Encyclopaedia Biblica/Meshech-Mica

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search


Cn*. ; O). i. Gen. 102 iCh. 1 5 Ezek. 27 13 etc. See TUBAL AND MESHECH. 2. i Ch. 1 17 = Gen. 1023, MASH (q.v.).


(rVO^CiD, ?rV^L"O, 30; on the name see below), the eponym of a course of Korahite doorkeepers (i Ch. 26 1 MOCoA&HA [B], MOCOAAAM [A], ceAeMi&C [L])- father of Zechariah (92i [yuaffaXa/xi B, /j.offo\\a.fj. A, /teeroXXa/iua L] 26 3 [/io<Ta\7?a B, fj.a.ffe\\atua A, creXe/ua L]). He is also called SHELEMIAH (2614 cra\a/Ma [B b ], -eia [B*] (reXe/xta [AL]) and SHALLUM (9:19 craXw/ttun [B], <raXw/a [A], <reXXoi/M [L]) ; in 9:17 a different Shallum (cp SHALLUM, 8) seems to be meant.

From a purely linguistic point of view we might suppose jnffOD to be a fuller form of c^C C (Meshullam?) and explain requited of Yahwe ; see MESHULLAM, and cp NAMES, 30. But a historical study of the group of proper names to which both Meshullam (?) and Meshelemiah (?) belong suggests that both names are disguises of an ethnic name, such as o^S? or even Sxi OE" ( C P SHALLUM). In the genealogy of Meshelemiah (i Ch. 2<ti-3) we find several ethnic names e.g., Jathniel = Ethani, Elam = Jerahmeel. T. K. C.


or rather, as in RV, MESHEZABEL pN5r?- P z -^-- 'God is a deliverer', 30, 83; cp Ass. Musezib-ilu}. Perhaps an artificial formation from SHOBAL (q.v. ) ; this would probably fit the names with which this name is grouped (Che. ).

1. Signatory to the covenant (see EZRA i., 7), Neh. 10:21 [22] (/necrio^ejSTjA. [BNA], /Sacrcrij, fajSojA [L]) ; perhaps to be identified with

2. The ancestor of MESHULLAM (13) mentioned in Neh. 3:4 (/ua<ref/3r)a [,x] ; jucure^eiTjA [A] ; /u.a<r<ria/3eA [L] ; B om.) and also with

3. The father of PETHAHIAH (Neh. 11:24 ; /3a<rr)fa [BN*A], /3aoT))37]A [xc.a], ^acro-^a/SrqA [L]).


(fl TO^P ; see below).

1. An Ephraimite, temp. Pekah, 2 Ch. 28:12 (/j.o<ro- \a/j.u6 [BA], fj.affaa\Lfj.(nid [L]).

2. b. Immer, a priestly name in the genealogy of AMASHAI [q.v.], Neh. 11:13 (om. BX*A ; fj.affa.Xafj.id [$c.ii m e . inf.] . -XAi/xwfl [L]) ; given in i Ch. 9 12 as Meshillemith (rrs^irc, /ua<reX[i]/xw0 [BL], /uotroXXa/xwtf [A]). Cp GENEALOGIES, 6, col. 1662.

Linguistically we might incline to point nto?t?D (see NAMES, 75). More probably, however, it is a disguised ethnic or local name, Ml standing for n- ; cp D2{?p. See MESHULLAM, and notice that Berechiah (cp Bicri) and Immer (see above, 1 and 2), are probably corrupt disguises of JERAHMEEL [q.v., 4l (Che.).


(XhUfo, 62 ; cpSHOBAH, ELIASHIB), one of the Simeonites who in the time of Hezekiah dispossessed the Meunim (i Ch. 434, ju.o(ru>/3a [BA], eTricrrpe ^wi/ [L]).


(D^D, as if 'kept safe' [by Yahwe], but in its origin probably an ethnic (Che. ), J a name frequently occurring in post-exilic literature ; /aocroXXa/u. [BXAL] ; cp also the Jewish horseman //.oaoXXa^tos in the pseudo-Hecatceus, Jos. c. Ap. 122, also the Nab. names Na^B S, icVtra [Cook, Aram. Gloss. 78 f.~\}.

1. Grandfather of the scribe SHAPHAN [y.v.], 2 K. 22:3 (fiecroAAaiot [BL1, /ueo-craArji/ [A]).

2. A son of ZERUBBABEL [y.v.], i Ch. 3 19 (^xocroAoajiios [B], fio<ToAAajiios [A]).

3. A Gadite chief, i Ch. 5 13 (/ioo-oAa/n [B]). Cp MICHAEL.

4. A name in a genealogy of BENJAMIN- \_q.v., 9, 2/3], i Ch. 8 i7(jac<roja/na.[L]), probably the same as Misname. 12. SeeJQl? H 103, i.

5. The father of Sallu and grandson of HASENUAH [g.v.], in list of Benjamite inhabitants of Jerusalem (EZRA ii., 5 [6], 15 (i)rt), I Ch. i7(/uooAAafi[B])=Neh. 11 7 (neo-ouAa/u. [A], /ueo-oAAaji [L], a/uetrouAa [B], -^. []).

6. b. Shephathiah, a Benjamite, i Ch.98 (^xao-eoArj/n [B], ftao-aAAa/ti [A]). See note i (end), and cp SHEPHATIAH.

7. b. Zadok, grandfather of Seraiah, a priest in list of in habitants of Jerusalem (see EZRA ii., $[{>], 15 [i] a), i Ch. 9n Gio<roAAo/oi [BA]) = Neh. 11 ii (fiei<rovAa^ [B], pea: [AN]). See SHALLUM, 6.

8. b. Meshillemith b. Immer, an ancestor of Maasiai or Amashai, a priest in list of inhabitants of Jerusalem (see EZRA ",.5 [/>], 15 [i] a), i Ch. 9i2. In Neh. 11 13, the name is omitted ; see MESHILLEMOTH, 2.

9. A Kohathite overseer placed by Ch. in the time of Josiah, 2 Ch. 34;12 Oifo-oAAa/u [L]).

1 If an Arabic nuance is permissible, one may explain the name as meaning 'submissive' [to Yahwe] ; cp Di.-Ki. on Is. 42:19. [The name may, however, be an adaptation of an old tribal name, presumably Ishme'eli (cp MESHELEMIAH). Note that Shallum and Meshullam seem in two cases (7 20), to be in terchangeable, also that Shallum is a Simeonite name and that Meshullam (see 6) possibly had Zephathite connections, while Meshelemiah (also interchangeable with Meshullam, see 20) occurs in i Ch. 262 in a list of names largely of tribal origin.- T. K. C.]

10. Head of family, temp. Ezra (see EZRA i., 2, ii. i^[i]if) EzraSie Oiecrot/a/x [B], M e<roAA<xjii [AL])= i Esd. 8:44 MOSOLLAMON, RV MOSOLLAMUS (jj.f(TO\a.p<av [B], fiO<TO\\a/j.ov [A], jU.e(7oAAajU, [L]).

11. One of Ezra's opponents (fferstel, ngy:)in dealing with the mixed marriages, Ezra 10:15 (/xeerouAa/i [ BK], /nerao-oAAajui [A], jueo-ao. [L])=i Esd. 9i4 MOSOLLAM, RV MOSOLLAMUS (/uocroA- AO.JUO? [BAJ, ju.eo-oAAa/a [L]).

12. One of the b'ne BANI, in list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5, end), Ezra 10:29 OxeAouo-a^. [B], - M a [ x ]) = i Esd. 9 30 OLAMUS (toAafios [BA]).

13. b. Berechiah, Neh. 3 4 (om. B; v. 30, /ueo-ouAa/i [BNA], /neo-oAAa/u [L]) ; cp G 18 (jneo-auAa/u. [BNc.aA], /neo-ovAa/3^. tx*vid.]) and

14. b. Besodeiah, Neh. 3 6 (/necrovAa^ [BNAL]), in list of wall- builders (see NEHEMIAH, if., EZRA ii., 16 [ij, 15^).

15. In list of Ezra s supporters (see EZRA ii., 13^ ; cp i. 8, i. 16 [5], ii. 15 [i] C), Neh. 84 (om. BN*, /xecroAAa/it [L]) = i Esd. 944 (jueo-oAAaju [L], BA and EV om.). Possibly his name and that of Zechariah which precedes are both later additions.

16. Signatory, and

17. Priestly signatory to the covenant (see EZRA i., 7), Neh. 1020 [21] (fuecrov^a/ji [BNA], /neo-<7oAAa^x [L]), and v. 7 [8] (lueo-ovAa^i. [BNA]) respectively.

18. Priest, temp. Joiakim (see EZRA ii., 6b, ii), Neh. 12 13 (ftecrouAajii [BNA1, /uecroAAaju. [L]).

19. Priest, temp. Joiakim (see EZRA ii., 6b, ii), Neh. 12 ie(BN*A om.).

20. A porter, temp. Joiakim (see EZRA ii., 66, ii), Neh. 1225 (om. BN*A); see SHALLUM, 8, SHELEMIAH, MESHELEMIAH.

21. In procession at the dedication of the wall (see EZRA ii., I3"), Neh. 12 33 Oieo-ouAa/u [BN*]. -AAa^t [Nc.a]).


ODD, 56 ; 'kept safe' [by God], but cp MESHULLAM ; /u.e<roAAo.^i [BL], a/iiftfl [A]), bath Haruz, mother of king Amon (2 K. 21:19).


(iYa n), 1 Ch. 11:47 AV, RV MEZOBAITE. See JAASIEL.


  • Name (1).
  • Later Conditions.
    • Greek Mesopotamia ( 2).
    • Geography ; divisions (3-4).
    • Recent times (5).
    • Roads, general condition (6-7)
    • Climate, vegetation (8-9).
  • Earlier history.
    • Babylon and the W. (10-11).
    • Nahrina ( 12).
    • The Mitanni ( 13).
    • Mesopotamian civilisation
    • Assyrians (17-18).
    • Ancient capital ( 19).
    • Aramaeans (20).

1. Name and reference in EV.[edit]

In this article it is proposed to give an account of the large district lying N. and E. of Palestine as far as may be necessary to supplement the articles SYRIA and ASSYRIA. How far the region commonly called Mesopotamia is represented by any specific names in the OT may be an open question (see ARAM - NAHARAIM, HARAN, NAHOR, PADAN-ARAM) : Israel heard of peoples rather than countries ; its writers speak of the Aramaean, the Hittite, the Assyrian, rather than of the lands they occupied ; besides, the independent importance of Mesopotamian states was a thing of the past when the OT writers lived. To understand the course of events, however, it is necessary to take account of the vast tract intervening between Israel and the great empires that reached out to it from beyond Damascus.

In the EV Mesopotamia represents in the OT the Hebrew ARAM-NAHARAIM (q.v. . i), being a rendering adopted from the LXX, where it represents also other Hebrew forms. 1 In Judith Mesopotamia is the land where Israel settled when it migrated from Chaldasa (224 67 /. 826). In Acts ?2 it seems to be Ur-Kasdim itself. In Acts 2g, however (list of seats of the Diaspora), there can be little doubt that the reference is to the region between the Euphrates and the Tigris.

1 Aram (Nu. 23 7 Judg. 3 8 [A]), Aram-naharaim (Gen. 24 10 Ps. 60[title in Sym.]), Naharaim (i Ch. 196 Ps. 60 [title]), Paddan (Gen. 282 [A], 5 [E], 6 7 [Dsil. E], 33 18 35 9 2646 15 48 7), Paddan Aram (Gen. 25 20 [AD] [juco-o sup ras Al], 28 2 [Dsil. E], 5 [AD], 7 [A], 31 18), Pethor Aram Naharaim (Dt. 23 4). AD adds it in Gen. 27 43. See Hatch-Redpath, Supplement to Concordance.

2. Mesopotamia of Greeks.[edit]

The Mesopotamia (MetroTTOTa^ia, 17 ^0-77 TWV [sell. x.upa or 2uptd], Strabo) of Greek writers, the 'country amid the rivers' or one might say 'River-country' is a purely geographical expression, the countries that it comprehends never having formed a self-contained political unity. The name occurs in Greek writers first at or after the time of Alexander ; though it probably had its origin much earlier (cp ARAM-NAHARAIM).

The extremely fertile district that Xenophon traversed after crossing the Euphrates at Thapsacus, he calls Syria. The country beyond (i.e., K. of) the Araxes (Chaboras?) he calls Arabia he describes it as a desert region in which his army had to suffer great hardships until it reached the gates of Arabia.

The statements of Xenophon indicate a demarcation into two sections : the fertile portion, inhabited by agricultural Aramreans, stretching from the Euphrates to the Chaboras ; and the desert portion, the home of wandering tribes, stretching on towards the Tigris. It would be rash, indeed, to conclude from this that Mesopotamia meant in practice the whole territory between the Euphrates and the Tigris ; like its proto type Naharima it may have meant the fertile country inhabited in later times by Syrians, in earlier times by others e.g., the Mitani (see 17). In this case the real eastern boundary would be not the Tigris but the eastern border of the country watered by the Chaboras. Towards the W. , however, the Greek Mesopotamia may, unlike Naharima, have reached no farther W. than the banks of the Euphrates. It was this district that practically constituted the political province of Mesopotamia after the final occupation of the country by the Romans (156 A.D. ). On the other hand, when, as is often in Greek writers the case, the Euphrates and the Tigris are regarded as referred to in the very name Mesopotamia, the one bank of the river cannot be geo graphically separated from the other, and consequently narrow strips of country on the W. bank of the Euphrates and on the E. bank of the Tigris must be reckoned to the country amid the rivers.

The limits towards the N. and the S. need not detain us. The country between the sources of the Euphrates and the Tigris belonged rather to Armenia. In this direction Mesopotamia properly ended with the Masius range. Towards the S. Mesopotamia was regarded as ending where Babylonia began.

3. Physical geography.[edit]

From what has been said it appears that Mesopotamia reaches its northern limits at the points where the EUPHRATES (q.v.) . and the Tigris break through the mountain range and enter the lowlands. In the case of the Euphrates this takes place at Sumeisat (Samosata), in that of the Tigris near Jezlret ibn Omar (Bezabda) and Mosul (Nineveh). Consequently the irregular northern boundaries are marked by the lowland limits of those spurs of the Taurus mountains known in antiquity as Mons Masius and now as Karaje Dugh and Tiir Abdln. Towards the S. the boundary was the so-called Median Wall, which, near Pirux Shapur, not much to the S. of Hit (the ancient Is), crossed from the Euphrates in the direction of Kadisiya (Opis) to the Tigris. There the two rivers approach each other, to diverge again lower down. At the same place begins the network of canals connecting the two rivers which rendered the country of Babylonia one of the richest in the world ; there too, in a geological sense, the higher portion of the plain, consisting of strata of gypsum and marl, comes to an end ; there at one time ran the line of the sea-coast ; and there begin those alluvial formations with which the mighty rivers in the course of long ages have filled up this depressed area. Mesopo tamia thus forms a triangle lying in the NW. and SE. direction, with its long sides towards the N. and SW. It extends from 37* 30 to about 33 N. lat. and from 38 to 46" E. long, and has an area of some 55,200 sq. m.

The points at which the rivers issue from among the mountains have an absolute altitude of between 1000 and 1150 ft., and the plain sinks rapidly towards the southern extremity of Mesopo tamia, where it is not more than about 165 ft. above the sea. As a whole the entire country consists of a single open stretch, save that in the N. there are some branches of the Taurus the Nimriid Dagh near Orfa, the long limestone range of Abd el- Aziz, running NNW., and farther to the E. the Sinjftr range, also of limestone, 7 m. broad and 50 m. long, running NNE. Between these two ranges - near the isolated basaltic hill of Tell Kokab(Hill of Stars) - runs the defile by which the waters of the Chaboras, swollen by the Jaghjaghaand other affluents from the Masius, find their way into the heart of Mesopotamia. The Khabiir proper, the ancient Chaboras, which rises in the three hundred copious fountains of Ras Ain (the ancient Rhesaena), and ultimately falls into the Euphrates near Karkisiya (Circesium), forms the boundary between the two, or more correctly the three, great divisions of Mesopotamia.

[large detailed map of Mesopotamia goes here]

INDEX TO NAMES Parenthesis indicating sections in MESOPOTAMIA or of articles that refer to place-names are in some cases added to non-biblical names having no biblical equivalent. The alphabetical arrangement ignores prefixes: ed-, el- ('the'), J. (Jebel, 'mt.'), jeziret ('island'), kal'at ('castle'), Kh. (khirbat, 'ruin'), Mt., Mons, N. (Nahr, 'river'), R., fell, fil ('mound'), Tur ('mount').

J. 'Abdel 'Azi, E2 (3, 9) Tur 'Abdin, E2 (3, 9) Accho, B4 Achzib, B4 Acre, B4 (DAMASCUS, 4) R. Adham, G3 (ASSYRIA, 4) Adiabene, F2 (DISPERSION, 6) 'Adlan, B4 Adonis, B3 (APHEK, 1) 'Afrin, C2 Agade, F4 (BABYLONIA, 3) 'Akarkuf, G4 (BABEL, TOWER, 7) 'Akka B4, (BETH-EMEK) Akkad FG3, 4 (BABYLONIA, 1) Akku, 4 Akzibi, B4 Alashia, A3 (CYPRUS, 1) Albak, G1 Aleppo, C2 (BEREA, 2) Alexandretta, C2 Mt. Amanus, C2 (EUPHRATES, 1) Amatu, C3 Amedi, E2 Amid, E2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 6) Amida, E2 N. Amrit, B3 'Ana, F2 (MESOPOTMIA, 4) Anathan, F3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Anatho, F3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) J. el-Ansariya, C3 Antakieh, C2 (ANTIOCH, 2) Antarados, B3 (ARVAD) Antioch, C2 Antiochia Mygdonia, E2 (4) Apamea, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 6) Apamea, C3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Arabia, EF3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 2) Aradus, B3 (PHOENICIA, 1, 4) Araxes, E3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 2) Arba'ilu, FG2 (ASSYRIA, 5) 'Arban, E3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 15) Arbela, FG2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Mt. Argaeus, B1 (CAPPADOCIA) Arka, B3 (ARKITE) tell 'Arka, B3 (ARKITE) Arkite, B3 Arpad, C2 (ASSyRIA, 2) Arpadba, C2 Arrapachitis, F2 (ARPHAXAD) Arvad, B3 (ASSYRIA, 31) Asi, A3 n. el-Asi, C3 (LEBANON, 6) Assbur, EF2, 3 Ashshur, EF2, 3 (ASSyRIA, 1) Assyria, FG3 Ashur, F3 (ASSyrIA, 1) tell Aswad, G4 Atrae, F3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) (A'zam ?), G3

Babylon, G4 Bagdad, G4 (BABEL, TOWER OF) Bagdad; (mie-Turnat), G4 Balawat, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Baldeh, B3 Balihi, D2 til Barsip, D2 (EUPHRATES, 1) Barzipa, FG4 Bairun, B3 (GEBAL, 1) Bavian, F2 Beirut, B4 (BEROTHAN) R. Belikh, D2 (ASSYRIA, 4) Beroea, C2 Berytus, B4 (PHOENICIA, 4) Beth 'Arbaye, EF2 (7) Bezabda, F2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 3) Biaina, F1 (ARARAT, 2) Bilechas, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Bire jik, G2 (CARCHEMish, 2) Birs Nimrud, G4 (BABYLONIA, 3) Biruti, B4 Borsippa, G4 Botrys, B3 (GERBAL) Byblos, B3 (ASSYRIA, 31)

Caenae, F3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Caesarea, B4 Calah, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) R. Calycadnus, A2 (CILICIA, 1) Caphtor, AB2 Carchemish, D2 Mt. Carmel, B4 Carpasia, B3 Carrhae, D2 (HARAN, 1) Chaboras, E3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Chalcis, C3 Chalybon, C2 Chne, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Cilicia, B2 Circesium, E3 (3, 4) Citium, A3 (CYPRUS, 1) Commagene, CD2 Corsothe, E3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Ctesiphon, G4 Cuth, G4 (BABYLONIA, 3) Cydnus B2 (CILICIA, 1) Cyprus, AB3

Daisan, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Damascus, C4 Dan, B4 Dphne, C2 (ANTIOCH, 2) ed-Der, E3 Diarbekr, E2 (ASSYRIA, 6) kal'at Dibsa, G3 Dijia, F2 Diklat, E2 Dimashk, C4 (DAMASCUS, 1) Dimashki, C4 (DAMASCUS, 1) Dinaretum, Pr., B3 R. Diyala, G3 (ASSYRIA, 4) Dor, B4 (PHOENICIA, 21) Du'ru, B4 Dur Kurigalzu, G4 (ASSYRIA, 28)

Edessa, D2 (ARAMAIC, 11) Edi'al, A3 Epiphania, C3 Erdjish Dagh, B1 tell-Erfad, C2 (ARPAD) R. Euphrates, C-G1-4

el-Furat, C-G1-4

Gargamia, D2 (CARCHEMISH) Gauzanitis, E2 (GOZAN) Gebal, B3 Ghiuk Su, A2 Gok Su, C2 Gordaean Mts., G2 Gozan, E2 (ASSYRIA, 32) Great Sea, AB3, 4 Gubli, B3 (GEBAL, 1) Gurgum, C2 Guzana, E2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4)

Abu Habbah, F4 (BABYLONIA, 3, 14) Habur, E3 el-Hadr, F3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Hadrach, C3 (ASSYRIA, 32) Halab,C2 Halwan, C2 Hamat, C3 Hamath, C3 (HITTITES, 11) Hanigalbat, D1 (ARAM-NAHARAIM, 3 Haran, D2 Harran, D2 (4, 6) Harran(u), D2 J. el-Hass, C3 Hatarikka, C3 Hatra, F3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Hatrae, F3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Hatte, C2 (CANAAN, 10) Hauran, C4 Hauran, C4 (HAURAN) Hawranu, C4 (H)emes(s)a, C3 (HETHLON) Hilakku, AB2 (CILICIA, 2) Hillah, G4 (BABYLONIA, 3, 14) Hit, F4 (MESOPOTAMIA, 3) Homs, C3 (HETHLON) Husur, F2 (NINEVEH)

nahr Ibrahim, B3 (LEBANON, 6) tell Ibrahim, G4 (CUTH) Ichnae, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Idalium, A3 imgur Bel, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) 'Irak, G4 (MESOPOTAMIA, 8) Irbil, FG2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Is, F4 (MESOPOTAMIA, 3) Issus, C2

Jaghjagha, E2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 3) Jaudi, C2 Jebeil, B3 (GEBAL, 1) Jerabis, D3 (CARCHEMISH, 1) Jerusalem, B5 Jihun, C2 jebel Judi, F2 (ARARAT, 3)

N. el-Kabir, BC3 (nr. 'Arkite') N. el-Kabir, BC3 (nr. Laodicea) tell el-Kadi, B4 (DAN, 2) Kadisiya, G3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 3) Kaisariyeh, B4 (CAESAREA, 1) Kalah, F2 (PHOENICIA 77) Kalhu, F2 Kana, B4 (KANAH, 1) Karaje Dagh, D2 (3) Karkisiya, E3 (3) Kefto, B2 (CAPHTOR, 4) Kennisrin, C3 Khabur, E3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 3) R. K_____r, F2 (ASSYRIA, 4) Khausar, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) N. Khazir, F2 Khorsabad, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Kirruri, G2 (ASSYRIA, 31) Kish, G4 (BABYLONIA, 4, 37) Kittim, AB3 Koa? G3 Tell Kokab, E2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 3) Korduene, E-G1, 2 (ARARAT, 3) Kue, B2 (CILICIA, 2) Kummuh, D1, 2 (ASSYRIA, 28) Kurdistan, E-G1, 2 (ASSYRIA, 3) dur Kurigalzu, G4 (ASSYRIA, 28) N. Kutha, G4 Kutu, G4 Kutu, G3 (BABYLONIA, 69) Kuyunjik, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5)

el-Ladikiyeh, B3 Laodicea, B3 (CANAAN, 1) Larnaca, A3 R. Leontes, B4 Lippara, F4 N. Litani, B4 (LEBANON, 6) Lycaonia, A1, 2 (CAPPADOCIA)

Malatya, D1 (ARARAT, 2) nahr Malik, G4 Ma'lula, C4 (ARAMAIC, 9) Man, FG1 Mar'ash, C2 Marathus, B4 (PHOENICIA, 1) Maridin, E2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 6) Markasi, C2 Mons Masius, D2 (3) Kh. Ma'sub, B4 (PHOENICIA, 10, n., 22) Median Wall, FG4 (3) Mediterranean, AB3, 4 Melitene, CD1 Melitene, D1 (ARARAT, 1) Mitani, Dn (ASSyrIA, 28) Mosul, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Kal'at el-Mudik, C3 (APAMEA) Musri, C2 (ASSYRIA, 28)

Naharina, CD2, 3 (ARAM-NAHARAIM, 2-3) Na'iri, EFG1, 2 (ARARAT, 2) Nasibin, E2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Nasibina, E2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Nicephorium, D3 Nimrud, D, D2 (3, 9) Nimrud, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Nineveh, F2 Mt. Niphates, DE1 Nisibis, E2 (DISPERSION, 6) Mts. of Nisir, G2 (DELUGE, 2)

jeziret ibn 'Omar, F2 (3, 6) Opis, G3 (CYRUS, 2) Ornithonpolis, B4 (PHoenicia, 21) R. Orontes, C3 (AsSYRIA, 31) Orrhoi, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Osrhoene, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4)

Palmyra, D3 (ARAMAIC, 4) Paltos? B3 Pedias, B2 Physcus, G3 Pitru, D2 (ARAM, 3) Purattu, C-G1-4 R. Pyramus, C2 (CILICIA, 1)

Radanu, G3 Rakka, D3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Rapiku, F4 Rasappa, D3 Ras el-'ain, E2 (5) Resh-eni, E2 Rezeph, D3 Rhesaina, E2 (3, 6) Ribla, C3 Riblah, C3 (HETHLON) Ruha, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Rusafa, D3 Ruwad, B3 (ARVAD)

es-Sabaha, C3 Sagurri, C2 Saida? B2 (PHOENICIA, 4) Sajur, C2 (CARCHEMISH, 2) Sam'al, C2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 19) Samaria, B4 Samarrah, F3 Samerina, B4 Samosata, D2 (CAPPADOCIA) Salamis, A3 (CYPRUS, 2) Salchah, C4 (BASHAN) Sarafand, B4 (SAREPTA) Sarepta, B4 (PHOENICIA) Dur Sargina, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Saruj, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) R. Sarus, B2 (CILICIA, 1) Sebaseiya, B4 (SAMARIA) Seleucia, G4 Serug, D2 Sherif Khan, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Kal'at Sherkiit, F3 (ASSYRIA, 5) Sidon, B4 (ASSYRIA, 31) Sidon, B4 Sidunu, B4 Sihun, B2 Simirra, B3 Simyra, B3 (PHOENICIA, 4, 5) Singaras, EF2 Sinjar Range, EF2 (ASSYRIA, 4, 16) Sinzar, C3 Soli, B2 (CILICIA, 1) Sophene, DE1, 2 Sippara, F4 Sippar, F4 (BABYLONIA, 3) R. Subnat, E1 (ASSYRIA, 27) Sumeisat, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 3) Sumra, B3 Sur, B4 (TYRE) Surru, B4 (TYRE) Suti, FG4 Syrian Desert, DE4

'ain Tab, C2 Tabal, C1 (ASHUR-BANI-PAL, 4) Tadpaux, D3 Tarabulus, B3 (DOR) Tarbis, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5) Tarsus, B2 (CILICIA, 4) Tartus, B3 (ARVAD) Taurus, F1 M. Taurus, AB2 (CAPPAWCIA) Thapsacus, D3 (6) R. Tigris, DE3, F2 (ASSYRIA, 4) Tornadotos, G3, 4 Tracheia, AB2 (CILICIA, 1) Tripolis, B3 (DAMASCUS, 4) Tubal?, G3 Tyre, B4 (ASSYRIA, 31) Tyros, B4

Unki, C2 Upe, G3 Urfa, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) L. Urmia, G1, 2 (ARAMAIC, 13) L. Urumiyah, G1, 2 (ARAMAIC, 13)

L. Van, F1 (ASSYRIA, 11)

Nebi Yunus, F2 (ASSYRIA, 5)

Zab (Great), FG2 (4) Zab (Lower), FG3 (ASSYRIA, 4) Zab (Upper), FG2 (ASSYRIA, 4) Zabatus Major, FG2 Zabatus Minor, FG3 Zabu Elu, FG Zabu Shupalu, FG3 Zaitah, E3 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) Zenjirli, C2 (ARAMAIC, 2) Zeugma, D2 (MESOPOTAMIA, 4) ez-Zib, B4 (PALESTINE, 20) Zimri, G3 (ASSYRIA, 32)

4. Divisions ; towns.[edit]

The divisions just referred to are

  • (i. ) the northern country W. of the Khabur,
  • (ii. ) the northern country to the E. , and
  • (iii. ) the steppe-land.

i. Under the dominion of the Seleucids the country to the NW. of the Khabur bore the name of Osrhoene, or better Orrhoene, and was for a time the seat of a special dynasty which at a later date at any rate was Arabian (Abgar). The capital of this kingdom was Orfa (Roha), the Edessa of the Greeks and Romans, the Orrhoi of the Syrians ; it was at a later date a Roman colony, ar.d bore also the name of Justinopolis. This once flourishing city lies on the small river Uaisan (the ancient Scirtus). South of Edessa lie the ruins of Harran (see HARAN). A third town of this region is Seruj (see SERUG). The town lies between Harrun and the Euphrates in a plain to which it gives its name. On the left bank of the Euphrates lay Apamea (the modern liirejik), connected with Zeugma on the other side by a bridge, and farther S., at the mouth of the Bilechas (modern Belikh), was the trading town and fortress Nicephorium, founded by command of Alexander, and completed by Seleucus Nicator, in memory of whose victory it was named. From the emperor Leo it received the designation Leontopolis. The spot is now known as Rakka (see below). Farther up the fruitful valley of the Belikh lay the town of Ichnae (C hne). Farther S. lay Circesium (Chaboras of Ptolemy, Phaleg of Isidor), not to be identified, as is often assumed, with CARCHEMISH [q.v.] which was on the right (W.) bank of the Euphrates ; from the time of Diocletian Circesium was strongly fortified. The site is at present occupied by a wretched place of the name Karkisiya.

In ancient times a highly flourishing district must have stretched along the river Chaboras (Khabur) to its principal source at Ras el- Ain. The strip of comparatively desert country which now stretches along the lower course of the Khabur was called by the Greeks Gauzanitis, and corresponds to the Gozan of 2 K. 17:6 (the Assyrian Guzana or Guzanu ; see GOZAN).

ii. The country to the E. of the upper Khabur is in many respects similar to that which has just been described. As the watershed of the Tigris is not far distant, the Masius range sends down into Mesopotamia only insignificant streams, the most important being the Hermas, the Mygdonius of the Greeks. On its banks was situated Nisibis (Nesibin), the chief city of the district, which commanded the great road at the foot of the mountains leading through the steppe, which here from the scarcity of water comes close up to the edge of the hills. In the Assyrian empire Nasibina was the seat of an administrative official. In the time of the Seleucids the site was occupied by the flourishing Greek colony of Antiochia Mygdonia ; but the new designation, transferred to the river and the vicinity of Nisibis from the Macedonian district of Mygdonia, afterwards passed out of use. Nisibis was an important trading city, and played a great part in the wars of the Romans against the Persians.

iii. The S. or steppe portion of Mesopotamia was from early times the roaming-ground of Arabian tribes ; for Xenophon gives the name of Arabia to the district on the left (E.) bank of the Euphrates to the W. of the Khabur ; and elsewhere it is frequently stated that the interior at a distance from the rivers was a steppe inhabited by Arabes Scenitae (Tent Arabs). Along the bank of the two great rivers ran a belt of cultivated country, and the rocky islands of the Euphrates also were occupied by a settled population. On the Euphrates, beginning towards the N., we must mention first Zaitah or Zautha, SE. of Circesium ; next Corsothe, at the mouth of the Mascas ; then Anatho or Anathan, the modern 'Ana ; and finally Is (Hit). On the Tigris the point of most importance is Caenae (Kcuyai of the Anabasis, which Winckler proposes to identify with Tekrit), S. from the mouth of the Great Zab near the present Kal'at Sherkat ; and not far distant towards the interior was Atrae or Hatrae, also called Hatra (el-Hadr), the chief town of the Arab tribe of the Atreni.

5. Recent times.[edit]

From the Arabic geographers and travellers we gain the im pression that a great part of Mesopotamia, with the exception of the southern steppe, of course, must at that time have been in a very flourishing condition ; the neighbourhood of Nisibis especially is celebrated as a very paradise. In fact it is only since the Turkish conquest of the country under Sultan Selim in 1515 that it has turned into a desert and gradually lost its fertility. As the nomadic Arabs have continually extended their encroach ments, agriculture has been forced to withdraw into the mountains ; and this is especially true of the western portions of Mesopotamia, the district of Ras el-'Ain, and the plain of Harran and Seruj, where huge mounds give evidence that the whole country was once covered with towns and villages. Under the Turks el-Jezira does not form a political unity, but belongs to different pashaliks.

From this brief survey it appears that Mesopotamia, like Syria, constitutes an intermediate territory between the great eastern and western monarchies, Syria inclining more to the W., and Mesopotamia to the E. In virtue of its position it frequently formed both the object and the scene of contests between the armies of those mighty monarchies, and it is wonderful how a country so often devastated almost always recovered. The roads, it is true, which traversed the territory were not mere military highways, but the main routes of traffic for Central Asia, Western Asia, and Europe. It is only in modern times, and since these lines of commercial intercourse have ceased to be followed, that the general condition of things has been so entirely altered.

6. Roads.[edit]

The number of roads which in classical times traversed the country was very considerable; the Euphrates formed not a barrier but a bond between the nations on either side.

At many places there were at least boat-bridges (zeugma) across. One of the most important of these ancient crossing-places must be sought, where in fact it still is, at Birejik (Apamea- Zeugma). From this point a great road led across to Edessa (Orfa) ; there it divided into two branches, the northern going by Amid (Diarbekr) and the other by Mardm and Nisibis to Mosul (Nineveh). (In quite recent times, in order to avoid the direct route across the desert and through the midst of the Bedouins, the post-road makes a great circuit from Nisibis by Jeziret ibn Omar to Mosul.) A second route crossed the Euphrates somewhat more to the S., and joined the other via Harran and Rhestena. The principal crosssing in Xenophon s time was at Thapsacus, almost opposite Rakka ; and it will be remembered also how important a part Thapsacus plays in the OT (see TIFHSAH). Sometimes a route along the Euphrates to Babylonia was followed, as is still frequently done by caravans at the present day ; but even in ancient times this course was attended by more or less difficulty, the country being occupied by the chiefs of independent Arab tribes, with whom the travellers had to come to terms.

7. General condition.[edit]

The condition of things in OT times must conse quently be considered as essentially analogous to that of the present day. The central districts away from the rivers were occupied at certain seasons, according as they yielded pasture, by nomadic cattle-grazing tribes, the physical character of the country being then and now the same on the whole as that of the Syrian desert, which belongs not to Syria but properly to Arabia. The tells on the banks of the rivers show that in ancient times the country was covered with settlements and towns as far as irriga tion was possible. 1 In the open country, however, beyond those limits there were Bedouins.

At one time the Tai Arabs were the neighbours of the Aramaeans, and consequently all Arabs bear in Syriac the name of Tayoye. The district between Mosul and Nisibis received the name Beth Arbaye from its being occupied by Arabs. In the northern parts of Meso potamia there are now tribes of mingled Kurds and Arabs which have to a greater or less degree abandoned their tents for fixed habitations and the tillage of the ground.

The Kurdish element appears only sporadically in the true Mesopotamian plain ; but the Yezldis, who form the population of the Sinjar range, may be referred to this stock. Of the old Aramaean peasantry there are no longer any important remains in the plain, the Aramaeans having withdrawn farther into the Kurdish highlands, where, in spite of their wild Kurdish neighbours, they are more secure from exactions of every kind.

The plain of the northern country of the two rivers was at one time richly cultivated, and owed its prosperity to the industrious Aramaeans, who formerly played so distinguished a part as a connecting link between the Persians and the Roman empire and afterwards between the western and the Arabian world, and whose highest culture was developed in this very region.

Quite otherwise is it now. In the plain there are almost no remains of the common Aramaean tongue. Apart from the scattered areas in which Kurdish prevails, the ordinary language is a vulgar Arabic dialect ; but both Kurdish and Aramaean (Syriac) have exercised an influence on the speech of the Arab peasant. Certain Turcoman hordes also now roam about the Mesopotamian territory.

8. Climate.[edit]

In climate and in the character of its soil, as well as in its ethnographic history, Mesopotamia holds an intermediate position. In this aspect also we must maintain the division into two quite distinct zones. The northern district of Mesopotamia combines strong contrasts, and is a connecting link between the mountain region of western Asia and the desert of Arabia. On the other hand, the country to the S. of Mesopotamia, or Irak, has a warm climate, and towards the Persian Gulf indeed the heat reaches the greatest extremes.

1 This is confirmed by the latest traveller, von Oppenheim ; see also the map in his Voin Mittelmeer zunt Persischen Golf.

9. Vegetation.[edit]

In Upper Mesopotamia, strictly so called, agriculture has suffered an extraordinary decline ; in spite of excellent soil, very little of the land is turned to account.

In the western district the fertile red -brown humus of the Orfa plain, derived from the lime of Nimrud Dagh, extends to about 12 m. S. of Harran. With a greater rainfall, and an artificial distribution of the water such as there was in olden times, agriculture would flourish. If spring rains are only moderately abundant, wheat and barley grow to a great height, and yield from thirty to forty fold.

Timber trees are few ; plane trees and white poplars are planted along the streams, and a kind of willow and a sumach flourish on the banks of the Euphrates. Of the great forest which stood near Nisibis in the time of Trajan no trace remains ; but the slopes both of the Masius mountains and of the Jebel Abd el- Aziz, as well as, more especially, those of the Sinjar range, are still covered with wood.

The wide treeless tracts of the Low Country of Mesopotamia are covered with the same steppe vegeta tion which prevails from Central Asia to Algeria ; but there is an absence of a great many of the arborescent plants that grow in the rockier and more irregular plateaus of western Asia and especially of Persia.

This comparative poverty and monotony of the flora is partly due to the surface being composed mainly of detritus, and partly to the cultivation of the country in remote antiquity having ousted the original vegetation and left behind it what is really only fallow ground untouched for thousands of years.

With few exceptions there are none but cultivated trees, and these are confined to the irrigated districts on the Euphrates and the Shaft.

The cycle of vegetation begins in November. The first winter rains clothe the plain with verdure. The full summer development is reached in June ; and by the end of August everything is burnt up. A. S. 1

10. Early Babylonian Influence.[edit]

There having been as yet no exploration by excavation in Mesopotamia (if we may use this term, as we propose to do in the rest of this article, merely for convenience, to denote the country stretching westwards of Assyria proper, and northwards of Babylonia), all that we can say about its earliest history is derived from such notices as have reached us in the Assyrian inscriptions of the Assyrian empire (since about 1500 B.C.), and in the Babylonian inscriptions of an earlier period. These notices are comparatively scanty ; to a certain extent we have to rely upon the kind of historical conjecture which draws its deductions from the history of neighbouring lands and the analogy of times with which we are better acquainted.

We may safely assume so much at least as this that a civilisation like that of the Old Babylonia which is met with in the monuments of Telloh in the fourth and third millenia B.C. cannot have been confined to the southern portion of the Euphrates valley, but even then, as we know to have been the case at a later date, must have extended also to the upper valley. When we find a king like Gudea (after 3000 B.C.) bringing material for his edifices from Phoenicia, the fact proves that in his day Mesopotamia, through which the western road lay, was already within the sphere of Babylonian civilisation, although we are not thereby informed as to its exact political position. It may be taken for granted that the greater kingdoms of South and North Babylonia were at pains to attach to themselves regions that were of such importance for their connection with the Medi terranean Sea, and thus we may safely represent to our selves the history of Mesopotamia in those times as having been, approximately, similar to other better known histories.

1 [The work of revising the article Mesopotamia in and adapting it to form part of the present article has unfortunately had to be done without the help of the author, who died (24th June 1890) before he had given effect to his purpose.]

11. Westward connection.[edit]

Looked at from another point of view, Mesopotamia forms a region in some degree separated from the southern lands of the Euphrates, a region which gravitates quite as much towards Syria, properly so called, and Asia Minor as towards the centre of Babylonian civilisation. Thus an impulse was given to an independent development in polity and culture, and it would have been indeed surprising if no independent states had ever come into being there, to carry on the civilisation of Babylonia on lines of their own.

12. Naharin.[edit]

The conjecture (based upon the probabilities of the case) that there were such states, finds confirmation as soon as history begins to supply us with facts regarding the lands in question. The Egyptian conquerors of the i8th and igth dynasties, the Thotmes, the Amenhoteps, the Rameses between 1700 and 1400 B.C. knew of a state here, usually designated by them Naharin, which they enumerate in their tribute lists. Unfortunately their references are not of such a nature as to convey much information as to the character and history of Naharin.

13. The Mitani aliens.[edit]

This defect is made good all the more conspicuously in the Amarna letters (1500-1400 B.C.) which make us acquainted with a people called Mitani who had their abode here. l The correspon dence of King Dusratta of Mitani with Amenhotep III. and IV. clearly shows that the race then dominant was non-Semitic, and manifestly of kin with the Heta and the (Alarodian) peoples who at that time had their settlements in Armenia ; but it shows also that it was alien in Mesopotamia, and, as the peculiarity of the script and language of the letters proves, had become possessed of a Semitic civilisation merely through conquest. For with but one exception these letters are written in the Babylonian-Assyrian character and language.

14. Mesopotamian language, etc.[edit]

This script and language, however, are shown by the peculiarities they exhibit, to possess definite rules of their own and to be quite distinct in character from the contemporary Babylonian. These peculiarities are exactly the same as those we meet with in the inscriptions which begin very shortly afterwards of the Assyrian kings Ramman(Adad ?)-nirari I. (in the 13th cent.) and Tiglath-pileser I. (about 1100). We now know enough of the beginnings of Assyrian history, however, to satisfy us that this orthography and gram mar cannot have developed in Assyria ; moreover, we meet with it precisely under those Assyrian kings who subjugated (or subjugated anew) Mesopotamia, so that we thus have an independent proof of what we had already conjectured from the nature of the country the independent development of civilisation in Mesopotamia ; for a splendid development of script and speech bearing all the marks of the influence of a definite school is pos sible only in a territory that enjoys independence both in its politics and in its culture.

15. Civilisation.[edit]

The script and style now usually designated Assyrian because appropriated by Assyria (which about this time was beginning to develop out of a little city-kingdom into a great empire) were thus originally Mesopotamian. This leads to the further conjecture that much else which we are accustomed to designate as Assyrian, because we first begin to meet with it in the time of the Assyrian supremacy (after 1300 and noo), may also have been of Mesopotamian origin. The only excavations which have as yet been made in the Mesopotamian field those of Layard in Arbiin on the Habur support such a conjecture. 2 The sculptures found there are plainly older than any Assyrian sculptures as yet known to us ; but, though they belong to a period preceding that of the Assyrian supremacy, they are all of the type that is cur rently spoken of as Assyrian.

1 A letter from the prince of Mitani is stated in a hieratic docket to have come from N aharna (no. 23 in Wi. s ed. , Kf>f>, p. xv ; Erman, Z.-t 27 [1889], p. 63; cp Erman, SB A IV, 1888, p. 584 and Maspero s note in Strugglt of X at ions, 146).

2 Quite recently, M. v. Oppenheim has laid bare some old monuments at Riis el- Ain on the Khabur. They are represen tations on a gateway, quite similar to those found at Zenjirli (Sam al) in Syria. As they certainly belong to the pre-Assyrian time, the Mitani inhabitants might be thought of as their originators (they would thus be Hethitisch in the sense ex plained in Helmolt, Weltgesch. iii. 1 no/.). Later, about the time of the Aramaean immigration, the stones were used again, and apparently it was then that the name of the ruler was added in cuneiform.

16. Political independence.[edit]

A further peculiarity which we are in the habit of regarding as specifically Assyrian is also doubtless pre-Assyrian - Mesopotamian. In Assyria dates are reckoned by eponyms (limu; see ASSYRIA, 19), instead of by regnal years as in Babylonia (q.v. 37+). Certain clay tablets, however, which are said to have been found in Cappadocia, and belong approximately to the thirteenth century, employ the same method of dating. We must accordingly regard this as a further peculiarity of the Mesopotamian sphere of civilisation as contrasted with the Babylonian.

The political independence of Mesopotamia, alongside of the Babylonian kingdom, we are also led to infer from another fact. We are able clearly to make out that in the various conquests of Mesopotamia by the Assyrians, notably by Ashur-uballit, Ramman(Adad ?)-nirari I., and Shalmaneser I. , in the fourteenth century, and by Tiglath- pileser and his predecessors about 1100 - the Assyrian kings who hold Mesopotamia bear the title of Sur kishshati, 'King of the World' (which later became the stereotyped title of all the kings) in association with that of 'King of Ashshur' (of which it had precedence). Following the analogy of Babylonian royal titles, we are to see here the title of honour which had been borne by the sovereigns of Mesopotamia, whose legitimate heirs the Assyrians claimed to be.

17. History : Mitani supremacy.[edit]

From the thirteenth century onwards - that is to say from the time of the conquest of Mesopotamia by the Assyrians - we are able to follow the political fortunes of the country with some detail. We have seen that before this, at the period of the Amarna letters (15th cent.), it was in the hands of the non-Semitic Mitani. Even at that early date, however, we can discern how Ashur-uballit, the king of Ashshur, is beginning to extend his power westwards, and coming into conflict with Dusratta of the Mitani. Accounts given by his successor attribute to him victories over the Subari (the Assyrian designation of the Mitani), and in agreement with this is the fact that a recently discovered inscription designates him as Sar Kissati, thus attributing to him the sovereignty of Mesopotamia.

18. Assyrian.[edit]

The Mitani supremacy was finally destroyed by Ashur-uballit's great-grandson Ramman(Adad?) - nirari I, (about 1300), who, with his son Shalmaneser I. , was the first to extend the Assyrian frontiers westward beyond the Euphrates, and northwards along the course of that river towards Armenia, at the same time seeking to secure these gains by planting Assyrian colonies. After the overthrow of Tukulti-Ninib I. , son of Shalmaneser I., Mesopotamia passed into the possession of Babylonia, whose kings henceforward bear the title of Sarkishshati ; but it was again reconquered by Assyria in the twelfth century (Asur-ris-isi, Tiglath-pileser I.), only, after some further vicissitudes, to be finally incorporated with the rest of Assyria in the tenth century.

19. Ancient Harran.[edit]

We are not yet in possession of any information as to the rulers of this kingdom which maintained itself, as we have seen, in Mesopotamia alongside of that of Babylonia during the pre-Assyrian period. (The ascendency of the Mitani was, of course, only an episode). Neither are we able to show by documentary proof what was the capital of the kingdom. Still it is hardly possible to doubt that it must have been Harran, a city of unrivalled importance in the most ancient times. This importance it owed to its position as the focus at which highways from the north (Armenia), from Babylonia, and from the west (the Mediterranean ports) converged, and this importance it continued to retain down to the Greek and Sasanian periods (cp TRADE AND COMMERCE). We can also make out that in Assyrian antiquity the worship of the moon-goddess (Sin) of Harran had an importance equal to that of the gods of the Babylonian capitals ; and when, still in the eighth century, we find at Sam'al (Zenjirli) in North Syria a dedication to the 'Baal of Harran', this is, according to oriental ideas, a specific proof of the former sovereignty in Syria of the kingdom of Mesopotamia with a capital at Harran a sovereignty which is also implied in the existence of a kingdom of Naharin in the Egyptian inscriptions.

20. Aramaean immigration.[edit]

The Assyrian conquest of Mesopotamia in the fourteenth century coincides, as we learn from the inscriptions, with the immigration of a new population which thenceforward impressed its character upon the land down to the time of the Arab invasion and onwards. As soon as the kings of Assyria had annexed Meso potamia, they required to defend it against the nomads of the steppe, 'the Syrian desert', - in other words, Arabia - whom they designate as the 'Aramaean hordes' (ahlamu Aramaya). Here we see the same play of circumstances as had been witnessed thousands of years before, reached its best - known historical manifestation in the Mohammedan conquest, and can still be observed even in our own day. As long as they are not firmly kept in check by a strong power, the Bedouins continually encroach upon the cultivated territory. With the fall of Tukulti - Ninib I. (about 1275) and the decline of the Assyrian power, these Aramaeans began to have a free hand and to be able to enter Mesopotamia unhindered. When the Assyrians again took possession of the country, we find them in stituting new campaigns, and claiming new victories over the Aramaean hordes (Ashur-rish-ishi, Tiglath- pileser I. ). The subsequent decline of the Assyrian power under the successors of Tiglath-pileser I. (after noo) exposed the country once more to their attacks ; and thus was rendered possible an immigration which we can best compare with that of the Hebrews into Canaan two centuries earlier, or that of the Chaldaeans or Kaldi a little later into Babylonia. What we know is that the entire land was taken possession of by Aramaean tribes, who, in the first instance, made them selves masters of the open country, but subsequently occupied the cities as well. It was then - between about 1050 and 950 - that Mesopotamia received the Aramaean population, to which we owe the biblical phrase ARAM- NAHARAIM (q.v.). As soon as Assyria again took the upper hand (about 900), and especially under Asur- nasir-pal (881-868), the Aramaean tribes, which by this time had developed into petty principalities, were again brought into subjection. Shalmaneser II. brought to a successful close the work of his father, and thenceforward Mesopotamia continued to be Assyrian down to the fall of the empire, though not in such a degree as to affect the Aramaean character of the population. Afterwards, it became Babylonian under Nabopolassar and Nebu chadrezzar. 1 A. S. , 2 2-9 ; H. w. , 10-20.

1 See further, Winckler, GBA, 1892 ; AOF, 1893-97 ; KA TP), 1901.

2 See, above, col. 3054, n. i.

3 [This revised article was originally written in 1883. It should be read in connection with the article ESCHATOLOGY, and with the special articles on biblical books, and on JESUS, PHARISEES, etc.]

4 The transcription is as in Peo-eroup, Tecrcrip for "rtt?;I (OS 2478; 281 58, 2 S. 3 3 (B*), leo-o-at for ej\ For the termination as for KH, see Lag. Psalt. Memph. 7 ; and for the use of nB D, etc., see ANOINTING, and cp Weinel, ZATIV, 1898, p. iff.


3 (Dan. 9:25-26), MESSIAS (AV Jn. 1:41, 4:25), are transcriptions (the first form modified by reference to the etymology) of the Gk - MCCCIAC (MGCIAC- MeceiAc), which in turn represents the Aramaic KITt^ p (meshiha}, answering to the Heb. rWSil, 'the anointed'. 4

1. The title.[edit]

The Hebrew word with the article prefixed occurs in the OT only in the phrase 'the anointed priest' (Lev. 4:3, 5:16, 6:22 [6:15]) ; but Yahwe's anointed is a common title of the king of Israel, applied in the historical books to Saul and David, in Lam. 4:20 to Zedekiah (see LAMENTATIONS, 8), and in Is. 45:1 extended to Cyrus. In the Psalms corresponding phrases (my, thy, his anointed) * occur nine times, to which may be added the lyrical passages 1 S. 2:10, Hab. 3:13. In the intention of the writers of these hymns it refers to the king then on the throne, 2 or, in hymns of more general and timeless character, to the Davidic king as such (without personal reference to one king) ; 3 but in the Psalms the ideal aspect of the kingship, its religious importance as the expression and organ of Yahwe's sovereignty, is prominent.

When the Psalter became a liturgical book the historical kingship had gone by, 1 * and the idea alone remained, no longer as the interpretation of a present political fact, but as part of Israel's religious inheritance. It was impossible, however, to think that a true idea had become obsolete merely because it found no expression on earth for the time being ; Israel looked again for an anointed king to whom the words of the sacred hymns should apply with a force never realised in the imperfect kingship of the past. Thus the psalms, especially such psalms as the second, were necessarily viewed as prophetic ; and mean time, in accordance with the common Hebrew representation of ideal things as existing in heaven, the true king remains hidden with God. The steps by which this result was reached must, however, be considered in detail.

2. The Messianic hope.[edit]

The hope of the advent of an ideal king was only one feature of that larger hope of the salvation of Israel from all evils, the realisation of perfect reconciliation with Yahwe, and the felicity of the righteousness in him, in a new order of things free from the assaults of hostile nations and the troubling of the wicked within the Hebrew community, which was constantly held forth by all the prophets, from the time when the great seers of the eighth century B.C. first proclaimed that the true conception of Yahwe s relation to his people was altogether different from what was realised, or even aimed at, by the recognised civil and religious leaders of the two Hebrew kingdoms, and that it could become a practical reality only through a great deliverance following a sifting judgment of the most terrible kind. The idea of a judgment so severe as to render possible an entire breach with the guilty past, and of a subse quent complete realisation of Yahwe s kings"hip in a regenerate nation, is common to all the prophets, but is expressed in a great variety of forms and images, conditioned by the present situation and needs of Israel at the time when each prophet spoke. As a rule the prophets directly connect the final restoration with the removal of the sins of their own age, and with the accomplishment of such a work of judgment as lies within their own horizon ; to Isaiah the last troubles are those of Assyrian invasion, to Jeremiah the restora tion follows on the exile to Babylon ; Daniel connects the future glory with the overthrow of the Greek monarch} . The details of the prophetic pictures show a corresponding variation ; but all agree in giving the central place to the realisation of a real effective king ship of Yahwe ; in fact the conception of the religious subject as the nation of Israel, with a national organisa tion under Yahwe as king, is common to the whole OT, and forms the bond that connects prophecy proper with the so-called Messianic psalms and similar passages which theologians call typical i.e., with such passages as speak of trie religious relations of the Hebrew commonwealth, the religious meaning of national insti tutions, and so necessarily contain ideal elements reaching beyond the empirical present. All such passages are frequently called Messianic ; but the term is more properly reserved as the specific designation of one particular branch of the Hebrew hope of salvation, which, becoming prominent in post-canonical Judaism, used the name of the Messiah as a technical form (which it never is in the OT), and exercised a great influence on NT thought, - the term 'the Christ' (6 X/HOTOS) being itself nothing more than the translation of 'the Messiah'.

1 The plural is found in Ps. 105:15 (1 Ch. 16:22), of the patriarchs as consecrated persons.

2 [This assumes (i) that the MT is throughout correct, where a ^D or king is referred to, and (2) that the directly Messianic interpretation is inadmissible. ED.]

3 In Ps. 84 9 [10] it is disputed whether the anointed one is the king, the priest, or the nation as a whole. The second view is perhaps the best. Cp PSALMS, 14.

  • [It must be remembered, of course, that critics like Duhm

would not endorse this statement, which, however, is by no means indefensible. ED.]

3. Development of the idea.[edit]

In the period of the Hebrew monarchy the thought that Yahwe is the divine king of Israel was associated with the conception that the human king reigns by right only if he reigns by commission or unction from him. Such was the theory of the kingship in Ephraim as well as in Judah (Dt. 33, 2 K. 9:6); [but it is only] the great Judaean prophets of the eighth century who connect Israel's deliverance with the rise of an ideal Davidic king, full of Yahwe's spirit (Is. 9:6-7, 11:1-2, Mic. 5:2) [though the genuineness of these passages has been disputed]. 1 This conception, indeed, is not one of the constant elements of prophecy ; the later prophecies of Isaiah take a different shape, looking for the decisive interposition of Yahwe without the instrumentality of a kingly deliverer. Jeremiah again speaks of the future David or righteous sprout of David's stem 2 (23:5-6); and Ezekiel uses similar language (34:23-24, 37:24-25); but that such passages do not necessarily mean more than that the Davidic dynasty shall be continued in the time of restoration under a. series of worthy princes seems clear from the way in which Ezekiel speaks of the prince in chaps. 45:9, 46:2, 46:12. As yet we have no fixed doctrine of a personal Messiah, only material from which such a doctrine might by and by be drawn. The religious view of the kingship is still essentially the same as in 2 S. 7:12-13, where the endless duration of the Davidic dynasty is set forth as part of Yahwe's plan of grace to his nation.

There are other parts of the OT - notably 1 S. 8:12 - in which the very existence of a human kingship is re presented as a departure from the ideal of a perfect theocracy. And so, in the exilic and post-exilic periods, when the monarchy had come to an end, we find pictures of the latter days in which its restoration has no place.

Such is the great prophecy in the second part of Isaiah in which Cyrus is the anointed of Yahwe, and the grace promised to David is transferred to ideal Israel ( 'the servant of Yahwe' ) as a whole (Is. 55:3). So too there is no allusion to a human kingship in Joel or in Malachi, and in the Book of Daniel it is collective Israel that appears under the symbol of a son of man, and receives the kingdom (7:13, 7:18, 7:22, 7:27).

[On the other hand in Hag. 2:23, Zech. 3:8, 6:12 the hope of the Messiah is connected with the name of Zerubbabel, and, possibly in the early Greek period, a prophetic writer has given us the fine prophecy of a victorious but 'humble' Messiah in Zech. 9:9-10. Some critics, too, refer to a late post-exilic period the prophecies of a personal Messiah in Isaiah and Micah mentioned above (cp ISAIAH ii. , 6-7. ; MICAH [BOOK]), and it is undeniable that the Messianic king is referred to in the Psalter (see PSALMS, 14).

1 [For references to recent criticism, see ISAIAH [ii.], MICAH [ii.]. Prof. \V. R. Smith referred in this connection to passages in Amos and Hosea as pointing forward to a Davidic king. The genuineness of the whole passage Am. ( 8-15, has, however, been shown to be very doubtful (see AMOS, 10), and though Hosea in 8 4 appears to refer to the illegitimacy of the northern king dom, the words and David their king (C2^D TltTKi) n Hos. 85 are certainly a gloss in the interests of Judah. The strong tendency of recent criticism is to include other favourite Messi anic passages in the list of later insertions, springing from a time when the Messianic idea had experienced a rich develop ment, e.g-., Hos. 1:11 [22] Mic. 2:12-13, Is. 11:10, 33:17 (with the sections to which the last two passages belong (and perhaps Gen. 49:10 (on which cp Dr./. Phil. 14:28), in case n^ s? > s a corruption of r9ff, and the writer alludes to Ezek. 21 27 [32], which he interprets Messianically. See, however, SHILOH ii.]

2 [Is this designation of the Messianic king suggested by Is. 42? It is true, the sfmah of Yahwe (ni.T rtSS) there is ex plained by most either of the fertility of the soil or (cp Is. 60 21) of the new growth of pious inhabitants in the Messianic age (cp ISAIAH ii., 5). On the other hand, in Zech. 38 6 12 OCX already appears as a kind of proper name.]

4. Later conception.[edit]

Meantime, however, the decay and ultimate silence of the living prophetic word concurred with the prolonged political servitude of the nation to produce a most important change in the type of the Hebrew religion. The prophets had never sought to add to the religious unity of their teaching unity in the pictorial form in which from time to time they depicted the final judgment and future glory. For this there was a religious reason. To them the kingship of Yahwe was not a mere ideal, but an actual reality.

Its full manifestation, indeed, to the eye of sense and to the unbelieving world, lay in the future ; but true faith found a present stay in the sovereignty of Yahwe, daily exhibited in providence and interpreted to each generation by the voice of the prophets. And, while Yahwe s kingship was a living and present fact, it refused to be formulated in fixed invariable shape.

When the prophets ceased, however, and their place was taken by the scribes, the interpreters of the written word, when at the same time the yoke of foreign oppressors rested continually on the land, Israel no longer felt itself a living nation, and Yahwe's kingship, which presupposed a living nation, found not even the most inadequate expression in daily political life. Yahwe was still the lawgiver of Israel ; but his law was written in a book, and he was not present to administer it. He was still the hope of Israel ; but the hope was all dissevered from the present ; it too was to be read in books, and these were interpreted of a future which was no longer, as it had been to the prophets, the ideal development of forces already at work in Israel, but wholly new and supernatural. The present was a blank, in which religious duty was summed up in patient obedience to the law and penitent submission to the Divine chastisements ; the living realities of divine grace were but memories of the past, or visions of the world to come. The scribes, who in this period took the place of the prophets as the leaders of religious thought, were mainly busied with the law ; but no religion can subsist on mere law ; and the systematisation of the prophetic hopes, and of those more ideal parts of the other sacred literature which, because ideal and dissevered from the present, were now set in one line with the prophecies, went on side by side with the systematisation of the law, by means of a harmonistic exegesis, which sought to gather up every prophetic image in one grand panorama of the issues of Israel's and the world's history.

1 See JOEL, 6, and ZECHARIAH, 3+. Compare Dan. 9:2 for the use of the older prophecies in the solution of new problems of faith.

5. Post-canonical.[edit]

The beginnings of this process can probably be traced within the canon itself, in the book of Joel and the last chapters of Zechariah ; l and, if this be so, we see from Zech. 9 that the picture of the ideal king early claimed a place in such constructions. The full development of the method belongs, however, to the post-canonical literature, and was naturally much less regular and rapid than the growth of the legal traditions of the scribes.

The attempt to form a schematic eschatology left so much room for the play of individual fancy that its results could not quickly take fixed dogmatic shape ; and it did not appeal to all minds alike or equally at all times. It was in crises of national anguish that men turned most eagerly to the prophecies, and sought to construe their teachings as a promise of speedy deliver ance in such elaborate schemes of the incoming of the future glory as fill the APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE (q.v.). Rut these books, however influential, had no public authority, and when the yoke of oppression was lightened but a little their enthusiasm lost much of its contagious power. It is therefore not safe to measure the general growth of eschatological doctrine by the apocalyptic books, of which Daniel alone attained a canonical position.

In the Apocrypha eschatology has a very small place ; but there is enough to show that the hope of Israel was never forgotten, and that the imagery of the prophets had moulded that hope into certain fixed forms which were taken with a literalness not contemplated by the prophets themselves (see ESCHATOLOGY, 58, a). It was, however, only very gradually that the figure and name of the Messiah acquired the prominence which they have in later Jewish doctrine of the last things and in the official exegesis of the Targums. In the very developed eschatology of Daniel they are, as we have seen, altogether wanting, and in the Apocrypha, both before and after the Maccabee revival, the everlasting throne of David s house is a mere historical reminiscence (Ecclus. 47:11, 1 Macc. 2:57). So long as the wars of independence worthily occupied the energies of the Palestinian Jews, and the Hasmonoean sovereignty promised a measure of independence and felicity under the law, in which the people were ready to acquiesce, at least, till the rise of a new prophet (1 Macc. 14:41), the hope that connected itself with the house of David was not likely to rise to fresh life, especially as a con siderable proportion of the not very many passages of scripture which speak of the ideal king might with a little straining be applied to the rising star of the new dynasty (cp the language of 1 Macc. 14:4-15).

It is only in Alexandria, where the Jews were still subject to the yoke of the Gentile, that at this time (about 140 B.C.) we find the oldest Sibylline verses (36:52-53) proclaiming the approach of the righteous king whom God shall raise up from the East (Is. 41:2) to establish peace on earth and inaugurate the sovereignty of the prophets in a regenerate world. The name Messiah is still lacking, and the central point of the prophecy is not the reign of the deliverer but the subjection of all nations to the law and the temple.*

6. Pharisees.[edit]

With the growing weakness and corruption of the Hasmonaean princes, and the alienation of a large part of the nation from their cause, the hope of a better kingship begins to appear in Judaea also ; at first darkly shadowed forth in the Book of Enoch (chap. 90), where the white steer, the future leader of God s herd after the deliverance from the heathen, stands in a certain contrast to the inadequate sovereignty of the actual dynasty (the horned lambs) ; and then much more clearly, and for the first time with use of the name Messiah, in the Psalter of Solomon, the chief document of the protest of Pharisaism against its enemies, the later Hasmonasans.

It was a struggle for mastery between a secularised hierarchy on the one hand (to whom the theocracy was only a name), whose whole interests were those of their own selfish politics, and on the other hand a party (to which God and the law were all in all) whose influence depended on the maintenance of the doctrine that the exact fulfilling of the law according to the precepts of the scribes was the absorbing vocation of Israel. This doctrine had grown up in the political nullity of Judaea under Persian and Grecian rule, and no government that pos sessed or aimed at political independence could possibly show constant deference to the punctilios of the schoolmen.

The Pharisees themselves could not but see that their principles were politically impotent ; the most scrupulous observance of the Sabbath, for example and this was the culminating point of legality could not thrust back the arms of the heathen. Thus the party of the scribes, when they came into conflict with an active political power, which at the same time claimed to represent the theocratic interests of Israel, were compelled to lay fresh stress on the doctrine that the true deliverance of Israel must come from God, not from man. We have seen indeed that the legalism which accepted Yahwe as legislator, while admitting that his executive sovereignty as judge and captain of Israel was for the time dormant, would from the first have been a self-destructive position without the complementary hope of a future vindication of divine justice and mercy, when the God of Israel should return to reign over his people for ever. Before the Maccabee revival the spirit of nationality was so dead that this hope lay in the background ; the ethical and devotional aspects of religion under the law held the first place, and the monotony of political servitude gave little occasion for the observation that a true national life requires a personal leader as well as a written law. But now the Jews were a nation once more, and national ideas came to the front. In the Hasmonaean sovereignty these ideas took a political form, and the result was the secularisation of the kingdom of God for the sake of a harsh and rapacious aristocracy. The nation threw itself on the side of the Pharisees ; but it did so in no mere spirit of punctilious legalism, but with the ardour of a national enthusiasm deceived in its dearest hopes, and turning for help from the delusive kingship of the Hasmonasans to the true kingship of Yahwe, and to his vicegerent the king of David's house.

1 In Sibyl!. 8775, i/ijdv must undoubtedly be read for vlov.

It is in this connection that the doctrine and name of the Messiah appear in the Psalter of Solomon. See especially Ps. 17, where the eternal kingship of the house of David, so long forgotten, is seized on as the proof that the Hasmonasans have no divine right.

This conception of the kingship is traced in lines too firm to be those of a first essay ; it had doubtless grown up as an integral part of the religious protest against the Hasmonaeans. And while the polemical motive is obvious, and the argument from prophecy against the legitimacy of a non-Davidic dynasty is quite in the manner of the scribes, the spirit of theocratic fervour which inspires the picture of the Messiah marks the fusion of Pharisaism with the national religious feeling of the Maccabee revival.

7. NT times.[edit]

It is this national feeling that, claiming a leader against the Romans as well as deliverance from the Sadducee aristocracy, again sets the idea of the kingship rather than that of resurrection and individual retribution in the central place which it had lost since the captivity. Hence forward the doctrine of the Messiah is at once the centre of popular hope and the object of theological culture. The NT is the best evidence of its influence on the masses (see especially Mt. 21:9 ; cp also Jn. 4:25) ; and the exegesis of the Targums, which in its beginnings doubtless reaches back before the time of Christ, shows how it was fostered by the Rabbins and preached in the synagogues. 1 Its diffusion far beyond Palestine, and in circles least accessible to such ideas, is proved by the fact that Philo himself (De Praem, et Pen., 16) gives a Messianic interpretation of Nu. 24:17 (LXX). It must not indeed be supposed that the doctrine was as yet the undisputed part of Hebrew faith which it became when the fall of the state and the antithesis to Christianity threw all Jewish thought into the lines of the Pharisees. It has, for example, no place in the Assumptio Mosis or in Eth. En. 1-36, 91-104 (cp APOCALYPTIC, 27, 29, 65 ; ESCHATOLOGY, 59, 65, 73). But, as the fatal struggle with Rome became mure and more imminent, the eschatological hopes which increasingly absorbed the Hebrew mind all group themselves round the person of the Messiah.

In the later parts of the Book of Enoch (the symbols of chaps. 45 f.), the judgment day of the Messiah (identified with Daniel's 'son of Man') stands in the forefront of the eschatological picture. Josephus (BJ 65, 4) testifies that the belief in the immediate appearance of the Messianic king gave the chief impulse to the war that ended in the destruction of the Jewish state ; after the fall of the temple the last apocalypses (Baruch, 4 Ezra) still loudly proclaim the near victory of the God-sent king; and Bar Kocheba, the leader of the revolt against Hadrian, was actually greeted as the Messiah by Rabbi Akiba (cp Lk. 2l:8). These hopes were again quenched in blood. The political idea of the Messiah, the restorer of the Jewish state, still finds utterance in the daily prayer of every Jew (the Sh mdne Esre), and is enshrined in the system of Rabbinical theology ; but its historical significance was buried in the ruins of Jerusalem.

1 The many Targumic passages that speak of the Messiah [especially in the Targum of Jonathan ( 'the king Messiah' )], are registered by Buxtorf, Lex. Chald., s.v.

8. Jesus.[edit]

But the proof written in fire and blood on the fair face of Palestine that the true kingdom of God could not be realised in the forms of an earthly state, and under the limitations of national particularism, was not the final refutation of the hope of the OT. Amidst the last convulsions of political Judaism a new and spiritual conception of the kingdom of God, of salvation, and of the Saviour of God's anointing, had shaped itself through the preaching, the death, and the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. 1 As applied to Jesus the name of Messiah lost all its political and national significance, for his victory over the world, whereby he approved himself the true captain of salvation, was consummated, not amidst the flash of earthly swords or the lurid glare of the lightnings of Elias, but in the atoning death through which he entered into the heavenly glory. Between the Messiah of the Jews and the Son of Man who came not to be ministered to but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many, there was on the surface little re semblance ; and from their standpoint the Pharisees reasoned not amiss that the marks of the Messiah were conspicuously absent from this Christ. But when we look at the deeper side of the Messianic conception in the Psalter of Solomon, at the heartfelt longing for a leader in the way of righteousness and acceptance with God which underlies the aspirations after political deliverance, we see that it was in no mere spirit of accommodation to prevailing language that Jesus did not disdain the name in which all the hopes of the OT were gathered up (cp JESUS, 26-27. ). The kingdom of God is the centre of all spiritual faith, and the per ception that that kingdom can never be realised without a personal centre, a representative of God with man and man with God, was the thought, reaching far beyond the narrow range of Pharisaic legalism, which was the last lesson of the vicissitudes of the OT dis pensation, the spiritual truth that lay beneath that last movement of Judaism which concentrated the hope of Israel in the person of the anointed of Yahwe.

9. Rabbinical development.[edit]

It would carry us too far to consider (1) the details of the conception of the Messiah and the Messianic times as they appear in the later apocalypses or in Rabbinical theology, and (2) the questions that arise as to the gradual extrication of the NT idea of the Christ from the elements of Jewish political doctrine. A word, however, is necessary as to the Rabbinical doctrine of the Messiah who surfers and dies for Israel, the Messiah son of Joseph or son of Ephraim, who in Jewish theology is distinguished from and subordinate to the victorious son of David. The developed form of this idea is almost certainly a product of the polemic with Chris tianity, in which the Rabbins were hard pressed by arguments from passages (especially Is. 53) which their own exegesis admitted to be Messianic, though it did not accept the Christian inferences as to the atoning death of the Messianic king.

That the Jews in the time of Christ believed in a suffering and atoning Messiah is, to say the least, unproved and highly improbable. See, besides the books above cited, De Wette, Opuscula; Wiinsche, Die Leiden ties Jfessias (1870). The opposite argument of King, The Yalkut on Zcchariah (Cam bridge, 1882), App. A, does not really prove more than that the doctrine of the Messiah Ben Joseph found points of attachment in older thought.

10. A Babylonian parallel.[edit]

[Among the non-Christian parallels to the belief in a Messiah a Babylonian parallel deserves special attention. 2 It is to be found in the legend of Dibbarra the Plague-god.

'Sea-coast against sea-coast, Elamite against Elamite, Cassite against Cassite, Kuthaean against Kuthaean, country against country, house against house, man against man. Brother is to show no mercy towards brother ; they shall kill one another.'

One cannot help comparing Mk. 13:8-12, Mt. 10:21. The countries mentioned are those nearest to Babylonia, which are to be a prey to war and anarchy until after a time the Akkadian will come, overthrow all and conquer all of them. The triumph of Hammurabi, king of Babylon, is foretold in this part of the poem or prophecy. This great king is to open a golden age of peace, and even if a Buddhist parallel to Is. 9:2-6, 11:1-9 may also be adduced, 1 it is historically very conceivable that a Babylonian belief may be the real parent both of this and of all other Messianic beliefs within the sphere of Babylonian influence. See further ARMAGEDDON.

1 [See the long series of OT passages explained in the NT of Jesus as the Messiah. ]

2 [Jastrow, Rel. of Bab. and Ass. 533.]

T. K. c. ]

11. Literature.[edit]

For an introduction to Messianic views of the apocalypses, see Schiir. ///, 28, 29 ; and cp Charles, Book o/ Enoch, and Ryle and James, Psalms of the Pharisees (i.e., the Psalter of Solomon, for the latest text of which see Gebhardt s edition, 1895). The Rabbinical statements are given in Weber, System der altsynagogalen paldstin. Theologie (1880; ft),Jiidische Theo logie auf Grund dcs Talmud, etc., 1897); cp also Schoettgen, Hor. Heb. et Talmud., Tom. ii., De Messia, 1742 ; Bertholdt, Christologia Judieorum (1811); Wiinsche, Die Leiden des Messias (1870) ; Neub. and Driver, The Jewish Interpreters of Isaiah, 53 (2 vols., i876_/T) ; Dalm. Der leidende u. der sterbende Messias der Synagoge im ersten nach-christl. Jahrtausend (1888). For larger surveys of the subject see Castelli, II Messia secondo gli Ebrei (1874), J. Drummond, The Jewish Messiah (1877), and V. H. Stanton, The Jewish and the Christian Messiah (1886). For a critical treatment of the OT material from different points of view, see v. Orelli, OT Prophecy of the Consummation of God s kingdom, 1882 (ET 1885); Riehm, Messianic Prophecy, 1885 (ET 1891); Delitzsch, Messianic Prophecies in historical succession, 1890 (ET 1891); Briggs, Messianic Prophecy (1886); WRS, The Prophets of Israel (1881), 302-310 ; Che. OPs. (1891), 22 36 200 238^ 338 f. ; Jewish Religious Life (1898), 94^ 243 ; Sta. Die Messiamsche Hoff- nung im Psalter, Zt. f. Theol. u. Kirche, 1892, pp. 369-413; Smend, A T Keligionss:eschichte (1893 ; I 2 ), 1899,), 230 f. 373 H. Schultz, OT Theol. 1889 (ET 1892), 43; Marti, Gesch. der Israelit. Rel. (1897), 190 f. 255 f. 289^ (the personal Messiah post -exilic) ; Loeb, La Litterature desPaui res dans la Bible (1892), p. 191 (the Messiah originally one of the Andwim, or spiritually poor, as in II. Isaiah, and then a scion of the house of David ; the doctrine in both phases post-exilic) ; C. A. Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels (1895); Volz, Die vorexilische Jahweprophetie und der Messias (1897), a lucid exhibition of the historical results of the latest criticism ; Dalman, messianische Texte aus der nach-kanonischen Litteratur (1898) ; Hiihn, Die messianischen IVeissagungen des israel-jtid. Volkes bis zu d. Targumim (1899-1900); and R. H. Charles, Eschatology, Hebrew, Jewish, and Christian (1899), passim. For the older literature see Schiirer (as above), and the bibliographical lists appended to Riehm's Messianic Prophecy, ET.

W. R. S. - E. K. , 1-9 ; T. K. C. , 10.

1 [Rhys David s Hit. Led. 1881, p. 141 ; Che. Je^v. Rtl. Lift, IOI.J

2 So <S, Vg. Pesh. (+ 'the small ones that were round about it' ) has a doublet, the variant being ]&sQJO0? \-l (?).




is a modern guess [RV mg] for the corrupt IDb of Job 38:36 ( ironciATtKi)!/ [cTriorT^j/i ] i.e., n ZJS f^]). The context forbids all the guesses of the ancients. See COCK.


(B&iTHpoyC [BA]), 1 Esd. 5:17 , RV BAITERUS (q.v. ).


(HDNH 37)$ ; THN A(J>copiC-MGNHN [BAL] ; frenum tributi ,\2to.^^i~36 )}. Two variously explained words (28.81) which AV (cp RV mg) apparently regards as the name of a place. The whole passage runs in AV, 'And after this it came to pass that David smote the Philistines, and subdued them : and David took Metheg-ammah out of the hand of the Philistines.' RV, however, renders Metheg-ammah by 'the bridle of the mother-city' (so, too, Ges. , Stade, Driver), which is supposed to mean 'the authority of the capital' (i.e. , of Gath ; cp i Ch. 18:1, where n"DN Trii3 i 'Gath and its towns', is substituted for 42liik f38d8).

There is no evidence, however, that ammah, nc, meant 'capital' in Hebrew, or that one of the five Philistine cities was regarded as the capital, and as having authority over the other four. The text is corrupt, and since LXX (rrjv d.<t>upicr/j.4vr]i> [aphorismenen = ch:an?) is here evidently based on an incorrect text, and the reading of i Ch. has the appearance of being a purely arbitrary emendation, we must set aside Ch. and LXX altogether, and endeavour to restore a text out of which MT and the text which underlies LXX may have been corrupted. In Exp. T, Oct. 1899, p. 47 / i it is proposed to emend 2 S. 8:1b into 'and he took Ashdod [i.e. , Ashdudimmu ; see ASHDOD], the city of the sea, out of the hand of the Philistines' (D ns>j?3"i p D ri linp TnB>N-rm np i). It is possible that the writer of 2 S. 8:1-6 (R.) had before him a text of 1 S. 7:14, in which the cities taken by the Philistines from the Israelites were described as lying between Ekron and Ashdod (but LXX " dirk AovcdXwj os frus Afo/3), and that he represented David as having (with foreign assistance ?) once more recovered these cities for Israel. The present writer suspects, however, that there has been a great misunderstanding relative to the name of the southern people against which both Saul and David warred, and that the true name was not Pelishtim (Philistines) but Sarephathlm (Zarephathites). See SAUL, ZAREPHATH. This theory affects many passages in i and 2 S., and among them 1 S. 7:14, where we should perhaps read, 'And the cities which the Zarephathites had taken from Israel were restored from Halusah (LXX B reads 'Ashkelon' ) as far as REHOBOTH, l and 2 S. 8:1, where we should not improbably read, '... David smote the Zarephathites, and subdued them, and David took the Maacathite region ( r3oya8rt) out of the hand of the Zarephathites'. The latter view accords with H. P. Smith s remark that 'Metheg-ammah', being described as taken 'out of the hand of the Philistines', must have been some tangible possession, probably a piece of territory. 2 On the district referred to, see MAACAH.

Both of the above emendations enable us to account for MT's HDNH JPD and LXX's probable reading vp-non- For earlier attempts to deal with the problems see the annotations of Wellhausen, Driver, Klostermann, and Kohler's judicious note (Bibl. Gesch. 2:244-245). The suggestion of Whitehouse (Acad., Feb. 2, 1890) and Sayce (Early Hist. Hebrews, 414 n.) that H8N is the Babylonian ammatu, 'mainland', earth, is hardly wanted; Sayce even considers the entire phrase to be a transcription of metek ammati, the road of the mainland (of Palestine). But if this had been adopted as a Hebrew geographical term, would it not have occurred again elsewhere? It is more natural to suppose corruption, jno an d nDNn are two corrupt fragments of ro4ysn. T. K. c.


(Win?), Gen.4:18 f AV, RV Methushael; and Methuselah (n^inp), Gen. 5:21-22, 25+. 1 Ch. 13. See CAINITES, 7 ; SETHITES.


RV (AV MEHUNIM, or MEHUNIMS, except in Neh. 7:52), a people, or peoples, of uncertain affinities, if the name is not due to textual errors.

(a) An explanatory note in 1 Ch. 4:39-41 makes this statement. In the time of Hezekiah certain Simeonites made a raid into Gedor (ihl-n) or rather Gerar (mj ; Ew., Ki., etc., yepapa), as far as the east of the valley (N>J, HA TTJS you), and took that wide, quiet, undisturbed land for themselves, destroying the original inhabitants, who were of Ham (QrrjD)i or rather 'of Jerahmeel' ([^NlDnlT] , cp HAM, ii.), 'and the Meunim that were found there' (so RV,3 following Kre, D Jiysn ; Kt. D ryD.T ; (Livaiow; [HA]; icii/at ows [L]). To understand the words 'for they that dwelt there aforetime', etc. (v. 40b), we must remember that Amalekites is probably only a distortion of Jerahmeel- ites (see JERAHMEEL, 4). Between a large part of the Jerah- meelites - i.e., Amalekites - and the Israelites there was a feud (i S. 15). It now becomes easier to understand the connection of vv. 39-41 with vv. 42-43. Those of the Jerahmeelites that had escaped from the slaughter mentioned in v. 41 were killed by the Simeonites in Mt. Seir. The wide, quiet land spoken of, to the E. of the gai (i.e., the Wady Jerur ; see GERAR), is according to Buhl E. of the Wady Mayin, near the Biyar Mayin, or wells of Mayin, which are two in number, and have a water which is sweet as the waters of the Nile (see Palmer, Desert of the Exodus, 345). Possibly, as Buhl suggests, 4 the name Mayin is an echo of the ethnic name Meunim. Cp also Ma'an, the name of a district E. of Wady Musa, near Petra (cp Doughty, Ar. Des. 131-35).

1 Halusah (Ziklag) and Rehoboth should perhaps be read for ' Ashkelon and Gath' in 2 S. 1:20. See JASHER, BOOK OF, 2.

2 So, e.g., Jos. Ant. vii. 5 i : ical wo\\r)v rijs xuipas aTrore- H<W> os.

3 AV wrongly, the habitations ; Vg. habitatores.

4 Geschichte der Edoniiter, 42.

Some would refer in this connection to the Minaeans. There is a Minaean inscription in which a district called Misran and another district called Main al-Misr are mentioned as being under a Minaean governor. 1 According to Wi. this can only refer to the N. Arabian region el-Misr and the Minaean colonies in N. Arabia (AOFfr 29 337). Hommel also builds a theory upon this inscription (AHT 272^).

The criticism of the Hebrew text, however, has not been searching enough. D 3iyD (Meunim), like p 3:ij;n (MEONENIM) in Judg. 9:37, is a corruption of an indistinctly written p^DJf (Amalekites), which was a gloss on D ^NCnT (Jerahmeelites), now represented by the corrupt cirSnN (quite a common cor ruption)- Thus the Meunim give place to the Amalekites.

(b) In 2 Ch. 267 Uzziah is said to have been victorious against the Philistines, the Arabians in Gur-baal [7] (Vj^ TU), 2 and the Meunim (D ^yan ; jxeu/ai ous [B], fj.iva.iov>: [AL]). 3 But Sjn-llJ is a corruption of ^NOm (Jerahmeel), and D^IJJD ls to t> e ex plained as in (a).

(c) The third passage is 2 Ch. 20:1b, where most commentators now read 'some of the Meunim' (see Ki. in.SBOT;* MT D jiayriO, RV some of the Ammonites, but cp mg.) ; the b'ne Moab and the b'ne Ammon are mentioned just before. But the geography of 2 Ch. 20 as it now stands is not that of the original story, which must have spoken of Jehoshaphat's enemies as the b'ne Missur and the b'ne Jerahme'el. c.tcy ar >d D JDjnD are both probably corruptions of D ^NOnT (Jerahmeelites). See ZIZ. (Some MSS read D JiySTO ; has K T<av ii[f]iva.iiav [AB], e/c rSiv vltav a/n^-ann/i [L].)

(d) In Job 2:11 ZOPHAR the Naamathite is called in LXX M[e]iv<uW j3a<7tAus [M(e)inaion Basilens], and in 11:1 etc., 6 t/l(t)iva.lot, as if J1JTO. Hommel (Exp.T 8472; AHT 252) follows LXX; cp (a), end. See, however. ZOPHAR.

(e) The Maon of Judg. 10:12 is disputed (see MAONITES). Glaser and Hommel 5 insist on identifying Maon with the Minaeans. Cp Moore, Judges, 2:80.

(f) In 1 K. 11:18 Thenius and Stade (Gesc/i.W 1 302) read for Midian Maon, as making the route of Hadad, the young Edomitish prince, more intelligible. The whole section, how ever, needs the most searching criticism. From the city of Midian (so HA; MT L from Midian ) should be (some of) the servants of his father, which is a corrupt repetition from, v. 17. So Klo. (see Che. JQR 11 552 [1899], and cp HADAD).

(g) The 'children of [the] Meunim' (D :iyp ; AV MEHUNIM) are mentioned among the NETHINIM in the post-exilic list, Ezra 2:50, Neh. 7:52 (in 1 Esd. 5:31 MEANI, RV MAANI). The list being partly at least artificial no great stress can be laid on the name, which is possibly a corrupt form of Jerahme'elim. Children of captives (Buhl and others) are scarcely meant, for Nethinim is probably an expansion of Ethanim, 'Ethanites'. See NETHINIM. LXX's readings are: Ezra 2:50, fiarwe/oieii [B], ftoovveiij. [A], fiootv. [L] ; Neh. 7:52, /liecreii/ioju. [B], ^e<r<r. [K], fieeii/. [A], L as before ; 1 Esd. 6:31, /novel [B], fiaayt [A], ^oovei/u. [L]). T. K. C.


Ezek. 27:19 AVmg, RVmg, UZAL (q.v.)


pnt ^P, as if 'waters of gold' ?), apparently the grandfather of Mehetabel (Gen. 36:39, MGZOOB [AE], M6ZOO [-O], MA.IZOOB [ L ] , i Ch. 1:50, om. BA . MAIZAA.B [L])- Really, however, it is a place-name.

The name has been fancifully explained in various ways by the Rabbins (cp Onk., Abarbanel), but is probably (like DI-ZAHAB) a corruption of D li D, Misrim - i.e., the N. Arabian land of Musri, which is referred to thrice in the list of Edomite kings (vv. 32, 37, 39). Mehetabel is called 'daughter of Misran (psDt corrupted into VIBD), a daughter of Misrim' (o lsoX where Misrim is simply a variant of Misran. Cp Hommel, AHT 264 n. T. K. C.


(iTTSrpn), i Ch. 11 47 RV. AV MESOBAITE. See JAASIEL.


(|D>P), Ezra 10:25, Neh. 12:5 AV, RV MIJAMIN (q. v.).

1 Strabo (xvi. 42) speaks of the MIMUOI as dwelling by the Red Sea. On the current controversy relative to the Minaeans and their empire, see Glaser, Skizze der Gesch. u. Geogr. Arabiens, 2450-452 ; Hommel, Artfsiitze, 1 292 ( excursus ); Sayce, Crit. Man. y)ff. , but, against Glaser s theory, see ZDMG 44 505.

2 Ki., however, reads 7ia"11D i.e., Baal s Rock ( <?7ri TTJ TreYpa? [which Lagarde, however, takes to mean Petra and Sela]; Vg. Am. Turbaal). This might be a title of Jebel Maderah, or (Buhl, op. cit. 41) of the traditional Mt. Hor ; Ki. does not say.

3 Schwally (Th.LZ, 1893, col. 469) reads in v.7 C jieyn following Vg. (Amwonitas) ; cp v. 8, where Ammonites (MT, Vg.) is the usually accepted reading. B has /mii-aioi, AL /juracot.

4 Cp Greene, Hebrew Migration from Egypt, zt&f. 5 Hommel, Aufsatze, 3; AHT 251.


prop, 5 ; M eBAAA [BK], MABAR [A], M&BA.A.P [L]), one of David's heroes (1 Ch. 11:38). The name is a corruption of 'of Zobah' (see HAGRI).


(Db 3O, 'sweet odour' ? MABc&M [EL]), perhaps to he explained as Basemath [see 2], or less probably an old error for DB1D, in which case we may (with Hommel) compare marsimani, an Arabian tribe mentioned together with the Tamudi, etc. (Sargon's cylinder, l. 20, A A TV**, 146277; Sprenger, Geog. Arab. 205). The name may be the same as the yttcucrcu/xaceis [maisaimaneis] of Ptolemy.

1. A 'son' of Ishmael (Gen. 25:13, /j.aaa a.fj. [A], -v [^?L] ; 1 Ch. 1:29, fiturtra. [B], pa/Strap [A]) ; also

2. A 'son' of Simeon (i Ch. 4:25, ju.a/3a<ra/x [H], -v [A], fiaae/xa^i [L]), in both cases in which it occurs named immediately before Mishma. We may therefore suppose the Simeonite tribe to have had Ishmaelite affinities. Cp the name Basemath i.e., Ishmaelith [Che.] (see SALMAH); see GENEALOGIES i., 5.


pWD; MAZAR [BADEL]), a 'duke' ('alluph) or 'clan' ('eleph) of Edom (Gen. 36:42, 1 Ch. 1:53. MABCAp[A], BAM<MHA[L]). Eusebius and Jerome (OSW, 27763 137 n) speak of a large village called Mabsara (fj.apffa.pa), which still existed in Gebalene, subject to Petra. Hitzig (on Is. 346), however, identified it with Bozrah, which, like Mibzar in Gen. I.c. , is mentioned with Teman in Am. 1 12. See BOZRAH.

T. K. c.


the city of (1S-IV5P "W TTHr-HC MAC4>ACCA.T K<M TOON TYRIOON [B], TTOAeOOC OXYP^MATOC T.T. [AL]), Josh. 19:29 RV mg, AV 'the strong city Tyre', RV 'the fenced city of Tyre'. 'The fountain of the fortress of Tyre' (LXX) would be Ras el-'Ain (Di.). See TYRE; also HOSAH, RAMAH.


(X3 ), 2 S. 9:12 etc. RV, AV MICHA.