~ on Eccles. 9:10.

3 Schiir. Hist,\2t)5f.

  • Ibid. 300.



1 Origin of the names.[edit]

In 2 Tim. 38 two Egyptian magicians, who withstood Moses ( Ex. 7:8-9) are named, though elsewhere the opponents of Moses are anonymous. The author of 2 Tim. may, as Theodoret held, have derived the names from oral tradition ; but it is not improbable that there existed a small apocryphal narrative with a title corresponding to the 'Jannes et Mambres liber' mentioned by Origen (Mt. 27g) and the 'Liber, qui appellatur Poenitentia Jamnis et Mambre, apocryphus' cited in the Decree of Gelasius (cp Schiirer, G/F3< 3 >292 /. ; Fabricius, Cod. Pseud-epigr. VT 1 813-825 2 105-111).

It will be noted that the names given in these Latin titles differ from the accepted reading in 2 Tim. The Codices, how ever, sometimes offer the reading Mcyi/Spjjs for the second name. Most modern authorities accept this reading and regard the name as equivalent to the Hebrew N"CD (see MAMRE); the aids pronunciation as in the case of A/u/3pa/i (see AMRAM). So Buxtorff, Lex, CliaUi. et Talm. col. 945. lai/i/TJs can be readily- explained as Hebrew, for laynrjs or Icoawrjs would correspond with Johanan (priv)- 1 In the Hebrew sources, however, the names are not always so spelt. In Bab. Talm. Mtndchdth, 853, we find the forms N-iCOl jnV, but in the Jer. Targ. the names are more similar to those in Timothy. There are several spellings even within the Targum itself. Ex. 1 15 0130 ! D J i Ex. 7 n, D r J Nil. lii 22, D lO i D V- (These spellings are cited from the editio princeps, Venice, 1695, and they are all confirmed by the valuable MS, Brit. Museum Add. 27031.) In other Jewish works the spelling of the names is even less uniform, so that we even find Joannes and Ambrosius (Shalsheleth Hakkabbala), and also three names instead of two, Jonos, Juchne, and Mambre (see Schottgen, Hone ffebr. on 2 Tim. 3 8).

There is another tenable theory as to the origin of the names. Lauth (.Moses der Ebriier, 77) held that they are Egyptian, Jannes meaning 'Scribe' and Mambres 'Gift of the Sun God' (Heliodorus). J. Freudenthal (Alexander Polyhistor, 173) also regards the names as Graecised-Egyptian. Freudenthal indeed traces the whole story to a Hellenistic Egyptian source, though one of the names occurs (perhaps) in Pliny (HN xxx. lii), a and in Apuleius (Apol. c. 90, ed. Hilde- brand). 3 The fullest citation in a pagan source is from Numenius (Eus. Prcsp. Ev. 98). Freudenthal considers it probable that Numenius derived his statement from Artapanos, a Hellenist who wrote in Alexandria in the second century B.C. (Schiirer, however, contests this, but on inconclusive grounds). Ewald (<7r/2l 3 i28, T2Sg, n. i) also treats the names as ancient, and well compares the Hebrew o Dtsin (see MAGIC, 2) with Numenius s ifpoypa.fj./j.a.TeLS. Ewald would thus agree with Lauth in holding that the names are the Egyptian equivalents for Scribes in general.

2. Explanation.[edit]

The explanation of the names, apart from their etymology, has given rise to many conjectures, some of them quite worthless. Iselin, who agrees with Freudenthal as to the origination of the story with Artapanos, thinks that the names were due to a mistaken reading (HDNI Nica) in Gen. 14:13 (see MAMRE). He cites also i Macc. 636, 01 viol lauPpdv (laftppi [N*], Afjippi [N c - a - c - b < vid -)]), K ~M.T)5apd, Medeba being situate in the old land of the Amorites (ZIVT, 94, p. 325). See JAMBRI. (Iselin gives a useful collection of the Syriac occur rences of the names.) Geiger (Urschr. 474), using the same passage in i Mace. , regards the names as Maccabaean, Jambres alluding to the sons of Jambri (but the reading thus assumed is very doubtful), and Jannes the inhabitants of Jamnia. These national enemies gave the names to the opponents of Moses. Levy (Chald. WB., s.v. D r) suggests that John the Baptist and Jesus were meant. Kohut (Aruch Com- pletum, s.v. D r and xjnv) compares the Persian demons, Janaya and Vyambura. Jastrow suggests Januarius and Janus. Such suggestions are mere guesses. Levy s theory that Mamre was chosen because of its meaning Apostate, has, however, found considerable accept ance. So too, it is easy to connect o r with the Rab binical j, to vex or mislead.

1 On the other hand JANNAEUS (<f.->.), K3 , is a contraction of Jonathan.

2 [est et alia magices factio a Mose et Janne et Lotape ac Judaiis pendens.]

3 [Carinondas vel Damigeron, vel is Moses, vel Jannes, vel Apollonius vel ipse Dardanus, vel quicumque alius . . . inter magos celebratus est.]

  • [For a similar proverb cp FISH, 7.]

3. Jewish references.[edit]

Of the Jewish statements about Jannes and Jambres, the only features that seem ancient are the bare names. In the Talmud (MSndch. 85 a] Johanan and Mamre thinking that Moses is a magician like themselves (so Koran 28), retort, 'Dost thou bring corn or straw to Afraim' ? 4 (evidently a city where corn abounded ; perhaps a town in Samaria; Neub. Gdogr. 155). The Jer. Targ. makes Jannes and Jambres sons of Balaam, who advised the prevention of the birth of Moses (Ex. 1 15), opposed him in Egypt (7"), and accompanied Balaam on his journey to Balak (Nu. 22 22). These statements are not real traditions ; they are built up from words in the text, after the manner of Midrash. According to some Midrashim, Jannes and Jambres perished in the Red Sea (Mid. Vayyoshd], according to others they joined the Israelites among the mixed multitude (Tanchuma to Ex. 32 1), and died in the tumult after the incident of the golden calf ( Yalkfit Rfubeni}. The Zohar (i3th cent.) has several references to Jannes and Jambres, but they are of no antiquity. The fullest consecutive narrative is to be found in the Sepher Hayyashar (nth or I2th cent.).

See I. Abrahams, The Rod of Moses, in Papers of Jews College Lit. Soc., 1887. For further Christian references, which, like the Jewish, add nothing authentic to Timothy, cp Schiirer, loc. cit. \. A.


(niy, resting-place ? but see below). i. AV Janohak. A point on the eastern border of Ephraim (Josh. 166/. ; IO.VWKO., /xaxw (?) in Josh. 16? nnii [B], law [A], -x<* [L]). According to the Onoma- sticon (267 59 133 20) it lay 12 R.m. E. of Neapolis, in AKRABATTINE ; the definition is almost exact (E. should be SE. ). It is mod. Kh. Yanfin (see GueYin, Sam. 26 /.; Rob. BR 4297). On a rocky hill to the NE. is the praying-place of Neby Nun. It was not uncommon to give the ancient names of ruined towns to supposed Moslem saints ; in the present instance, however, Ydnun has become the prophet Nun. Here, no doubt, was the chief high place of Janoah.

2. A town in N. Israel, depopulated by Tiglath- pileser (2 K. 1629, aviux [B], iavwx [AL]). It is men tioned between Abel-beth-maacah and Kedesh, and has been identified by GueYin (Gal. 2 371 f. ) with Hunin (famous for its old fortress and for its view), and with more plausibility by Conder with Ydniih, a. village 6 m. E. of Tyre (PFM 15196). Apparently Janoah was a frontier city towards the Tyrian territory. The present writer has conjectured (Acad., July 6, 96) that it is the city of Yenu amu, which is mentioned in the Israel- inscription of Merneptah and elsewhere in the Egyptian records, and appears in one of the Amarna letters as Yinuamma (Wi. 1428). In the letter referred to some one reports to the king of Egypt that this city has fallen away and barred the gate behind him. Yenu amu must have been a rich town, for Thotmes III. endowed the temple of Amun at Thebes with an annual sum to be paid by this and two other cities (Brugsch, GA 329). There is an Egyptian picture given by Rosellini and W. M. Miiller which shows its position. It lay by a small lake, and was surrounded by forests in which the conquered enemies took refuge. It is difficult to think that such an important place-name as Yenu amu or Yinuamma has not (like other equally ancient names) survived.

According to the theory here adopted, Yenu amu is not a compound of cyj (rjyj , Hommel ; cp Yinuamma), but is equivalent to pymr- In Kings this name was shortened into nir (Janoah), just as nnS (Jepthah) is shortened from Vx nDD . That n before y is not reproduced in the Egyptian form Yenu amu need not surely surprise us ; it would have been very troublesome to an Egyptian to pronounce the name accurately. The alternative explanation m; riir (E. Meyer, ZATW*oi) is philologically less probable. 1 Clermont-Ganneau s identification of Yenu amu with the southern town of Naamah of Josh. 1641 {Rev. Arch. 29127) s a so linguistically improbable. Naville (Rec. de travattx, 20 [ 98]) seeks for the site near Gezer, and would even identify it with Jabneel ; but this, too, seems un- likely- T. K. c.

1 ,113, to dwell, is doubtful. Hab. 2 5 and Ps. 68 13 [14] are corrupt.


RV Janim (Q^ Kt., DW Kr. ; Josh. ISss; leM&GIN [B], i&NOYM [AL]), an unidentified locality in the hill-country of Judah, in the neighbour hood of BETH-TAPPUAH. Read perhaps fE>\ Jamin.


(hebrew script; greek script [BADEL]), son of Noah (Gen. 532, etc.; see Ham), and ancestor of the peoples N. and W of Palestine (Gen. 102-5, P)

1. References.[edit]

That he was generally regarded as Noah's youngest son is shown by the constant order of the three brothers, and is in harmony with 10:21, where G is not to be followed (see SBOT, and cp Bu. Urgesch. 304 ff.). It is true that in 9:24 'his youngest son' means Ham, or rather Canaan (see Ham i. ), and that the narrative 9:20-27 belongs no doubt to an earlier stratum of narrative than the other passages ; but the narrow sense in which Shem, Japheth, and Ham are used here was abandoned by later writers, who made Japheth the youngest son, and the ancestor of remote northern peoples. In the early narrative Japheth (if we suppose that he was really mentioned in it) may represent the Phoenicians (so Bu. ), who are to be distinguished from the Canaanites, though they dwelt in the land of Canaan. Wellhausen (CH 15) less plausibly suggests the Philistines. It is very probable, however, that the mention of Japheth (v. 23) and the accompanying blessing (v. 27) are later insertions. The words 'he shall dwell in the tents of Shem' may conceivably allude to the conquests of the Greeks, 'Shem' being taken in the later enlarged sense (Duhm's suggestion, adopted by Bertholet, Die Stellung der Israeliten, 76 f. , 198). The narrative gains considerably by the omission of Japheth. The division of the world into three parts caused the troublesome insertion.

2. Meaning of name.[edit]

In explaining the name it is well to follow the analogy of Shem, which was doubtless a personal, not an ethnic, name. Japheth (hebrew script, yepheth) is usually explained in accordance with Gen. 9:27, 'Let God enlarge' (hebrew script, yapht] Japheth. It seems unlikely, however, that a stem so unusual in this sense as hebrew script (pāthāh) would have been chosen. Since the names Shem, Canaan, Japheth, are doubtless older than the poetic oracles, and there are other cases in which we may hold that old names have become mutilated (cp SHEM, HAM, NOAH), it is not too bold to suppose that hebrew script is a fragmentary form of hebrew script (yiphftah 'ēl), 'God opens' (cp the old name Japhti'-Addi in Am. Tub. ). hebrew script (pāthāḥ) is a word well adapted for legendary heroes (see Jephthah), and 'enlargement' is a blessing equally fit for the Phoenicians and for the father of so many races as Japheth, one of which was the conquering Javan. Furst's and Budde's explanation, 'beauty', from hebrew script (yāphāh), accepted by D. S. Margoliouth (Hastings' DB 2549b), is not in accordance with analogy, and is rightly rejected by Dillmann.

Of quite another order is the theory of E. Meyer, who connects Japheth with the name Kaft, in hieroglyphic texts = Cilicia. greek script is a Cilician deity; see Phoenicia, and cp Caphtor, §§ 3, 4.

Kaft and Asi - i.e., Cilicia and Cyprus - represented the western quarter of the world to the Egyptians. But the mutilation of Kaft into Yaft is improbable, and we expect a purely personal name. Sanskrit comparisons (Lenormant, Origines, ii. 1 191 f.) are nowadays discredited. T. K. C.


(ITS*), a border city of Zebulun, mentioned between Daberath (Dabtiriyeh) and Gath-hepher (el- .\[eshhed); Josh. 19:12. (B s readings are <j>a-)>yau. [B], ta^ayai f A], icu^ue [L] ; Eus. (pnotii.) gives ia<j>ed with an appended 8 as in eAtcrajSefl ; Jer. lafthie (Vg. Iafhie\

The pretty village of Yafa, 1.5 mi. SW. of Nazareth, is its representative ; the phrase goeth up to Japhia is sufficiently explained by the position of Yafa on two connected ridges, to which a ravine leads up. The one historical association to which this city can lay claim is its siege and capture by the Romans. The name which Josephus gives it is Japha (ta<a) ; he calls it a very great village, well secured with walls and full of people ( Vit. 45). He also says that he fortified it with a double wall, and for some time made it his headquarters.

That in one passage Josephus diminishes the distance between Japha (Japhia) and Jotapata 1 is as much or as little of an objection to Robinson's identification as his patent exaggeration of the number of the inhabitants of Japha (BJ iii. 7 31). Euse- bius (OS 267 69 ; cp 133 32) appears to hesitate between the claims of an ascent (still) called Joppa and those of Sycaminon (r)<j>a= //a.i/a).V Perhaps the village of Ynfa had almost dis appeared in his day. It was in Robinson s time but a small village of about thirty houses (BK 3 200). T. K. C.


(&&, 64, tall of stature ? ; , A( J)ie [A]).

1. King of Lachish, defeated by Joshua ; Josh. 10 3 (ie<j>da [B] ia<j>aie [L]). Cp the name of Japahi, prince of Gezer, Am. Tab. 204, 206 ; also that of Japhti -Addi (see JAPHETH, 2), also in Am. Tab.

2. A son of David : 2 S. 5 15 i Ch. 87 146 (te^iej, tavove -ovov [BN], a</>ie [A in 28.]; L, lavad, va.<f>ed (i S.), a^ixa/x (! i Ch. 3 7), vafyeK, iaj3ey (16. 146). See DAVID, n (d).


(&!?$!, 53 ; [God] delivers ; cp Pelatiah ; i(J>A/v\HA, &4>AAHX, i&(pA.AHA [B], i&cJj&AHT [A], -(J)AT [!-]) A clan in a genealogy of ASHER (q.v., 4, ii.), iCh. l^f.\ cp JAPHLETI.


RV The Japhletites (*C&gn ; ATTTA- AeiM [B], ie(J>*,A9l [A], ie4>AHTi [L]). a clan whose district was on the S. border of Ephraim (Josh. 163). There is thus no geographical objection to connecting the name with that of PALTI b. Raphu, the Benjamite. The Asherite clan called Japhlet was, of course, distinct.


(13*), 2 Ch. 2i6 [15] EV n e-, EV JOPPA.


(^J3), Jer. 13 12 48 12, RVs-. See BOTTLE, 2.


(i"n^), * Ch 94 2 - See JEHOADAH.


(31*; i&peiM [BAQ*], - P eiB [Q a ] ; ULTOREM, -RI], the name of an Assyrian (?) king mentioned twice in Hosea (5 13 106) as receiving tribute from Israel. Unfortunately there is no Assyrian king contemporary with Hosea whose name bears even a distant resemblance to Jareb. Hence most critics take Jareb to be a nickname = 'the contentious' (cp Aq. SiKaffOfj.evov, 613, Aq. , Theod. , diKafovn., Symm. vTrepna^ovvrt, 106). This would be plausible only if Jareb resembled some Assyrian name, so that its reference might at once be caught. Hence the present writer proposed 3 to change 3T -j^D into nn ^D. the Great King (cp Ps. 482 [3]), or m 7|ta the High King (cp BA Q*). But since it has been shown by Winckler that references to the N. Arabian land of Musri (see MIZKAIM, 26) underlie the traditional text of many passages in OT, and that iie-jj has probably sometimes (by corruption) taken the place of lisa i we cannot rest satisfied with this theory. Prob ably we should read in Hos. 613 and 106 respectively

When Ephraim saw his sickness | and Israel his wound,
Then went Ephraim to Musur | and [Israel] sent to the Arabian king.
That too shall men bring to Musur | as a present to the Arabian king.

The substitution of Israel for Judah need not be justified here (cp HOSEA, 4). 3Y ~i?Q should probably be 3J1J| ^I?O; 3~lJJ in Palestine, like mat Aribit in Assyria, was coming into use as a term for N. Arabia (cp Schr. KA 7T 2 ), 414

CO/ 2 107). The treatment of Jareb in A ATW 439 ( = CO T 2 1 36 f.) may also be consulted though it is necessarily incomplete. For quite recent views see note 3 below.

T. K. C.

1 His words in BJ iii. 7 13 are iiri TLVO. riav T>js IwroTrdn;? avTvyeLTOviav iroAty, *la.<j>a KaAeirai. The order of the places in Vit. 37, BJ 206, is in closer accordance with geographical tacts.

2 So Reland, Pal. 826, followed by Ges. Thes. s.v.

3 Che. Expos., gjb, p. 364, and, virtually, M Curdy, Hist. Proph. and Man. 1415 ( 94). Independently W. M. Miiller gives the same view ; h; prefers, however, 31 sSo* tne phrase being treated as a proper name (ZA Tib* 334 Jf. [ 97]). Wi. (Musri, etc., 32 [ 98]), with great ingenuity, proposes to read mini "j ?D~ 7N> to the King of Jathrib i.e., mod. Medina, which seems to have been on the southern border of Musri (cp Hommel, AHT 273). An alternative is to read 11103, Nimrod ; see SBO 7"Isa. (Heb.) 195.


or, as AV i Ch., JERED (TV), Gen. 615-20 i Ch. 1 2 Lk. 837. See CAINITES, 7 ; SETHITES.

On the meaning of the name, see Bu. Urgesch. no. The readings are : iapeS [BAD], -ET [Gen. 5 15 f. E, 18 AE ; Lk. 837 Ti. WH] ; fared, cod. Am. -cth.


RV Jaareshiah(iT;Bnj. 39; meaning obscure ; |&C<\P<MA KAI C&RAI& [B], |<\p&CIA K- CA&plA [A], lepClA [L]). b. Jeroham in a genealogy of BENJAMIN (q.v., 9, ii. /3), i Ch. 8277.


(yrTV, ,co X HA [BA], , e pee [L], [Aid., and 8 MSS. in H-P], N!TTV [Pesh.], IERAA [Vg. ]), the servant of SHESHAN [q.v.}, a Jerahmeelite, who afterwards became his master s son-in-law and the head of a long genealogical line ( i Ch. 2 34 f. ) ; see JERAHMEEL, 3. He is generally regarded as an Egyptian (EV) 1 the Rabbins, indeed, represent him as a proselyte. This view is of course legitimate, but considering the probable early seat of the clan Jerahmeel, it is perhaps more natural to treat -isp as meaning rather an inhabitant of the N. Arabian Musri or Musur (see MIZRAIM, 2*). 2

We cannot retain the present spelling of the name ynT I would be plausible to read NITV or ITV (the latter a Palmyrene name), or, better still, ^NOT (after BA S ^ni")- A connection with moon-worship need not be insisted upon ; perhaps the name was considered to be identical with Jerahmeel (as an abbreviated form). This would account for the presence of the ancestral list, i Ch. 234-41, in the genealogy of Jerahmeel, since it is probable that Sheshan himself was not originally Jerahmeelite. His inclusion in v. 31 (the details of which do not agree with v. 34 ) may be later. The union of the Musrite Jarha (Jerahmeel !) and Sheshan (cp the Hebronite Sheshai?) is suggestive. See HEBRON, if.; JEKAHMEEL, zf. ; SHESHAN.

S. A. C.


(T"V, 53; he [God] contends ; cp Jehoiarib, Joiarib ; i&p[e]lB [AL]).

1. A son of Simeon, elsewhere called JACHIN (q.v.) , i Ch. 424 (iap<HK [B], capetM [L]).

2. Head of family temp. Ezra (see EZRA i., 2 ; ii., 15 [i]rf); Ezra S 16 (ape/3 [B])=i Esd. 844 JORIBUS (ivpipov [BA om. L]). Perhaps = no. 3.

3. A priest in list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5 end); Ezra 10 18 (iapcc/u. [B], twpci/x [N])=i Esd. 9 19 JORIBUS ( t(0 p t /3os [BA]).

4. (iu>ap[<f]i/3 [ANV]), i Mace. 14 29, RV JOARIB. See JEHOIARIB.


(iAp[e]iMCo9 [BAL]), lEsd. 9 2 8 = Ezra 10 27, JEREMOTH, n.


(D- IE V; cp JEREMOTH, iepi/v\OY9 [AFL], iep[ei]MOY0 [B]).

i. A Canaanite city, in the Shephelah of Judah (Josh. 12 n iept.fj.ov [A] 15 35 ; cp Neh. 1129, where BXA om., ipipovO [N c - am - inf -]), whose king joined the coalition under ADONI-ZEDEK, and was de feated by Joshua (Josh. 10s 5 23 12 n). It is represented by the modern Khirbet el-Yarmuk, which is 16 m. W. by S. of Jerusalem, and about 8 m. N. of Beit-Jibrln. The distance from Eleutheropolis, which the Onomasticon (0S< 2 > 132si 26638) assigns to ie/>/uX ws or Jermucha (10 R.m. NE. ), being so nearly that of Yarmuk from Beit-Jibrln, we are justified in identifying the places. It is remarkable that the closing letter of the modern name should agree with that of the name in the Onomasticon. Such a form, however, as Jarmuk cannot well be ancient ; Micah already (it may be) attests the final -uth (see MAKOTH). The same prophet, too, in Mi. 1 12, if we may read niDT for nna (see MAROTH), indicates that Jarmuth was in the neighbourhood of Mareshah, or, at any rate, the assumption that a city called Jarmuth stood there enables us to attain a better text for the passage than we can secure in any other way. We have certainly no reason to suppose that the Jarmuth of the OT narratives was the Yarimuta of the Arnarna Tablets (5516, and often), the position of which is disputed (see Niebuhr, Ml G ^yiff. [ 96]: Flinders Petrie, Syria and Egypt, i6<)f. ). In Josh. 1635 Jarmuth is mentioned with Adullam, and the other notices accord with this. There were possibly several Jarmuths. Can we thus account for the discrepant notice (?) = Jarmuth in OS266i 132i6? CpBiTHiAH, MERED, PIRAM.

2. See RAMOTH iii.

1 W.MM (OLZ, Feb. 1900, col. 51 n. 4) takes the name to be correct Egyptian; T = W, great.

2 The same view has been proposed also by Wi. MVG^d [ 98].


(n n^. 53 = nVV. He enlarges (?) ; IAAI [B], &A. [A], &poye [L]). in a genealogy of GAD (Gilead) (iCh. 5i 4 ).


RV Jasaelus (&c*HAoc [BA]), i Esd. 9 30 = Ezra 10 29, SHEAL.


(jy^). In 28. 832, in the list of David's thirty heroes we read (RV), Eliahba the Shaalbonite, the sons of Jashen, Jonathan (acrav [BA], Leffcrai 6 yowi [L], pava.1 6 ywvvi [243, in Field]) ; in the parallel text (i Ch. Il33/i), . . . the sons of Hashem the Gizonite ( jinn ; < A cura/i 6 yuvvi [cp @ L of 2 S.], @ L cipatrai 6 yowi). <J3 (MT <33, sons of) is obviously wrong. It is simply dittographed from the preceding word (so Driver and most), or should je"-33 be viewed as a corruption of a proper name (so H. P. Smith)? In the former case we might read, . . . Jashen (or Hashem) the GUNITE (see GUNI) ; in the latter ^ riN would be a plausible restoration. Jonathan is generally taken as a separate hero, and connected with Shammah (v. 33) by p (inserted from Ch. ) ; but, as H. P. Smith points out, jmi.T may be the corruption of a gentilic. Cp HASHEM. T. K. c.


RV Jashar, Book of pB>n 1SD, 'book of the upright' ; cp EV m -), the title of an ancient song-book twice quoted in the OT (Josh. 10 13: < BA om. , BiBAlON Toy eyGoyc [L]. Liber Justorum [Vg.] ; )^jf^-^- !- ] ;a-oo [Pesh.] ; sifr el-mustaklm [Ar.] ; 2 S. Ii8: BiBAiON Toy eyeoyc [BA], . . . eyeecoc [L] ; **,/ ;Q>T [Pesh., similarly Ar. aslr], Vg. id.).

1. Josh. 10.[edit]

In the account of the battle of Gibeon and its sequel there occurs a memorable passage (Josh. 10:12-14) with a fragment of song quoted (most probably by E) from the Book of Jashar. 1 The speaker is said to be Joshua, and by a late scribe's interpolation the song is invested with the character of a prayer. In reality, the address to the sun and moon (see below) is rather a command, or perhaps a spell, than a prayer. The writer of the song no doubt thought of the sun and moon as taking Joshua's side against his (and Yahwe's) foes. 2 But the interpolator had a good intention, and expressed the devout feeling of the later Jews. 3 The passage containing the song was evidently inserted by D2 , who at the same time introduced the explanatory words, 'In the day when ... in the sight of Israel' (v. 12), and the statement, 1 'So the sun rested . . . for Yahwe fought for Israel' vv . 13-14. ). In the circles to which D2 belonged the primitive feeling for nature had died out. 4

In its original form, therefore, the passage ran thus :

Then spoke Joshua,
O sun ! rest over Gibeon ;
O moon ! stand still over Aijalon.
So the sun rested, and the moon stood still,
Until Yahwe had taken vengeance on his enemies. 1
Behold it is written in the Book of Jashar.

The third line, however, is probably the insertion of the early narrator, from whom the passage was taken by D2, so that the fragment quoted from the old song in the Book of Jashar consisted of the first, second, and fourth of the above lines, and for 'had taken vengeance on', we should substitute 'takes vengeance'.

1. See Ki. Hist. 1302; We. CH 128; Sta. Gesch. Iso: Bu.

2 See Judg. 520 ; and cp Horn. //. 2413^, 18239^; Od. 28241^ With a touch of primitive feeling, Syrian peasants still cry in song to the sun to hasten his going down that they may rest.

3 Cp^ this passage from Last Journals of Bishop Hannington, \t>\f. ( 88). As soon as the sun showed, a fresh and powerful band of warriors came at once, and demanded hongo. . . . How often I looked at the sun ! It stood still in the heavens, nor would go down. I agonised in prayer, and each time trouble seemed to be averted.

4 This is partly admitted by Kittel (Hist. 1 304), who neverthe less thinks that the fact of a striking continuance of daylight remains, though we may not know the natural law through which it was brought about, and that the song itself . . . proves Israel s belief that a miracle was wrought. The former view may be defended by Hab. 3n, Ecclus. 464, Jos. Ant. v. 1 17, but seems hardly critical ; the latter assumes (with Kau., but not with Di.) that so the sun rested, etc., forms part of the song-fragment, which can scarcely be admitted.

2. 2 Samuel. 1.[edit]

The second quotation is the lamentation for Saul and Jonathan, ascribed to David (2 S. 1:17-27), and probably early, though, it is to be feared, not Davidic (see, however, DAVID, 13). 2 According to a revised text, 3 the passage runs thus :

Of David. For the sons of Jeduthun. For the Ezrahite.
O Saul ! by thy death have I been slain ;
Alas that the heroes have fallen !
Report it not in Rehoboth !
Declare it not in Halusah !
Lest the daughters of the Zarephathites rejoice,
Lest the daughters of the Jerahmeelites triumph.
Be thou parched, O Jerahmeel ! descend not
Dew or rain upon thee !
Become desolate, ye lofty mountains !
Let the bushes fade, deprived of fatness !
The shield of Saul has been defiled
With the blood of those slain by the sword :
Broken is the bow of bronze,
Shivered is the well -sharpened sword.
The beloved, the longed-for in life
In death they were (still) unparted ;
They (who) were swifter than eagles,
They (who) were stronger than lions.
Women of Israel, shed tears
For Saul . . .
Who gave you linen garments,
Who decked your raiment with gold.
Alas that the heroes have fallen,
And the strong of heart lie stiff!
Jonathan ! by thy death have I been slain ;
For thee, O my brother, I am smitten to death !
Thou wast very pleasant to me, my comrade !
More was thy love to me than women's love.
Alas that the heroes have fallen,
And the strong of heart lie stiff !

The four-lined stanzas are well marked (as in the Book of Job).

1 In /. 2 read 3 10S? (as suggested by Bu. ZATWTitf ; cp the first correction of /. i in L, which also has the simple intro duction, KO.I eiTrei TTJCTOVS.

2 Here again the quotation is probably due to E (or Rj E ), cp Cook, Notes on the Analysis of 2 Sam., AJSL 16 147 [1900].

3 For details of the restoration see SAUL, 6 ; Che. Crit. Bib. Cp We., Dr., HPSm., Bu., and GASm. HG 404^ The title is of course very late ; but this does not involve the lateness of the poem.

4 For text cp Klo., adloc. ; WRS, OTJCP) 434/ ; We. CHW 269 ; Ch. O Ps. 193 212 ; Dr. Intr. 182. ,

5 If!. (?) a shorter form for ^Nlt? ; cp JESHURUN. Other theories, for instance, that "IB^n "ISO was a law-book (Targ., Kim., etc.) or that "18^ was the name of the author, or the opening word ("X? }, and . . . sang ), may be mentioned.

3. 1 K. 8:12-13.[edit]

A third quotation is to be found in a passage ascribed to Solomon, and at any rate pre-exilic. The poetical words assigned to Solomon (1 K. 8:12-13) immediately before a speech in more prosaic style, are given in another place with some variations, and in fuller form by LXX{BAL} (v. 53 ; G{A} gives another version before v. 14), which expressly state that the words are written iv /3t/3\t <fj (/Si/SXy), or eiri J3ij3\iov rrjs ydrjs i. e. , Ttpn TSD3. If this title ( 'Book of Song', or 'of Songs' ) were correct, it would suggest that the source of the quotation was a Psalter ; but the words are almost certainly a slip for nc^ri nep (note that Pesh. makes a similar mistake in Josh. 10). For this fragment as emended, see CREATION, 26. 4

4. Origin.[edit]

The Book of Jashar was, so far as we know, a product of the post-Solomonic age (cp St. GV1 Iso). It was a national song-book the 'book of the righteous' (or, possibly, brave) one, - i.e., Israel 5 (as if = ^K ntr, cp Nu. 23 10). Its contents were partly secular (in 28. 1 19 ff. there is a total lack of religious feeling), partly religious (i K. 8:12-13 ); it refers, e.g. , to the battle at Gibeon and the prowess of Saul and Jonathan, but also to the temple. Indeed, we may presume that the third of the extant passages belonged to a hymn to Yahwe. Nor could we venture to say that the Book of Jashar contained no pre-Davidic songs. Not impossibly it was similar in the width of its range to the Arabian collections of El Isfahdny or the Hamasa. Probably the songs of which it was composed had short historical introductions, so that altogether it may have almost served as an Iliad of the Israelites. Can we form a reasonable conjecture as to its other contents? Surely such a collection must have contained David s (?) lament over Abner (2 S. 3:33-34 ), and among earlier passages, the Song of Deborah (Judg. 5), the Song of the Well (Nu. 21:17-18 , see BEER), and the Song of Triumph over Sihon (ib. vv. 27+ : but see WARS OF THE LORD, BOOK OF). One might even perhaps add the songs of the primitive history, such as we find in Gen. 4:23-24, 9:25, 27:27-29, 27:39-40, etc. ). Franke (who ascribes the book to the time of Hezekiah 1 ) includes also Ex. 15:1-18 and Hab. 3 ; but see EXODUS ii. , 6 ; MOSES, HABAKKUK, 8f.

In later Christian times the Book of Jashar is the title of a ritualistic treatise by Jacob b. Meir (died 1171), and of one or two forgeries which are only remarkable for the undeserved success they obtained ; for a more detailed account of them see Kitto, Bib. Cycl., s.v. See HISTORICAL LITERATURE, 2 ; and POETICAL LITERATURE, 2 (i.).

S. A. C., i, 3, 4; T. K. C., 2.

1 Utter Bedeutung, Inhalt, u. Alter lies Sepher Hnjjaschar, Halle, 87.


(DIDC^). i. The name, not indeed in itself impossible but certainly corrupt, borne by one of David s chief warriors in i Ch. 11 n (where he is called ben Hachmoni ; see HACHMONITE) and 27 2/ (where he is styled ben Zabdiel ). The former passage occurs again with variations in 2 S. 238, where the name of the warrior is represented in the Hebrew text by the letters abat? i.e., ISBB ; the appended letters na probably represent rr2, which should be connected with the following word Maann (corrupt ; RV a Tahchemonite ).

For the JOSHEB-BASSHEBETH of RV( = AV that sat in the seat ), derived from the pointed text, nothing can be said, except that it justifies the warning in RVmg. that the verse is probably corrupt.

ISBBS 1 seems to be incompletely written for ISBBST ; originally there may have been a mark of abbreviation after the s. This may be read either Jashibbosheth ( 'Bosheth brings back' ), or, better, if the second B be regarded as an error, Ishbosheth ( 'man of Bosheth' ), where Bosheth ( shame ) is the well-known substitute for Baal. The final Q in cyac" is either a corruption from ^ (which is palaeographically possible), or, as Marquart (Fund. 15, n. i) supposes, an intentional alteration due to religious scruple (he compares ciQT, altered perhaps from ^JDT ; see JEROBOAM). See ISHBAAL, 2, and cp Gray, HPN 46, note i.

<S s readings are : in 2 S. 23 8 ie/3o<r0<f [B],-0ai [A], io<r/3aaA [L] ; in i Ch. 11 ii letre/SaSa [Bl, iecrcrat. [{tl, t<r|3a.aju. [A], tecr<r<ff3aaA [L] ; in i Ch. 27 2 To/3aA [B], JajSoa/n [A], iecr/3. [L].

2. Another of David s warriors, a Korhite (i Ch. 12 6), see ISHBAAL, 3, and DAVID, iirt(iii.). T. K. C.


p-"IB, he returns, 54; cp SHEAR-JASHUB ; ia<rou/3 [BAF L]).

1. One of the sons of Issachar (Nu. 2624 pa<rov/3 [F*]; but I Ch. 7 i 3 {? Kt., lacrcrovp [B]),called in Gen. 40 13 (by omission of a letter) JOB, RV Ion ( a - v ; ia<rov</> [A], -ou/3 [DL]) ; see NAMES, 4. Gentilic Jashubites ; Nu. 21)24 ( ar^; io-ou/3[e]i [BAFL]).

2. One of the b ne Bani in the list of those with foreign wives (KzRA i, 5 end) Ezra 10 2g-(ia<7o5 [B], aomia IN])= i Esd. 9 30 (JASUBUS; iao-ov/3os [BA]).


(DH^ C| 3^). a name of anomalous formation which appears in i Ch. 422 among the descendants of the Judahite SHELAH [y.v.].

Bertheau, Kautzsch (doubtfully), Kittel read CH 1 ? rra 13B i, and they returned to Bethlehem ; but the whole passage is as obscure as the records themselves are said to be ancient. Provisionally we might read at the .beginning of the verse Zm lD 1 ? fy 1VK . . . K31D EOK (for D p VI) IDlp l. <B has KO I airf<TTpe\l/ev aurovs [BA], icat ive<npe\^iav eaurois Aee/m [L] ; and Jerome translates et qui reversi sunt in Lahem [Bethlehem], taking the words as applying to those named in the preceding clause. s. A. C.


pN W), i Ch. 11 47, RV JAASIEL.


([e]tcurwj [ANV], JASON, a name of Grecian origin in frequent use among the Jews, by whom it was regarded as equivalent to Joshua, Jeshua, Jesus ; cp the parallel Alcimus from Eliakim, Menelaus from Menahem, Simon from Simeon, and see NAMES, 86).

1. Of Cyrene, a Hellenistic Jew, author of a history of the times of the Maccabees down to the victory over Nicanor (175-161). Our so-called second book of Maccabees is an eViTo/i^ [epitome] of this larger work, which is said to have consisted of five books (2 Mace. 223, cp 26). The writer probably lived in the second half of the second century B.C. See further MACCABEES, SECOND, 2, 6; and cp HISTORICAL LITERATURE, 18.

2. Second son of Simon II., and brother of Onias III., the high priest, whose original name was, as Josephus (Ant. xii. 5i) relates, Jesus. He represented the Hellenizing section, and was opposed to the policy of an alliance with Rome. By means of a bribe (helped also doubtless by the sons of Tobias) he managed in 175 B.C. to obtain the high-priesthood in place of his brother from Antiochus Epiphanes (see ANTIOCHUS, 2); 1 and proceeded to introduce various practices which were an abomination to the Pharisaism of the time. 2 Another bribe procured him permission to set up a gymnasium and ephebeum below the Acropolis and hard by Mt. Zion, the consequence of which was the adoption of Greek games (see Discus), Greek caps (see CAP), etc. The priests themselves betook themselves eagerly to the palestra, and being ashamed of their Jewish singularity did all they could to conceal it (i Mace. 1 15, cp Schiir. GVI \\y. t n. 24, and see CIRCUMCISION, 8). At the same time, Jason obtained permission to register (avaypd^ai) the in habitants of Jerusalem among the citizens of Antioch 3 (2 Mace. 49), and sent a contribution to Tyre on the occasion of the festival to HERCULES [<?.v.]. This, however, was so repugnant to the bearers that they used the money for the equipment of the triremes (2 Mace. 4 18-20). An obscure account of a visit of Antiochus to Jerusalem (ib. 21 f.} is all that is told us for the next three years, at the expiration of which time Jason was suddenly supplanted in the priesthood by MENELAUS [^.w.]and forced to flee. Menelaus, however, failed to win popularity, and the appearance of certain dread portents 4 as well as a baseless rumour of the death of Antiochus encouraged Jason to emerge from his asylum in Ammanitis (cp 4 26). Helped by the populace, he captured the city (ca. 170 B.C.). Menelaus was com pelled to take refuge in the citadel. But his success was of short duration ; he missed his great object the priest hood and, having alienated his supporters by his vindictiveness, was forced to flee before Antiochus. From the Ammonites, he passed to Aretas, and then to Egypt ; finally he crossed over to the Lacedcemonians, relying, we are told, on the kinship between them and the Jews (see SPARTA). An effective rhetorical period (5gf. ) closes his story.

3. Son of Eleazar (cp Jesus, son of Sirach Eleazar, Ecclus. 5027), sent by Judas to Rome (i Mace. 8 17). He is probably the Jason who is mentioned as the father of ANTIPATER [q.v.\ (i Mace. 12 16 1422).

4. Jason of Thessalonica, who, for his hospitality to Paul and Silas, was attacked by the Jewish mob, brought before the magistrates, and bound over to be loyal (Acts 17 1-9). For a less probable view of the object of the demand of the security (TO IKO.VOV) see Ramsay, St. Paul the Taveller, 231. He may possibly he identified with the Jason of Rom. 18 21, one of Paul's 'kinsmen' (uuyysueisfi i.e., a fellow-Jew ; cp ROMANS, g$4, 10. The tradition in pseudo-Dorotheus makes Jason bishop of Tarsus.

1 According to Jos. (Ant. xii. 5 i) he was the natural successor, Onias having died, and left only an infant son.

2 He is probably referred to in Dan. 9 26 11 22, where see Bevan ad loc. and cp We. fJGW 245. n. i.

3 Cp the similar case of Ptolemais (Akko), and see Schiir. op. cit. 28:. Other explanations of this verse have been offered; see Berthplet, Stellung d. Isr. u. Jud. 208.

  • Warlike troops were seen in the sky (2 Mace. 62); cp 2 K.

6 17, Jos. BJ vi. 5 2 and Tac. Hist. 5 13.


( i AC TT 1C. borrowed from Ass. a$pA,yaspil = nap or nS^). In Rev. 21 ii (cp i8/.) the New Jerusalem is said to be irradiated by a luminary like a stone most precious, as if a jasper-stone, clear as crystal (\iQq> Idffiridi upwraXXifavTi).

The description is suggested by <S s rendering of Is. 54 12 (see below), 'I will make thy battlements jasper (iiunriv), and thy gates stones of crystal (Aiflous (cpvo-roAAou), and thy rampart choice stones' (Ai 0. icAeKTov), where the writer of Rev. seems to have supposed that both the phrases stones of crystal and choice stones were synonymous with and explanatory of jasper (see, however, TOPAZ).

In Ex.282o 39 13, nsty, yas pheh ( = ta<nris) is apparently rendered in @ by t>vtiyj.ov (but see below) ; but the onyx, not being a clear stone, cannot be meant in Rev. 21 n. Nor can our jasper be intended, as it is not sparkling nor translucent, but an opaque, close-grained variety of quartz, variously tinted, but generally either red or brown. It is probable, however, that the jasper of the ancients included the opal, which, by its brilliance and play of colour, has always been one of the most attractive of precious stones, and in its choicest variety (see Plin. HNBJ^if.) deserves in the highest degree the description in Rev. 21 n.

This is the view of O. Fraas, who states that the modern conception of the jasper first became general in the seventeenth century, and that in the Nibelungenliedfat jasper is represented as clear, and as greener than grass.

The choice opal is said to occur frequently in ancient Egyptian tombs ; in particular, a splendid statuette of Isis, made of opal, is referred to. 1 This view is also favoured by the description of the divine king on his throne in Rev. 43 as like a jasper stone and a sardius, and by the combination of jasper with pure gold and clear glass in Rev. 21 18. (With the reference to jasper as garnishing the foundation in v. 19, cp Sargons description [Khors. 159] of the foundation of his palace on gold, silver, and aspu stones, etc. ) See PRECIOUS STONES.

The Heb. n32> ( = i<wnr) occurs in Ex. 28:20 39:13, Ezek. 28:13!. It is not impossible that the order of the precious stones in LXX text was different, and that bvvx lov was intended as the equivalent of nSn% yahaloin, and ia<nrt? of nSB - Thus @ s rendering will become consistent. In Is. 54 12 <S s laoTrts (Symm. Kap^rjSoviov) seems to be a version of ~\3~\3, kadhkodh, (so Aq., Ezek. 27 i6), 2 but it may be merely a guess, for elsewhere (Ezek. 27 1 6) i5 does not recognise this word (see CHALCEDONY, i. end). T. K. C.


(IACOYBOC [BA]), i Esd. 9 30 = Ezra 10 29, JASHUB, 2.


(A.TAP [A]), i Esd. 628 AV-Ezra2 4 2, ATER, 2.


(| A 6AN[BA])Tob. 5i 3 RV. See JONATHAS.


( PK^JT. ; cp NATHANAEL ; ieNOYHA [BA], N&9&NA.HA. [L]). a Korahite doorkeeper ( i Ch. 26t).


(Tl^.; [e]ie6ep[BAL]), a town in the hill-country of Judah, assigned in P and Ch. to the Levites (Josh. 1648 t0ep [L], 21 14 cuXw/u, [B], i Ch. 642 [57 in <S v. 58] ifddap [B], tedep [A], om. L?), and historically connected in i S. 8027 with the period of David s outlawry (yeddop 3 [B]) ; cp IRA, 3; ITHRITES, JABEZ.

It is plain that Jattir must be the modern Attir (Rob. BR 2194), which is situated on two knolls in an amphitheatre of brown rocky hills, studded with natural caves (Tristram, Land of Israel, 388), and is 13 m. S. by W. from Hebron. The change of into y in the name is not incapable of explanation ; < may first have passed into K, and then into y (Kampffmeyer, ZDPVlGts). No doubt this is the place intended (OS 11927 133 3 1342 4 255 7 8 266 42 2688?) by the very large village Jethira, 20 R. m. SE. of Eleuthero- polis, in the interior of the Daroma hard by Malatha (see MOLADAH). In two passages (OS 119 27 255;8) it is assigned to Simeon, perhaps by a confusion with ETHER (q.v. ).

1 See Riehm, HWBW 335*; Calwer Bib.-lex. 158 a.

2 But see Field, ad loc.

3 The -yf0 in i S. 30 29 [B] appears to be a duplicate of this corruption (cp HUMTAH, SIPHMOTH).


(\) i.e., the lonians, or the Greeks.

(a.) In the Table of Peoples Javan appears as one of the sons of Japheth, and father of Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim or Rodanim, Gen. 10:2 = 1 Ch. 157 (iiavav [BADE], iiavvav Gen., iwavai/ Ch. [L]). This statement comes from P ; it is therefore not pre-exilic. There is in fact no pre-exilic reference to the Greeks, though see on the other side M Curdy (Hisi. Proph. Man. 1416), who refers to Zech.9i3, Joel 3[4] 4-6, and even, for a not obscure allusion, to Hos. 11:10. The text of Hos. I.e., however, is not quite in order ; instead of the obscure D D, 'from the sea', we should probably read G1ND. 'from Aram' (cp c).

(b) In Joel 3 [4] 6 the sons of the Javanites (EV Grecians, TOIS viols Twf "EXMjvtav [BNAQ]) are spoken of as purchasing Jewish captives from the Phoenicians and Philistines, but the Persian date of JOEL [y.z .] is not often disputed.

(c) In Zech.9i3 Judah and Ephraim are represented as the instrument of Yahwe s vengeance against the sons of Javan (TO. TfKva. riav EAAijwoi [BNAQr]), who are contrasted with 'thy sons', OZion.

It is hard, however, to believe that the author of the prophetic composition to which Zech. 9 13 belongs (which, apart from its references to Hadrach, Hamath, etc. , would at once appear to be post-exilic) would have mentioned the Greeks ; this view seems hardly consistent with the archaising references. Clearly the writer wishes to produce the illusion of antiquity, and the name Javan would at any rate not be conducive to this. The textual phenomena suggest that jr is either a corrupt or a mutilated name, or both ; the author can scarcely have written p s "pa and then, just after, jr "p3- The scribe who wrote the latter group of letters must have made a slip of the pen, and the true reading probably is DIN J3, the sons of Aram (cp v. i, and see HADRACH).

(d) In Ezek. 27 13 ( EXXds [BAQ]; Symm. luvla) Javan is described (as in Joel) as engaged in slave-traffic in the market of Tyre ; the name stands between Tarshish and Tubal, the latter in Gen. 10:2 Javan's next brother, the former in Gen. 10:4 his second son.

(e) In Is. 66:19 Javan ( EXXdj [BXAQ]) occurs in a gloss enumerating the far-off countries which will hear of Yahwe's future glorious manifestation.

(f) In Dan. 8 21 1020 11 2 we hear of the king, the prince, and the kingdom of Javan ("EXXrjces [Theod. 87]); the reference is to the Grasco-Macedonian empire an expansion of the original conception, which identified Javan with the important Ionian colonies in Asia Minor.

(g) The only remaining reference (not counting the imaginary one in Ps. 1284) is in Ezek. 27 18 (/cat olvov [BAQ ; Q also has tccuijX, whilst Aq. has tevav]), where Javan, with Dan [AV] or Vedan [RV], appears a second time among Tyre s traffickers. Dan and Javan, however, are both corrupt. For p<l pi Cornill ingeniously reads pnni, and the passage becomes, wine of HELEON [q. v. ], and Simin, and Arnaban they furnished for thy traffic. But more probably we should read, not and Simin and Arnaban, but and wool of Hauran (see WOOL).

The scantiness of the extant pre-exilic literature does not permit us to deny that the Israelites may have heard of the lonians from the Phoenicians or the Syrians in pre-exilic times. We may even admit this to be probable. The fact, however if it is a fact possesses very little significance, unless indeed M Curdy s statement (Hist. Proph. Man. 2418) can be proved, that Grecian immigrants had settled in Philistia in the time of Sargon, 1 and formed an influential class in Ashdod. All, however, that can safely be said is, that the adventurer called Yamani or Yatni, who displaced the king of Ashdod appointed by Sargon, came from Cyprus (see ASHDOD). The real origin of the Assyrian name for Cyprus is obscure ; it seems to have been popularly explained as the Ionian island. Whether the upstart who provoked Sargon s wrath was an Ionian or a Phoenician by race, we cannot tell. Still less can we assert that immigrants of the same race as Yamani had settled in Philistia. An original and ingenious view of Flinders Petrie 2 also deserves mention. This explorer is of opinion that between 607 and 587 B.C. there was a constant intercourse between the men of Judah and the Greek frontier garrison at Tahpanhes (Daphnae). They would thus obtain a far more vivid conception of lonians than had formerly been possible. The view is not unplausible, even if we cannot admit that it justifies an early date for Dan. 3.

The Ionians are only once expressly referred to in the Assyrian cuneiform inscriptions : Sargon calls them the Javanites who are in the middle of the sea (cp D ri "N), and says that he drew them out like fishes (COT16 3 ; A7?2 43 ; Del. Par. 248). It is in the cuneiform inscriptions of Darius that we find the next mention of Javan ; Darius certainly means by this, not Greece proper, but the Ionian colonies of Asia Minor. The contact of Egypt with the lonians (Yevan, Yevanu, etc. ) began much earlier. The lonians are referred to by name in the epic of Rameses II. among the allies of the H6ta.

See WMM As. u. Eur. ~>f><)ff., and, on the biblical passages, Stade, Das Volk Javan ( 80), reprinted in Akad. Reden u. Abhandl., 99, pp. 123-142. T. K. C.


i. RV has improved several interesting passages by substituting javelin for AV's spear (e.g. , Josh. 8 18 26 Job 41 29 [21]. The jira, kiddn, was shorter than the rnn, hanlth. In Ecclus. 46 2 RV keeps sword (potato) ; but a version based where possible on the Hebrew text would give javelin (pTa). We now know that Ben Sira quotes accurately from Josh. 8 18. Inconsistently RV gives spear in Jer. 5042 ; see Jer. 623 (and cp DAGGER, 2). Most lexicographers would support RV s statement that Goliath had a javelin of brass between his shoulders (i S. 176 ; AV shield ). This is really very doubtful (see 5). In Job 3923, however, javelin rightly takes the place of shield (it is coupled with spear ).

2. AV also renders rnn, hanlth (i S. 18ioy. 2033), and nph, romah (Nu. 267), javelin ; but RV rightly prefers spear. In Ezek. 39 9 AV m s- javelins for V(5D, makkel, staff, or rather stick" (see STAFF).

3. In Job 41 2 1 [29] AV s darts (nnln) is better than RV s clubs ((r<j>vpd). Read rwiljl (tarttlK), javelin = Ass. tartahu, leichter Wurfspeer (Del. A ss. HWB 630^). D tWin, tartdhlm, should also be read in Ps. 5522 [21] and Mic. 5s [6], for ninriS, 5 !?5?i ar| d nrnn for nino, as the name of a star (Antares?) in Job 38 36.

4. In Ps. 353, lip? (iiscgdr), and stop the way" (EV) should most probably be H3E>1 (usekod), and javelin (cp RVmg- battle-axe ). Before giving up a passage like this as hopeless, or venturing on a mere makeshift, it is a duty to refer to the Assyrian vocabulary. Here we find sukudu, a synonym of tartahu (Del. op. cit. 630 b, 656 a). For a less plausible view see Hal. Rev. Sent. 847.

5. In i S. 17:6 Klosfermann deserves credit for showing that the brazen piece of armour (MT, P"l 3j 0$ acm-i s 3 ) between Goliath's shoulders, which AV renders target and RV javelin, must have been for defence, not for attack. Exegeti- cal fairness requires us either to endeavour to emend W3i or at least to recognise the corruption of the text by putting asterisks instead of a rendering. But Tl 3 (Klo.) can hardly mean an oval, concave, metal plate. Possibly pT3 should be JT2, and rendered 'protection' (Ass. kidanu, protection ; see Del. Ass. HWB 318 a ; Muss-Arnolt, Ass. Diet. 373 a). 1

1 It is interesting in this connection to note that (5 substitutes EAArjj/as for Philistines in Is. 9 12 [n].

2 Nebcsheh and Defenneh (Eg. Expl. Fund), 49^.

3 Aquila renders jn 3 CIOTTI S in Job 41 29 [21] Jer. 623 ; Symmachus in Josh. 8 18 Jer. C 23.

T. K. C.


One of the exploits of Samson is connected in legend with an ass's jawbone, an extemporised weapon. Judg. 15 15 is rendered thus in RV :

And he found a new jawbone of an ass, and put forth his hand, and took it, and smote a thousand men therewith.

An old jawbone would have been too light and brittle for the purpose. Of the punning poetical speech which is attached, the following is a plausible rendering :

With the jawbone of the red one (i.e., an ass) I have reddened them ;
With the jawbone of the red one I have smitten a thousand men.

Hence the legend explained the origin of the name 'Lehi'. Criticism, however, has to go behind the legend and investigate its origin. Both LEHI (q.v. ) and Onugnathus seem to presuppose a myth which was common to the Danites and the Phoenicians. This myth was probably derived from Babylonia. The mythic weapon of Marduk (a kind of spear or javelin i.e. , lightning) is described in Creation Tablet, 430 (Jensen, Kosmol. s8oy!) as kakku id mahra, 'peerless weapon'. The myth containing this phrase was probably preserved at the sanctuary of Samasan (Beth-shemesh) ; the popular speech would easily convert it into Ithl hamor. Steinthal has already noted the stress laid on throwing the jaw bone (cp Ps. 18 14 [15]) in Judg. 15 17.

In v. 16 read D FHen linn (so Moore ; cp ). Doorninck and Budde connect the verb ion with Ar. haiara, in the sense of shave, flay. But hamara also means to be red, and this sense is supported by ~yy\ II. (Job 16 16). So Zenner, Zt. f. kath. TkeoL, 88, p. 257, comparing Arabic poetical passages in We. Skizzen, 144 5 and 188 13 ( 84). Moore, however, comparing ISh, heap, 'renders I have piled them in heaps', or (SBOT) 'I assailed my assailants'. T. K. C.


pIJP, TtlP [i Ch.], IAZHR), or Jaazer (Nu. 2132 3235 AV; in i Mace. 58 I&ZHN [A] Jazar), a place E. of the Jordan, occupied by the Gadites (Nu. 32 35 Josh. 132 5 iCh. 681 [66], rAZ ep [B], rAZ Hp [A], |&zeip [L]), but previously by the Amorites (Nu. 2132). It lay on the border towards the land of the Ammonites in a fertile region of pastures and vineyards called the land of Jazer, and had dependent villages (Nu. 2l2 4 2 [@] 3 2 32i Is. 168 Jer. 48 3 2 3 ), which, like itself, were taken by Judas the Maccabee (r Mace. 5j/., cp Jos. Ant. xii. 81). P idealistically reckons it among the Levitical cities (Josh. 2139 [37]), and the Chronicler tells of Levites at Jazer in the fortieth year of the reign of David (iCh. 26 31 piaftp [B] ; cp 28. 24 5 eXiefe/> [B], eXtofrp [A], tefcp [L]).

Eusebius and Jerome (O5< 2 ) describe it as 10 R. m. W. from Philadelphia, 15 from Heshbon, and as situated at the source of a large stream (/u^ywroj irora/j-os) which falls into the Jordan. Elsewhere (OS 212 27) Eusebius calls the city Azer, and makes it 8 R. m. W. from Philadelphia. A place with ruins bearing the name of Sar or Sar, which Seetzen discovered in 1808, 4 is now usually connected with Jazer (so, e.g. , Baed.( 3 173; Ges. Lex. < 13 , s.v. -IJJT ; Merrill, in Hastings DD 2ss3; cp Porter, in Kitto s Bib. Cycl.). It is on the S. of the Wady Sir, on the road leading westward from Amman. In spite of Merrill s enthusiastic descrip tion, however, the identification is to be rejected, (i) because the sibilants of Sar and Jazer do not correspond, and above all, (2) because there is no large stream, such as the statement of Eusebius requires. Hence we are led to suppose that Eusebius has confounded the Jordan with the Jabbok. Oliphant (Land of Gilead, 235 /:) points out the ruins of a populous Roman city (which no doubt succeeded earlier cities) in the WadyZorbi, which falls into the Wady Zerka (Jabbok). The place would be 8-10 R. m. N. of Philadelphia. It is called Yajuz, and is a little to the W. of el-Jubeihat, the ancient JOGBEHAH [q. v. ]. That these two places were near together is evident from Nu. 8235. In the centre of the Wady Zorbi is a copious fountain (the Ain el-Ghazal), soon after passing which the stream becomes large enough for irrigation, and so compares very favourably with the Wady Sir. Indeed, between this point and the Zerka the country in spring is an expanse of waving crops, and the wady is well adapted for vine culture (Oliphant, 233 236). The rival combination (E. Pal. Survey, 1 19) with Beit Zera , not far to the NE. of Heshbon and a little beyond el- Al (ELEALEH), is opposed not only to the statement of Eusebius, but also to Nu. 8235 ; nor is it really favoured by Is. 168, for my ny, as far as Jazer, implies that Heshbon and Jazer are rather far apart. 1 Against Oliphant s alternative theory that Yajuz may be Jahaz see JAHAZ. T. K. c.

1 On the subject of 3-5 see Che. JQR lOsSo/; Exp., Aug. 98, p. 8 3 _# ; Exp. TIG 522 (Aug. 99).

2 Reading 1TJT, Jazer, for 7J7 (which does not mean forti fied ), with .

3 D i sea, has intruded into MT before 1HT> Jazer, from the preceding clause. Seetzen need not have looked about for a sea of Jazer.

4 See references in Ritter, ErdkundeW , 15 1047.


(rr), a Hagrite, David s chief flock-master (i Ch. 27 31 : lafeif 6 yapem)s [B], iioafi^ 6 a-yapinji [A], tcoaf 6 yafiapi [L]). See HAGAR, 2.


1. Prevelance.[edit]

In cases of suspected guilt which were involved in uncertainty or were of extreme gravity, means were very generally taken in antiquity to obtain a direct decision of the deity. In Europe, down to beyond the limits of the Middle Ages the custom is found to have prevailed, and even at the present day the same thing is seen in the less civilized parts of the world. In the OT we have frequent references to one means which the Hebrews adopted for this purpose, viz. , the sacred lot (see URIM AND THUMMIM) ; but we have only one clear record that they also adopted another widely-spread custom the ordeal. The common element in all ordeals is one of risk e.g. , of being burnt by walking over hot stones or ploughshares, or by thrusting the arms into molten lead or of receiving injury from noxious potions and the common belief that underlies them is that the deity will preserve the innocent from the injurious effects which will befall the guilty.

The one case in which extant Hebrew law provides for a resort to the ordeal is that of a woman suspected of unfaithfulness to her husband. This procedure is described in Nu. 611-31 [P]. In spite of the uniqueness of the law and of the fact that the Hebrew narratives record no instance of its adoption, there are indications that (at least) in earlier times, ordeals were more frequent among the Hebrews. Robertson Smith_ (Rel. Sem.W 181) accounts for the origin of the names En-Mishpat = well of judgment, and Me MSribah = waters of controversy, by the supposition that the well at Kadesh was regularly used for purposes of the ordeal ; Stade ( ZA TIV 15 178 [95]) adduces reasons for concluding that the case of suspected marital infidelity was not the only one in which the memorial meal offering bringing guilt to remembrance (Nu. 5 15) was offered. It has been supposed that Ps. 109 iSi contains a reference to the water of ordeal ; possibly also Prov. 627-29 refers to other forms of ordeal (note ngr in v. 29 and cp Nu. 5 19). Cp also Nu. !Qi6/:

The points to be considered are (i) the conditions of the ordeal, (2) the accompanying offering, (3) the character of the ordeal itself.

1. The ordeal is to be resorted to when a man is jealous of his wife, but is unable to produce either the witnesses required for an ordinary process at law (Dt. 19 15 Nu. 8630) or other evidence of her guilt (cp Ex. 22 13 [12] Dt. 22is)w. 12-14.

1 The distance between Yajuz and Elealeh is about 15 m. (Oliphant).

2. Accompanying offering.[edit]

2. When the man brings his wife to the priest (v. 15) or before Yahwe (v. 30) i.e. , to the door of the tabernacle (in the case of Herod's temple, according to Sofa 1:5, to the Nikanor door) he has to bring with him an offering which is described as her offering for her (!V^yW3Tp) i v. 15. This has been understood to mean that the -woman makes an offering (of the nature of a trespass-offering) of material provided by her husband. This, however, is unlikely, for the offering is made before the question of the woman s guilt or innocence is decided. More probably it is the man who offers (in accordance with the general law that no one must seek Yahwe s face empty i.e. , without an offering), and the above phrase means the offering which concerns her, is on her account. To symbolise, however, the connection of the offering with the woman, it is placed in her hands v. 18 (cp Lev. 827). The material of the offering is noticeable : it consists of one-tenth ephah of barley meal the commoner and cheaper flour (2 K. 7i Rev. 66) and is not to be mingled with either oil or frankincense (v. 15). The latter provision applies like wise to the poor man s sin-offering which also consists of the same small quantity (Lev. 5u), but even in that case, as in the case of every other offering in P, barley meal is expressly excluded by the insistence on the more expensive fine meal. Probably this is merely an isolated survival (which is capable of obvious explana tion) in the late law-books of an earlier freedom (cp Judg. 6 19 i S. 1 24) to use in all cases any kind of meal.

At any rate we must discard the explanation, practically endorsed by many moderns (e.g., Bahr, Keil, Winer), attributed in the Mishna to R. Gamaliel as her acts had been bestial, so her offering consisted of the food of beasts (Sota, 2 i).

3. Other ceremonies.[edit]

One other element in the ritual has been taken, and with more reason, to symbolise the woman's shame, viz. , the loosing of the hair (v. 18). We may then compare the case cited by Robertson Smith { RS w l8l ) from the Kitab al-Agani, i. 1563^, where a suspected wife is carried to Mecca, to take oaths of purgation, seated on a camel between two bags of dung. According to Sota 1 5 the upper part of the woman s body was also stripped a proceeding which could have had only one significance. On the other hand, the mere loosing of the hair (together with the wearing of black garments) was, at least some what later, customary on the part of persons accused before the Sanhedrin of any crime (Jos. Ant. xiv. 4 9 ; cp Zech. 83).

4. The ordeal itself.[edit]

3. The actual ordeal consisted of drinking a specially prepared potion (vv. 17 24) ; if the woman be innocent, the potion is harmless, and thus proves her innocence ; if she be guilty, the potion causes injury to her thigh and belly - the members instrumental to her act of sin (2?/. ). This potion consists of holy water i.e. , water hallowed from having been standing in the sacred laver (Mishna, Targ. ), rather than running water (LXX) from the temple spring with which is mingled dust from the floor of the tabernacle, and into which are washed the written words of the curse. For the risk of coming into contact with holy water or receiving it into one's system, we have many parallels in the Semitic domain as well as elsewhere (WRS loc. cit. ) ; for the use of the dust, fewer ; but this also being taken from the sanctuary must be regarded as holy, and the fusion of it with the water as a means of increasing the holiness and, consequently, the efficacy of the potion. Reference is often made in this connection to Gen. 814 Is. 4923 Mic. 7 17 Ps. 72g ; but the parallels are not obviously to the point. Prob ably the combined use of water and dust has arisen from the fusion of two originally distinct rites ; and possibly the use of the dust originated in necromantic customs. The explanation of the washing of the curse into the water must be sought in the belief in the efficacy of the oath and the independent existence of the words of it (cp OATH, and Goldziher, Abh. zur Arab. Phil. 26- 41) ; the connection with oaths of purgation (Ex. 22 10 [g]/! ) is also close. The potion has to be mixed in an earthen-ware vessel (y. 17), which probably had to be destroyed immediately after use (cp Lev. 628 [21] 1133 15 12) ; cp CLEAN, 2.

One point that is not clearly stated in the OT narrative is the time within which the potion takes effect ; probably the effect was expected to be immediate in any case, within a much shorter time than the two or even three years which the Mishna allows (Sota, 84).

5. Text of Nu. 5:11-31.[edit]

The text of the section (Nu. 5:11-31) presents difficulties which Stade (ZATW 16166-178 [ 95]) has attributed to literary fusion of distinct rituals ; but his analysis is unconvincing. The only question of serious importance here is the relation of v. 24 to vv. 26b-27. The only natural view of v. 24+ is that the woman drinks before the offering is made (v. 26) ; but 26b distinctly states that she drinks afterwards. Since the assumption that she drinks twice is unnatural, our onlyalternatives are to follow Stade or to regard v. 24 as textually intrusive.

In their note on Nu. 6:11-31 seen since the foregoing was written, Carpenter and Harford - Battersby (Hex. 1 191 f.) adopt Stade's analysis with some modifications. According to them the section, in which it will be seen by the fre quency of the harmonist's phrases that the fusion has been fairly complete, results from the fusion of

  • (a) a condemnation (vv. 11-13a, 13c, 15, 18, 21, 23-24 27b 25b 26 31) and
  • (b) an ordeal (vv. 29, 13b, 30a, 14, 30b, 16-17, 19-20, 22, 25a, 27a, 28).

In the case of the condemnation, the woman s guilt needs no demonstration, but only draws down on her the priestly doom. But (i) ac cording to the analysis a (see 12b, 13a, 13c) as well as b presupposes an offence unprovable by ordinary process of law, that is to say, presupposes circumstances such as those under which ordeals are generally resorted to ; the crime is one which has been commuted without the knowledge of the husband or any other witness. (2) The proceedings with the waters of bitterness correspond to proceedings in the case of ordeal, but have no analogy in the Hebrew law with regard to clearly proved cases of adultery, for which an entirely different punishment was pro vided (MARRIAGE, 4). Into the linguistic distinctions, admir ably presented by Carpenter and Harford-Battersby in their note, it is impossible to enter here ; but literary analysis in the present instance, even if justifiable, appears too uncertain to be of material importance for the subject of this article.

Of the OT archaeologies see especially Nowack, 2249-253 ; of the Commentaries (on Nu. 5 uff.), Dillmannand/ter<z/. Crit. Com. On the text, etc., see Stade s article cited above. For ethnic parallels cp Tyler s article Ordeal in B(ty ; Burckh. Bedouins and IVahtibys, \ 121 f. G. B. G.


(Dntf nn ; Josh. 15io: rroAlc IAR6IN [B], TT. !Ap[e]lM [AL]), a ridge on the N. border of Judah, identified elsewhere (CHESALON). The name, however plausible, is scarcely correct.

Either Jearim has grown out of 3H > Jarib (see KIRJATH-JEARIM), or it is a corruption of pISJ?, EPHRON [g.v.], Mount Ephron being probably not a mere mountain, but a long ridge.



RV Jeatherai ("10^), i Ch. 621 [6] = i Ch. 641 [26], ETHNI.


(-irVimV 28), the father of ZECHARIAH [i., 27] (Is. 82, BARAXIOY [BNAQF]). The name is usually abbreviated to BERECHIAH [<7.z;.].


(D-in 1 ;; leBoyc). Judg. 19io/; Jebusite Op-U^n ; leBoyc, -CAI[OC], ceitisi])- Gen. 10 16, etc. , but once Jebusi, Josh. 18 16 AY. See JERUSALEM, 13.


(nnpjT), iCh. 3i8, RV JEKAMIAH.


(r$3, 35), 2 Ch. 26 3 t Kt. RV, AV JECOLIAH.


J, 35), 2 K. 152 AV, RV JECOLIAH.


[Ti. WH]), Mt. 1:11-12 RV, AV JECHONIAS. See JEHOIACHIN.


(IHj*. 35! pointing doubtful; lexeAlA [AL]), queen mother of Azariah, king of Judah (2 K. 15:2, AV JECHOLIAH ; X A.AeiA [K], ICXEMA [A], 2 Ch. 26:3 ; H79J [Kr.], rm[Kt], RV JECHILIAH.


(!T^), i Ch. 3i6/ See JEHOIACHIN.


(iexONiAc[BA]), i Esd. 1 9 = 2 Ch. 35 9 CONANIAH, 2.


(Kt. ^IP, Kr. VfJP), 2 Ch. 9 29 RV">e-, EV IDDO (iii. i).


(iVi;T, Yeda yah, Yahwe knows, 32).

i. A priestly family in the great post-exilic list (see EZRA ii. , 9). Mention is made of the B'ne Jedaiah of the house of JESHUA [y.v., ii., 6], Ezra 236 (teovSa [B], ifdSova [AL]) = Neh. 7 39 ( lu dae [BXA], fddova [L]) = I Esd. 624, Jeddu (te55ou [B], tddov [A*], teddovK [L]).

There would seem to have been two families of the name of Jedaiah, for two men bear this name, Neh. 126 (om. BN*A, iSeias [Nc.amg. sup. L]^ #_ ? ( om BNA, iSa [NC-amg. sup.^ loSovia? [L]) ; and two father s houses are referred to in Neh. 121921 (om. BN*A, <.5ia,V. 19; iSeiov.T . 21 [Nc.amg. inf.]; lf & el q. t v. 19 ; la&ovia, v. 21 [L]). 1 In Neh. 11 10, Jedaiah, son of Joi- arib (SaSfia [B], SaAeia [], ta5ia [A], ? [L]), one should omit son of; cp i Ch. 9 10 (tuSae [BA], uoiae [L]). Jedaiah was the head of the second course, i Ch. 24 7 (avaiSna. [B], ifieia [AL]).

2. One of the Babylonian Jewish delegates, temp. ZERUB- BABEL, Zech. 6 10 14 (BKArQ d o no t recognise a proper name : ol eirfyviaKOTfS avrrjv [avrvv A in v . 10], Aq. iJea).


(fVT), YSdayah, 32.

i. Ancestor of Ziza, a Simeonite, Teh. 4 37 (i8ia [B], eia [A], ttSSaa. [L]).

2. b. HARUMAPH (q.v.), Neh. 3 10 (icSaia [BA], ieeia [NL]).


(leA&lOC [BA]), i Esd. 830= Ezra 1029, ADAIAH, 5.


(PNy 11 "!^, i.e., known of God, cp ELIADA and Palm. ^3JPT= leAeiBnAoc ; i&AmA [AL]).

1. A chief division of BENJAMIN according to the list in i Ch. I (>ff., but not mentioned in the other lists (cp JEHIEL. ^N j; ). the Gibeonite (i Ch. 76, aSeujA. [B], v. iof., aptrj\ [B], aJirjA, afiir/p [A p sup. ras Ab) ; leStrjA. [L thrice}). See JEIEL, 2.

2. b. Shimri, one of David s heroes, i Ch. 11 45 (eASeiTjA nisi eAeeiTjA. vid. Swete [BN], te 3iT)A [AL]). See DAVID, na [ii.].

3. A Manassite, one of David s warriors, i Ch. 12 20 (po)6ii)A [BN], tefi^A [A]). See DAVID, na [iii.].

4. A Korahite door-keeper, i Ch. 262 (tSepr/A [B]).


(HIH*. beloved, cp JEDIDIAH), queen-mother of Josiah, king of Israel (2 K. 22 1 ; leAeiA [B], eAiA&[A], ieAiA&[L]). See ADAIAH, i.


(n^TT, beloved of Yahwe, 19, 27. so amabilis Domino [Vg. ], ayair-^rbv Kvpiov [Sym.], cp IUDO ; iSfSfi [B], tfSSiSia [L], [e]te5t5ia [A Aq. Theod.]), as the text stands, is the name given by David to Solomon after a visit of the prophet Nathan (28. 1225). It has been remarked elsewhere, however (see BATHSHEBA, col. 503, top ; DAVID, col. 1032, foot), that the narrative in 2 SS. 11:1-12:25 has passed through an amplifying process in the interests of edifica tion ; originally Solomon was not represented as the son of a penitent reconciled by Nathan s instrumentality to his offended God.

1 Possibly, however, Adaiah (cp Neh. 11 12) should be read for one of these. See ADAIAH, 4.

2 So first Thenius ; cp Vg., misitque euin in manu.

In the earlier form of the story 2 S. 12:15b must have followed 11:27 (so Schwally). The original form of vv. 24-25, however, is still undetermined (see We., Dr., Klo., Ki., Bu., Lohr, H. P. Smith). Wellhausen (cp Lohr and Bu.) thinks it enough to read ln?B"l " or 1D7B"1, and he entrusted him to the care of the prophet Nathan, and he (David) called him Jedidiah ; while Gratz and H. P. Smith prefer to connect the last two words of z>. 24 with r. 25 And Yahwe loved him, and sent by the hand of the prophet Nathan, etc. These expedients, however, are but palliations of the evil, which needs a more radical cure. The truth seems to be that 11:27a was originally followed by the naming of the son born to Bath- sheba after Uriah s death. We may suppose with S. A. Cook, that 12:24b ( and he called [tnp 1 Kt.; hut xipni Kr.] his name Solomon ) once followed immediately upon 11:27a, ! and that Jedidiah, the name given by Nathan (1) to the child Solomon, was the symbolical expression of the reconciliation between David and his God. It is equally possible, however, that the words relative to the naming of the child spoken of, which originally stood in 11:27, were, and he called his name Jedidiah. The words UHN mm, which have puzzled critics not a little, seem to be a first miswritten and then manipulated form of the words rt TT """ (again miswritten at the end of v. 25, as ril.V Tlljn). When the words, 'And he called his name Jedidiah', were transposed to v. 25, they received the awkward but necessary prefix, And he sent by Nathan the prophet, 2 the corrupt words at the end of v. 24 having already been converted into and Yahwe loved him. The editor seems to suppose a second and more pleasing visit of Nathan.

If the last of the theories mentioned above be accepted, the narrative originally ran thus :

And when the mourning was past, David sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bare him a son, and he called his name Jedidiah. But the thing that David had done displeased Yahwe, and Yahwe struck the child that Uriah's wife had borne to David, and it was very sick. . . . And David comforted his wife Bathsheba, . . . and she bore a son, and he called his name Shillumo 3 (1D?C , i.e., his compensa tion), because of Jedidiah.

Now all becomes clear ; the corruptions of the text are healed and accounted for, and an intelligible narrative is produced. Solomon remains Bathsheba s second son. He lacks the religious interest attaching to the son of a penitent saint, but he gains the human interest attaching to the child of a deeply afflicted father. He called his name 'his compensation', with reference to the lost Jedidiah. See SOLOMON.

In 2 S. 12:25b LXX and Theod. read mmrrQ instead of niiV113lD which KIo., and HPSm., following Cappel (frit. Sac. 265), adopt. The harder reading, however, should be the nearer to the original. T. K. C.


Kr.), 2 Ch. 9 29 RV m e-. EV IDDO (iii. i).


(nn-VT, f-irvT [firr-p, Kt., Ps.soi (title) 77 1 (title), Neh. 11 17 i Ch. 16 3 8], iA[e]i9OYN. -00YM [BNART], L generally (AlGoyM ; i Ch. 9 16 IW000N [B]. In i Esd. lis ( = 2Ch. 35is) RV EDDINUS, eAA[e]iNOYC,[BA]).

The Vss. as a general rule support the form |TTT. They offer as the vowel of the second syllable ei [B] or t [AL], but cp iSofto/i (2 Ch. 35 15 "), iSeflui/ (i Ch. 16 3 8 N). ov occurs only in i&ov6<ai> [A], iSovffovv [LJ (i Ch. 9i6). The renderings for the last syllable vary between -tav, -ovv, and -ovja, rarely -<oju,. Possibly pn T should be restored for the surprising jwv in the heading of Ps. 45. That the heading also refers the psalm to the Korahites is no objection (see PSALMS).

1. References.[edit]

The father of Obed-edom (i Ch.1638), and the founder of a company of door-keepers (i Ch. 1642; other sons are mentioned in Neh. 11 17 om. BN*A= i Ch. 9i6), 2 Ch. 29 14 i Ch. 25 3 ; and the phrase the sons of Jeduthun should possibly take the place of the odd reference to the sons of Judah in 2 S. 1 18 (see JASHER, BOOK OF, 2). Jeduthun is no doubt the favourite form of MT, but the versions as a general rule favour Jedithun, which may be correct (see below). It is the name of one of the great guilds of temple singers ; its supposed founder is mentioned with ASAPH (3), and HEMAN in i Ch. 25 1 6 2 Ch. 5 12 35 15 (where Jeduthun is called the king's seer ), and with the latter alone in i Ch. 1641. It is remarkable that, so regarded, he takes the place of ETHAN (q.v. ). Jeduthun (Jedithun) is mentioned about twice as often as Ethan, and it is noteworthy that although the Chronicler numbers him among the Levites (i Ch. 9i6) he does not give his levitical descent.

1 See AJSL, 1900, p. i 5 6f.

2 Schwally (pp. cit.) has already noticed that v. 2$a is not by the writer of 12 iff. ( Nathan tJu prophet ). It is arbitrary to insert the prophet in 12 i (as Bu. does).

3 A slight distortion of the name nb Vc* (cp Shallum). The above theory arose independently of H. P. Smith s remark (p. 326 top) that the narrative suggests recompense as the meaning of Solomon.

2. Explanation of the name.[edit]

Jeduthun, or Jedithun (Ps.39 i [title] 77 i Kt. [title]), occurs in the headings of Pss. 39 62 and 77. In 39 ^ 1 in 62 and 77 V ^ is the form of the musical direction. The preposition Vy led Ewald to suppose that a peculiar musical mode was designated by Jeduthun. Robertson Smith, too, regards the name as not in any sense personal but a musical term, which by a strange transformation became the name of a chief singer (OTJC^, 143, where the odd names given in i Ch. 254 are adduced as parallels).

It is natural to suspect a connection with rvnin (cp Neh. 128, and see CHOIR, 2), 1 but not easy to suggest a plausible etymological theory. Or one might take Jedithun to be an abbreviation of Jehudithun, an artificial form suggesting the devotion of the guild of Jedithun to a specially Jewish type of music (cp Gratz s theory of Gittith and see JESHURUN).

Lagarde's view, however, is more plausible than any of these hypotheses ; according to this, the name is a corruption of Ethan, produced through the combination of T 'hands of' with the personal name Ethan ( Uebers. 121).

If so, 'Jedithun' will be the correct form, and ^y not ^> the right preposition in the musical directions ; jfMT"7{? will be a contracted form of ]n J< *V*7j, 'to be performed (or, preserved) through (or by) the guild of Ethan'. That the editor of Chronicles, in the form in which we have it, regarded Jeduthun as a synonym of Ethan may be admitted ; in other words, he did not understand the name. T. K. C. S. A. C.


(lenAi [A]), i Esd. 5 33 = Ezra 2 56 JAALAH, Neh. 7 58 JAALA.


deHAoy [ B l). i Esd. 892 = Ezra 10 2, JEHIEL (ii. i).


OJJPK, nflPK), Nu. 26 3 of AV. See ABIEZER.


(SH-lint? 13), Gen. 31 47- See GALEED, i ; and cp ISHOD.


( t ?N&?n <l , as if 'God praises', or 'he praises God', 34; but ?NCnv, JERAHMEEL [g.v.] is surely the right reading. See i Ch. 2 42, where Ziph is the son of Mesha, son of Caleb, brother of Jerahmeel, and ib. | 6 44 [28]^ 242Q, where Kish, or Kishi, the Merarite, is con nected with MAHLI {q.v.} and (24 29) with Jerahmeel. For an analogous corruption see MAHALALEEL.

1. AV JEHALELEEL, in the genealogies of Judah, is father of Ziph, Ziphah, etc. (i Ch. 4 16 ; (cai vibs O.VTOV ye<rer)A [B], ai viol aiiTOv laAAeArjA [A], -ijju [A*vid-], ical vioi aAAeAojA [L]).

2. AV JEHALELEL, a Levite (2 Ch. 29 12 ; TOV AA)j [B], TOV taAArjA [A], TOV taAerjA [L]). T. K. C.


(-in^fV, Yahwe is glad or gladdens ; cp JAHDIEL).

1. A Levite, i Ch. 24 20 (laSeio. [B], laSaia [AL]).

2. A Meronothite, entrusted with King David s asses, i Ch. 27 30 (cafiias [BA], lofiatas [L], JOOM [Pesh.]).


(^IT, 29, 53 ; ezeKHA [BA], IGZ6KIHA [L] ; JEZBCEL; RV Jehezkel). The name in Hebrew is precisely the same as that known to us as EZEKIEL. In i Ch. 24 16 it is borne by one of the twenty-four courses into which the priests were divided in post-exilic times. 2


(n*ni, Yahwe lives ; cp JEHIEL), a door keeper (with Obed-edom) for the ark, temp. David, i Ch. 152 4 t(i 6 iA[BN 1 ], eiA[N*], ieAi&[A], iemA [L]).


(^NTT, 35 ; God lives ; cp Palm. 7NTP, and perhaps Sin. VPP ; [e]iemA [BNAL]).

1. A Levite musician, temp. David : i Ch. 15 i8(tair;A [L]); 15 20 (etfyA [BN], i0u,A [A]); 16 s (AV JEIEL ; lafcrjA [A], icu>)A [L]X

2. Head of a family of Gershonite Levites, temp. David : i Ch. 238(ii7A[B]); 20s(/36o-t>)A[B]). Cp JEHIELI and see LADAN, 2.

3. Son of Hachmoni, who was with David s sons : i Ch. 27 32 (i7)A [B], iepii)A [A], t(u-r)A [L]). See HACHMONI.

4. Son of king Jehoshaphat : 2 Ch. 21 2 (ir)A [B]).

5. RV JEHUBL (Kt. "j.xirr), a Hemanite Levite, temp. Hezekiah : 2 Ch. 29 14 ; see JEHUEL.

6 A Levitical (or priestly) overseer of the temple, temp. Hezekiah : 2 Ch. 31 13 (eir,A [B]).

7 Ruler of the house of God, temp. Tosiah : 2 Ch. 358. In i Esd. 1 8 Tjo-urjAos [B*A], AV SYELUS, RV ESVELUS. _

8 Father of Obadiah in a post-exilic list of fathers houses : EzraS 9 (ie|aa[B], t e7)A[A])= i Esd.835 jEZELUs(ie]Aow[BA]).

9. Father of Shecaniah : Ezra 10 2 (lerjA [B], teeirjA [A]).

10 A priest, son of Harim : Ezra 10 21 (ieri\ [BN])= i Esd. 9 21 (lepe^A [BA], EV HIEREEL).

11 \ layman, son of Elam : Ezra 10 26 (larjA [B], i<xeir)A [N], OU*HAD- I Esd. 9 2 7 , AV HlERIELUS, RV jEZRIELUS(iepu)Aos [A], ieopiKAos [B]).

1 See Koberle, Die Tempelsdnger im Alien Test. ( 99), 66i55/

2 In B he appears as the nineteenth ; in AL as the twentieth.


(?8*Ityi better Jelel, as generally in RV.

i One of the sons of Elam : Ezra 10 2 (icrjA [BN], leeirjA [A], leiijA [L])= i Esd. 8 92 (urjAov [B], tojA [A], ieir)Aov [L], JEELUS).

2. iCh. 9 3 5 AV, RV JEIEI,, 2.

3. i Ch. 1144 AV, RV JEIEL, 3.


n, 35 : cp Jehiel). The b'ne Jehieli, a family of Gersrionite Levites, were over the treasuries of the house of the Lord, temp. David: i Ch. 26 2 1/. (ictr/A [BAL], v. 22 ier)A [A; om. L]). Cp JEHIEL (i. 2), and see LADAN, 2.


(in*ip?rV, 29 ; the pointing is strange, see HEZEKIAH ; ezeKiAC [ BAL ]) b. Shallum, an Ephraimite leader (2 Ch. 2812).


(rnirirV ; perhaps corrupted from Jehoiada [see A Pesh."], cp 35! Gray, HPN 283), RV, following MT, Jehoaddah. in i Ch. 836, but in n 9 i,-2.\ rnjr, EV JARAH, a corruption of T\~V (ia5 <cat taSa, laSa [B] ; iwiaSa [A ; so Pesh ] iiaSa [L]), a descendant of Saul mentioned in a genealogy of BENJAMIN (f.v., 9. 0)> J Ch. 8 36 = 9 42 (ia6<x [BA], iwSa [L]).


RV Jehoaddin (JTOrV, 38 57 ; but nyi T, Kt. in Kings; luaSeu/ [AL] ; 'Yahwe gives pleasure" ; Hommel, ^//r, 321, '. . . is pleased' ; in 2 K. 14 2 favours the alternative form pyirr, with which cp py, ^DIN BAL in 2 Ch. 29 12, however, supports JEHOADUAN ; see EDEN [i.]; JOADANUS in i Esd. 9 19 seems to be due to corruption), the queen-mother of Joash, king of Israel (2 K. 14 2 ; tuiaSeiM. [BL], 2 Ch. 25 i i<ovaa [B], iu>aSe [A]).


(TnKfoW, Yahwe holds fast, 29 50; cpAhaz.Ahaziah; ICOAXAC [B], -f[AL] generally).

1. Father of Joah the recorder, 2 Ch. 348 (tuax [B]).

2. Son of Jehu, succeeded his father on the throne of Israel in 814 B.C. and reigned seventeen years (814- 797 B.C.), 2K. 13i-9 (iwaxas [A, v. 7]) 25 ("oafax [ A , w. 250]), 14 1 ([vltf] a X af [A]) = 2Ch.25i 7 (om. B), v. 25 (twas [B]). The Syrian oppression brought Israel s power very low in his time ; it was left for JEROBOAM II. to repair the mischief. We may assume, however, that the success of Ramman - nirari III. against Mari , king of Damascus, was not without some good result for Israel. Whitehouse (Schr. CO7 2324). M Curdy (Hist. Proph. Man. 1300), and Winckler even think that Ramman-nirari III. is the saviour spoken of in 2 K. 13s- See, however, JEROBOAM, 2.

3. JOACHAZ or JECHONIAS, i Esd. 1 34, tex<"" as [B]. iwxf [A]; ZARAKES, i Esd. 1 38 fa/uos [B], fapa/c^s [AL]). Jehoahaz, son of Josiah, succeeded his father on the throne of Judah in 608 B.C. and reigned for three months, 2 K. 23 3 i-33 2 Ch. 36 1-3 (twaxcw [A in 2 K. 2834], -f [BAL in 2 Ch.]). In Jer.22ii he is called Shallum. This was probably his birth-name, which he exchanged for the name Jehoahaz when he was anointed. It is much less natural to suppose that Shallum is used ironically (like Zimri in 2 K. 9si), as if Jehoahaz were called the second Shallum, one whose reign was almost as short as that of Shallum l (z K. 1613). This conclusion, however, will not justify us in following the MT of i Ch. 3 15, where four sons are given to Josiah, one of whom is an otherwise unknown Johanan, and another is Shallum. The Chronicler who calls Jehoahaz s successor Jehoiakim (not Eliakim ) would certainly have called Jehoahaz by his crown-name, not by his (supposed) birth-name. Shallum, therefore, in i Ch. 3 15 is derived from Jer. 22:11 ; the Chronicler failed to see that Shallum and Jehoahaz were the same person. Johanan in i Ch. I.e. is miswritten for Jehoahaz (cp < L and see JOHANAN, 10) or else an editor has altered Joahaz into Johanan to cover over the Chronicler s mistake. At RIBLAH on the Orontes Jehoahaz was put in chains by Necho, and sent to Egypt. See Jer. 22 10-12 Ezek. 19s/, and cp JEHOIAKIM.

4. King of Judah (2 Ch. 21 17, o X of(e)i [BAL], 25 23 [BA om.], oxofiov [L]). See AHAZIAH, 2. T. K. C.

l So Graf.


(tTXirr), 2 K. Il2i [12 1], etc. See JOASH i. , i.


(ijnin 11 ), i Ch. 26 3, etc. See JOHANAN, 5.


(P^T, onceT^V, Ezek. 1 2, 'Yahwe establishes', 31, cp caco eTOi|iiao>io adnot Q""g., Ezek. 1 2 ; iwoucei/oi [BNAQ], -KCIV [L in 2 K.}, texofias [BAL in 2 Ch.], by contraction JECONIAH (n;?13^ ; Jer. 27 20, M?n3;, Jer. 24 1 28 4 29 2 i Ch. 3 I6/, Miexovia? .[BNAQL]) and CONIAH C 1^3, Jer. 22 24 28 37 i ,iexovtas [BNAQ], twaicein [A in 2224], cp CHENANIAH, CONANIAH).

The nineteenth king of Judah. He succeeded his father Jehoiakim in 597 B.C. at the age of eighteen (2 K. 248 || i Esd. 143 JOACIM, RV JOAKIM, tuaKfifj. [BAL]),| and after a brief reign of three months ( and ten days, i Esd. 143) surrendered to Nebuchadrezzar, by whom he was carried captive to Babylon, with his mother, his generals, and his troops, together with the artificers and other inhabitants of Jerusalem, to the number of 10,000. He remained in confinement there as long as Nebuchad rezzar lived ; but the next king, Evil-merodach, not only released him, but gave him an honourable seat at his own table, with precedence over all his royal companions in misfortune, and a continual provision (2 K. 2627-30 Jer. 5231-34). The writer of the pathetic passage at the close of Kings evidently regards Jehoiachin as the legiti mate king even in his exile ; so too does Ezekiel, who dates his great vision with reference to Jehoiachin's captivity (Ezek. 1 2), and writes in moving terms of this event (Ezek. 19 9). Cp Meyer, Entst. 78.

See also Esth. 26(BNALom.); also Mt. 1 11, where JECHONIAS (texoi tas [Ti. WH]) is called the son of Josias, his grandfather.


(ITU in 1 !, Yahwe knows ; see JOIADA, and cp Jedaiah, Jediel, etc. ; icoAAe [BSL], ico&A. [A]).

i. The chief priest 2 who (temp. Athaliah) by his promptness and energy rescued Judah from becoming a mere appendage of the northern Israelitish kingdom, directed by the dynasty of Omri, 2 K. 11 4 (iwiadaf [A]) and in \1 7 ff. 12z [3]^ 2 Ch. 23/ (in 242 iway |-ga mg. b-j by confusion with the preceding name in the same verse). Both our historical accounts (see JOASH i. , i) represent Jehoiada as the soul of the revolution, and we can well understand that he was virtually ruler during the minority of Joash. The king did not, how ever, remain the tool of his tutor ; in the twenty-third year of the reign of Joash we find the king administering a rebuke to Jehoiada and the priests (2 K. 12? [S], cp 2 Ch. 246). According to the Chronicler. Jehoiada married two wives, one of whom was JEHOSHABEATH, daughter of king Jehoram, grandfather of Joash (2 Ch. 22 1 1 iviaSa [A], 24s).

In a letter ascribed to a prophet named Shemaiah we find (Jer. 29 25) Zephaniah and the other priests at Jeru salem (temp. Zedekiah) represented as occupying the place of Jehoiada the priest, so far as related to the supervision of persons who claimed to be prophets. The phrase reminds us of Mt. 23 2 ( the scribes . . in Moses seat ); Jehoiada represents the principle of sacerdotal superiority to prophecy.

2. Father of Benaiah (io>a6 [L]), 2 S. 8 18, IO.VO.K [B], iwSae [A], 2023, axei\ov9 [B, introduced from [^.24], tioSae [A], iu>a65ai [L] ; iwcaSae [A in 28. 23 20 22 and i K.lyT except 1 26, luiSae [A], in i Ch. 112224 1817 27s; on the error in i Ch. 27 34 see BENAIAH, i). In i Ch. 12 27 he is called leader of AARON [q.v., n. i] i.e., of the Aaronites (rwaSas [B], -Sae [N], oa. [A], iwaSa [L]), cp DAVID, n [Hi.].

1 On the singular statement of MT of 2 Ch. 36 9 cp i Esd. 1 41 /. but AL has OK Kal Seiea (in Ch. ; but 6a OKTIO [A], OK xal Seita [L] in i Esd.) see Barnes s note in Cambr. Bible.

2 In 2 K. 12 10 [n] Jehoiada is called high priest, but this is contrary to usage. The original document must have been altered (so also 2 K. 22 8). See Kittel and Benzinger.


1 (D^ irp, Yahwe raiseth up, 31 ; cp JOIAKIM, JOKIM ; iu)AK[e]iM, [BNAQL]), also ICOK6IM [A in 2 K. 246], |OAK6IN [L in 2 K. 24ig], I6XONIA [A in Jer. 222 4 ]), at first called ELIAKIM (q.v. 2), eighteenth king of Judah, son of Josiah and ZEBUDAH(2 K. 2336 2Ch. 864^; JOACIM, RV JOAKIM, i Esd. 137/1 ; JOACHIM, RV JOAKIM, Bar. 13).

He succeeded his deposed brother Jehoahaz as the nominee of Pharaoh-Necho, at the same time receiving the new name of Jehoiakim (probably suggested by the priests) from his suzerain (cp 2 K. 24 17). Jehoiakim showed his gratitude by pursuing an Egyptian policy as long as he could. His first object was to collect the tribute imposed by Necho (2 K. 2835; cp!52o). The royal treasure being probably much reduced, he had to exact the silver and gold of each one according to his taxation, 2 which almost inevitably led to much oppression of the poor (cp HOSHEA, i). It is surprising that Jehoiakim should, in such circumstances, have shown a passion for regal magnificence. By forced labour, as Jeremiah tells us (22 137^. ), he built a spacious house, ceiled with cedar and painted with vermilion, thus vying with Ahaz or with Ahab (see AHAB, 8), according to two of the ancient readings of this difficult passage (v. 15). Of what use, cries the prophet, is this ill-gotten magnificence? Will vying with former kings be any security to him in the day of trouble ? Or rather for the text certainly needs emendation wilt thou con tinue to reign, because thou makest a nest in choice cedars? 3 And then, reverting at the close to this love of cedar- wood, he cries to the royal family in the palace (v. 23), Thou that dwellest in a Lebanon, that hast a nest on the cedars, how wilt thou groan when pangs come upon thee the pangs of those who are being led into the presence of a ruthless conqueror? We have no document equally trustworthy with this prophecy for the character of Jehoiakim. That the morality of the nobles was on a par with that of the king appears from other prophecies of Jeremiah, and when a prophet named URIAH ventured to rebuke Jehoiakim, the king slew the messenger of God and dishonoured his dead body (Jer. 26 20). Jeremiah and Baruch narrowly escaped the same fate (Jer. 8626) ; with horror the biographer of the prophet relates that the king cut and burned with his own hands the sacred roll of prophecy (Jer. 36 23). 4

The chronology of the close of Jehoiakim s reign is uncertain. According to 2 K. 24 1 he paid tribute to Nebuchadrezzar for three years, and then rebelled. Since a Babylonian army did not appear before Jerusalem till after Jehoiakim s death, it has been supposed that the three years referred to are the three last of Jehoiakim s life and reign i.e. , 600-598. 5 But there are historical difficulties, which have been forcibly urged by Winckler (A T Unters. %iff.}. Winckler himself makes the three years of Jehoiakim s fidelity to Babylon 605-603. The Chronicler says (2Ch. 366/. ) that Nebuchadrezzar carried Jehoiakim to Babylon ; but according to 2 K. 24 6 he died in peace at Jerusalem and in the LXX 2 Ch. 368 asserts that he was buried in the garden of UZZA [y.w.]; cp 2 K. 21 18 26. The latter statement is probable, just because it runs counter to the terms of denunciation in Jer. 22 18/ 8630. See ISRAEL, 40 / T. K. c.

1 In Jer. 27 i Jehoiakim is an error for ZEDEKIAH {q.v., i] ; cp RVmg.

2 RV makes the tribute-money exacted of (from) the people of the land." But this gives the verb tM3 a third accusative. i ~)Nn QjrnN is a gloss on the expression j^Nn ( the land ) in the same verse, and is therefore to be deleted. Cp Klo., Ki.

s Because thou viest with Ahaz (<8 B NQ), or with Ahab (<5 A ; so Co.), is some improvement on MT s because thou strivest to excel in cedar (?) ((pQ nff., cp Aq., Symm.). A better reading (see Crit. Bib.) is suggested by v. 7 and v. 23.

  • See Che.,/er., Life and Times, 139^

5 See Tiele, BAG wff.\ Stade, GVI l6 7 s; Guthe, GVI 220.


nj, 'Yahwe contends' ; ico\p[e]lB [ANVL]; i Ch. 9 10, -/* [B] ; i Ch. 2-i 7 , iapei/j. [B], -peijS [A]), also JOIARIB (?.z .)> or JOARIU (see below), the founder of an important priestly family which was represented in the time of Joiakim the high priest by Mattenai (see EZRA ii., > 66 n), Neh. 12 ig (otap[e]i/3 [Nc.a rag. inf. L; B*NA om.]), and from which the Maccabees also were descended (JoARin, i Mace. 2 i iwapei/u [AN] 1429 [RV])- I" iCh. 9io24 7 Jehoiarib has a high place in the priesthood of David s time ; according to Neh. 12 6 (<.auap[e]i/3) Joiarib returned with Zerubbabel and Jeshua from Babylon, and in Ezra 8 16 (apei/3 [B], la. [L], icoapeijii [A]) he is one of Ezra s assistants and a teacher (| 3C). Cp JARIB, JOIARIB.


Pl^ liV), 2 K. 10 15. See JONADAB, 3.


(}n3 in^), i Ch. 27 25 AV, etc. See JONATHAN, 9, n, 16.


(DTirV ?.<?., 'Yahwe is high', 38 44 ; ICORA.M [BAL]). The fuller form of JORAM [q.v.].

i. b. Ahab, king of Israel after Ahaziah (852?-842).

1. Moab.[edit]

It was in his reign that, according to 2 K. 3:5-6, the Moabites revolted from the house of Omri, and we may at any rate infer that the Moabites had during the short reign of Ahaziah taken such reprisals on the Israelites that Jehoram could not safely neglect to give Israel s former vassals a lesson. Everything seemed to favour such an enter prise. In particular, Israel s most dangerous foes, the Syrians of Damascus, were prevented by the constant danger of a fresh Assyrian attack from renewing their old hostilities against the kingdom of Samaria.

2. Siege of Samaria.[edit]

We do indeed hear, in 2 K. 6-7, of a siege of Samaria by the Syrians, which the editor evidently supposes to have taken place under Jehoram. This chronological assignment, however, improbable enough (for the reason mentioned just now) in itself, is probably shown to be a mistake by the mention of BENHADAD (q.v. , 2) as the besieger of Samaria, and by the tradition that the host of Benhadad dispersed in a panic at the supposed approach of the kings of the Hittites and of Mizraim.

The Hittites are of course those of Northern Syria, and more especially perhaps of Hamath. Mizraim must either be corrupt, or must, although generally the Hebrew word for Egypt, be the name of some people and country not far removed from the Hittites. Nor can we be long in doubt which alternative to adopt. For Mizraim we should, both here and in i K. 1028yC 2 Ch. 1 i6_/C, read Misritn, i.e., the Misri, who, in the inscriptions of Shalmaneser 1. and Tiglath-pileser I., are referred to as dwelling on the borders of Northern Syria and Cappadocia, and in Shalmaneser II. s time were still able to send 1000 warriors to the assistance of Bir idri (Benhadad) at Karkar (see MIZRAIM, % za, and cp CILICIA, 2, n. 2).

Now the only time when these two kingdoms (Hamath and Musri) would be dangerous or at least troublesome to the Syrians of Damascus would be that immediately preceding 854 B.C., while Shalmaneser was still occupied in Mesopotamia. The normal condition of these northern states was one of mutual jealousy ; but for a moment the presence of a common danger united them ; they combined, as we have seen, not without some beneficial results, at Karkar. 1

The siege of Samaria referred to in 2 K. 6/. was therefore not an event of the reign of Jehoram, nor (as Kue. Einl. 25, n. 12, and Ki. Hist. 2 277, main tain) of that of Jehoahaz, but probably of that of Ahab. a

The narrative itself leaves the name of the king undetermined, though the mention of Elisha as contemporary with the siege shows that the circle in which this narrative originated did not suppose the king to have been Ahab.l Such a mistake would have been impossible in the royal annals, but was not so in a tradition told and retold often before it was committed to writing.

1 See Hommel, GBA 610, n. 3 ; Winckler, A T Unters. 172 ; (7/1 151 ./C; M Curdy, Hist. Prcph. Man. 1409; and cp Schrader, KGF 254 ff. The view of Wellhausen (7/287) th at the Hittites and the Egyptians are mentioned by mistake for the Assyrians, must therefore be abandoned. (Since this article was written the above view of Q isD ^ as been adopted also by Benz. and Ki.)

2 Thus we have a duplicate tradition of the siege (i K. 20 1-22, and 2 K. 6 24-7).

3. Expedition against Moab.[edit]

We now return to Jehoram's expedition against Moab. The narrative which describes it is not taken from the annals ; like that of the siege of Samaria, it proceeds from popular tradition. It is possible enough that Elisha was consulted on the occasion ; but some of the details present a suspicious resemblance to those of the departure of Ahab for Ramoth-gilead (cp 2 K. 3ii/. with i K. 227-9), though at the same time there is a difference, for Elisha receives from Jehoram much more respect than Micaiah receives from Ahab. There is also one clearly inaccurate historical statement. There can have been no king of Edom at this period to accompany Jehoram and Jehoshaphat (see i K. 22 [47] 48 /. , and cp 2 K. 8 20 ; see also EDOM, 7). That the Israelites really adopted the means of getting water described in 2 K. 3i6/. 20, it would be rash to deny ; their leaders were doubtless as well acquainted with the ground as modern travellers (see OTJC^ 147, and cp ELISHA, 5).

4. Mesha's sacrifice.[edit]

The account of the havoc wrought by the invaders is trustworthy (see KIR-HARESETH). Nor is it clear why Winckler ((7/1207) should doubt the historicity of Mesha's sacrifice of his firstborn (2K. 2:27). The plague or some other physical calamity which befell Israel at the close of the expedition would perpetuate the memory of the awful sacrifice which preceded it. The original tradition appears to have stated that this calamity was caused by the wrath of the god of Moab at the invasion. 2 Israel's courage ebbed away, while Mesha's desperate act inspired the besieged with religious enthusiasm. They sallied from the fortress and drove the Israelites away. The honour of Moab and of Mesha was saved.

1 There is apparently a confusion between Elijah and Elisha, as in 2 K. 8 13 9 i-io. See ELISHA, 5.

2 The text in its present form simply states that there was a great outbreak of divine wrath (^"IS *]-j3) against Israel. The sense of this is clear, for except in Eccles. 5 17 [16] (if the text be correct) and Esth. 1 18 1^2 is always used of divine anger ; but which god is referred to ? We must clearly distinguish between the original tradition and the narrative in its present form. The contemporary Jews may possibly enough (cp i S. 26 19) have said that Chemosh, the god of Moab, had hitherto been wroth with his people (cp inscription of Mesha, /. 5), but that now he turned his indignation against the invaders of his land. The author of the narrative in its present form, however, certainly thought that the God of Israel had the supreme power even in the land of Moab (see 2 K. 3 16-18). His natural impulse was to attribute to Yahwe the calamity which marred the success of the Israelites, and yet how could Yahwe have turned suddenly against Israel? He therefore says quite vaguely that divine wrath fell upon Israel, without mentioning the name of Yahwe. The original tradition may have said CHCD JsVp fj!Jj5, wrath from the presence of Chemosh. That the wrath of Chemosh is meant is admitted by Berthean, Bit. -lex. (Schenkel), 4 231^, Stade, GVI 1 430 535; H. Schultz, AT TheoH*}, 174; Smend, A T Rel.-gesch. in. Wellhausen cautiously (Prol.Pi 23^) describes this view as possible, which points in the direction of such a theory as is adopted here. The language of the text is vague ; this vagueness has to be accounted for. Klostermann's view (Saw. u. KSn. 400^) is at once too complicated and too arbitrary to be discussed here. The best conservative treatment of the question is in Kcih. Bibl. Gesch. 3 335, n. 5.

5. Gilead.[edit]

The cloud which hovered over Syria at this time was favourable to another warlike project of Jehoram - the recovery of the Gileadite cities for which Ahab had so bravely, but so vainly, fought. So the king of Israel summons his kinsman Ahaziah of Judah to attend him, as Jehoshaphat had attended him before, on the field of battle. Jehoram is wounded, and returns home to Jezreel, and Ahaziah goes to visit him. Thus Jehu ben Nimshi is left alone in command of the troops. How he is encouraged to seize the crown, is told elsewhere (JEHU, i). Pierced by Jehu's arrow Jehoram falls.

2. Son of Jehoshaphat by Athaliah, and king of Judah (851-843 B.C.), 2 K. 816-24. A fragment of the royal annals tells us that in his reign the Edomites revolted from Judah, and chose themselves a king. Jehoram, however, seems to have had even less success against Edom than his Israelitish namesake had against Moab. Until the close of the campaign the N. Israelites appear to have had the advantage over Mesha ; but of the southern Jehoram we are told (so far as the text can be understood) that he had the greatest difficulty in cutting his way by night through the Edomites who had sur rounded him, and saving his life with a faithful few. The greater part of his army ( the people, as 28. 18i-8) had fled. Libnah, probably a Canaanitish city annexed to Judah, revolted at the same time.

Whether any grains of historical fact can be gleaned from the narrative of the Chronicler (2 Ch. 21) is more than doubtful. The temptation to enrich an empty reign with didactic details was especially strong in the present instance, Jehoram being the representative in Judah of the dangerous innovating religious policy of Ahab (2 K. 8 is). A writer who was capable of invent ing (or even of accepting without criticism) a letter from Elijah to Jehoram simply to enhance the king s guilt, cannot safely be followed even in such comparative trifles as the illness which, he says, preceded Jehoram s death. To accuse Jehoram of open ing his reign with a massacre (cp ATHALIAH, i), and to burden the history with something like a repetition of the supposed invasion of Zerah (so Smith, DBV) ; Koh. Bibl. Gesch. 8339- 344 ; Klost. Gl /203) is therefore scarcely to be called critical. See Kue. Einl. 31, n. 3, and cp Bennett, Chronicles, 393-398.

3. A priest, temp. Jehoshaphat, 2 Ch. 17 8 (iu>pap [B]).

T. K. C.


(Dl^ liT), 2Ch.22n. See JEHOSHEBA.


(BBtpiV, 36, Yahwe judges, cp -irVtDD^, etc., and see JOSHAPHAT, also DAN i. , i ; ia>c&4>&9 or iooc&(t>(Vr [BAL ; in 2 Ch. always -<yr])-

i. King of Judah (i K. 152 4 222^; 2 K. ?>iff. 2 Ch. \1\ff.}. Probably his accession is to be placed in the eleventh year of Omri, not in the sixth year of Ahab. 1 Of the latter king he was in all proba bility a vassal (see AHAB, 7, n. 3). Repeatedly (i K. 224 2 K. 87) he takes the field with the king of Israel ; his visit to Ahab in Samaria (i K. 222) is no doubt a compulsory one, connected with the campaign against the Aramaeans in the N. of Gilead. The marriage of his heir Jehoram with Ahab s daughter ATHALIAH (q.v. ), was also a political necessity; as a vassal, Jehoshaphat took this means of lightening his burden. Nor can he protest when Ahab puts him in a false position by disguising himself as a common soldier while Jehoshaphat retains his royal insignia (i K. 2230). The compiler of Kings gives him a good character for piety. His piety, however, whatever it was, did not blind him to the necessity for national progress in national things. His attempt to open direct communication with the gold-country OPHIR (q.v. ) is thus described in i K. 2247-49. (The passage is not so obscure as it has been thought, but needs emendation ; it is an old coin needing to be purified from its rust. )

And he had mariners in Nesib-edom, those that wield the oar [in] ships of Tarshish, [and they undertook] to go to Ophir for gold, but they went not, for the ships were wrecked in Nesib-edom. Then Ahaziah b. Ahab said to Jehoshaphat, " Let my servants go to sea with thy servants." But Jehoshaphat consented not. 2

How the Chronicler represents these facts is told elsewhere (CHRONICLES, 8 a). The same writer omits to mention the war against Moab in which Jehoshaphat did vassal's service to Jehoram (2 K. 3 ; see JEHORAM, i), and substitutes the strange narrative (2 Ch. 20 ; see CHRONICLES, 8/>) of the pious king s deliverance from Moab, Edom, and Ammon, which is a romantic version ( but with much geographical precision ; see NEGEB) of the tradition recorded in 2 K. 3, and only valuable (i) from its geographical details, and (2) as an illustration of levitical religion in the third century B.C. On the reputed tribute of the Philistines and Arabians (2Ch. 17") see ARABIA, 3, PHILIS TINES ; see also below, JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF.

2. b. Ahilud or rather Ahimelech (see AHILUD), David s vizier (T31E); 28.816 (iwtrou/) [A], 2024, vafav [L], i K.43 i Ch. 1815). See RECORDER.

3. b. Paruah, Solomon s prefect in ISSACHAK [ 4] (i K. 417 [BL oin. ; replaced after i . 19, where iaxi<ra</>aT [L]).

4. b. Nimshi, father of JEHU, i. (2 K.02 14.) Cp ISSACHAR, 4.

T. K. C.

1 The account in i K. 2241-50 is given by BL between i K.lt>28 and 29 with some omissions and with a different chronological statement (viz. that adopted above), f (but not L)also renders the full Hebrew text of i K. 2241-46 (but not 47-50, which A, however, gives).

2 The received text is supposed to state that although it (Edom) had a king, yet he was merely a nominee of the king of Judah. This cannot be right. The text has, There was no king in Edom a prefect king Jehoshaphat. Following hints of <B, Stade and Ki. read thus, In Edom there was (then) no king, [but] the prefect (or, officer) of king Jehoshaphat built, etc. This is not at all natural. The key is furnished by Ezek. 2729; OilN 3"!i},lVesi6-edi>tH, Column of (the god) Edom, we must hold to be the true name of the miscalled Ezion-geber.


(pDl> DBt irp), or rather The Valley (called) Jehosha- phat," the name of the place of judgment for all nations (Joel 3 [4]2i2f). If correctly read, it is the coinage of the prophetic writer himself ; it means Yahwe judges, for there will I sit to judge all the nations round about (v. 12 ; similarly v. 2 in the Hebrew). Had the writer any definite geographical site in view? Some have thought of the valley of BERACHAH (ronapDi;, aCh. 2026), where Jehoshaphat is said to have gained a victory ; but surely Jerusalem, not Tekoa, is to witness the judgment. Others prefer the valley of KlDRON (q.v. , 2), where there appears to have been a common graveyard in pre-exilic times (2 K. 236), and where both Jews and Moslems still bury their dead in anticipation of the judgment. The tradition, however, connecting this valley with Joel s prophecy can be traced no earlier than the fourth century A. D. (see Eus. and Jen OSIlSZg 113 13), and has no authority ; besides, the Kidron valley is called ^m, ndhal, not ppjj, emek. In v. 14 Joel gives another descriptive name pnnn pDJ7. EV valley of decision." It might seem that he was thinking of Is. 2821/1, where destruction is threatened to the whole earth (or, land) in terms reminding us of Joel s second phrase, and it is said that Yahwe will arise for judgment as on Mt. Perazim, and as in the valley (pcjn) by Gibeon. Isaiah obviously refers here to the valley (ppy) of REPHAIM (q.v.), SW. of Jerusalem, which was for him the typical valley of judgment. It is not impossible that Joel refers to the same site (but cp Zech. 144). Elsewhere, however (Crit. Bib.), it is argued that the same corruption has occurred in both passages, and that the obscure phrases valley of Jehoshaphat and valley of decision (?) (or, of threshing, Geneva English Bible, AV m ?-, Calv. , Credner) should be read valley of judgment" (BSB SH) and valley of judicial righteousness."

For valley of Jehoshaphat B ^ A Q gives rijv xoiAaSa iaxra^ar, Theod. TTJI> \<apo.v nrjs (cptVews ; Tg. w>-\ ji<?3 IB p- Thus Theod. and Tg. favour EStJ D,"!- For valley of decision (?) has TJJ KoiAaSt [-Ajj {<*] Tiijs 8iK?)s i.e. , np~l!>n, but Theod. repeats T^s Kpio-ews.

A learned (unpublished) Index of Passages bearing on the topography of Jerusalem by A. B. M Grigor ( 96) summarises the traditional statements on the valley of Jehoshaphat. The Pilgrim of Bordeaux (333 A.D.) believed that this valley was to the left of those going from Jerusalem to the gate which is against the E. , that they may ascend Mt. Olivet. Antoninus Martyr uses the term valley of Gethsemane as synonymous with valley of Jehoshaphat. Willibald says that it was near Jerusalem on the eastern side. Adamnan also knows of a tower of Jehoshaphat in the same valley, not far from the Church of St. Mary. Against all this, and much more of the same kind, we may put the statement of Midrash Tillim, 'A valley called Jehoshaphat does not exist" (Neub. Geogr. 51). T. K. C.


(inB>irV, probably for M>i?V, Jehoshua ; cp ELISHEBA ; but cp 33 ; icoc&Bee [B*AL], looc&BeG [B a b (6 superscr. )]) or JEHOSHABEATH (ruqenrv, iwc&Bee [BL], icocABee [A]), apparently an error produced by the following J"Q (so also Gray HPN 285; cp <S Ex. 623, where the same error appears, and ELISABETH), daughter of Joram, sister of Ahaziah, and wife of Jehoiada, who saved the life of her royal nephew Joash (2 K. 11 2 2 Ch. 22 n). See ATHALIAH, JOASH. T. K. c.


(WJnrP), Nu. 13 16, and Jehoshuah, i Ch. 7 27, RV JOSHUA [f.w.J


(njrP), Gen. 2 4 , etc. See NAMES, 109 ff.


(HKT niiT, Kypioc [e]iACN [ADL]), or rather Yahwe-yir e, the name given by Abraham to the place on which he had offered up a ram instead of his son (Gen. 22 14). In view of v. 8, it should mean 'Yahwe selects' ; but the next words are, according to the traditional text, 'Hence it is even yet said, In the mountain where Yahwe appears', as if this were a popular saying (cp lOg). We are thus face to face with an inconsistency. Probably the editor of JE, who (see ISAAC, 2) interfered with the original story of the Elohist, vocalised differently, so as to read Yahwe-yera e, Yahwe appears (on this spot). His object is manifest from 2 Ch. 5 i , where the site of Solomon s temple is said to have been on Mt. Moriah (mien ina). where [Yahwe] appeared (nN"i:) unto David his father. The Elohist, however, must have written El-yir e, and have explained the name as (the place which) God selects," or generally, God selects (place, victim, etc., as it pleases him). Cp MORIAH.

What the Elohist has given us cannot, however, be the original story. Using the reinterpreted story of Beer-lahai-roi as a key (see ISAAC, 2), we see that it is the same sacred spot, called properly Beer-Jerahmeel (or Jerahmeeli), which is here referred to. To suit the new Hebrew story of the divine pro hibition of human sacrifice, the name Jerahmeel was altered into El-jireh ( God provides ). In v. 14 we should probably read, for "1H3, in the mountain, "1N2, well i.e., according as it is still the custom to say Beer-jireh-el. The latter name was an edifying alteration of Jerahmeel. [,iNT Hl.T, the first time KV/HOS e dev, the second (ei> T<U opet) Kiipios u^iflj). Pesh. , Vet. Lat. , and (after it) Vg., represent the Kal both times, and agree in pre supposing 1H3.] T. K. C.


C DrmiT, KYPIOC K<yr&ct>YrH AAOy, Domimts exaltatio mea), the name given to the altar built after the defeat of Amalek at Rephidim, Ex. 17 15. EV renders the 'Lord (is) my banner," which is in fact the usual explanation. Most compare Ps. 206 [5], and paraphrase, 'We fight in reliance on Yahwe'. The paraphrase, however, is not natural, and Ps. 20s [6] is corrupt (see ENSIGNS, i b, col. 1299).

Vg. imagines a derivation from NEO ; apparently reads DUO. Probably (@ is right ; the Pasek before S3 may indicate that the text is doubtful. Verse 16 is equally uncertain (on EV see HAND, V). An inspection of the Hebrew letters suggests that both CD Sy an d ncnSo are probably miswritten for p^oy. When the second p^CJ? had become corrupted into nDTPDi pTDJD fflit*7 had to be inserted to make sense. "Tl T1D ^n unusual phrase) should probably be Q TS"13> an d T 3 should be T3il 3-

The whole passage should probably run thus : 'And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it "Yahwe is my refuge" ; he said, Yahwe has put Amalek to flight in Rephidim' (crTETO p^OjrnK TJn 3). On the name Amalek see JERAHMEEL, 4. T. K. C.


(D&C ; mm, GIRHNH Kypioy [BA], KYP- eip. [L] ; Domini pax), the name of Gideon's altar at Ophrah, Judg. 624.! The name probably commemorated the traditional victory of Gideon, though the narrative as it stands seems to connect it with a phrase ascribed to "Yahwe Peace to thee" ( = 'It is well with thee' ). Cp, however, Moore, Judges, 189. T. K. C.


p3jirp, Yahwe gives, 27 ; ICOZA- BAA [BAL]). See JOZABAD.

i. b. Shomer, one of the murderers of Joash, 2 K. 12 21 [22] (if0ou0 [BAL]); in 2 Ch. 24 2 6/ (fo>i0e [B], iu>x/3e6 [A], -(9 [L]), where the text is otherwise corrupt (cp especially P), he is called b. Shimrith a Moabitess (MT, L) O r Moabite (BA).

2. A Benjamite chief under Jehoshaphat, 2Ch. 17 18.

3. b. Obed-edom, i Ch. 2t> 4 (tu>aj3a0 [B]).


(Pl/in 1 ;, 36, 57 [but V in Ezra-Neh.], God is righteous, cp rrpns ; icoceAeK [BXAQFL]), EV JOZADAK in Ezra-Neh. ; AV JOSEDECH in Hagg. , Zech. The father of JESHUA \q.v. , ii. , 5] the high priest (Hag. 1 i, etc. , Zech. 6 n Ezra 3 2 5 2 10 18 Neh. 1226, cp i Esd. 5 48 56 6 2 9 19 and Ecclus. 49 12 [JOSEDEC, RV JOSEDEK]). In i Ch. 6 n/. [5 4c/ iw<ra5a.K, B] he is the son of Seraiah b. Azariah (see GENEALOGIES i. , 7 [iv.]) ; cp i Esd. 5s, and see SERAIAH, 7.


(XliT, 38, perhaps for NirnrV, 'Yahwe is he', unless we read [NjlilV ; cp W^V, MB" [cp Kon. Lehrg. 3489] ; in Ass. ia-u-a, [elioy [BL], [e]ioy or [elmoy [ A D-

1. ben Jehoshaphat ben Nimshi, a king of Israel, aK. 9/. Hos. I 4 iou5a [BAQ], 2 Ch. 228 (841-815 B.C. ; see CHRONOLOGY, 28 34 /, and ^ y ^.

1. Accession.[edit]

Originally a member of Ahab's bodyguard, 1 he rose to the position of general under Jehoram, and was entrusted by him with the protection of the border city of RAMOTH-GILEAD (or rather, perhaps, Ramath-Salhad), menaced by the Aramaean army. Jehoram was at the time away in Jezreel, in valided, and Jehu seized the opportunity of placing himself on the throne.

How the conspiracy was described by the historian we cannot tell ; the editor has substituted an account derived from a cycle of narratives shaped by disciples of Elisha. It is, of course, not improbable that ELISHA 2 [q.v., 5] favoured a change of dynasty ; the editor may have justly preferred the dramatic scene in the Elisha narrative to the briefer account of the historian. The consequence of this editorial operation is that we do not know for whom Jehu's speech in 2 K. i) 15/1 is intended. Probably, however, he addresses his chief supporters in the army, whose existence is implied by the word ")B r)*l, he bound himself (with others) in i>. 140..$

The story of the slaughter of king Jehoram and his royal kinsman and vassal Ahaziah need not be related at length. Jehu poses as the champion of true Israelitish manners, and justifies his treatment of Jehoram as an act of vengeance for the judicial murder of Naboth, contemplated by the solemn declaration of Elijah. Ahaziah's race for life is referred to elsewhere (see BETH-HAGGAN ; GUR). The murder of JEZEBEL [?. .] was justified on similar grounds. That of the sons of Ahab, or rather (see 2 K. 102/. ) of Jehoram, 4 however, is simply the measure constantly taken by Oriental usurpers for their own security.

The opening words of 2 K. 10 i, and also seventy persons in v, 6b are incorrect glosses ; the number seventy in v. 7 is made up by including all the sons of the king i.e., all the members of the royal family, as well as the young children of Joram. Seventy, however, is not to be taken literally ; a similar massacre of seventy relatives of the king is mentioned in a north Syrian inscription. 8

1 On the question of Jehu's origin, see ISSACHAR, 4.

2 Another cycle of stories represented Elijah as the prophet who favoured Jehu s insurrection (i K. 10 16, TJIOU [A]).

A This form occurs elsewhere only in aCh. 24 25/T, of the parties to a conspiracy.

  • See Sta. ZATW, 85, p. 275. The rulers of Jezreel (v. i)

must also be wrong. <B L and Vg. presuppose the reading SKI Tyrt Hj-^N, to the officials of the city, and to (Keil, Bahr, Klo., Benz., Ki.). Cp v. 5.

6 See the Zenjirli inscription of Panammu, i, 3.

6 Sta. ZA TIV, 85, p. 276.

2. Acts of cruelty.[edit]

Two further acts of butchery are recorded. In the first, the victims are forty-two kinsmen of King Ahaziah who are on their way to visit the Israelite princes in Samaria(cp 10 12). The passage is, however, evidently in a wrong connection ; 6 the contents belong to the revolution period which is just over. The princes must have encountered Jehu to the S. of Samaria, whereas Jehu, according to 10 12, should be on his way from Jezreel in the N. to Samaria. It is not impossible that the murder may have been committed within the border of Judah, and stand in connection with an attempt on the part of Jehu to incorporate Judah, which in Ahab s time had already been reduced to vassalage, in a great Israelitish kingdom, the centre of which would be in Samaria. 1 This idea is confirmed by the co-operation which Jehu appears to have received on religious grounds from JONADAB the Rechabite ; the seats of the Rechabites were surely not in the N.but in the S. of Judah.

It is not much help to say that the story of Jonadab is in this connection improbable (Benz.). That the account of Jehu's meeting with Jonadab in 2 K. 10 15 f. is complete, no one would assert ; and the implied view of the editor, that Jonadab rode with Jehu in his chariot into Samaria with the object of witness ing Jehu s destruction of the devotees of Baal is in the highest degree improbable. Such a course would have put all the adherents of Baal worship on their guard, and nullified Jehu's reputation for subtilty. 2 But we cannot get rid of Rechabite co-operation altogether.

The second massacre is on a vaster scale ; it is nothing less than the extermination of the prophets, priests, and devotees of Baal, and the subtilty of Jehu consists in this that he makes the priests and prophets the instruments of the ruin of their religion. The persons who sanctified a solemn assembly for Baal (2 K. 1020 RV), were not the courtiers of Jehu but Baal s prophets and priests (v. 19, where all his worshippers is an interpolation). 3 So all the Baal worshippers in the land were collected in the courts, or perhaps in the liskah or hall 4 of the temple (presum ably a large one) which Ahab had built in Samaria (i K. 1632). How the stern warriors of Jehu slew the robed devotees, hurled the sacred objects to the ground, pressed into the sanctuary itself, took thence the sacred pillar of Baal and broke it in pieces, pulled down the altar 5 (cp i K. 1632/1 ), and finally the temple itself, is graphically told in 2 K. 1018-27. How far it is really historical we can hardly say. The fact at any rate is certain that in the narrator s time Ahab s temple lay in ruins, and that tradition connected this with the name of the cruel king Jehu. It also appears likely enough that Jehu was not originally known as a strict wor shipper of Yahwe ; the hypocritical words, Ahab served Baal a little, but Jehu shall serve him much, would have had no effect if Jehu had been a person like Jona dab the Rechabite. It is perfectly conceivable that a leading prophet like Elisha may have selected Jehu as the substitute for the religiously worthless Jehoram, 6 simply on the ground of his usefulness, not for any good moral qualities which he supposed Jehu to possess (cp i K. 19 17). Jehu, on his side, accepted the support of Elisha, and adopted the prophetic programme, simply because it was convenient so to do. The great prophet Hosea saw through him, and implies that many of his contemporaries passed the same moral condemnation on the bloodshed of Jezreel (Hos. 14). Unhappily 2 K. 16:30 (Ro) expresses a very different judgment.

1 Wi. Gesch. 1 85 ; cp 165, 177.

2 The words and Jehonadab ben Rechab in v. 23 are, of course, a late insertion.

3 So Klostermann, Benzinger, Kittel.

4 The correction of vestry into hall (see VESTRY) is a great gain to the sense.

6 The critical emendations of the text are nearly all due to Klostermann. Thus, for to the city of the House of Baal we should read, even to the sanctuary (TinIV, L <> TOU vaoC) ; for and the guard and the captains cast (them) out, hurled to the ground the Asherim ("!? : K? T!* ^ T- 1 -) for pillars (HUSO), pillar (raifO ; so (B L ; omit JV3) ; for pillar (v. 27), altar (najD, so Benz.). To these add 13B ! ;], and they broke it in pieces (v. 26) for n^SI^ l, and they burned it (Che.). Ewald (GK/3 572, n. 2) seeks to defend ^iQrrrra Ti 1 , the city of the house of Baal, but admits that the Holy of Holies is what is meant. The Holy of Holies should be T^- : -\ fell out owing to the preceding -|. Benz. and Ki. also find VT1 attractive, but make no objection to rmonD (v. 27, EV a draught house ). If, however, the emendations of similar read ings elsewhere (cp DOVE S DUNG) are in the highest degree probable, such conservatism is injudicious. The present writer has proposed n unnc (Ezek. 29 12). Perhaps the true reading was deliberately altered.

6 It is true that, according to 2 K. 32(Rt>), Jehoram put away the pillar (BL, Klo. " pillars ")of Baal that his father had made. But in v. 13 Elisha expresses the utmost contempt for that king.

3. His policy.[edit]

The view adopted above, that Jehu's main political object was to subjugate Judah, is supported by a consideration of his relation to Syria (Damascus). He was fighting against the Aramaeans when the chance was offered him of seizing the crown, and the history of the reign of Ahab warned him of his constant danger from Damascus. The one sure date in his reign is his payment of tribute to Shalmaneser II. in 842 B.C., which we may probably place immediately after the deeds related in 2K..9/. In this year Shalmaneser once more attacked Syria, whose king, Hazael, he ultimately besieged in Damascus ; Tyre and Sidon, and Yaua (Jehu) of Bit-Humri purchased the favour of the monarch by rich gifts 1 (see Ball, Light from the East, i66/).

The relief thus gained by Jehu was, however, only temporary. Damascus was not taken by the Assyrians, and after 839 B.C. Syria had a long period of rest. It immediately resumed the offensive against Israel. In those days, says an extract from the annals, Yahwe began to loathe 2 Israel, and Hazael smote them in all Israel s borders, from Aroer which is by the valley of the Arnon to Gilead and Bashan (2 K. 1032). 3 It was, not improbably, at this troublous period that Jericho was fortified as a protection for the Jordan valley. Jehu, not an unknown HIEL, is probably the name of the builder of the fortifications, and, somewhat as Mesha, king of Moab, sacrificed his first-born son to Chemosh when in danger from the Israelites, he sacrificed (in a peculiar way) his eldest son when he laid the foundations, and his youngest when he set up the gates. This is no doubt only a conjecture, but no other adequate explanation of i K. 1634 appears to have been offered. Jehu s religion is elsewhere represented by the historian as of a rather low type (2K. lO^id). See HIEL, where C. Niebuhr s suggestion is adopted that i K. 1634 originally stood after 2 K. 1033.

2. b. Hanani, a prophet, temp. Baasha and Jehoshaphat, who, according to the Chronicler, wrote a history of his time (i K. l(i i 7 12 2 Ch. 19 2 20 34, tijcrov [B]).

3. b. Obed, a Jerahmeelite (i Ch. 238, ii}<rovv, i)(rovs 4 [B]).

4. b. Joshibiah, a Simeonite (i Ch. 435 bis, icoijA [BAL], and Ko.1 OUTOS z.i?., Nini [B*]).

5. An Anathothite, one of David s warriors (i Ch. 12 3, ir)ov\ [BNA], irjovS [L]). See DAVID, n a (iii.). s readings may point to an original ^Nin , Yah is El, cp (4) above ; or to -iinin i C P "lirV3N> ar >d see ABIHUD. T. K. C.

1 In the legend on tne Black Obelisk Jehu is called son of Humri an inaccuracy which need not surprise us ; cp, how ever, ISSACHAR, 4.

2 For nisp?i <5 crvy/coTrreiv, EV to cut short , read probably Ppi? (Vg. to-deri), with KIo., Gra. Tg., however, ^Sp? (so Hitz., Then., Kau., Benz., Ki.).

3 A later scribe has prefixed a second specificaticn from the Jordan eastward, all the land of Gilead, the Gadites, the Reubenites, and the Manassites. Gilead as a designation of the whole of the trans-Jordanic territory is late (Benz.).

4 The readings u\<rmi[y], -ous, are probably corruptions in the Greek for tijou.


(Him Kt. i.e., Yahbah, 53; 'he [God] hides', cp ELIAHBA, HABAIAH ; rt21"P Kr. i.e., and HUBBAH, cp ABUBUS), a name in a genealogy of ASHER (y.v., 4 ii., and note), i Ch. 7 34 (icai co/3a0 [B, i.e., Hobab], Kal o/3a [A], Kal lajSo. [L]).


, 35, Yahwe is mighty 1 (?) ; Gray, HPN 152, n. i, regards Tfyfff as a derivative from ^3% Giidemann, Der Ahnen-cultus, 185, n. 2, maintains the composition with nin ; iwax aA [BAQ] or, shortened, as in ch. 38, JUCAL (73V), one of Zedekiah s courtiers (Jer. 37 3 : itaaxa-x [ N *L "X a s [c.a AQ] ; 38 i : wa X aA [B*], auaxas []).


(-m ; ACCOP [B?], loyG [A], - Y A [L]), a city of Dan mentioned before BENE BERAK (Josh. 19 45).

Doubtless the modern Yahudiyeh, about three miles E. of Ibn Ibrak, in the district of Lydda, about eight miles E. from Jaffa.


H-liT, 76 ; Jew ; cp JUDITH).

An officer in close relation to the princes who took Jeremiah's roll into consideration before it was read (by the same Jehudi) to Jehoiakim (Jer. 8614: lovSei [A], BN om. ; v. 23 uaSeiv [A]; Vg. ludt). His great-grandfather was named CUSHI [$r.p.]; perhaps Jehudi had lately been admitted as a naturalised Jew on the principle of Dt. 23 8/T (Hitzig).


or rather, as in RV, the Jewess (rPTlTn), apparently one of the wives of MERED [^.i .] (i T Ch. 4i8t; A. A eiA [B], iAi<\ [A], loyA&iA [L]). The passage relating to Mered and his wives (?) is disfigured by several corruptions. Possibly Ha-jehudijah (so RV m -) is a faulty reading for Hodiah (cp BITHIAH, JAHDAI). The children of the Jewess are connected with the places Gedor, Soco, and Zanoah (see JERED, JEKUTHIEL, SOCOH).


( pfrOn 1 Kt., ^{On* Kr. ; ,emA [BAL]; JAHIEL) ; so RV, but AV JEHIEL. A Levite of the guild of Heman (2 Ch. 29 ut). The name reminds us of Vx inD (see MEHUJAEL), but though we might read Jehaw-el i.e. , God (El) giveth life, the name is more probably a corruption of Jerahmeel (cp JEHALLELEL).

Apart from the indications of Jerahmeelite connections in these genealogies we might compare the Phoenician name Jehaw-melek, Melek giveth life C/6 l no. 1 1. 5), and parallel As syrian and Babylonian names, such as Asur-uballit ( Asur giveth life ), Bil-uballit, Samas-uballit, Sin-muballit (KP(-) 2 206, 4 112 f. ; Winckler, GBA 59). T. K. C.


(Ellty, i Ch. 839, RV JEUSH \_q.v., 3].


(VgTO^ ; Kt. ^NW in Nos. 2, 3, 6, and 7 ; ieiHA[BNAL], cp JEUEL).

1. A Reubenite, i Ch. 5 7 (tcor/A [BAL]). See REUBEN.

2. AV JEHIEL, father of Gibeon : i Ch. 935. (ii)A [B*], ie>)A [N]). The name seems to be corrupt. It will not do to read ?N 3N, though Abiel in i S. 9 i is the father of Kish (which might seem to suit 11. 36), for Becher would have a prior claim, and Gibeah (not Gibeon) was the home of the Bicrites (see GIBEAH, i). Read perhaps 7NJTT, Jeriael, and supply the same name in i Ch. 82g(RV Jeiel). JEDIAEL \q.v.} was the brother of Becher. See GIBEON, 3. (Jeriael = Jerahmeel.)

3. AV JEHIEL, one of David s heroes: i Ch. 1144 (icta [B], tea [{<], iei.V)A. [L]).

4. A doorkeeper for the ark : i Ch. 15 18 (ieeir)A [B]).

5. Ancestor of Jahaziel, an Asaphite Levite : 2 Ch. 20 14 (<fAeai)A. [B], eAfT)A [A]).

6. One of Uzziah s scribes (TS lDn) ; 2 Ch. 26 n.

7. RV JEUEL, a Levite of the family of Elizaphan, temp. Hezekiah : 2 Ch. 29 13 (eiujA [B]).i

8. A chief of the Levites, temp. Uzziah : 2 Ch. 35 9 (i<or)A [B], iojA [L]). In i Esd. lg ox)Ao [BA*?] oo)Aos [A? A*?], AV OCHIEL, RV OCHIELUS.

9. RV JEUEL, head of a father s house in a post-exilic list: EzraS 13 (eueia [B], eu;A [Avid.]). I n i Esd. 839 JEUEL AV and RV (yeovTjA [B], leourjA [A]).

10. A layman who joined in the league against alien marriages : Ezra 1043 (")A [B], teeiTjA [A], ecijA [L]).

T. K. C.

1 With regard to nos. 4, 5, 7 it may be observed that both Elizaphan and the doorkeepers were ascribed to Kehath, the latter through Korah ; and that Asaph himself, who appears as a Gershonite, seems to have been at one time a Korahite ; see further GENEALOGIES i., 7.


), Neh. 11 25. See KABZEEL.


( Drpp\ the [divine] kinsman avenges ; see JOKMEAM, and 31. The vowels are untrustworthy. In another form n , ink, takes the place of QJ;, dm; see <B, and JEKAMIAH), a Levite, son of Hebron (i Ch. 23 19 : nce/nios [BA] ; 2423, lOKOft [B], KKf^ia [A] ; both places, touca^ta? [L]). See GENEALOGIHS i., 7 [v.].


(iTTpi^, see JEKAMEAM).

1. b. Shallum, a descendant of JARHA [y.z>.], i Ch. 241 (lex^a? [B], ceKOiuuas [A], ta*e,i. [L]).

2. AV JECAMIAH, one of the sons of king Jeconiah (i Ch. 3 18, tcKevia [BA a ], -fita [L], and see Be. ad loc.).


(Wl1p> ; xermA [B], leKGimA [A* see Sw. ], ie4>6iHA [L]), the name given to the father, or founder, of the town of Zanoah in the genealogical lists of Judah (i Ch. 4i8). Gesenius explains it piety towards God (cp JAKEH) ; similarly the Targum on Chronicles ( trust in God ), regarding it as a title of Moses ; but evidently it is closely related to JOKTHEEL (q.v. ), which like Zanoah was the name of a Judahite town. Probably both Jekuthiel and Joktheel are mis-written for Eltekeh nnVN. T. K. c.


RV Jemimah (HCW), the name of Job's eldest daughter (Job 42i4f).

Learning has not succeeded in accounting for this name. LXX (<jiu.e pa) and Vg. (i/i t s) suggest derivation from or, 'day', out of which the rendering 'Diana' has even blossomed; moderns, but not Schultens, identify with Ar. yamamat 'dove', or (Del.) with yumemat, diminutive of yammat=yamamat. No theory is free from objection. When we remember, however, the frequency of certain textual corruptions, and the popularity of the Song of Songs, we cannot hesitate to read flO Sfl, 'the spotless' (cp nsn, Cant. 6269). Observe that D precedes.

T. K. C.


(ie/v\Nd^Msl [BA, perhaps accus. ?], -N&& [X c - a ], &MMA [K*]), a city on the coast of Palestine, between Ocina (Acco) and Azotus (Ashdod), which submitted to Holophernes (Judith 228). No doubt JABNEEL (i) is meant.

When the author of Judith wrote, Jamnia was still altogether a heathen city (cp 368); this is a fact of importance with reference to the theory of Volkmar, who regarded the Book of Judith as a reflection of the campaign of Trajan, A.D. 118. The book must be older than Johanan ben Zakkai, who transferred the Sanhedrin to Jamnia ; older too than Philo, who would not have described Jamnia as a heathen city (see JABNEEL ; and cp JUDITH, BOOK OF).


11 ), Gen. 46 10, EV "ff- NEMUEL (q.v.,


(nn?\ [God] opens [the womb], 54, 6l ; cp JIPHTHAH, JIPHTHAH-EL, PETHAHIAH ; le 4> eAe [ BAL D-

1. Critical problems.[edit]

As the text stands, a deliverer of the Israelites of Gilead from the Ammonites, and their sophet (EV ( judge ) or regent (Judg. 106-127; cp I S. 12n). The story is as deficient in unity as that of Gideon, and presents similar problems. Only through criticism can we arrive at a definite view of what was really told by the ancient Hebrews. The last narrator, as Kittel remarks (Hist. 2 89), has no certain knowledge of [Jephthah s] origin and his fortunes ; he has worked up what he received, but does not understand it aright.

The prevalent critical opinion is that the story comes from a single traditional narrative, but that a great inter polation has been made (11:12-28 [or 29]), compiled from JE's narrative in Nu. 20/^ According to Wellhausen (CffW, 228 f. ), this leaves nothing definite to be told of Jephthah except the anecdote of his sacrifice of his daughter ; this critic also regards 12:1-6 as a late appendix, based on a part of the story of Gideon (8:1-3). Moore (Judges, 283), also a believer in one source (cp JUDGES, 10), disputes the necessity of this unfavour able inference ; he finds more substance in Jephthah than does the great German critic.

Holzinger and Budde have struck out a new path for themselves, which still more decidedly than Moore's encourages the belief in a historical Jephthah. According to them, the existing Jephthah-story is derived from two in dependent sources (cp GIDEON). One of these (E) stated that the hero resided in Mizpah, made war on a foreign people which had done him some grievous injury, and gained the victory over them, but at the cost of his dearest possession his own flesh and blood : the other (J), that, though a Gileadite, he had become a freebooter on a foreign soil, and was commissioned by the Gileadites to avenge their wrongs on their oppressors, which he accomplished, though denied the help of the tribes W. of the Jordan (cp 122 and 1129). 12:1-6 also belongs to this source. In the strange mixture of refer ences to Moab and Ammon in 11:12-28 these critics also find evidence that there were two traditions respecting the people against which Jephthah waged war, one naming the Moabites, the other the Ammonites, traditions which R JE harmonised by the substitution of Ammon.

2. New theory.[edit]

Our course, however, in dealing with the existing story of Jephthah, must be somewhat different. Budde, with whom we may couple Frankenberg (Comp. d. dt. Richterb. 37 [ 95]), is no doubt right in recognising a discrepancy between the Jephthah of Judg. ll:1-11 and the Jephthah of the anecdote in 11:34-40. When, however, he attempts to trace out the two different narratives, he fails after advancing a few steps. Failure, indeed, as he himself sees, was inevitable. Literary criticism cannot solve the problems which meet us here. Even the steps forward which Budde hopes that he has taken are by no means secure. The method adopted here is that which is followed in the case of the kindred narratives of Gideon and of Laban and Jacob elsewhere (see GIDEON, GILEAD, 4). It endeavours to win back some parts of the two earlier stories which underlie the present narrative, not without some historical gain. The plausibility of the following restoration, the details of which have been so expressed as to minimise the need of a commentary, will, it is hoped, be manifest. Should any reader wish to substitute Jephthah for Jair in the first story, he is at liberty to do so. He will, however, lose what (if our readings are correct) appears to be the fullest tra ditional account of the origin of the HAVVOTH-JAIR [q.v. ]

Not improbably, we suggest, it is to JAIR (q.v.), as not only victorious over his foes, but the conqueror of the Havvoth-jair, that the first story was originally devoted. In Judg. 10 3-5 the account of this sephit is tantalisingly brief ; he is, what Wellhausen calls Jephthah , not a form but a shadow. The second story brings us face to face with the true Jephthah.

3. J : Real story of Jair.[edit]

I. Story of Jair. - It came to pass that the sons of Hauran made war against Gilead, 1 -and though the clansmen in different parts of the land withstood their oppression, it availed them not. Now there was at that time, in the land of Tubihi (see TOB), a valiant man, a Gileadite, Jair by name. 2 For some forgotten cause he had been banished from his country, and had become renowned, like David afterwards, as the leader of a band of freebooters. So the elders of Salhad 3 (the border city of Gilead), in their despair, went to this outlaw at Tubihi, and besought him to lead them against the men of Hauran, and, when he asked for his reward, a solemn promise was made to him before Yahwe at Mizpah (the sanctuary of Salhad, see MIZPAH) that if he came back victorious he should be the head of all the inhabitants of Gilead. Then Jair sent messengers to the king of Hauran, who said to him, Why hast thou come into the land of Israel? [Did not Laban, son of Hauran, make a solemn covenant with Israel, son of Isaac, not to pass beyond the border cities Salhad and Mizpah ? 4 ] Let Yahwe judge this day 5 between the sons of Israel and the sons of Hauran (1127$) ! But the king of Hauran hearkened not unto the words of Jair. And Yahwe delivered the men of Hauran into the hand of Jair, and he fell upon city after city, from Edrei as far as the approach to Salhad, and as far as the district of Maachah twenty cities. 6 So the sons of Hauran became subject to the sons of [Gilead]. 7 But the men of Ephraim were angry because Gilead had set up an independent sovereignty. In defence of the old tribal constitution they came to Mizpah 1 (12:1) and fought with Jair. But the battle went against them ; many of them fell, others fled to the fords of Jordan. But when the fugitives sought to pass over, their speech betrayed that they were of Ephraim, and their brethren the men of Gilead had no mercy on them. [And the cities which Jair took from the men of Hauran were called Havvoth-jair. 2 Afterwards they came into the possession of Geshur and Aram. 3 ] And Jair died and was buried in Mahanaim 4 (10s).

1 For |ioy (early error) read pin> a "d for |£% (editorial alteration) read -|j?Sj.

- For rtnp 1 (editorial alteration) read TN -

3 For ijpj (early error) read in^S (see GILEAU).

4 See Gen. 31 44-54, and cp GILEAU, 4 ; LABAN.

5 Read Ci ? nirt BEE" B lEC> with Bu.

6 Read n:j?o n ijn TV c"\cy ir (11:33).

7 Something like z>. 33, but with iySj for 7jnC"> nm*t have stood in the original story, to express the full result of the great victory. 7N1E". of course stands in connection with the late and incorrect insertion in n. 29. Jephthah (rather, Jair) made no attempt to get a levy of Manassites or (12 2) of Ephraimites.

4. E: Real story of Jephthah.[edit]

II. Story of Jeplithak. Now the men of Hauran greatly oppressed the men of Gilead, [and when Jephthah, a valiant Gileadite of Mizpah, with his clan, resisted them, they slew Jephthah's own brethren and many others also]. In the bitterness of his heart, and with settled purpose, Jephthah went to the sanctuary. There he vowed to Yahwe that whoever came out of the door of his house to meet him, when he returned safely from the sons of Hauran, should be Yahwe's, and that he would offer him up as a burnt offering. And Yahwe gave Jephthah the victory, and he returned home. But behold, he saw coming out to meet him, at the head of her maidens, with music and dancing, his own, his only child. He rent his garments and spoke, and the maiden answered as became a maiden of Israel. To the father it was a stunning blow ; but his daughter would not add to it by reproaches or complaints. For such a victory over the foes of her house she was content to yield up her life. But she asked and obtained a respite of two months that she might go upon the mountains 5 with her companions and bewail her maidenhood. After this Jephthah did to her what he had vowed to do ; she died a virgin. And it became the custom in Israel for women to devote four days in the year to bewailing 6 Jephthah's daughter. And Jephthah died, and was buried in his city, Salhad (127).

5. Comments.[edit]

The first of these stories (J), like those of Gideon and Jerubbaal, has suffered much transformation, owing to corruption of the text partly to the editor's want of comprehension of Hebrew antiquity. Whoever misread ly 1 ?}, Gilead, for in 1 ?^ Salhad, must have been unaware of the great part played by this border city in early Israelitish history, or he would surely have felt that a Gilead-story with no reference to Salhad could hardly be right. The alteration of Jair into Jephthah was deliberate ; it is perhaps a sign of the editor's deep interest in the fascinating story of Jephthah's daughter. He wanted to tell more about Jephthah, and robbed Jair to fill out the meagre tradition of Jephthah. At the same time he filled up gaps in the partly illegible narrative which lay before him. Thus to account for Jephthah's (Jair's) outlawry he made him a bastard driven from his home by his brothers, and in lieu of the illegible account of Jephthah's (Jair's) message to the king of Ammon (for so he misreads pin) he inserts a tedious historico-legal argument referring entirely to Moab, and therefore most inappropriate for a discussion with the king of Ammon. He also interpolates the central part of the touching story of Jephthah's daughter, so that the transition from Jephthah's, or rather Jair's, conquest of the twenty cities and the Ephraimite invasion is obscured. 1 Cp JAIR.

How much of the two stories is historical ? The border warfare between the Hauranites and the Gileadites. The temporary subjection of cities in Hauran to the Gileadites. The importance of Salhad and the citadel and sanctuary of Mizpah or Penuel (? see MIZPAH). The invasion of Gilead by the Ephraimites, which was an assertion of the rights of the tribal federation (see Wi. G/lsi, n. i). The offering up of a maiden as a sacrifice for Yahwe under great stress perhaps for the last time. On the Shibboleth incident no great stress can be laid. It is plausible in the extreme (see SHIBBOLETH) ; but a clever narrator might easily imagine it.

1 For nrDS read HBS3n. Cp Mez, Bibeldesjos. 17.

2 Possibly the uncertainty whether the HAVVOTH-JAIR (f-v.) were in Gilead or in Rashan arose from the corruption of Salhad into Gilead. The cities referred to became by conquest cities of Salhad, and Salhad was on the border of Bashan and Gilead. See next note.

3 See i Ch. 221-23, which originally stood with 7 14-19, where originally, it is probable, much was said of Salhad (ZELOPHEH AD).

4 In 10 5 read probably D:jnC3 for |iCjJ3. A Mahanaim not far to the SW. of Salhad seems to be meant (cp Gen. 322). CAMON (q.v.) is unknown. Probably there was no such place.

5 Budde (after van Doorninck) conjectures that <rrm is a mis placed gloss. Certainly EV s that I may departandgodown upon the mountains is impossible. The remedy is not difficult, when we remember the practice of the scribes. flTTl is a corruption of TVjni (end of verse), written too soon, and left uncorrected.

6 For ni-in 1 ? (11 40) read probably rim 1 ? (Gra.).

6. Jephthah's daughter.[edit]

We must not, however, pass over the annual mourning of the Israelitish women referred to in 11:40. There is no occas on to doubt that a great Gileadite once sacrificed his daughter to Yahwe. a There are good parallels for this, not only in OT passages (see SACRIFICE), but especially in an Arabian tradition mentioned by Lyall (Anc. Arabian Poetry, Introd. , p. xxxviii). Al-Mundhir had made a vow that on a certain day in each year he would sacrifice the first person he saw ; Abid [a poet] came in sight on the unlucky day, and was accord ingly killed, and the altar smeared with his blood. The sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter, however, seems to have been connected, at any rate, in later times, at Mizpah and probably elsewhe.re, with a ceremony which consisted originally in mourning for the death of a virgin goddess. Such a ceremony (which is analogous to the well-known mourning for TAMMUZ [g.v. ]) is attested by Porphyry and Pausanias as still performed in their time at Laodicea on the Phoenician coast, and as connected with the sacrifice of a stag (cp ISAAC, 4) which was a substitute for the more ancient sacrifice of a maiden. 3 The fact that the name of Jephthah's daughter was associated with such a celebration is of itself enough to refute the idea that she was not really sacrificed but only dedicated to perpetual virginity. This notion first appears, according to Moore, in the Kimchis (end of 1 2th cent. A. D. ); the older Jewish and Christian inter preters all take the words of 1 1 y^a in their natural sense. It may be noticed that Jephthah's daughter is not re ferred to in the NT ; Jephthah himself, however, is a 'hero' of faith (Heb. 11 32).

See, besides We. CH, I.e., and the commentaries of Moore and Budde, Sta. GVI lea; Kittel, Hist. 289-91 ; Frankenberg, Die Composition ties deuteron. Richterbuches, 35-38 ( 95) ; C. Niebuhr, Studicn, i. 222_/C ( 94) (this writer transfers the Shib boleth section to the story of Jerubbaal): Kohler, Bibl. Gesch. la 31, n. i (on the mythical theories of Goldziher and Grill).

T. K. C.


once AV Jephunne (n^, '[God] is brought back', 54; cp Palm. "OSDX ; ifffiovvr) [BAFL]).

1. The father of CALEB (Nu. 136 [P] Dt. 136 [D 2 ] Josh. 146 t.JE and Do], i Ch. 415 14e Ecclus. 40 7 , AV JEPHUNNE).

2. b. Jether or Ithran of the tribe of Asher (i Ch. 738; lAiva [B], i6<H* [A]).


(H"!^), a son of Joktan, mentioned after Hazarmaveth (Gen. 1026; IAP&A [A], -eA [E], iep&X [L] ; i Ch. l2oom. BA, lApe [L])- Possibly, like some other Arabian tribes, named after the moon ( rrr = moon in Heb. , Ph. , Eth. ; Sab. nil = month) ; cp the Palmyrene name TIT. Glaser (Skiste, 2425) identifies with Mahra and S. Oman. For other suggested identifications, see Ball, Smith s DB(->, s.v.

1 Moore s attempt {Judges, 306) to explain 12 1-6 in connection with the story of Jephthah s daughter had to be made that all possible devices might be tried, but is hardly successful.

- Here we differ from Goldziher, Hebrew Mythology, <)f>f.

3 See WRS Rel. Sem.V) 419 466.