Encyclopaedia Biblica/Micah-Minister (chief)

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search


(H^p, 51 ; short for MICHAIAH [q.v.] or for an ethnic underlying this name ; M[G]IXA [BAL]).

1. A contemporary and fellow-worker of Isaiah ; his name is prefixed to the sixth of the books of the Twelve Prophets 1 (see below). Of his external circumstances we know nothing, save that he bore the surname the Morasthite (Mic. 1:1, Jer. 26:18; /a[e]txatas[BAQ], /xeaj [K in Jer.]), from his birth-place MORESHETH-GATH (q. v. ). The statement that he prophesied under Jotham, as well as under Ahaz and Hezekiah (li), is probably the remark of a later writer - the same who made the chronological insertions in Is. 1:1 and Hos. 1:1, who wished to indicate thereby that Isaiah, Hosea, and Micah were, roughly, contemporary (Nowack). The earliest date at which we know Micah to have prophesied is in the reign of Ahaz ; in 1:2+ he foretells the destruction of Samaria. Cp CHRONOLOGY (Table V, col. 797 f- ) The threat against Jerusalem in 812 was, however, according to Jer. 26:18+, pronounced in the time of Hezekiah. Micah, or a disciple of Micah, may in fact have sought to preserve the prophecy against Samaria by working it into a prophecy on the kingdom of Judah. That Micah prophesied as late as the reign of Manasseh, cannot be held to have been rendered probable (on Mic. 6f. see MICAH, BOOK OF, 4).

2. A man of the hill-country of Ephraim who built a shrine with objects of worship, and hired a Levite to perform the due services. The history of the carrying off of both priest and sacra by the tribe of DAN (q. v. ) as related in Judg. 17-18 is supposed to come from two sources, for the analysis of which see JUDGES, BOOK OF, 12 (no ip, 17:14, cp MICHAIAH, 6-7; /xeixcuas [B]).

The story is evidently intended to account for the foundation of the sanctuary of Dan, but has suffered greatly from the manipulation of editors.

1 On the strange gloss in 1 K. 22:18 which agrees with the opening clause of Mic. 1:2, see MICHAIAH, i.

There is an underlying tradition which perhaps had reference (as a searching criticism renders probable) not to the conquest of a city in the far north but to that of a place which seems to have been prominent in the early Israelitish traditions, viz., Halusah, 1 close to which was an important sanctuary called Bethel. One version of the conquest of Halusah, according to this theory, is given in Gen. 33 (see SHECHEM); another, in Judg. 17-18. The story begins with a certain Micah, whose name (see MiCHAlAH)indicates his Jerahmeelite origin. Helivesin the highlands of Mount Jerahmeel ('Ephraim' miswritten for Jerah- meel as in 1 S. 1:1, see RAMATHAIM-ZOPHIM). Being probably the head of a clan (cp Judg. 18:22), he had there a sanctuary of his own, and when a young man from Zarephath of Jerahmeel came to Mount Jerahmeel, seeking priestly employment, Micah received him as his priest. (Zarephath was apparently the headquarters of the clan of Moses, known as Levites ; see MOSES, 17). After this we learn that the path of this Jerah meelite was crossed by a party of Danites, who had been sent to explore the land of Missur on the N. Arabian border ; these Danites forced the young priest to accompany them, to give them divine oracles. They came to Halusah, and saw the people that dwelt therein . . . in Misrephath (Zarephath) of the Misrites (v. 27), etc. They captured and destroyed the city, which was in the valley that belongs to Rehoboth (v. 28). Then they rebuilt it, and called its name Dan, and set up there Micah s graven image, with the young Levite, who was of the Moses clan, as their first priest. The sanctuary is said to have lasted until the captivity of the ark^(vv. 30-31). See SHILOH ; but cp Moore's able and acute attempt to make the best of the received text.

3. b. MERIBBAAL (q.v. ); grandson of Jonathan in a genealogy of BENJAMIN (q.v. , 9, ii. /3), 1 Ch. 8:34 (/tux tt [B]), 940. In 2 S. 9:12 his name is written K3<n, MICHA. Note that one of his sons is called (1 Ch. 8:35) Melech, which the present writer has explained else where also as a distortion of Jerahmeel.

4. b. Shimei, a Reubenite, 1 Ch. 5:5 (7)\a [B]).

5. b. Uzziel, a Kohathite Levite ; 1 Ch. 23:20 (fiti.\as [B], (ii. [L]) = 2424yC (L m\aias once in v. 24 and om. in v. 25) where AV has MICHAH.

6. 1 Ch. 9:15 AV. See MICHAIAH, 6.

7. 2 Ch. 34:20. See MICHAIAH, 2. T. K. C.

MICAH (BOOK)[edit]

  • Early criticism (1).
  • Criticism in 1883 (2).
  • Later criticism (3).
  • Present position (4).
  • Bibliography (5).

1. Early criticism.[edit]

Until recently the book which bears the name of Micah was unaffected by the disintegrating tendency of modern criticism. Ewald was led by the peculiarities of chaps. 4-5, to say that they might conceivably, though by no means necessarily, be the work of a contemporary of Micah. He also proposed a critical view of chaps. 6-7, which is by no means destitute of plausibility, and he held that the comforting promise in 2:12-13 must be an interpolation from the margin. The decision of questions such as these, to which others have to be added, is of consider able importance, not only for our view of the date of Micah (on which [see MICAH i. , 1] the late editorial state ment in the heading is no authority) and of his character as a prophet, but also for the history of biblical religion. We shall, first of all ( 2), give an exposition of the state of criticism in 1883, and then (3-4) mention the points in which, since that date, the criticism of Micah has taken steps in advance.

1. 'Laish', like 'Luz', is, upon this theory, a corruption of ni ?7n, Halusah. See ISAAC, i ; SHECHEM ; ZIKLAG.

2 Read ninn for j lK.T Kimhi long ago declared that the land must mean the ark.

2. Criticism in 1883.[edit]

a. Chaps. 1-3 are (apart from 2 12 f. ) a well-connected prophecy of judgment. In a majestic exordium Yahwe himself is represented as coming forth in the thunderstorm from his heavenly palace, and descending on the mountains of Palestine, at once as witness against his people, and as the executer of judgment on their sins. Samaria is sentenced to destruction for idolatry ; and the blow extends also to Judah, which participates in the same guilt (ch. 1). Whilst Samaria is summarily dismissed, the sin of Judah is analysed at length in chaps. 2 and 3, in which the prophet deals no longer with idolatry, but with the corruption of society, and particularly of its leaders - the grasping aristocracy whose whole energies are concentrated on devouring the poor and depriving them of their littde holdings, the unjust judges and priests, the hireling and gluttonous prophets who make war against every one that does not put into their mouth (3:5), but are ever ready with assurances of Yahwe s favour to their patrons, the wealthy and noble sinners that fatten on the flesh of the poor. The pro phet speaks with the strongest personal sympathy of the sufferings of the peasantry at the hands of their lords, and contemplates with stern satisfaction the approach of the destroyer who shall carry into exile the luxurious sons of this race of petty tyrants (1:16), and leave them none to stretch the measuring line On a field in the con gregation of Yahwe (2:5). The centre of corruption is the capital, grown great on the blood and wrongs of the provincials, the seat of the cruel princes, the corrupt judges and diviners. 1 For their sake, the prophet con cludes, Zion shall be ploughed as a field, Jerusalem shall lie in ruins, and the temple hill return to jungle (3:12).

The internal disorders of the realm depicted by Micah are also prominent in Isaiah's prophecies ; they were closely connected, not only with the foreign complica tions due to the approach of the Assyrians, but also with the break-up of the old agrarian system within Israel, and with the rapid and uncompensated aggran disement of the nobles during those prosperous years vrhen the conquest of Edom by Amaziah and the occupa tion of the port of Elath by his son (2 Kings 14:7-22) placed the lucrative trade between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea in the hands of the rulers of Judah. On the other hand the democratic tone which distin guishes Micah from Isaiah is explained by the fact that Micah s home was not in the capital but in an insignifi cant country town. 2 He can contemplate without a shudder the ruin of the capital of the aristocracy because he is himself one of the oppressed people. Nor does this ruin seem to him to involve the captivity or ruin of the nation as a whole ; the congregation of Yahwe remains in Judaea when the oppressors are cast out (2:5) ; Yahwe s words are still good to those that walk uprightly ; the glory of Israel is driven to take refuge in Adullam (1:15), 3 as in the days when David's band of broken men was the true hope of the nation ; but there is no hint that it is banished from the land. Thus upon the prophecy of judgment we naturally expect to follow a prophecy of the reintegration of Yahwe's kingship in a better Israel, and this we find in 2:12-13 and in chaps. 4-5.

b. Both 2:12-13 and 4-5, however, present difficulties, and Kuenen (Ond. >, 2:350) remarks on the great differ ences of critical opinion. 2:12-13 seems to break the pointed contrast between 2:11 and 3:1 and is therefore re garded by some as a gloss, by others (e.g. , Ewald and Roorda), less plausibly, as an example of the false pro phecies in which the wicked rulers trusted. 4-5 is of course much more difficult. It is becoming more and more felt 4 that 4:11-13 stands in direct contradiction to 4:9-10, and indeed to 3:12.

The last two passages agree in speaking of the capture of Jerusalem ; the first declares Zion inviolable, and its capture an impossible profanation. Such a thought can hardly be Micah's, even if we resort to the violent harmonistic procedure of imagin ing that two quite distinct sieges, separated by a renewal of the theocracy, are spoken of in consecutive verses. An interpolation, however, in the spirit of such passages as Ezek. 38-39, Joel 3 [4], Zech. 14, is very conceivable in post-exilic times, and in connec tion with the growing impulse to seek a literal harmony of all prophecy on lines very different from the pre-exilic view in Jer. 26, that predictions of evil may be averted by repentance.

1 [On 28, the text of which is clearly corrupt, see WRS, Pro- phets, 427, and cp Wellh. ad loc.}

2 [Cp Prophets, 290.]

3 [The supposed reference, however, seems rather far-fetched. See MORASTHITE.]

4 [This was written in 1883. Cp Nowack, St. Kr., 1884,

Another difficulty lies in the words and thou shall come to Babylon in 4:10. Micah unquestionably looked for the destruction of Jerusalem as well as of Samaria in the near future and by the Assyrians (1:9); but, according to Jer. 26:17-18, this was -the. judgment which Hezekiah s repentance averted. It is easy to see that the words in Mic. 4:10 are a later gloss. 1 The prophetic thought is that the 'daughter (population) of Zion' shall not be saved by her present rulers or defensive strength ; she must come down from her bulwarks and dwell in the open field ; there, not within her proud ramparts, Yahwe will grant deliverance from her enemies. 2 This thought is in precise harmony with chs. 1-3, and equally characteristic is what follows in ch. 5. Micah s opposition to present tyranny expresses itself in recurrence to the old popular ideal of the first simple Davidic kingdom (48), to which he has already alluded in 1:15. These old days shall return once more. Again, guerilla bands 3 (inrm) gather to meet the foe as they did in the time of Philistine oppression. A new David, like him whose exploits in the district of Micah s home were still in the mouths of the common people, goes forth from Bethlehem to feed the flock in the strength of Yahwe. The kindred Hebrew nations are once more united to their brethren of Israel. The remnant of Jacob springs up in fresh vigour, inspiring terror among the surrounding peoples, and there is no lack of chosen captains ( 'seven shepherds and eight princes', 55) to lead them to victory against the Assyrian foe. The supports of that oppressive kingship which began with Solomon, the strongholds, the chariots and horses so foreign to the life of ancient Israel, are no more known ; they disappear together with the divina tions, the idols, the massebds and asherds. The high places, however, are left untouched. 4

c. Chap. 4:1-4. Some difficult problems are suggested by Mic. 4:1-4, which (excepting v. 4) occurs in a slightly modified form in Is. 22-4 (cp ISAIAH ii. , 5). The words have little connection with the context in Isaiah ; but whether we can safely ascribe them to Micah is uncertain.

The ideas do not reappear in chap. 5, and the whole prophecy would perhaps be more consecutive and homogeneous if 46 (where the dispersed and the suffering are, according to chap. 2, the victims of domestic not of foreign oppression) followed directly on 812. At the same time we can hardly say that the passage belongs to a later stage of prophetic thought than the eighth century B.C.*

d. Chap. 6:1-7:6. That chaps. 1-5 form a single well- connected Book of Micah, can be held (WRS, Proph. 427). No sooner, however, do we get into chap. 6, than new phenomena present themselves. Yahwe appears to plead with his people for their sins ; but the sinners are no longer a careless and oppressive aristocracy buoyed up by deceptive assurances of Yahwe s help, by pro phecies of wine and strong drink ; they are bowed down by a religion of terror, wearied with attempts to pro pitiate an angry God by countless offerings, and even by the sacrifice of the first-born. Meantime the sub stance of true religion is forgotten ; fraud and deceit reign in all classes, the 'works of the house of Ahab' 6 are observed (worship of foreign gods). Yahwe's judgments are multiplied against the land, and the issue can be nothing else than its total desolation. All these marks fit exactly the evil times of Manasseh as described in 2 K. 21. Chap. 7:1-6, in which the public and private corruption of a hopeless age is bitterly bewailed, obviously belongs to the same context. Micah may very well have lived into Manasseh s reign ; but, without appealing to the title, we can see clearly that the style differs from that of the earlier part of the book. It is therefore prudent to regard the prophecy as anonymous. So far at least we may go with Ewald.

1 [So Kuenen, Th.T 6291 [1872]; Ond. ( 4 2 74, note 9 ; cp Che. Micah, 1882, pp. 387: ; Driver, Intr. (6) 32 g/. ; Nowack, ad loc.; G. A. Smith (Twelve Prof hets, I ?,(,%) thinks that the words may be, but are not necessarily, a gloss. A keener textual criticism seems to be required in order to arrive at a fully satisfactory solution. See 4.]

2 [See, however, 4.]

3 [Probably the writer would have modified this view of an obscure and very doubtful phrase. See Wellhausen and Nowack ; also Crit. Bib., where "USD n2 is proposed, 111;! being due to dittography.]

4 [Hence it is generally inferred that 5:9-13 are pre-deutero-nomic ; see Nowack, p. 213.]

5 {See, however, ISAIAH ii., 5, n. i, and cp Marti,/**. 27^ ; Nowack, A7. Proph. 206.]

6 [Mic. 6:16 also speaks of the Statutes of Omri. How obscure both phrases are, will be seen from Nowack's note. On the text, see 4.]

e. Chap. 7:7-20. With 7:6, as Wellhausen justly re marks, the record breaks off abruptly ; vv. 7-20 represent Zion as already fallen before the heathen, and her inhabi tants as pining in the darkness of captivity. The hope of Zion is in future restoration after she has patiently borne the chastisement of her sins. Then Yahwe shall arise mindful of his oath to the fathers, Israel shall be for given and restored, and the heathen humbled. The faith and hope which breathe in this passage have the closest affinities with the book of Lamentations and Is. 40-66. w. K. s. T. K. C.

3. Later criticism.[edit]

In revising the above conclusions the writer would probably have made larger concessions to the criticism of Wellhausen, whose edition of the Minor Prophets supplements (so far as Micah is criticism. concerned) his remarks in Bleek's Einl.W (1878), pp. 4257". Stade, too, would perhaps have re ceived fuller justice. For though we painfully miss the detailed introduction to Micah, with which some critical scholar, not tied to the Massoretic text, must one day present us, it would seem that Stade s pioneering work is the most important and influential which has yet been done on this part of the prophetic literature.

There are still no doubt representatives of a mediating and even a conservative criticism.

Konig, for instance, thinks it enough (Einl. 328) in reply to Stade's remark that Mic. 4-5. refers, not to some definite nation or nations, but vaguely to many peoples to appeal to Is. 89 29 7 Jer. 317. On these passages, however, a keener criticism has much to say which Konig overlooks. In 4:10 he recognises no doubt an insertion, but somewhat strangely assigns it to the last years before the exile. On chs. 6-7 he agrees with Ewald.

Driver (Intr. I 6 , 328) is even more cautious. He thinks that the existing book of Micah is a collection of excerpts, in some cases fragmentary excerpts, from the entire series of the prophet s discourses, 1 and though he admits that there is much probability in Ewald's date for 6:1-7:6, he thinks, in accordance with Wellhausen, 1 that this does not quite exclude the authorship of Micah.

Ryssel is entirely, and Wildeboer and Elhorst are pre dominantly, conservative. The theory of Elhorst is ingeniously novel. He accounts for the present arrange ment or rather disarrangement of Micah by an elaborate theory respecting the transcribers, who may have had before them the prophecies written in columns, and may partly have misunderstood, partly have economised space, and have thrown the whole book into confusion. That 4:9-14 [5:1] and 5:8 [9] are post-exilic, even Elhorst frankly admits. Kuenen, the greatest of Dutch critics, agrees with Ewald as to 6:1-7:6; 7:7-20 he holds to be probably exilic, and 2:12-13. to be an exilic interpolation. So too the passages 4:6-8, 4:11-13 and 6;9-14 in their present form are held to be exilic and post-exilic ; but 4:1-4 Kuenen regards as pre-exilic, though not the work either of Micah or of Isaiah.

1 Wellhausen, however, feels a difficulty in assigning to Micah the expressions ;pjviD DH3V rT3D (v. 4) and mrv mplS (v. 5).

4. Present position of criticism.[edit]

We now pass to the consideration of the doubtful passages in Micah from the point of view indicated in the article ISAIAH (ii. ). To draw out in full the argument from phraseology and ideas would be a remunerative but too lengthy task ; it may, however, be hoped that the intrinsic probability of the results here given will com mend them to readers. Kosters has treated of the phraseology of 6:1-8, 6:9-16, 7:1-6, 7:7-20 in Th. T 27:269-270, 27:272-273. Such arguments, however, will in future have to take more account of probable corruptions of the Hebrew text, some of which will be here indicated.

(a) Our first pause is at 1:10-15, which, from its artificial paronomasias (see JQK 10:573-588), seems hardly more worthy of Micah than Is. 10:28-32 is worthy of Isaiah. It is plausible to refer the passage, not indeed to the time of Sennacherib, 1 but to an editor or supplementer, of literary rather than prophetic gifts, in the post-exilic period, when the outrages of the Edomites were still fresh in remembrance. 2

(b) 2:5-10. These passages do not fit into the context, and probably come from some other writing (Ruben). So, too, Nowack, as to v. 5.

(c) 2:12-13. This passage presupposes the Exile and the Dispersion, and presents phraseological resemblances to exilic and post-exilic works. 3 Presumably this passage has been substituted for one which was either too strongly expressed to please the late editor, or had become illegible.

(d) 82^3^. Superfluous and unimportant. See Nowack.

(e) It is hardly possible that the original collection of Micah's prophecies closed with the short prophecy of the desolation of Jerusalem in 3:12, and the question arises whether fragments of the true conclusion of Micah may not be imbedded in chaps. 4-5 which in their present form are clearly not the work of Micah, or indeed of any single writer. Opinions on this point are divided. Nowack thinks that 4:9-10a, 4:14 [5:1] and 6:9-13 may belong to Micah, though more parallels in writings of the age of that prophet would certainly be desirable. 4:1-4 and 5 ; 4:6-8 (cp 2:12-13), 5:2-6 [5:1-5] (not homogeneous); 5:7-9 [5:6-8] and 5:14 [5:15] are all post-exilic insertions ; possibly 5:24 were originally connected with 4:6-8. To the present writer, however, these results of Nowack appear to lack a sufficiently firm text-critical basis.

In the study of Micah, as elsewhere, the next step forward will have to be taken by critics who are not afraid to attempt the correction of the traditional text. Volz has already suggested that 5:9-14 [5:10-15] in its original form may have described how Yahwe's anger against the disobedient people of Judah showed itself in the destruction of the civil and religious institutions (cp Hos. 3:4) which had assumed a form displeasing to him, and that it is the natural sequel of 4:9-10a, 4:14 [5:1]. This suggestion appears to be right ; only the connected pas sage should be said to begin at 4:8, and does not include v. 14 (revised text), and we cannot safely say that any part of it is the genuine work of Micah. It is quite true that Micah may conceivably have spoken of a siege of Jerusalem ; but the description in 4:8-10a, 5:9-14 [6:10-15] may be post-exilic, even as the text now stands, and must be so, if it is, as we think, corrupt in certain im portant points (on v. 8 see OPHEL). On an improved textual basis we can affirm with much probability that some post-exilic writer, looking back on the Babylonian invasion, described in the style of prediction, how the N. Arabian peoples (whose outrages impressed most of the Jews much more than those of the Chaldaeans 4 ) came against Jerusalem, and carried away some of its inhabitants as captives, and how the civil and religious system of Judah, which was permeated with falsehood, was destroyed. From what context this passage was taken, we know not. The editor who placed it in the book of Micah appears to have sought to correct the severity of its tone. This he did by so transforming 5:9-14 [10-15] as to make it a prophecy of religious regeneration and also of judgment on heathen nations, and further, by inserting 4:10b-14, and 5:4-5 [5:3-4]. which tell how the Jews, while on Jerahmeelite soil, will be delivered, and how the Ishmaelite plunderers will suffer a crushing blow at Zarephath. 6 Henceforth, whenever a raid is attempted by Ishmaelites, there will be no lack of leaders to retaliate on the invaders.

1 Cp Smend, Rel.-gesch.P), 237, n. 2, end ; G. A. Smith, Twelve Prophets, \ 362.

2 Read probably in 1:15b, unto Jerahmeel (not, unto Adul- lam) shall the glory of Israel come. Cp 4:10, where read, for thou shall go unto Babylon, thou shall go unlo Jerahmeel.

3 On the exegesis, cp Driver {Expositor, 1887 , 263-269), who takes the king to be ihe Messiah. The parallelism, however, favours another view (the king = Yahwe ; cp Is. 52:12 Jer. 318^".). So Nowack.

  • Note in this connection that Jer. 50_/?, commonly regarded

as a prophecy against Babylon, may possibly refer in part to Jerahmeel (see LEB-KAMAI, MERATHAIM, SHESHACH).

6 At Zarephath (rtm 3) has become in the traditional text B^B S ; similar corruptions of nSIX probably occur in the Psalter. See Crit. Bib.

Another writer, devoted to the Messianic hope, inserted (5:1, 5:3 [5:2, 5:4]) a prediction of the Messiah, who was to come from Beth-ephrath, i.e., Bethlehem (see EPHRATH, 2); 5:2 [5:3] is evidently a later gloss, affirming that the depression of Israel will last only till the birth of the Messiah. Still another writer, to whom the kingship of Yahwe was hope and comfort enough, seems to have produced 1:12-13 and 4:6-7, with the object of mitigating chaps. 1-2 and 3 respectively, and also 5:6-8 [5:7-9] in explanation of the somewhat obscure prophecy in 5:4-5 [5:5-6]. 1 That 4:1-4 and 4:5 is of post-exilic origin, may here be assumed; v. 5, however, is later than vv. 1-4 (see Nowack).

(f) 6:1-8, 6:9-16, and 7:1-6 are generally grouped to gether, and are by some assigned (together with 7:7-20) to the time of Manasseh ; the complaints in 6:9+ and 7:1+ of far-reaching moral corruption, and of the disappearance of godly men (7:2), the reference to the statutes of Omri and all the works of the house of Ahab (6:16), and to the practice of the sacrifice of the firstborn (6:7) have been held to point to this date ; but the passages ought not to be grouped together.

1. 6:1-8 is in the optimistic, rhetorical tone of Deuteronomy (cp Dt. 4:26, 5:29, 10:12-13), and may fitly be grouped with Ps.8l:8-15 [81:9-17], and perhaps 50:7-15, and Is. 48:22-28. It is a literary rather than, in the full sense of the word, a prophetic work, and certainly not pre-exilic. The special reference to the Zarephathites and the Jerahmeelites ( = the Philistines and the Amalekites) which most probably occurs in 6:4 {2} favours this view. The passage must surely be incomplete, and we may well suppose that it originally closed with a prophecy of the renewed expulsion of the Jerahmeelites from Canaan such as we can trace with virtual certainty underneath the text of Ps. 81:17 [8:16],

From those of Jerahmeel would I rescue him,
From Missur and Zarephath would I deliver him.

The reference to the most awful form of sacrifice in 6:7 seems to be as purely rhetorical as that to rivers of oil. The writer may have gone on to say that Yahwe took no pleasure in any sacrifice but that of obedience, and that if that had only been rendered, Yahwe would have delivered his people from the Arabians.

2. 6;9-16 is not stronger in its complaints of the prevalence of fraud than many of the psalms. The obscure phrases in v. 16, supposed to require a pre-exilic date, because they contain the names of Omri and Ahab, are better regarded as corrupt ; <-|Dy should be O DIN, and 3NnN should be ^unnT. The psalmists speak of a faction of wicked lawless Jews, who acted in concert with the Edomite oppressors.

3. 7:1-6 reminds us of Pss. 12 14 58 Is. 56 n-57 i 59 i-i$a. Cp fntr. A. 317^ Verse 56 may perhaps suggest the existence of mixed marriages (cp Ezra 9_/I).

(g) 7:7-20 - We have seen already ( 2, end) that 7:7-20 has distinctly post-exilic affinities. The enemy spoken of in vv. 8-10 is not Babylon, for there is no evidence that the Jews are now in Babylon. Nor is it the heathen world in general (Giesebrecht, Beitr. 149 ; Wellh. Kl. Pr.W, 149) ; this view depends on the accuracy of MT. The enemy is a personification of the people which, in the psalms, gives such trouble to pious Israel by the mocking question, 'Where is thy God' (Ps. 42:3-10, 79:10) - i.e., the people of N. Arabia : the Jerahmeelites or Edomites (see PSALMS, 28).

In v. 12 we should probably read, 'In that day those that are left of thee (I lKB :) shall come from Ishmael and the cities of Missur to the river (Euphrates)' - i.e., the Jews who are in N. Arabia and by the Euphrates shall hasten to the common centre, Jerusalem. And in v. 14 Yahwe's flock (Israel) is probably said, in the true text, to dwell not 'in the forest in the midst of Carmel', a but 'in Arabia, in the midst of Jerahmeel'. The passage reminds us of Lam. 5 where in v. 5, according to the most probable read ings, the Misrites and the Ishmaelites (i.e., the N. Arabians) are represented as the oppressors of the Jews (see LAMENTATIONS, 7 ; and cp PSALMS). It now becomes impossible to think of the years following the captivity of Tiglath-pileser for the com position of the passage (GASm. 373) ; Bashan and Gilead are referred to on account of their fertility (cp Ezek. 34:14), and as representing parts of Palestine into which the Jewish race and its religion had not yet, in early post-exilic times, penetrated. 1

Our result is that in no part of chaps. 4-7 can we venture to detect the hand of Micah. What the real Micah was, must be learned from chaps. 1-3, which are mostly genuine. The in serted and appended passages are, however, of the utmost value for the later period of Jewish religion, though the text needs careful examination.

1 Note jr-iKB> in all these passages, and cp Giesebrecht, Beitrage, 42.

2 'I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam' (6:4) is very strange, and still more unexpected is 'from Shittim unto Gilgal' (6:5). Probably Q i-|Dl pn WDTiN and ^)V\ iy D BSSTJ JD are both corruptions of Q ^MQjm D HSIS or rvpVojn D nB >l ?B, and PHEW comes by transposition from tj>Snj<. 64 should therefore run thus, - 'For I brought thee up out of the land of Misrim, and redeemed thee out of the house (territory) of the Arabians, and^I defeated before thee the Zarephathites and the Jerahmeelites' ( = the Philistines and the Amalekites). For very improb able explanations of the text, see Nowack's note.

3 G. A. Smith (437) omits Sm3 "pm 1JP in his translation, but in the note suggests dwelling alone like a bit of jungle in the midst of cultivated land. Yet if Bashan and Gilead are proper names must not -|y< and *?D"O be so too?

5. Literature[edit]

1. Introductory. C. P.Caspari, Ueb. Micha den Mora sthiten u. seine proph. Schrift, Bd. i., 1851 ; Bd. ii., 1852. V. Ryssel, Untersuch. iib. die Textgestalt u. die Echtheit des B. Micha (1887). Hoth works are very elaborate. Kue. OnJ.ft), 2 (1863) 345- 351 ; Ond.P) 2 (1889) 369-380 ; Dr. Introd.(*>) 325-334 ; Ko. KM. 327-331 ; Wildeboer, Letterkunde {*%<)), 174,^, 10, Micha en Jezaia ; Co. EM.P), iWff,; Sta. ZATW\ (1881) 161 ff. 3 (1883) i ff. ; 4 (1884) 291 ff. ; Now. ib. 4 277 ff. ; Kosters, De samenstelling van het boek Micha, Th.F i l (1893) 249-274 (primarily a review of Elhprst) ; Elhorst, De proph. Tan Micha (1891); Pont, Micha-studien, Theol. Studien, 1888, pp. 235^ ; 1889, pp. 436^ ; 1892, pp. 3297?:

2. Text.RySKl, see above ; Kue. in Etudes dtdiees a M. le Dr. C. Leemans (1885), 116-118: J. Taylor, The Mass. Text and the ancient Versions of Micah (1891) ; Ruben, Critical Re marks (1896), 12* 20-22 (on 11323-11 7 if.) ; WKS, Proph. 427 ff. ; Roorda and Wellhausen, see below (4). See also the pre ceding article, and Crit. Bib.

3. Monographs and notes. Caspar!, see above (i) ; Oort, 7h. T 5 (1871)501^". (on Mic. 5 i) ; 6 (1872)271^ (on Mic. 4 1-5): Kue. Th.TS^ff. (on 5i); de Goeje and Kue. Th.T Svjqff. (on 4 1-5); Giesebrecht, Beitr. 216-220; Smend, Rel.-geschw, 237, n. 2; WRS, /V<;>y4. (1882)287^; cp Introd. to 2nd ed.; Dr. Kxpos. 1887 <$, 261-269 (on Mic. 27 12 ff.) , Volz, Die vorexil. Jalfweprophetie (1897), 63-67.

4. Commentaries. Pocock (1677) I Pusey (1860) ; Roorda (1869); Reinke (1874); Che. (1882; Cambr. Bible); Wellh. (Kl. Proph.V-}, 1892, very good ; W [1898], lacks a more thorough revision of the text) ; GASm. Twelve Prophets, 1 (1896) 355^ ; Now. Kl. Proph. in HK (1898) 185^ (thorough, but in textual criticism lacks independence).

W. K. S. T. K. C. , 2 ; T. K. C. , I, 3/


(iT|3 ), 2 K. 22:12 etc. See MICHAIAH. For 2 Ch. 132 see MAACAH ii. , 3.

MICHA, RV MICA (N^D, abbrev. from -liT^ p, see MICHAIAH ; A/\[e]ix& [BNAL]).

1. Son of Mephibosheth (2 S. 9:12). See MICAH, 3.

2. A Levite signatory to the covenant (see EZRA i., 7), Neh.

10 1 1 [12] (om. BN*).

3. A Levite in list of inhabitants of Jerusalem (EzRA ii. , 5 [i], 15 [i]a\ 1 Ch. 9:15, Neh. 11:17 (/uax* [BN]) = i Ch. 9 15, cp Neh.

11 22 (a;u.eix a [N*])- See MICHAIAH (6).

4. RV MICAH, father of Ozias, Judith 6:15 (x e M a [A]).


(Wp ; M [e]iXAHA [BAFL]).

The name occurs frequently, but only in post-exilic writings. If it was always pronounced Mi-cha-el, it was doubtless taken to mean 'Who is like El' (cp Dt. 33:26, and see 24, 38) ; to the author of Daniel's visions it must have meant this. We must not, however, suppose that either this writer, or P, or the Chronicler, or any other post-exilic writer, coined the word as an expression of monotheistic faith. All that late writers did was gently to manipulate an ancient ethnic name so as to suggest the uniqueness of their God (see MICHAIAH).

On the history of the name Michael see Crit. Bit., where it is explained as a popular corruption of Jerahmeel.

1. An Asherite, father of SETHUR [j.7.] (Nu. 13:13). Other Asherite names corrupted from Jerahmeel occur in i Ch. 7:30-39, including Ahi, Imrah, Arab, Hanniel, and especially MALCHIEL.

2, 3. Two Gadites (i Ch. 5:13, /lo^ajjA. [L], 14). On v. 14 see Crit. Bib.

4. A name in the genealogy of Asaph (i Ch. 6:40 [6:25]). Note in same verse Malchiah, which is also no doubt based on a corruption of Jerahmeel.

5. b. Izrahiah, of Issachar (i Ch. 7:3). In the same genealogy note the names Rephaiah and Jeriel, also distortions of Jerahmeel.

6. b. Beriah in a genealogy of Benjamin (i Ch. 8:12+), which contains other distortions of Jerahmeel, such as Jeremoth and Jeroham. Cp BENJAMIN, 9, ii. |3.

7. A Manassite, one of David s warriors (1 Ch. 12:20). Note in same verse the Manassite name Elihu, another distortion of Jerahmeel (see JOB [BOOK], 9). Cp DAVID, it a, iii.

8. An Issacharite, father of OMRI [4] (i Ch. 27:18 ^eia-arjA [B]).

The forms /u.eio-ar)A, fii(rar)A, if correct, presuppose the read ing Mishael. Michael, however, is probably correct ; a variant (in the same verse) is Jehiel. Both Michael and Jehiel come from Jerahmeel ; MISHAEL (q.v.) has a different origin.

1 Cp Wellh. 7/C(l) 163. The view there taken of passages in Pss. 68 and 87 is, however, open to question on text-critical grounds.

9. A son of king Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. 21:2, fi[e]i<ra)A [BA]). Observe that Jehoshaphat's wife probably came from the Negeb (see SHILHI).

10. Father of Zebadiah, of the sons of SHEPHATIAH (q.v.) in Ezra's caravan, Ezra 8:8 (jia^ai)A [A])=i Esd. 8:34 (n(e ]i\ar)\oy [B, om. A]). See EZKA i., 2, 2 15 (i.) d.

11. Michael, one of the chief princes (o Jc xnn cnbn, Dan. 10:13), or 'the great prince' (ib. 12:1, Vnart lorn ; LXX 6 &yye\os 6 ntyas, the great angel ), the name given to the guardian angel of Israel (cp Dan. 10:21, 'your prince', and 12:1, 'Michael . . . stands for [supports] those belonging to thy people' ; cp Enoch 20:5). In this character he is referred to as opposed to the prince- angels of Persia and Greece (Dan. 10:13, 10:20). Possibly he is referred to in Mal. 31, 'Behold, I send mine angel, and he shall prepare the way before me', and Bar. 6:7 (Ep. of Jer. ), 'for mine angel is with you' (i.e., with Israel).

Probably enough the later meaning of Michael was the most influential reason for the name given to this archangel. However, another reason may also have had weight - viz., that (if the present writer s theory of Is. 29:1, Mic. 4:8 [see LO-RUHAMAH, OPHEL, and cp Crit. Bib.] be accepted) an early name of Jerusalem, known to Isaiah, was 'Jerahmeel'. When, through Babylonian and Persian influence, 1 names were given to the angels, it was natural that the four greatest should receive names representing the name Jerahmeel, which had once been borne by Jerusalem and which was still dear to an important section of the Jerusalem com munity (see PEREZ, ad fin.}. It is a remarkable proof of the unwillingness of the psalmists to encourage inno vations that, just as there is no Satan in the Psalter, so there is no trace of any angelic name, though the idea (also late) of patron angels of nations is not wanting (see ANGELS, 4, with note).

It will be noticed that the name of the opponent of Michael is not given in Daniel's vision (Dan. 10:13, 12:1). In Rev. 12, however (a chapter of non-Christian origin, see APOCALYPSE, 41), Michael and his angels are introduced fighting on behalf of the heavenly ones against 'the great dragon, the old serpent, who is called SidfioXos and 6 (raravas (v. 9). In the Babylonian myth the heavenly representative was the light god Marduk, and in the Book of Job and elsewhere Israel's God Yahwe takes Marduk's place (see BEHEMOTH, DRAGON). The transcendency of the divine nature, however, seemed to the writer of Daniel s visions to require that Yahwe should be represented by his archangel.

In Jewish theosophy Michael, who is sometimes designated osnaiEN. e TT ir p OTTOS, plays an important part. He is the chief and greatest of the four great angels ; 2 he stands at the right hand of the Almighty (Midr. Rab., Nu. 2:31), and is frequently opposed to Sammael, the enemy of God. Tradition connected him with many incidents in the history of Moses and especially with his burial (cp Targ. , Jon. on Dt. 346, Midr. Rab. n) ; and the altercation between this archangel and the devil, who claimed Moses body, on the ground that he had murdered the Egyptian (Ex. 2:12), related in the Assumptio Mosis, chap. 14 (cp APOCALYPTIC, 59), is alluded to in Jude 9." According to Kohut (Jiid. Angel. 24) Michael is parallel to Vohumano, Ahura's first masterpiece, one of the Zoroastrian Amesha-spentas or archangels.

See, further, Li tken, Erzengel Michael (1898). T. K. C.

1 Ifl Jer. Rfsfi hassanah, 56 a, Ber. rabbet, 48, it is said that the names of the months and of the angels came from Babylon.

2 Michael, Gabriel, Uriel, and Suriel (cp ZURIEL) or Raphael.

3 The words with which Michael repels the devil en-macron <rot icupios, are taken obviously from Zech. 82; cp .


), 1 Ch. 24:24 J. AV, RV MICAH


RV MICAIAH (PP^C nos. 2, 6 /., 1!"P3 P nos. 47"., and abnormally -liTIPp nos. i, 3, cp MICAH, 2; M[e]iXAiAC [BXAQ]). The name has a strange history. Like REPHAIAH [y.v.] it is properly one of the many popular corruptions of the tribal or ethnic name Jerahmeel (see MICAH, MICHA). Later writers, however, attached i to it as the final letter in order to suggest the idea of the peerlessness of Yahwe (see MICHAEL) ; it is very probable, too, that some of those who used the name Michaiah (without a final -u) were reminded by it of the uniqueness of their God. Thus viewed, it resembles (as Schrader long ago pointed out) 1 the Assyrian name Mannu-ki-ilu-rabu ( Who is like the great God? ), to which Mannu-ki-Ramman (Adad), Who is like Adad, may be added. The form in TD. wherever it is used with reference to pre-exilic times, is probably incorrect i.e. , the final i is due to an editor. It is worth noticing that the name of the man of Mt. Ephraim in Judg. 17 is called n rD (Micaiehu) only in vv. i 4 ; elsewhere he is called Micah ; also that i.TS D, Micaiahu, only occurs twice in the late Book of Chronicles (2 Ch. 13:2, 17:7) and that in one of these passages (2 Ch. 13:2) it corresponds to the mj.;p (Maachah) of 1 K. 15:2, 2 Ch. 11:20-21. Now myo is probably the original of Micah and of Micaiah ; and Micaiahu or Micaiehu (?) is a pious Jew's expansion of Micaiah. MAACAH itself is probably a corruption of Jerahme'el. For a good statement of the ordinary view it is enough to refer to Gray, HPN 157.

i. b. Imlah, a prophet who was consulted by Jehoshaphat with regard to the projected battle against the Syrians at Ramoth-Gilead, and for his unfavourable answer was imprisoned (i K. 22:8-28, 2 Ch. 18:7-27, ib. v. 8 iro D. Kt. ). The interpolation of words from the opening of the Book of Micah in i K. 22:28b (BL om.), 2 Ch. 18:27, indicates that he was sometimes con founded with Micah the Morasthite (see MICAH, i). The name was of course common. To prevent any doubts as to the origin of Jehoshaphat s contemporary, he is called ben Imlah ; now Imlah may be very plausibly regarded as a corruption of Jerahmeel (n^D* from ^NOrn").

2. Father of ACHBOR (?.v.), 2 K. 22:12 ; in 2 Ch. 34:20 na D i.e., MICAH (<B iA , however, fi[f]i^ata). His son's name Achbor, like his own, and like that of Ahikam, is a corruption of Jerahmeel. Cp PEREZ, ad fin.

3. b. Ciemariah, who was present when Baruch read the roll of Jeremiah (Jer. 30:11-13). He too was probably a Jerahmeelite. Gemariah has, like Gemalli and Gamaliel, probably grown out of Jerahmeel.

4. One of Jehoshaphat s commissioners for teaching the law (2 Ch. 17 7). The leader of the band is Ben-hail (from Ben- Jerahme el). This Micaiah, too, was evidently a Jerahmeelite.

5. 2 Ch. 132. See MAACAH, $/.

6. b. Zaccur, a name in an Asaphite genealogy (Neh. 1235). See MICHA, 3.

7. A priest in the procession at the dedication of the wall (see EZRA, ii., 13^), Neh. 1241 (BN*A om.). Among his com panions are Malchijah and Klam, both corruptions of Jerahmeel.

The remark made at the end of the article REPHAIAH (y.v.) seems to be fully justified. T. K. C.

1. Die Ass. -Bab. Keilinschriften, 147 (187?).

2. The statement in 1 S. 25:44, even if unhistorical, is valuable archaeologically. It may be illustrated by a severe law of ancient Egypt, referred to by Grenfell and Hunt (Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ii.), which permitted a father to take away his married daughter from a husband who displeased him. This law was set aside as inhuman by Roman prefects.


(VyO, 74 a, 'power '? or, like Abihail [see below] a corruption of Jerahme'el ; LXX MeAxoA I yu,o\xo\ 1 S. 19:17 [A once], /mf\xop\ i Ch. 15:29 [] i.e. , ?{O? [cp Pesh. ] = 7NOnT 1 ), younger daughter of Saul, if the statement in i S. 14:49 is correct (see MERAB), and wife of David. How she loved the youthful David and became his wife without purchase-money (mohar), as Saul's recognition of his prowess (1 S. 18:20+; see below) ; how by craft she saved his life (1 S. 19:11+) ; how for a time David and Michal were parted (1 S. 25:44) I 2 how at a later time David demanded her from Abner or Ishbosheth, and Palti, her husband, had to send her back (2 S. 3:13-16); how she mocked David for taking part in a sacred dance (2 S. 6:16, 6:20-23), was well known to the later tradition (see DAVID, SAUL). It is not difficult, however, to see that, from the romantic and idealistic tendency inherent in popular tradition, the marriage of David with Saul s daughter has been placed too early. It was only at Hebron that Michal became David's wife, and the marriage had the purely political object of uniting the tribes of Israel and the clans of Judah. 1 It was also only at Hebron that Michal bore David a child - viz. , Ithream (2 S. 3:5), whose mother's name in 2 S. is corruptly given as Eglah. This ITHREAM (q. v. ) seems to be the Jerimoth of 2 Ch. 11:18, where his mother's name is given as Abihail (read 'Abihail, daughter of Saul' ). The existence of this son of Michal, however, was apparently unknown to the writer of 2 S. 6:23, 2 where it is stated that 'Michal, bath Saul, had no child unto the day of her death'. Later generations seem to have been surprised not to hear of children of David by Michal, who (if Eglah is, like Michal, 1 a corruption of Abigail = Abihail) must have taken precedence of all David's other wives ( 'David's wife' is her description in 2 S. 35). An occasion for David s supposed dislike of Michal was therefore invented. In the unpleasing story in 2 S. 6:16, 6:20-23, David takes up the same attitude of a defender of an ancient but (to some) offensive religious custom as is taken by Samuel in 1 S. 15. On Michal's true name see further SAUL, 6 ; on her five sons (2 S. 21:8), see MERAB ; and on the name of her second husband, see MERAB, PHALTI.

The lateness of the story in 1 S. 18:25-27 is generally thought to be proved by its reference to the rilVlJ? of the Philistines. This however, presupposes the correctness of MT. It has (one may hope) been shown elsewhere that in no less than three passages 9lJ? h as been miswritten for Q ^NDnT, and that in 1 S. 18:25, omitting a gloss and a dittogram, the speech of Saul should run, The king desires not any purchase-money, but to be avenged on the Jerahmeelites. The story is nevertheless late. Winckler (C/2 179 zoo) agrees, so far as the lateness of the story is concerned. He also agrees that Michal was not connected with David till after the death of Ishbaal, when, to avoid the danger of pretenders to the crown, he obtained posses sion of Saul's daughter Michal and his grandson Meribbaal (MEPHIBOSHETH). T. K. C.


(Micheae), 4 Esd. 1:39 . See MICAH, i.


Michmas in Ezra 2:27 = Neh. 7:31 = 1 Esd. 5:21 MACALON (^DSD, DCOO, /v\&x(e)MAc ^"^j " ^ ^/i f- eK ^ K ^ A f WN [BA] M AK MAC [L]), the scene of one of the most striking episodes in OT history (1 S. 14, see SAUL, 2), was a place in Benjamin, about 9 R. m. N. of Jerusalem (0S 280:47 1405).

1. References and situation.[edit]

Though it did not rank as a city (Josh. 18:21-22), Michmash was recolonised after the exile (Neh. 11:31 ; /Mtx<x/u.as [BX*A]), and, favoured by the possession of excellent wheat land (Mishna, Men. 8:1), was still a very large village (Ma^as) in the time of Eusebius. The modern Muhmas is quite a small place. 3 [Conder found large stones, a vaulted cistern, and several rough rock tombs.]

The historical interest of Michmash is connected with the strategical importance of the position, commanding the N. side of the Pass of Michmash, which made it the headquarters of the Philistines and the centre of their forays in their attempt to quell the first rising under Saul, as it was also at a later date the headquarters of Jonathan the Hasmonaean (1 Macc. 9:73; /ictxMais fV a ]). From Jerusalem to Mount Ephraim there are two main routes. The present caravan road keeps the high ground to the W. near the watershed, and avoids the Pass of Michmash altogether. Another route, however, the importance of which in antiquity may be judged of from Is. 10:28-29 (/ttax/ua [N*]), led southwards from Ai over an undulating plateau to Michmash. Thus far the road is easy ; but at Michmash it descends into a very steep and rough valley, which has to be crossed before reascending to Geba. 1 At the bottom of the valley is the Pass of Michmash, a noble gorge with precipitous craggy sides; (on the difficulty of Bozez and Seneh in 1 S. 14:4 see 2). On the N. the crag is crowned by a sort of plateau sloping backwards into a round-topped hill. This little plateau about a mile E. of the present village of Muhmas, seems to have been the post of the Philistines, lying close to the centre of the insurrection, yet possessing unusually good communica tion with their establishments on Mount Ephraim by way of Ai and Bethel, and at the same time command ing the routes leading down to the Jordan from Ai and from Michmash itself.

1 So first Marq. Fund. 24. David s first wife would naturally come from a clan with which his own clan had connubium ; see 2 S. 3:2.

2 The list in 2 S. 3:2-5 comes from some special source (Klo.).

3 [According to Gautier, it has lately increased considerably.]

2. On 14:4-16.[edit]

A geographical and textual study of 1 S. 14:4-16, in continuation of SAUL, 2, will not be unfruitful. Geographically we are much indebted to Conder. He points out the accuracy of the passage in which Josephus describes the camp of the Philistines. It was, Josephus says, 'upon a precipice with three peaks ending in a small but sharp and long extremity, whilst there was a rock that surrounded them, like bulwarks to prevent the attack of an enemy' (Ant. vi. 62). Such a site actually exists on the E. of Michmash a high hill bounded by the precipices of Wady Suweinit on the S. , rising in three flat but narrow mounds, and communicating with the hill of Muhmas, which is much lower, by a long and narrow ridge, the southern slope of which is immensely steep. Towards Jeba (Geba), therefore, an almost impregnable front is presented ; but the communication in the rear is extremely easy ; the valley here is shallow, with sloping hills, and a fine road, affording easy access to Muhmas and the northern villages. The camp of Saul, according to Conder, was probably in those fields of Geba which must have lain E. of the village on the broad corn plateau overhanging Wady es-Suweinit. The 'holes' of the Hebrews (v. 11) are of course the line of caves on both sides of the Wady es-Suweinit. On one important point Conder corrects Robinson, who speaks (BR 1:441) of two hills (in the valley) of a conical or rather spherical form, having steep rocky sides, and corresponding to the Bozez and Seneh of 1 S. 14:4. The existence of these hills is denied by Conder. The valley, he says, is steep and narrow, each side formed of sharp ledges and precipitous cliffs. These craggy sides are called teeth, and each tooth receives a name, the one that of Bozez, the other that of Seneh. As Gautier (180, n. ) observes, however, the word "tooth" is not to be taken quite literally. The reference is to walls (cp RV 'crag' ) of rocks. He adds, it is impossible to say which of the two cliffs was called Bozez, and which Seneh ; moreover, the meaning of these two names is unknown. It is also important to notice, owing to the ambiguity of the phrase (*??D), that the southern wall - i.e., that turned northward - fronts Michmash, and that the northern wall, turned southward, fronts Geba. The two former points are real difficulties.

[C> cannot be used in the supposed sense ; it can indeed be used of the jagged points of rocks, but not for a wall of rock. |tf probably should be 13* (cp Aram. N13H a rock); j;?0n should be omitted as a gloss. Also the whole clause on the names (from Ci^l to n_3p) should be omitted as a corrupt form of v. 5. Note that piss in v. 5, like } S12 in v. 4, is a corruption of flSJfS.

We should probably render therefore, 'there was a wall of rock on the one side, and a wall of rock on the other side. The one wall of rock rose up on the N.', etc. See further the account in SAUL, 2.

Compare Conder, PEFQ, April 1874, p. 6r/ ; Teniivork 2ii2f.; Furrer, Wanderungen durch das heil. LamiP), 253^: (especially) ; Gautier, Souvenirs tie Terre Sainte, 177 ff. ; Miller, The Least oj all Lands, 85-115.

W. R. S. , I ; T. K. C. , 2.

1 So Is. 10:28 describes the invader as leaving his heavy baggage at Michmash before pushing on through the pass.


RV Michmethath (rmpSPH), a town, or (note the art.) district, mentioned in connection with ASHER (q.v. , ii. ), on the boundary between Ephraim and Manasseh, Josh. 166 (IKACMGON [B], M&x6toe [A], &x6. [ L JK !7; UHAANAO [B]. [ATTO ACHR] /v\Ax9co9 [A], [ATTO ACHR] THC M. [L])- See ASHER, 2 (and cp Buhl, Pal. 202).

Conder's theory that the plain E. of Nablus called el-Makhna is referred to may perhaps find support in the statement of Jos. (Ant. v. 1:22) that the Ephraimite territory extended north ward from Bethel to the Great Plain (an appellation which does not always in Jos. mean Esdraelon); but the appearance of corruption in both contexts renders it very uncertain. No emendation of the text has been offered.


(nDD, cp MACHIR [T3O] ; MAxeip [B], fi<>xop [A], fj.axei.pL [L]; so also Pesh. :^^.^.^d ), a Benjamite (see BENJAMIN, 9, iii.) inhabitant of Jerusalem (see EZRA ii. 5 W 15 [!]), i Ch. 9st, omitted in || Neh. 11:7. The name should perhaps be read Bichri ; cp BECHER.


(DnSP) in the headings of Pss. 16:56-60 ; also, by an easy conjecture, in Is. 38:9 (SDOT, with Stade and others for 3P13D, EV 'a writing' ). An old tradition finds the sense of 'inscription', as if the Michtam-psalms were to be inscribed on stones (<S Theod. <TT-r]\oypa.(f)la or els (TTTjXoypafliav ; so Quinta in Ps. 56 ; cp Tg. Nx in NB Sj, sculptura recta; Vet. Lat. tituli inscriptio}. Another favourite explanation was 'humble and perfect' (QR ip) ; the Targum adopts this, except in Pss. 16 and 60 ; 1 also Jerome, Aquila, and Sym- machus. De Dieu and many moderns (so, too, AV), after Ibn Ezra and Kimhi, derive from 'kethem' (ana) 'gold' ; as if the Michtam-psalms were honoured above others and perhaps even written in golden letters, like the Arabic poems called Mu'allakhat. All this is but ingenious trifling. The most probable solution is suggested by LXX's version of croo (for so the translator of Is. 38:9 probably reads) - viz. wpofffuxr [proseuche]) (so LXX B NGT ; LXX A (jJ5??, wpofftv-xri), which seems to correspond to narw or pjnn 'supplication'. The two most fertile sources of error - transposition and corruption of letters - have combined to produce the non-word nroo Michtam ; parallel cases are MASCHIL, MAHALATH. T. K. c.


d^P; AINCON[B], MAROON [A], M&AA6IN [L]), the doubtful name of a city in the wilderness of Judah (Josh. 15:61). LXX B suggests the reading 'Aenon' a place of springs ; the spot intended might be near Ain el-Feshkha, not far from which there are now two ruined places, Khirbet el-Feshkha and Khirbet el-Yahud (see BETH-ARABAH). LXX BA attributes the giant of 2 S. 21:20 to fiaSuv (EV 'of great stature' ). Another and preferable course is to read for pic, Turn (for which there are parallels). Missur would be a record of Misrite influence (see MIZRAIM).

The former identification, however, depends entirely on the correctness of the ordinary view of the 'Ir ham-melah' (EV 'city of Salt' ) and En-gedi in v. 62. If these two names are corrup tions of Ir-Jerahmeel and En-kadesh, it becomes probable that Middin, NIRSHAN, and SECACAH should be placed to the S. of Judah not too far from 'Ain Gadis. T. K. C.

1 In the heading of Ps. 60 Tg. has pens, 'a copy'.

2 C np in Gen. 37:36 is naturally a mere scribe's error, which could have been corrected from the context even if the Sam. text and had not preserved the true reading.


(tHP ; 2 MAAlAM. -AN ; in Judith 2:26, Acts 7:29 AV has MADIAN; gent. ^HP, O i MAAIHNAIOI [BADF], 01 MAAlNAIOI [L]).

The notices respecting the Midianites are by no means uniformly consistent. As to their occupation, we sometimes find them described as peaceful shepherds, sometimes as merchants, sometimes as roving warriors, delighting to raid the more settled districts. Knowing what we know, however, of the way of life of Arabian tribes, we need not regard these representations as in consistent. As to their geographical position, which is, for the comprehension of historical narratives, of much importance, we also meet with some diversity of tradi tion. We must first refer to the genealogy in Gen. 25; Midian is there (vv 1-2 = 1 Ch. 132) represented as a son of Abraham and KETURAH (q. v. }. The name Midian (more properly Madyan) does not appear to occur either in Egyptian or in Assyrian documents. Kriedrich Delitzsch, however (Par. 304 ; cp KA 7T J 146), identified the Hayapa of the cuneiform inscrip tions with EOHAH (q.v.), one of the sons of Midian i.e., a Midianite tribe. This identification, if correct, shows us (1) that nB y should be pronounced ns y or nS V (not nB y), and (2) that Midianites dwelt in the northern part of the Hijaz. The latter point follows from the fact that in Tiglath-pileser's time (745-727 B.C.) the Hayapa are mentioned with the people of Tema, a locality which is still so called (see ISHMAEL, 4), and in Sargon s reign (722-705 B.C.) with the tribe called Thamud, the later geographical position of which is known (AV? 22i). It is true, a late prophetic writer (Is. 60:6) speaks of the camels of Midian and Ephah, as if Midian and Ephah were distinct peoples. This, however, is unimportant, since the writer most prob ably derived the names from older writings. Another son of Midian in Genesis (I.c. ) is named EPHER (isy), who is identified by Knobel with the tribe of Ghiftir, which in the time of Muhammed had encampments near Medina. That is all the light shed by the Genesis genealogy on the geographical position of Midian. It is, however, historically suggestive that of the five sons of Midian in Gen. 25:4 three (Ephah, Epher, and Hanoch) have namesakes among the Israelites. It is probable enough that some Midianite clans became assimilated to Israel.

Proceeding to Exodus (3:1), we find the father-in-law of Moses described as priest of Midian (see HOBAB, JETHRO) ; and from the fact that in Judg 1:16 he is called, not the Midianite, but the Kenite (cp AMALEK), we may perhaps infer (though to be sure the conjecture is somewhat hazardous) that the Kenites, or at least a portion of them, were at one time or another reckoned as Midianites. However that may be, there is no doubt as to the inference next to be mentioned. It is stated in Ex. 3 1 that Moses led the flocks of his father-in-law to 'Horeb the mountain of God', from which it is plain that the narrator placed the Midianites in the Sinaitic peninsula i.e., apparently in the southern part of it. In the regal period (i K. 11:18) we find Midian represented as a district lying between Edom and Paran, on the way to Egypt i.e., somewhere in the N E. of the Sinaitic desert (but cp HADAD, where the correctness of the reading JHO is questioned). The poem at the end of Habakkuk also seems to place Midian in the region of Sinai (Hab. 87 ; cp CUSHAN). Lastly, in E's version of the tale of Joseph we read of Midianite traders journeying through the pasture grounds of Jacob's sons towards Egypt (Gen. 37:28a, 37:36 ; cp ISHMAEL, 3). None of these passages, however, gives us any information as to the geographical position of Midian.

Elsewhere in the OT the Midianites are described as dwelling to the E. of Israel. Abraham sends the sons of his concubines including Midian, eastward to the east country (Gen. 256) ; cp EAST [CHILDREN OF THE]. The story of Balaam, too, yields a not uninteresting geographical point. It has been shown by a critical analysis of Nu. 22 that, in one of the older forms of the story of Balaam, Midian took the place of Moab, and was represented as situated more to the E. than Moab.

The important struggle of the people of northern and central Palestine, under GIDEON (q.v. ) or JERUBBAAL, against the Midianites of the Syrian desert is related in Judg. 6-7 (a composite section - see JUDGES 5, 8). We have here a vivid presentation of the struggle, which so continually recurs in those countries on a greater or smaller scale, between the agricultural population and the wandering tribes of the desert. Of the Bedouins, in particular, we have an admirable picture.

Such passages as Judg. 8:24, 'for they had golden ear rings (or nose-rings?), because they were Ishmaelites', imply accurate knowledge (see RING, 2). The nomads must have come in full force against their neighbours to the W. , until the latter took courage, assembled their troops, and drove out the invaders. The memory of this was long cherished by tradition, as we see from Is. 9:4 [3], 10:26, Ps. 83:9-10 [83:10-11] (pafrafj. [R]). Whether the defeat of Midian by the Edomite king Hadad (Gen. 36:35) 'in the field of Moab' (see FIELD) - in the vicinity, therefore, of Gideon's last victories - may be brought into connection with this war, is a subject of controversy (see Ewald GVI( 3 ) 2:476 ; but cp BELA) ; it seems very probable.

It is a mere reflex of the story of Gideon that we find in the account of the war waged by the Israelites in the time of Moses against the Midianites, who had led them into sin (Nu. 25:6-9 ; on chap. 31, see Dillmann, and Driver, Introd.(6), 68, who recognise its secondary character). The narrative bears the stamp of artificiality and is thoroughly unhistorical. It is worth noticing that the writer places the home of the Midianites in the northern portion of Moab, which afterwards becomes the territory of the tribes of Reuben and Gad. (On the names of the 'five kings of Midian', see REKEM, ZUR, etc.)

This variety of statement as to the geographical position of the Midianites need not surprise us. Tribes that dwell in tents and breed camels - and as such the Midianites are represented in many passages of the OT - may shift their territory in the course of ages ; they are also liable to internal disruption, not to mention the fact that many tribes regularly move from place to place according to the season of the year. Moreover, the grouping of the tribes and clans is by no means constant ; hence we can easily understand that whilst in the Genesis lists Ishmael is a step-brother of Midian, in Judg. 8:24 the Midianites are represented as a branch of Ishmael.

Midian as a nation disappears from history at a very early period. Whilst, however, the principal sphere of the activity of the Midianites was the country to the E. of Israel, we find in a region at a considerable distance to the S. a trace of this people lasting down to the end of the middle ages and even to modern times.

Ptolemy (6:7) mentions a place called MoSuxya [modiana], on the coast of Arabia, and his definition of its position relatively to Ovvrj makes it certain that he refers to the locality which the Arabic geographers call Madyan, in the neighbourhood of Una ( 'Ain "Una, now pronounced 'Ainuna). Madyan is the first halting- place to the S. of Hakl, the second to the S. of Aila ('Akaba), on the pilgrim route to Mecca. According to an Arabic account the place is abundantly supplied with water, and so it was found to be by the famous traveller Riippell ; it was, therefore, peculiarly suitable for a permanent settlement. At present it is known as Maghair Sho'aih, 'the Caves of Sho'aih', after the name of the prophet of Madyan mentioned in the Koran. From this point Riippell reached Makna in seven hours, journeying in a WSW. direction. Madyan is, accordingly, almost exactly opposite the extremity of the Sinaitic peninsula ; though cut off by the sea, it is not far from the pasture-grounds of the ancient Midianite priest and from the district once inhabited by the Hayapa. Being only a short way from the sea it is treated by Ptolemy as a place on the coast, and even one of the ancient Arabic geographers describes it in similar terms. Nor can we be surprised to find that in the same passage of Ptolemy it appears again, under the name of Ma8ta/aa [madiama], as an inland place near Makna and Akale (Hakl). Double references of this kind occur elsewhere in the works of geographers who derived their information from several different itineraries and thus could hardly avoid such mistakes (see, however, Sprenger, Die alte Geog. Arab., 16, 209). The passage in Ptolemy excludes the notion that the place acquired the name of Madyan in con sequence of its being identified with the Madyan of the Koran, or in other words, that the name was borrowed indirectly from tn ? OT. A further proof of this is that the poet Kuthaiyir (died in 723 or 724 A.D.), who was very well acquainted with the district in question, also mentions the name. Perhaps even the mysterious figure of Sho'aih may have been derived from genuine Midianite tradition, and brought by Muhammed into connection with narratives of biblical origin. In any case the site must be one in which, at some time or another, a portion of the nomadic Midianites established a settlement, so that the name of this long-forgotten people became permanently attached to the spot.

Cp GEOGRAPHY, 12* ; GOLD; SINAI; and see Noldeke, Ueber die Amalekiter und einige andere Nachbarvdlker tier Israeliten (1864); Sir R. Burton, The Gold Mines of Midian (1878), and The Land of Midian Revisited (\%-]cj). 7-. N.


(trrip), 2 Ch. 13:22, 24:27 ; AV Story, RV Commentary. See CHRONICLES, 6 [ 2 ], HISTORICAL LITERATURE, 14.


(rnn r), Ex. 29:13 AV mg- See CAUL, LIVER.


(rn??P), Gen. 38:28 etc. See MEDICINE.


PN THJP, 'tower of God' ? - rather, like Migdal in some other cases, from 'Jerahmeel' ; Mep&AA [ARCIM] [B], MAfAAAm (COPAM) [A], MAP AA.AIHA (to.) [L]), a 'fenced city' of Naphtali (Josh. 19:38), mentioned with Iron and Beth-anath, and there fore most plausibly identified, not with Mejdel-Kerum (Knobel), nor with Mujedil (PEFMem. 196, after Gue rin), nor with a MAGDALA on the Sea of Galilee, but with Mejdel-Silim, between Mujedil and Hunin, well within the limits of Naphtali.

The name which follows, without the conjunctive particle, is HOREM [q.v.], which is evidently due to a mistake. The scribe glanced over Beth-anath and Beth-shemesh, and wrote 01 (whence Q-||-|) too soon. T. K. C.


(l|"?^f3O, tower of Gad, cp BAAL-GAD ; MA.rA.AA, [-A.A [B], MArAAAr. [AL]), a city in the lowland of Judah, included in the same group with Lachish and Eglon (Josh. 15:37), and possibly the Maktir or Migdal mentioned in a list of Rameses III. with places identified as Judahite (Sayce, RP C 2 , 639). It is not improbably the Magdali of Am. Tab. (237 26) mentioned with En-anab (see ANAB) and other places in S. Judah. Jerome gives it a bare mention as Magdala (0S139i2). GueYin (Jud. 2130-132) identifies this place with the large village el-Mejdel, two m. inland from Askalan. So fertile a district needed a protecting Migdal (tower). But surely this site is too near a Philistine fortress. El-Mejdel may be either the village with a strong tower near Ashkelon called Belzedek in Josephus (Z?/ iii. 23), or perhaps the inland city of ASHKELON (q.v. ). Remains of marble columns abound.

T. K. c.




P^P [^ "n^p J er -46i4]; MAfAcoAoc. castra, Vg. [cp Aq., Synim.] in Ex., turris in Ez. [=^ tower, 1 AV], Magdalum. in Jer. ), the name of one, or two, Egyptian places. So far as the form is concerned, the name represents nothing but the Egyptian pronunciation of the Hebrew word ^jc, tower, castle, accented kames being regularly rendered by 6 in Egyptian.

In names of towns, we can trace this loanword, written ma-k-ti-ra, (the ti can be read to), ma-ga-di-ra, back to the fourteenth century B.C. Sahidic Coptic has preserved it as MeSYoAi Lower Coptic MlXTOoA- M6UJT60A, MlXfOAiand thus it occurs also in various geographical names. Semitic names were frequent in the eastern regions of the Delta, owing to their mixed population, cp GOSHEN, 4.

1. The first Migdol is mentioned in Ex. 14:2 (less clearly in Nu. 337). The Israelites encamp 'between Migdol and the sea', at the moment of leaving Egypt. Evidently, this place was only a small fortified border town, more probably nothing but a fort protecting the roads from the E. It would be possible to compare a locality, mentioned in pap. Anastasi, 5:20. Two run away slaves are pursued near T-ku (Sukkoth ? cp EXODUS i. , 10) to 'the closing fortification (s-ga-ira, IJD) of T-ku', thence to the S. and to 'the fortress' (htm, not ETHAM, q.v. ) ; but they pass 'the northern wall of the Watchtower (ma-k-ti-ra) of Sety I'. This 'Maktol of king Sety I.' which is, certainly, to be sought for NW. of the region of Tku-Succoth-Maskhuta, not far from the modern Isma'iliye, would fulfil all conditions for those assuming the Crocodile Lake as the 'Sea' of the Exodus-narrative. As long, however, as it is impossible to determine the other two geographical names (PI-HAHIROTH and BAAL-ZEPHON) connected with the passage through the sea, we cannot say much regarding this location, and must accept it with the greatest caution (cp EXODUS i. , 11 ). There must have been various other Migdols or 'towers' along the eastern border of Egypt to guard it against inroads of desert-tribes. A trace of such a fort is to be found, for example, in the modern name Bir-Magdal (Bir Maktal], in the desert, 23 m. NE of Isma'iliye. J Others, the situation of which cannot be determined, 2 occur in the inscriptions. Thus the name is too frequent to admit an easy identification. For another view of the geography, see MOSES, 11.

1 See Stern, Copt. Gr., 164, on these forms.

2. In Ezek. 29:10 (/j.aySov\ov [Oj) desolation is threatened to Egypt, 'from Migdol (so AV mg) to Syene' ; so also in 306 - Migdol thus marking the N. and Syene the S. limit of the country (see SYENE). In Jer. 44:1 Migdol heads the list of Egyptian towns in which the Jewish refugees from the Babylonians had congregated (Migdol, Tahpanhes, Noph). In 46:14, accordingly, the same three cities are the field of Jeremiah's activity in proclaiming the coming desolation of Egypt by Babylonian armies. (The passages are treated elsewhere from a different point of view ; see PATHROS, 2, and Crit. Bib. ) Stephen of Byzantium mentions Magdolos as a city of Egypt on the authority of Hecatneus. 3 The Itinerarium Antonini places Magdolo 12 R. m. S. of Pelusio, 12 m. N. of Sile, on a road which ultimately leads to Serapiu - i.e., the city Serapeum near the E. end of Goshen. It is evident that this frontier city of the Itinerarium cannot be identified with that of Exodus (as has frequently been assumed), being situated too far N. of Goshen. On the other hand, it is quite likely that this Magdolo(n) is the Migdol of the prophets. Its situation near Pelusium 'the key to Egypt', agrees well with the presence of a colony of Jewish fugitives. However, a town at the entrance of Goshen would fulfil the same conditions and would fit well in the parallelism to Memphis. We have only to consider that, apparently, there was no larger city on the frontier of Goshen, such as would be required for giving shelter and occupation to a great number of immigrants. Thus the northern Migdol is at least much more probable than one of the various small frontier-fortresses of that name (see note 4). The above place is usually identified with Tel(l)-es-Semut, {4} 12 Eng. m. SW. of Pelusium, at a distance agreeing with the Itinerarium, possibly only somewhat too far E. No certainty, however, can be attributed to this identification. 5 \v. M. M.

1 Actually identified with the biblical Migdol by Ebers, entirely against the description in Exodus, as it is outside of Egypt and far from the lakes.

2 Among the desert forts enumerated by Sety I. (cp W. M. Miiller, Asien, p. 134) occurs 'the Ma-k-ti-ru of Sety I.' ; cp Rosellini, Man. Star. 50. This does not seem to be identical with that mentioned in pap. Anastasi (.see above). We should expect to find it more to the NE. of the great border city Ta-ru. Some Egyptologists have erroneously confounded this and the biblical Migdols with a royal 'tower' or magdol Phoenicia, mentioned under Rameses III. (Ros. op cit. 133).

3 Wiedemann, Comm. on Herod. 1is,f), quotes also Theogn. Can. p. 62.

4 Hill of direction, from its situation near the road to Syria. It has, of course, nothing to do with an ancient city Sm-bha(t ?), compared by Brugsch.

5. Champollion thought of various Egyptian places called mashtul, but this name is, most likely, Arabic ( plantation, cp Schleiden, Dillmann). Winckler, A mama Letters, no. 159, 1:28, understands magdali in the phrase behold, Acco is like magdali in Egypt, of the biblical city, whilst the present writer (op. cit. glossary) would prefer to take it in the general sense 'watch-tower, fortress', as an allusion to the numerous border-fortifications.


(133), Gen. 10:8 etc. See ANGELS, 1, and cp NEPHILIM, I.c.


(}V"l3D), mentioned in the list of places on the route supposed to be taken by an Assyrian invader of Judah (Is. 10:28, LXX Pesh. read Megiddo ; in Q mg- 6 MA[-eAAcON . . A c KAI . TO eBpAIKON MAPPO). Magron [Vg.]). The enemy passes necessarily through Aiath, Migron, and Michmash ; Migron is therefore identified with the ruins of Makrun, N. of Miehmash on the road to Ai (cp Baed. Pal. 1 , 119, Buhl, Pal. 176 - 177). If the text of 1 S. 14:2 ( fj.ayui> [B], ev /u.<x-ye55u> [L]) be correct, we also find a Migron situated 'in the border (nxp) of Geba' (so read for Giljeah ), 1 and as the context shows, between Geba and Michmash, and therefore S. of the Migron in Isaiah. The two places cannot be identified (cp Di. ) ; either there were two Migrons, or (the defining words in Migron being superfluous) the text in 1 S. 14:2 must be corrupt.

Wellhausen, Budde, H. P. Smith would read flJD (in the) threshing floor, Klostermann conjectures chjID '(in the) common-land'. The former, however, is an assumed word, and the latter is post-exilic in use. The corruption seems to be more deeply seated ; JTUD may be a corruption of p a"l, rimmon. A glossator, finding the two readings pan and p"uc (p"UC)> probably harmonised them by representing the rimmon or pomegranate tree 2 as situated in a place called Migron (Magedon). In Zech. 12:11 (see HADADRIMMON), MT and (even more clearly) LXX still preserve the same two competing readings [iQ-| and pun-

T. K. C.


(J P P, 99) or MINIAMIN (so EV), but rather, MINJAMIN ; j^P^P ; cp Benjamin, and Mini- amini, one of the Jewish names found by Hilprecht and Clay in the business documents from Nippur ( Th. LZ, Aug. 6, 1898, col. 434). Probably a corruption of Jerahmeel (Che. ) ; note /utXijXos (cp Mahalalel) and yUar/Xos (cp Elam in Ezra2? 31).

1. The name borne by one of the 24 (post-exilic) priestly courses; 1 Ch. 24:9 (/3si>iajxeii> [B], fj.[e]tafj.fi.v [AL]). Also the name of a Levite, temp. Hezekiah, 2 Ch. 31:15 ($tvia.\i\t\t.v [HAL]), of a priest, temp. Nehemiah, Neh. 12:5 (AV MIAMIN; fjLCifj.il [Nc.a mg.], fj.iafj.eiv [L), BK*A om.), of a 'father's house', etmp. Joiakim, Neh. 12:17 (f)fvtafj.fiv [Nc.aing.^ fna.fj.eiv [L], UN* A om.), of a signatory under Nehemiah, Neh. 10:7 (fj.tafj.tt.ij. [B], -v [AL], fj.eiafj.<ai []), and of one of those who took part in the services at the dedication of the wall, Neh. 12:41 (f3evi.aij.fiv [Nc.a mjr.], fj.tafj.fiv [I,], BN*A om.).

2. AV MIAMIN, in list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., $ 5 end), Ezra 10:25 (afj.afj.fiv [BN], fj.fafj.ifj. [A], fUOftnttat [L])=1 Esd. 9:26 MAELUS (/AiAr/Aot [BJ, fiarjAos [A], fiia/uu6aias [LJ).


(nv?pp; 1 Ch. 8:31-32. MAKAAtoe [BA], MAreAA.006 [I-] ; 9:37-38., MAKeAAcoG [B and X once], MAKeAooe [A], MAKeAcoe [L])- i. No doubt a member of the Benjamite genealogy in 1 Ch. 8:30-38 (see BENJAMIN, 9, ii. |3). The name should be supplied in 831 from B and 9:37.

The name is probably a corrupted abbreviation of Jerahmeel. But for the numerous parallels to this, it might mean rods, see NAMES, 75.

2. According to MT a (supernumerary) officer of David (i Ch. 27:4, AtaK\Xw0 [L] ; Vg. Macelloth ; Pesh. om. ). BA (rightly) omit v. 4a - i.e., the clause containing Mikloth. Notice that ni^pD is suspiciously like in pbnoii which itself appears to be due to dittography.

T. K. C.

1 See GIBEAH, i.

2 For another plausible but hardly probable view of *\~r\ in 1 S. 14:2 see RIMMON ii., 2.


, as if 'Yahwe is possessor', 36; fiaKfviaM [BNA], fj.aidcavta(<;) [L]), a Levite musician, 1 Ch. 15:18 Gio/ceAAeia [B], fj.aKK(\\a [ K ], paKKavia [ L] 21 ). Perhaps, however, we should read jn JflP Mattaniah.

T: " r T. K. C.


, a Levite musician, Neh. 12:36 (BNAL om.). A corruption of Jerahmeel, like Gilalai which follows. Cp Mahalalel, and see Guthe in SBOT ad loc.

T. K. C.


(H^p, 44! MeAx*. [BADELF] ; MELCHA}.

i. Bath Haran, wife of Nahor (Gen. 11:29, 22:20-23, 24:15, 24:24, 24:47-48). If the view taken elsewhere (HARAN, NAHOR) is correct, it is most probable that (on the analogy of [2] below, and of HAMMOLEKETH) we should correct Milcah into SALECAH (q.v. ). If, however, we think the traditional readings, 'Haran' and 'Nahor', to be safe, it will be plausible to explain Milcah on the analogy of SARAH (q.v.) as a divine title, queen, and Jensen (ZA, 1896, p. 300) has aptly referred to the titles maliktu or malkatu, 'princess', 1 and malikat ilani (i.e., either 'princess of the gods' or 'giver of decisions [malikat, partic.] of the gods' ) 2 borne by Ishtar. In the Sumerian hymns Ishtar is called the daughter of the moon-god. To the early Israelites, however, Milcah (or Malcah?) would be the 'queen' of the children of Isaac. The possibility of a connection with Jerahmeel may also be mentioned.

2. A daughter of ZELOPHEHAD (q.v.), Nu. 26:33, 27:1, 36:11, Josh. 17:31. The name seems to be miswritten for SALECAH (f.v.), D and o being easily confounded (cp 1 K. 21:4, -\o for -o).

T. K. C.


(D ; MeAxoM [AL], MoA\. [ A Q = conformation to MOAo\] < MELCHOM), the national god of the Ammonites (1 K. 11:5-33. 2 K. 23:13)- 3 The same name should be read in Jer. 49:13 (so MeAxoA [BK ; A in v. i], Vg. , Pesh.), where MT erroneously pronounces malcham, 'their king'. 4 In some other cases ancient translators and modern interpreters have read the consonants DD^D as a proper name ; thus, in 2 S. 12:30 (/ie\xoX. rov fiat. ai)r [B]) = 1 Ch. 20:2 for MT 'the crown of their king' LXX {BA} has the doublet MoX%o\ (B ; MoXxo/u. A) TOV /SacnXews O.VTUV (see also Vg. in Ch. ), and this interpretation, which is found in the Talmud (Abodd Zdrd 44 a) and Jewish commentators, is adopted by Geiger, Graetz, Wellhausen, Driver, Klostermann, and others (cp pSa in 2 S. 12:31). The special interest of the passage lies in the fact that, if this view be correct, we should naturally infer that Milcom at Rabbah was represented by an idol in human form and of con siderable size (see IDOL, 4-5. ). In Am. 1:15 Aquila and Symmachus read MeXxoyU, and are followed by Jerome. This interpretation - probably suggested by the resemblance to Jer. 49:3 - is not favoured by the parallel, 2:3. In Am. 5:26, for MT DDD^D 'your king' (where and Vg. have Moloch ; whence Acts 7:43). Aquila read MoXxo^t, Jerome (? Sym. ) Melchom, Syriac (also in Acts) Malchom. A reference to Milcom is out of place, whatever the meaning of the difficult verse may be. Finally, in Zeph. 1:5 some Greek minuscules have MeXxo/x [melchom] (so Vg. , Pesh. ), others MoXox [moloch] (so Q m e-) ; in the context Milcom is very improbable ; 'their king' is doubtless the god who received this title (Molech).

Many scholars, in ancient and modern times, have been of the opinion that Milcom was the same deity as Molech, an identification which is in part responsible for the confusion of the names that is found in the versions. The only ground for this identification, apart from the obvious similarity of the names, is 1 K. 11:7, 'Molech the abomination of the Ammonites', compared with vv. 5 and 33 (Milcom). The Hebrew text of v. 7 is in itself suspicious (-^D without the article), and LXX {L} has MeXxo/u(-o [A]) [Melchom], doubtless the true reading. The high-place which Solomon erected for Milcom is said to have been on the Mount of Olives (2 K. 23:13), whilst Molech was worshipped, so far as our sources show, only in the Valley of Hinnom ; and the name of Milcom is never coupled with the sacrifice of children which was characteristic of the Molech cult (Ew. , Movers, Dies., and Kue. ). Others therefore rightly distinguish Milcom, the national god of Ammon, from Molech (see MOLECH).

Nothing further is known of this god, whose name has not been found outside of the OT. The name is obviously derived from melek, 'king' (cp Phoen. milk in proper names, and see MOLECH) ; the last syllable is probably an inflection, the nominative ending with the old determinative mimation ( Baudissin ; cp Lagarde) ; so that the name signifies simply 'king'. Those who regard cuVo as a compound, equivalent to ay -^D. king of the people (Kue., and others), or 'Am (the god of Ammon) is king' (Eerdmans) give no satisfactory explanation of the syncope of the guttural.

Literature. - Milcom has generally been treated in connection with Molech ; see the literature in the latter article.

G. F. M.

1 Cp Schrader, MB AW, 1886, pp. 477"49i-

2 G. Smith, Hist, of Assurb. 121 ; Del. Ass. HWB 412.

3 <E> has in i K. 11 533 rw /3a<nAei avrwi/ [BA on v. 33!, riav /Sao-iAeW ai. [A in v. 5] ; in 2 K. 23 13 (xoAxoA [B], a/ueAxojU. [A], (xoAox [L].

4 There is no reason to think that the Massoretes meant malcham to be taken as a proper name, though it is so understood by Rashi.


(flp t 1 , yerakon; OOXRA [ Dt. 28:22]. I KTROC [1 K. 8:37 (A), 2 Ch. 6:28, Am. 4:9], ANeMOd>eopl<\ [Hag. 2:17]) is five times mentioned in connection with pQ^tJ*, siddaphon, 'blasting'. The adj. pv, yarak, signifies greenish-yellow ; in Jer. 30:6 yerakon is used of deathlike pallor, and as applied to corn it means doubtless the hue of decay produced by the Puccinia graminis, Pers.

Puccinia graminis is a very common and widely distributed fungus, which after hibernating on the dead leaves and leaf-sheaths of grass-plants alights first on such leaves as those of the barberry ; J after this a fresh generation is produced, the spores of which being carried by the wind enter and act upon the leaves of grass-plants. (See the account in EB^ 16:293-294 , and esp. Sachs, Textbook of Bot.W, 332-5.) Arabic cognates of ppT denote jaundice. N. M.




(MiAHTOC, Acts 20:15-17; 2 Tim. 4:20 [where AV has MILETUM by a mere error]) stood on the southern shore of the bay of Latmus into which the Maeander flowed.

1. History.[edit]

The site, now deserted, bears the name Palatia, from the ruins of its huge theatre, the largest in Asia Minor. The period of the greatness of Miletus lay six centuries before the time of Paul. Even in Homer (Il. 28:68) 'Carian Miletus' is a city of renown. During the early Greek period, it was the port for the trade of the Maeander valley. This is seen from its early coinage (Head, Hist. Num. 502) ; and the existence of trade with Phrygia is attested as early as the sixth century B.C. by Hipponax, who twits the Phrygian traders at Miletus with their bad Greek (Hipp. frg. 36 [30] : KCU TOUS 2oXo/Kouy, T)I> Xd/3wcri, irepvafftv \ $>pvyas /J.fv MtXTjrov d\(f)LTVcroi>Tas , quoted by Rams. Hist. Geogr. of AM 37). [Miletus is given in LXX as the source of the wool that was imported to Tyre (Ezek. 27:18). It represents apparently the Heb. ins. Pliny speaks of Milesia Zana ( HN 29:2 9), and Vergil of Milesia vellera (Georg. 3:306).] Ephesus was in many respects a more convenient port for much of the trade of the Maeander valley; but for a long time the energy of the Milesians enabled them to defy all rivalry (cp Herod. 5:28, T??S luvlrjs fy 7rp6<rxi?M a )- Their commercial relations were very far-reaching - with Egypt (Herod. 2 178, Strabo 801), with the Pontus, on the shores of which they planted more than seventy colonies (Str. 635, Ephesus ap. Athen. 524), and with lower Italy. The energy of the city disappeared under Persian rule after its capture in 494 B.C., when the inhabitants suffered transportation to the Tigris (Herod. 5 30 6 18/.) and Ephesus began to assert herself. Miletus possessed no fewer than four harbours, one of them large enough for a fleet ; but in course of time the silt brought down by the Maeander blocked the harbours and the entire gulf of Latmus (Plin. HA r 2gi 631) so that the site of the town is now as much as five or six miles from the sea. This process must have advanced some way even in Paul's time (about 57 A. D. ); but how far is not certainly known.

1 In this form it is called Aecidium Berberidis, Garth.

On the one hand, the island of Lade in front of Miletus was apparently still an island in Strabo's time - about 19 A.D. - (cp 635, jrpoiceiTai & r) Aa6r) vr\<ro<; n-ATjcriW) : it is now a hillock in the plain, 2 miles W. of the town. On the other hand, Priene, lying almost due N. of Miletus, on the opposite shore of the gulf, was close to the sea, and the Maeander entered the gulf at a point between that town and Miletus (Strabo, 636) : the site of Priene is now 10 m. or more from the sea.

It appears, therefore, that the silting-up process has been more rapid on the northern side of the gulf than on the southern ; and this agrees with the fact that at the present day the southern loop of the river, as it winds through the alluvial plain, seems to be the ancient channel. We must conclude that, at the time of Paul s visit, it was possible to sail across to Priene, whereas to-day the track crosses the plain and the ferry over the Maeander (Mendere Chai) : the land journey must have involved an immense detour of over 40 m. round the head of the gulf.

The death-blow of Miletus was given by its capture by Alexander the Great (Arrian, Anab. 1:19-20., Strabo, 635). In Paul's time, therefore, Miletus, though still called a fi.T)Tp6iro\is of Ionia, 1 was a second-rate town. A sure index of its unimportance is to be seen in the fact that it did not lie on any great Roman road. For the eastern trade-route turned off sharply to the E. at Magnesia 15 R. m. S. of Ephesus (Plin. HN 5:31), and did not touch Miletus. The most direct route to Ephesus, some 30 m. distant in an air-line from Miletus, was by way of Priene, crossing Mt. Mycale to mod. Chanli (anc. Panionium) and thence along the coast to mod. Scala Nova, which is about 10 m. from Ephesus (cp Murray's Handb. to AM, iii. ).

2. Paul's visit.[edit]

Paul came to Miletus the day after leaving Samos, the intervening afternoon and evening having been spent at Trogyllium (AV), or in Samos Roads (RV). 2 He had 'determined to sail past Ephesus', as he was anxious to spend Pentecost in Jerusalem (Acts 20:16): finding that the vessel would be detained some time (how long is not stated) at Miletus, he sent thence to invite the Ephesian elders to meet him (v. 17). The next evening after leaving Miletus was spent at Cos (Acts 21:1).

Conforming to the conditions of navigation on this coast, Paul's vessel sailed very early in the morning from its anchorage at Trogyllium, taking advantage of the N. wind, and soon traversing the 20 m. to Miletus. Paul thus reached Miletus probably before noon ; and his messenger may have waited for the evening breeze from the S. (the Imbat), which would carry him across the gulf (about 12 m. ) to Priene. Eight hours would suffice for the journey thence to Ephesus, by the path above described. The elders would not travel as fast as a single messenger ; but it would be possible for them to reach Priene twelve hours after the arrival of the messenger at Ephesus ; and if a boat were in readiness there they might be in Miletus by midnight. The ship would weigh from Miletus after midnight with the first breath of wind from the N. (cp Acts 21:1, fvdvdpofj.r)<Tai>Tes, 'running before the wind' ). Forty hours is therefore the minimum of Paul s stay in Miletus. This would just allow him to see the elders during the two or three hours before sailing. Probably, however, it would be right to allow another day for the unlading and lading of the ship at Miletus. This would allow more ample time for the various items in the calculation ; and would mean that the elders availed themselves of the morning wind from Priene, and reached Miletus probably before noon, forty-eight hours after Paul's arrival there, and spent with him the last twelve or fourteen hours of his vessel's stay. 1 The impression given by the passage (Acts 20:17-21:1) is that there was little margin of time.

1 Cp CIG 2878 : Tlij? 7Tp(OTI)S IT)? ItOVl a? GMCKT/XcVlJf KO.I fiT)TpO7roAews 7roAAcii> Kai ft.eyd\<ai> vo\riav (v rt TU> \\6vrta Kai TJI Aiyvnr<j) ai jroAAa^ou TTJV oiKou/neVrjs MtArjiruoi TroAeais rj BovA>j which sums up the traditional history of the city.

2 Kai/u.eiVai>TeeVTpo)yuAtc{>(DHLP; Dgr Tp<oyuAi <) is omitted by KABC, Lachm., Tisch., Treg., WH.

Paul was not master of the movements of the vessel, otherwise he would have touched at Ephesus. The somewhat ambiguous expression of v. 16 ( 'Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus', AV : KtKpiicfi . . . Trap<nr\fv<rai, 'to sail past', RV) refers to a decision made at Troas (Acts 20:6) when selecting the coaster upon which a passage was to be taken. The omission of Ephesus from the itinerary was not the choice of Paul ; it was a disadvantage outweighed by the speed of the ship upon which he finally decided to embark. The fact that she could not accomplish her landing at Miletus in time to take advantage of the first (or perhaps even the second) morning's wind, was an unforeseen way out of the difficulty.

On the visit of Paul to Miletus implied in 2 Tim. 4:20, see TIMOTHY, EPP. TO, and cp TROPHIMUS. w. j. w.


At every period of their national life, from the earliest to the latest, the Hebrews made large use of milk as an article of diet. It is therefore rightly men tioned by Ben Sira, even before wine and oil, among 'the principal things for the whole use of man's life' (Ecclus. 39:26), for the nomad ancestors of the Hebrew tribes had long been nourished on the milk of their flocks (Gen. 18:8) before their descendants took possession of the vineyards and oliveyards which they planted not in the land of Canaan. Indeed, when the spring milk is in, the nomads [of central Arabia] nourish themselves of little else. In poorer households it is all their victual those two months (Doughty, Ar. Des. 1:325]. So, too, Palmer testifies of the Arabs of the great desert of et-Tih, to the S. of Palestine. In many parts of the desert, milk forms the sole article of diet obtainable by the Bedouin, and I have heard a well-authenticated case of an Arab in the N. of Syria, who for three years had not tasted either water or solid food 2 (Desert of the Exodus, 2:294).

Milk, in its fresh state, is always 3^1, halab ; LXX and NT 7a\a [gala].

1. Halab.[edit]

This word occurs over forty times in the OT - predominantly in a figurative sense (see 4 below) - about one-half of all the occurrences being in connection with the standing description of Palestine 3 as a land 'flowing with milk and honey' (fifteen times in the Hexateuch sources, J and D, also Lev. 20:24 [H], Jer. 11:5, 32:22, Ezek. 20:6-15; Ecclus. 46:8; Bar. 1:20). Some slight confusion has arisen from the fact that halab, milk, and heleb, fat, were expressed by the same unpointed consonants; thus in Ezek. 34:3 LXX has preserved the better, and now generally adopted, reading : 'Ye enjoy the milk, etc'. (reading halab for heleb, and so Ps. 119 [LXX 118] 70). Conversely LXX reads heleb for halab in Job 21:24, Is. 55:1, Ezek. 25:4.

Halab includes the human mother's milk (Is. 28:9), which the Hebrew infants enjoyed for from two to three years (2 Mace. 7:27), as well as the milk of the females of the herd (ipa) and of the flock (jris), the latter including both sheep and goats (Dt. 32:14, Prov. 27:27, Ezek. 34:3 [see above], 1 Cor. 9:7). To what extent the milk of the she-camel (Gen. 32:15 [16]) was used by the Hebrews is not known.

[That camel's milk was drunk is inferred from Gen. 32:15. A reference to it may also underlie the extraordinary phrase L nan rn 73 D^rrcy, 'with the kidney fat of wheat', which should probably be read [.INCH] n n23 aWrcy, 'with the milk of female camels' (rtNpn> 'soured milk', is misplaced). In Ps. 81:16, 14:7-14 the text is also probably corrupt. T. K. C.]

In a mountainous country like Palestine, the small cattle must always have formed the large part of the peasant's stock, and their milk, especially goats milk (Prov. 27:27), was apparently more highly prized. The milk was milked (in later Hebrew sVn) into pails ({ryey, dtlnim, Job 2l:24, EVmg and moderns) and preserved, as among the Bedouins still, in skins (Judg. 4:19, see BOTTLE). A diet largely of milk was supposed to give a special whiteness to the teeth (Gen. 49:12).

1 So Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, 294, where it is suggested that Paul landed at Miletus on Thursday, April 28, 57 A.D., and sailed again early on Sunday morning, May 1.

2 Cp Pliny's statement (HN 11:97) that Zoroaster lived for thirty years upon cheese.

3 In Nu. 1613 the phrase is used of Egypt. See HONEY, i, note by T. K. c.

From the thrice repeated command : 'Thou shall not seethe a kid in his mother's milk' (Ex. 23:19, 34:26, Dt. 14:21), 1 we may certainly infer that the custom in vogue among the Arabs of boiling a kid or a lamb in milk (Burckhardt, Notes on the Bedouins, 163) was not unknown to the earlier Hebrews (cp MAGIC, 2a.).

The reasons for its prohibition are still obscure. If the words are to be taken in a strictly limited and literal sense, they might be set down to purely humanitarian motives (cp Dt. 22:6-7). Probably the reason first suggested by Maimonides, and approved by Bochart, Spencer, and various later writers, is the best that we have here the prohibition of a heathen Canaanite rite, the details of which are beyond our ken.

Robertson Smith (Kel. Sem. W 221 n.) is inclined to range this prohibition alongside of the more familiar taboo which forbids the eating of flesh 'with the blood', inasmuch as milk has sometimes been regarded as a kind of equivalent for blood, and as containing a sacred life. Offerings of milk are found among the ancient Egyptians (Wilk. 8417), Arabs, and Carthaginians (Kel. Sem.W 220 with reff. ) ; but such offerings have no place in the Hebrew cultus. Josephus's averment that Abel brought milk and the firstfruits of his flocks (Ant. 1:2:1) as a sacrifice to God is only another instance of the confusion, above referred to, of halab and heleb. This absence of milk from the sacred offerings of the Hebrews is most probably due, as Robertson Smith has suggested (op. cit. 220 n. ), to the exclusion of all fer ments from presentation at the altar (Ex. 23:18, Lev. 2:11), for in hot climates milk ferments rapidly, and hence, as we shall see presently, is generally drunk or eaten sour.

2. Hem'ah, leben, and samn.[edit]

The last remark leads naturally to the discussion of some of the forms in which milk figures as an article of diet, otherwise than in its fresh or 'sweet' state. To this day the wandering tribes of Arabia consider the milk of their camels and their flocks as more refreshing if it has been slightly fermented or soured by being poured into the milk-skin (semily), on the inner side of which are still sticking sour clots from the previous milking (cp the use and source of leaven in breadmaking), and there shaken for a brief period (Doughty, Ar. Des. 1 263, and Eastern travellers passim}. To this slightly sour milk (the oxygala of Pliny HN 28 36), known indeed in the East widely (not, however, in Egypt) simply as leben ( milk ), which is also applied to what we term buttermilk (Burckhardt, Notes, etc., 1240), the Hebrews gave the name hem'ah (nNcn, from an unused root, ncn, in Arabic, 'to be thick, hard', but see Ges.-BuhK 13 ; in LXX rendered jSouTvpov, 2 Vg. butyrum and hence EV 'butter' ). This is placed beyond doubt by the incident of Jael and Sisera, in which the former took the milk-skin (nSrn -mi, Judg. 4:19) and gave her visitor 'milk (yea), sour milk (rtNcn), in a lordly dish' (5:25). The same refreshing draught is probably intended in Gen. 18:8 and Dt. 32:14 ( 'butter of kine and milk of sheep' ).

[In 2 Ch. 28:15 EV represents that 'all the feeble' of the captives of Judah taken by Pekah were 'carried upon asses, and (so) brought to Jericho'. c*ncri3 DlS"lJ > however, cannot, in accordance with usage, be rendered 'carried them upon asses'. c24392 D"s is also suspicious (three *?, two 3). There is a great error in the text. Read D Bnyi ^jy\ flNCra w^p l (cp 2 S 17:28-29), and they sustained them with soured milk and parched corn and lentils. ( Them = the whole body of captives.) ^>nji and SD^D have a tendency to get confounded (see Ball on Gen. 47:18 ; Che. on Ps. 31 4). T. K. c.]

1 For some of the more remarkable views entertained regarding this enactment, see art. Milk in Kino's Bib. Cycl. The refinements of the later, and still binding, Talmudic law (see especially Hullin, 8:1+) are referred to elsewhere (COOKING, 8). Only locusts and fish, not the flesh of animals, venison, or fowl (see Jewish commentaries on Hullin, I.c.) may still be boiled in milk.

2 ViovTvpov [Bouturon], lit. 'cow-cheese', is now regarded as an instance of Volksetymolngie, being an attempt on the part of the Greeks to reproduce the sound of the native Scythian name (see Hehn, KulturpjJanzcn u. Hausthiere^), 153^ with O. Schrader's note, isq, which see also for the attitude of the classical peoples to butter. Cp Pliny, HNZS-g and the extracts from other classical writers given in Ugolini, de re rustica Vet. Hebr. in Thes. 29 174^).

Hem'ah, including the miswritten ncn (Job 296) and the cognate nNcnp (Ps. 55:21 [55:22], where, however, we should read and point r39 nxcno, 'his face was smoother than hem'ah') is found in other places, and in regard to these, as well as to the passages already cited, there has been great diversity of rendering - sour-milk, curds, cream, butter, buttermilk, each having its advocates. Of the eight places referred to, the most explicit, and perhaps the latest, is Prov. 30:33, 'the pressing of milk (a^nn pp) bringeth forth hem'ah'.

Here it may be explained that milk consists of numberless minute globules of fat, each encased in a thin albuminous envelope, floating in a watery, colourless fluid. To procure butter, which is simply the fat of milk, it is necessary by concussion to break this albuminous envelope or skin, which allows the enclosed fat-globules to come together and form the fatty mass which we term butter. Now this result the Arab house wives have obtained, from time immemorial, by simply rocking the milk-skin to and fro on their knees till the butter comes in a clot at the mouth of the semily (Ar. Des. 267), or the skin is hanged in the fork of a robust bearing-stake of the nomad tent (ib. 1:324), or it may be suspended, as by the more settled peasantry, from a primitive tripod of sticks (see illustration, Picturesque Palestine, Div. 648). Butter, of course, does not keep in a hot climate ; the Arabs and Syrians, accordingly, boil the fresh butter over a slow fire, throwing in coarse meal or 'burghul' (boiled wheat, see FOOD, 1) to clarify the mass. This clarified butter, the best of which is said to have 'the odour of a blossoming vine', is known throughout the Arabic-speaking East as samn (in India as ghee), and is one of the most valuable articles of commerce in Arabia. 1 In view of the extent to which melted butter enters into the menu of Bedouin and fellahin alike - to whom samn is all that clotted cream is to a Devonshire man, and more - and in view of the unchanging customs of the East, one is prepared to find something equivalent to samn in the. earlier biblical period. This we find unmistakably in Prov. 30:33, where we have an exact description of the rocking and pressing of the milk-skin, so that the rendering of EV, which follows LXX, is amply justified, the churning of milk bringeth forth butter. Equally clear is the comparison in the amended text of Ps. 55:21, 'his face is smoother than butter', where neither sour milk nor curds is admissible. Again samn, as the most prized of all the preparations of milk, is suggested by Job 296, of which a modern paraphrase would run : 'I sat, up to the lips in clotted cream'. - The two modern equivalents here advocated for the biblical hem'ah - viz. , leben and samn - we find side by side in the much- glossed passage, Is. 7:15-22 (for which see Cheyne and Duhm, in loc. ). In the last verse, in particular, we render 'because of the abundance of milk he shall eat samn' (v. 22a), a gloss entirely at variance with the context, which speaks of the poverty of the land when the few inhabitants shall be reduced to the simplest nomad fare, sour milk and wild honey (22b).

1 Doughty estimates the trade with Mecca alone at £2000 annually (Ar. Des. 2457).

2 Butter in the East is made ordinarily from whole milk (but see 3), hence nxcn never probably in any passage literally signifies our 'cream', although Rashi in his commentary - writing, however, in the West - defines nNDn i" Gen. 18:8 as 'the fat of milk (aSnn |C1C )> which they skim from its surface'. As a link between biblical times and the present day, we would point to the usual Targum rendering of ,1NCn - viz., JCt? (lit. 'fat' ), by which we understand the Arabic samn. The Povrvpov (LXX) of the Greek-speaking Jews of Egypt was manifestly in that climate samn.

3. Cheese.[edit]

Cheese is referred to, according to EV, in three passages of the OT, and in each case it represents a different expression in the original.

(a) The most explicit of these is Job 10:10 where the patriarch, referring to the growth of the human foetus, asks the Almighty : 'Hast thou not poured me out as milk, and curdled (lit. thickened) me as cheese' (nrajia)?

Here we have the ordinary Hebrew word for cheese, gebhinah, as found in the Mishna (passim), where also TCVn is the standing expression for curdling (reff. below), while the denominative |23> gibben, signifies to make cheese, hence [3JD, megabben, a cheese-maker (Tosefta Shabbath 9 [10] 13).

That cheesemaking was a flourishing industry in Jerusalem in NT times is usually inferred from the name of the valley between the eastern and western hills, the valley of the cheesemakers (TUV rvpoiroitav , Jos. BJ v. 4:i [Niese, 140]). However, the contention recently submitted by some scholars of note (HaleVy ; Buhl, Pal. 132 etc.), that this name is a euphemism, has considerable plausibility. At the end of the so-called Tyropoeon lay the dung gate (nstyxn -\yy, Neh. 2:13 etc. ), and hence it is conjectured that the original name of the valley was the dung or refuse valley (ge ha-ashpoth), changed by a transposition of consonants into ge ha-shaphoth, cheese- or curd-valley (see below, b).

The milk was curdled by means of rennet (i"Op, Ab. Zar. 24 ; cp Dt. 18:3) ; also of the acrid juice of the leaves and roots of certain trees and plants ('Orla 1:7). After being drained of the whey (Clp, Nedar. 65 ; 3^n D [water of milk], Makhshir. 65), the curds were salted (Nedar., I.c.), shaped into round discs (/12J, ), and dried in the sun. These were hard enough to be cut with a hand-saw (Shabb. 17:2). The cheese of Bithynia enjoyed the highest repute in antiquity (Pliny, HN 11:97), but was forbidden to the Jews because it was curdled with the rennet that had been procured from calves not ritually slaughtered, or had been offered in heathen sacrifice ( Ab. Zar. 24).

(b} The present which David took to his brothers at the front - viz. , ten aSrn s in (lit. 'cuts of milk', 1 S. 17:18) can hardly have been anything but ten freshmilk cheeses (cp LXX - TpvtpaXidas [soft cheeses], (S A <TTpu<pa.\idas, Vg. decent fonnellas casei).

(c) Quite obscure, on the other hand, is the present which David himself received at a later period, of hem'a (here probably samn) and 1J33 niSC>, which EV (after Pesh. and Tg.) renders cheese of kine (2 S. 17:29 ; BA aa^tad fiotav, - yaAafrqi a /moffxapia.). Wetzstein advocates cream of kine, similar to the preparation of thick cream scalded and sold in small wooden cylinders in Syria under the name of kishta. It is some times eaten with sugar (see Wetzstein under Viehzucht in Riehm's HWB and ZATW 3:276+). It is tempting, however, to read rVlSKiy (from fjNt?, to rub down, crush, etc.), and to find in the expression the dried curds of the present day, which, rubbed down and mixed with water, give a most refreshing drink.

4. Milk in OT figures.[edit]

So universal an article of food as milk could hardly fail to suggest a variety of figures to the biblical writers. As the natural food of infants milk is used in the NT to express the first elements of religious instruction ( 1 Cor. 3:2, Heb. 5:12-13, 1 Pet. 2:2). In the oft-repeated phrase, flowing with milk and honey (see HONEY), so expressive of the rich productiveness of the promised land, milk represents the common elements of the Hebrew dietary, as honey does its delicacies (cp wine and milk, Is. 55:1). So Joel embodies his conception of the surpassing fertility of the soil in the Messianic age in a picture of the hills flowing with milk (Joel 3:18 [4:18]). Together with snow, milk is typical of the whiteness of the human skin (Lam. 4:7), and, probably, of the human eye (Cant. 5:12). A bride's kisses are refreshing as honey and a draught of fresh milk (ib. 4:11), to which also the joys of the nuptial couch are compared (5:1).

A. R. s. K.

1 The writer has eaten this delicacy in the Lebanon under the name of leben.


The hand-mill is one of the most widely distributed of human inventions. Under MORTAR will be found some account of the earlier appliances which served the same purpose (cp Nu. 11:8, mill and mortar mentioned together) among the Hebrews as among the Romans. For the latter we have not only the express testimony of Pliny and other writers for the later origin of the hand-mill, but also the still more important witness of the Latin terms pistor, pistrinum, etc. 1

1. The mill and its parts.[edit]

The handmill, as consisting like the old Scottish querns of two parts, was named C rn, rehayim (mod. Egypt rahaya), rarely P n: ?> tehon (Lam. 5:13; cp tahun, the Egyptian water-mill) and !"!j!!!?> tahanah (Eccles. 12:4). Since the stones were originally of the same size, the mill looked as if cleft in two, hence n T S, pelah (something cleft) was the old name for either millstone, the lower of which was then rvnriFI Pi ??, pelah tahtith (Job. 41:24 [Heb. 16], AV following LXX, Vg. etc., 'a piece of the nether millstone', but see RV), the upper 32T n?S, pelah rekeb (Judg. 9:53, 2 S. 11:21). In NT times the stones were distinguished simply as the 33T (chariot, or perhaps the rider, Arab. rakib, already Dt. 24:6), and the 33^ (Her, our 'bed-stone', Bab. Bath. 2:1). The corresponding names in the Greek OT and in NT are : for the mill, (oiwAos [mulos],2 Ex. 11:5, etc., perhaps Mt. 24:41 (best MSS); millstone is Ai flos jxvAiicos [lithos mulikos] only in Lk. l7:2 (in best MSS, see below), also /mvAos [mulos] Rev. 18:21 (B), 18:22, according to usual interpretation also Mt. 15:6, Mk. 9:42 (best MSS, but see below) ; the favourite Greek name of the upper stone, the catillus of the Romans, was ovos [honos] the ass, also i-ni^ii^iov [epimulion] (Dt. 24:6, Judg. 5:3 [K]; perhaps also juiiAos [mulos], Judg. 9:53 [AL], 2 S. 11:21-22); the nether millstone, the Roman meta, was /nvA> [mule]) in the special sense, but does not occur in the Gk. Bible. The mill-house or pistrinum was fivAioi/ [muloon] (Jer. 52:11 [not in Heb.], Mt. 24:41 [D and TR]), and perhaps /uOAos [mulos] (Mt. I.c. [ N B]).

The hand-mill of the Hebrews (T W C rn, Zabim 43, modelled on the Gk. xetpo/uuXTj [cheiromule]) can scarcely have differed in any important particular from the mill still in use in the East among Bedouins and fellahin alike, although it probably presented the same variety of shape and size in different parts of the country.

Thus in some parts the stones are both flat, in others the lower is slightly convex and the upper correspondingly concave ; some mills have both stones of equal diameter ; in others, the upper, which is invariably the lighter, is of smaller diameter. This last seems to have been the usual fashion among the Jews of the first and second centuries A.D., when the diameter of 'the rider' was usually a couple of handbreadths less than that of the bed-stone (Bab. Bath. 2:1). The average diameter of the modern hand-mills is probably about 18 inches.

The lower stone is always of some hard stone, whilst the upper, in Syria at least, is almost invariably of the black, porous lava of Hauran, which has the admirable quality of always preserving a rough surface. Through the centre of the rider a funnel-shaped hole is chiselled out, and in the corresponding part of the bed-stone a stout peg of wood is inserted, by which the upper stone is kept in place. The upper stone is turned by means of an upright wooden handle inserted in its upper surface, near the edge. The mill is fed by pouring the grain in handfuls into the centre opening of the rider and may be placed on a sheepskin, or inside a large circular tray, placed on the ground to receive the flour 3 as it passes out between the stones.

1 Servius" comment on Virgil, AEn. 1:179, is often quoted : quia apud maiores nostros molarum usus non erat, frtimenta torrebant et ea in pilas missa pinsebant, et hoc erat genus molendi, unde et pinsitores dicti sunt, qui nunc pistores vocantur.

2 The classical fivA)j is used in the LXX only metaphorically of the molar teeth.

3 A large basin or tray for this purpose seems intended by the D* or sea (i.e. basin ; cp the brazen sea of the Temple) of the mill (D rrn C ), several times mentioned in the Talmud.

2. The work of the mill.[edit]

Grinding the flour or barley-meal for the household need has in all ages been peculiarly women s work (Mt. 24:41 - hence 'the grinders' of Eccles. 12:3, lit. as RVmg 'grinding women' ), and a millstone has more than once in the world's history been an effective weapon in a woman's hand (Judg. 9:53, 2 S. 11:21; cp the fate of Pyrrhus). Among the Jews grinding stood first among the housewifely duties, from which the young wife could only be released if she had brought, as part of her dowry, a slave girl as a substitute {Kethuboth 5:5). In the houses of the great, the work of the mill fell to the female slaves (Ex. 11:5), hence the command to 'the daughter of Babylon' to 'take the millstones and grind meal' ( Is. 47:2) is a prophecy of impending slavery. The same idea may underlie Job's words regarding his wife (Job 31:10a), although the parallelism certainly suggests a coarser interpretation, which the Vg. also finds in Lam. 5:13 (see the comms. ). Male prisoners and captives were likewise compelled to this species of hard labour, as was Samson (Judg. 16:21), and, according to the Greek text of Jeremiah (52:11), king Zedekiah in Babylon. In the passage from Lamentations just alluded to (5:13), the Hebrew poet pathetically describes the lot of the young exiles, condemned to bear the heavy millstones to grind for their captors, while the boys stumbled beneath the wood x to fire their bread. The slaves were wont to lighten the burden of their labour with a song, the y Srj ^Tu/ui /Xios of the classics (a specimen from Plutarch apud Bliimner, op. cit. 33), a practice to which there is a reference in the Gk. text of Eccles. 124 (0COC77S TTJS a.\-qdova-r]s).

3. The mills of the Romans.[edit]

The form of the hand-mill or quern above described was doubtless the same as that which it first assumed among the classical peoples (cp. Blumner's standard work, Technologie, etc. 24); but among the Romans of the later republic and the empire the form was somewhat different. From a square or circular stone base rose the fixed nether millstone in the shape of a blunted cone, hence called meta, with an iron peg or pivot inserted at the top. The upper stone, the catillus, was cut into the shape of an hour-glass, or, more precisely, of the old-fashioned reversible wooden egg-cup. Its lower half was hung on the above-mentioned pivot, over and surrounding the meta, and the whole catillus was turned by means of a couple of handspikes through holes in its waist or narrowest part (see the illustrations in Smith's and Rich's Diets of Antiquities, s.v. Mola, and in Blumner, op. cit. 27). The corn was poured into the upper half of the egg-cup, so to say, which served admirably as a hopper, and found its way through certain apertures in the waist to be ground between the surface of the cone-shaped meta and the inner surface of the lower half of the catillus. We mention these details mainly because we have discovered evidence, overlooked or misunderstood by previous writers, that this form of the mill was not unknown among the Jews of NT times. Thus in the regulations for the sale of house property, we have the following distinction in Jewish law, between fixtures that went with the house, and movables that did not (Bab. Bath. 4:3) 'Whoso has sold a house has sold the door but not the key, the fixed mortar but not the movable one, the istrobil (ranccx) but not the kalath (nSp), etc'. Again, in Zabim 4:2 we find mentioned together the istrobil and the hamor (-fen) of the hand-mill (t^& G rnSc?). Now these terms have been entirely misunderstood by the authoritative commentators on the Mishna (see apud Surenhusius in loc.). In reality the hamor of the hand-mill is nothing but the 5j>os [honos] (ass) or upper millstone of the Greeks (cp Hesychius, s.v. jUi/Xr; : /cai OUTU \eyerai KO.I 6 KO.TU TTJS fj.u\r)s Xt 0os rb 5e teal dvu #cos), 2 which, again, from the shape of its upper portion, is also named the kalath (Gk. KaXados, a tapering, funnel-shaped basket). 3 Similarly, the istrobil is the Gk. errpo/SiXoj [strobilos], a spinning-top, the likeness to which of the meta or lower stone with its ribbed surface is self-evident. The mills of this construction were larger and heavier those of Pompeii are about 5 to 6 feet in height than the ordinary Jewish hand-mill, and, as we have seen, were built into the floor of the house. They were capable of being adjusted so as to produce flour of varying fineness ; by this means, and by the process of bolting described below (col. 3095, begin.), were obtained the different sorts of flour and fine flour to which there is reference in the Mishna (Makhrhir: 10:5).

1 Since Ibn Ezra it has sometimes been absurdly supposed that 'the wood' here means the light and unremovable handles of the mills! (So Hoheisel, De tnolis. etc.. adopted in Smith s DR, art. Mill. ).

2 The learned author of the art. 'Bread' in Hastings DB (1:317a), in the section on the Hebrew hand-mill, in making oi/o? [honos] the nether millstone has allowed himself to be misled by the erroneous and now antiquated findings of Hoheisel and other early investigators who wrote before the discovery of actual mills, esp. at Pompeii, had made their construction intelligible.

3 Thus Pliny (HN L l 2) describes the flower of the lily as paulatim sese laxantis (tapering), effigie calathi.

4. The mola asinaria.[edit]

In addition to these, the molae manuales, the Romans made use of a still larger mill of the same construction turned by worn-out horses or asses, hence named molae jumentariae or molae asinaria (illustr. ut sup. ). A reference to these ass-mills has been found by all commentators in Jesus' denunciation of him who shall cause the little ones of the kingdom to stumble, for - according to Mt. - 'it is profitable for him that a yu.i;Xos dvt/cis [mulos honikos] (AV millstone, RV great millstone, RV mg - a millstone turned by an ass ) should be hanged about his neck and that he should be sunk in the depth of the sea' (Mt. 186 RV). 1

We cannot here discuss the readings of the parallel passages, Mk. 9:42, Lk. 17:2 ; it must suffice to note that the /xvAos OI/IKOS [mulos honikos] is repeated in the textus receptus of Lk., where the best MSS and editors read A<.#o /uvAixos [lithos mulikos] i.e. the ordinary millstone (so RV) which, again, is the received reading of Mk., where the best MSS have ;u.uAos OI/IKOS [mulos honikos] (RV with mg. as above).

What, then, was the /u>Xos OVIKOS? [mulos honikos] Is it the case, as a recent commentator puts it, that the vehement emphasis of Christ's words is toned down in Lk. here, as often elsewhere (A. B. Bruce, Exp. Gk. Test, ad Lk. 17:2)? Has the third evangelist really reduced the heavier 'millstone turned by an ass' to the stone of an ordinary handmill ? We reply that the /xi Xos 61^*6* [mulos honikos] of the first two evangelists is simply a literal Gk. rendering of mola asinaria or ass-mill, as indeed Jerome (Mt. I.c.}, and before him the Peshitta, have perceived (cp Stephanus, Thes. Ling. Grac. 988). The words used by Jesus we suppose to have been the B rrrW "lien of the Mishna, or their Aramaic equivalent in the G6mara N lvn tncn, the ass. or upper millstone, which, as the removable stone (cp Mishna above), would most readily occur to contemporary readers of Lk.'s \idos jUt Xt/cos [lithos mulikos]. The author of the second gospel, probably followed by the author of the first, has confused the two meanings of lien and ovos [honos] as applied to the upper millstone and the live animal that turned it - a confusion from which other Greek writers are not free (Blumner, op. cit. 35, n. 3). The result of this confusion is the impracticable suggestion of the offender having hung about his neck the relatively enormous weight of a whole mola asinaria. Only large private establishments or professional millers ([ma, Demai 3:4) would possess one of this class of mill. There is no reference in the Bible, it may be added, to the third class of ancient mills, the mule aquariae, or water-mills, now so largely used in Syria.

The Hebrew creditor is forbidden (Dt. 24:6) to take to pledge either the whole mill 2 (RV) or even the upper stone, for he taketh the man s life to pledge, in other words, the means by which the family sustenance was provided.

This law was later extended to include all the utensils necessary for the preparation of food (Baba Mesi'a 9:13, cp Jos. Ant. iv. 8 26 [Niese, 270]). The user of the hand-mill in this direction was not limited to grinding wheat and barley. Beans, lentils, fruit, etc., might all be passed through the family mill (Mishna, passim). For the olive-mill (Q-JVI ^Vf Q rn) and the pepper-mill (*?gsg Sjy ")) see OIL and SPICES respectively.

1 For the Greek punishment known as Ka-ran-oi Tioyio? [katapontismos] see the special treatises cited by Winer, Rll BW, 2 13, and Goetz, op. cit. In the Gospels, of course, we have a mere figure of speech.

2 King James's translators, following a tradition as old as the second century A.D. adopted by Jewish commentators (see Rashi on Dt. I.e.), quite falsely rendered C lTl by 'nether millstone'.

In order to obtain the 'fine flour' (nSb) required for the sacred offerings as well as for the finer sorts of bakemeats, it was necessary to bolt or sift the flour (nsi3) that came from the mill by means of a bolt-sieve (nc:, Is. 30:28, Mishna passim, the K^KLVOV [Ecclus. 27:4] of the Greeks). To judge from the comparison of the model pupil to the naphah which lets out the kemah and keeps back the soleth (Aboth 5:15,) - a passage misunderstood both by Jewish and Christian commentators (see, e.g. , in Surenhusius) - the naphah used for this purpose was not a sieve with meshes like the modern munhul (see Wetzstein, ZZ3/ > / / 143/. ) but a close-bottomed sieve, the modern minsef. The bolting was effected by a combined up-and-down and rotatory motion - the verb (Tpn.i), used of the process of sifting the flour in Shabb. 7:2, means literally 'to cause to dance' - by which the heavier particles of the flour were collected at one side and thrown over the edge of the sieve.

5. The mill in figures.[edit]

Among the figures which Hebrew writers have borrowed from the mill, in addition to the figure for slavery ( Is. 47:2 ) already explained, may be noted Isaiah's graphic denunciation of the rich magnates of his day who ground 'the faces of the poor' (Is. 3:15). 'The dull rumour of the running millstones is 'at this day' as it were a comfortable voice of food in an Arabian village, when in the long sunny hours there is often none other human sound' (Doughty, Arab. Des. 2179). So it was in the villages of Judaea, and hence the cessation of the 'comfortable voice' of the mill (D rn Vip, Jer. 25:10 ; cp Rev. 18:22, ifxavrj /JLU\OV [phoone molon]) is to Jeremiah and the seer of Patmos an important factor in that 'solitude' which a ruthless enemy is wont to make and call it peace. The essential hardness of the nether millstone is the source of a popular proverb, first met with in Job (41:24 [41:16]). The identity of function in the case of the millstones and the teeth has suggested a figure common to many tongues (Eccles. 12:3-4 ; cp fj.ij\ri [mole] in the LXX = dens molaris}. In the Talmud, to have a millstone round one's neck is to be burdened with domestic cares, which are fatal to the fruitful study of the Torah (Kiddush. 29 b}. In the mediaeval Hebrew work, the Choice of Pearls, 'he who poses as a wise man without the true wisdom is like to the "ass" (lien, the upper millstone) of the mill ; which goes round and round without moving from its place' (cited but misunderstood by Goetz, op. cit. 219, and by those who quote from him ; see ap. Hastings, op. et II. cc. ). Finally, it may be added that some have found in the Gk. proverb 6 favywv fj,v\ov d\ff>LTd (fievyfi the original of Paul's wise injunction, 'if any man will not work, neither let him eat' ( 2 Thess. 3:10).

6. Literature.[edit]

A considerable amount of special literature has been devoted to the mills of the ancients. The principal older works are Joh. Heringius, De Afolt ndinis, 1663 ; Hoheisel, Dissertatio de Molls Manualibus Peterum, 1728 ; and esp. Goetzius, Diss. de Molis et Pistrinis I eterum, 1730 the two last reprinted by Ugolinus in his Thesaurus Antiquitatum Sacrarunt, vol. xxix. These have all been superseded by Hugo Hliimner s classical treatise Technologie und Tcrntinologie tier Geiuerbe und Kiinste bei Grieclien umi KSmern, 1875, Hd. 1 23^ A good summary in art. Mola in Smith s Greek and Roman Antiquities^).

A. R. S. K.

1. Probably an interpolation from 12:9.


1. References.[edit]

Once, and only once, in the NT we hear of a millennium, for neither 1 Cor. 15:23-24 nor 1 Thess 4:l6-17, points in the. We hear in Rev. 20:2-5 of a period of a thousand years during which the dragon [the old serpent, which is the Devil and Satan] J (see DRAGON, 2) is confined in the abyss, 'that he should deceive the nations no more until the thousand years be finished', while the martyrs 'who worshipped not the beast nor his image', alone of the dead live again, and reign with Christ. This revival of the martyrs is called 'the first resurrection' (v. 6), and at the end of the millennium Satan shall be loosed out of his prison for a little time to deceive the nations (v. 7 ; cp v. 3). See ESCHATOLOGY, 75, 88.

Why this specification of 1000 years? The Book of Enoch (91:12) gives a week (see WEEK) as the period of the Messianic kingdom ; the Apocalypse of Ezra (7:28-29) gives 400 years, so also Rabbi, quoting Mic. 7:15 (Weber, Jiid. Thepl. 373). It is in the Talmud that we find the statement that this kingdom will last for 1000 (or 2000) years. The world was to last for 5000 or 4000 years of evil ; then, in the kingdom of the Messiah, 1000 or 2000 years of Sabbath-rest were to come for God s people. This idea may have been common in the time of the writers of the Apocalypse.

2. Origin of the idea.[edit]

But was the idea really of Jewish origin ? We may reasonably suspect that many of the later ideas were of Babylonian or Persian origin, though the new growths became thoroughly Jewish ; and it is quite fair, in dealing with suspected Persian influences, to use the later Zoroastrian Scriptures, because these writings, even if late in composition, are admitted to embody and to develop genuine early traditions. Now it was the later Zoroastrian belief that time consisted of a series of twelve millenniums, the last of which should be marked by a wonderful progressive amelioration of the lot of the human race. Before the end of this twelfth millennium Saoshyans, the Triumphant Benefactor, the last of the posthumous sons of Zarathustra, would be born. During the space of 57 years all evil would be destroyed, and at the end of this period Ahriman the fiend would be annihilated, and the renovation for the future existence (cp the new heavens and the new earth ) would occur. *

3. Influence of the belief.[edit]

Much fanaticism has sprung up in the Christian church from an exaggerated belief in the millennium. But so much must be admitted - that the doctrines with which this belief is connected have been morally most efficacious. Both Zoroastrianism and Christianity are deeply indebted to the doctrine which they both share, or have both shared, of the conflict between the two principles of good and evil, and of the future renovation of the earth ; and when, as in Christianity, this is coupled with a belief in the future advent, not of a mythical Saoshyans, but of the historical Author of the faith, it has given an extraordinary force and freedom to the operation of the Christian spirit.

The expression of what we may call millenarianism in the Apocalypse of John is comparatively temperate. It is quite otherwise with other early Christian works. The Jewish apocalypses were received as sacred books of great antiquity, and their contents were greedily absorbed. Even the Gentile Christians were conquered by millenarianism, and in proportion as, after the war of Bar-Kocheba, the Jews became indifferent to the Messianic hope, chiliastic ideas became naturalised in the Christian communities, and the books containing them were sedulously preserved. Thus Papias confounds expressions of Jesus with verses from the Apocalypse of Baruch (29:5 ; see Charles's note) referring to the astonishing fruitfulness of the soil in the Messianic days (see Iren. 533). Barnabas (Ep. 15) accepts the Jewish theory that the present world will last 6000 years from the creation, that at the beginning of the Sabbath (the seventh millennium) the Son of God will appear, to put an end to the period of 'the unjust one', to judge the wicked, and to renovate the earth. He does not, however, like Papias, expatiate in sensuous descriptions ; it is to be a time of holy peace. It is not the end, however ; it is followed by an eighth day of eternal duration the beginning of another world. Hence, according to Barnabas, the Messianic reign closes the present aiuv. Justin (Dial. 80) speaks of chiliasm as a necessary element of orthodoxy, though he knows Christians who do not accept it. He believes that a restored Jerusalem will be the seat of the Messiah s kingdom, and assumes that all believers, together with patriarchs and prophets, will enjoy perfect happiness for a thousand years. In fact, he reads this view into the Johannine Apocalypse. Cerinthus, too, speculative as he was, clings to the chiliastic ideas, and pictures Christ's kingdom as one of sensual pleasures (Eus. //328 725).

After the middle of the second century these expectations gradually retired into the background. So early as the year 170 A.D., the party of the so-called Alogi rejected the whole body of apocalyptic writings, and denounced the Apocalypse of John as a mass of fables (cp APOCALYPSE, 4). Perhaps their own hostility to Montanism was the cause. Here we may pause, noting, however, in conclusion that in the time of Eusebius the Greek Church was saturated with prejudice against the Apocalypse, on account of its Jewish chiliasm.

1 See West's translations in Sacred Rooks of the East, vols. v., xxiv. ; especially Bundahis 30:3 ; Dinkard 1:10.


(jrn, dohan; KEfXPOC ; MILIUM} is once mentioned, along with wheat, barley, beans, lentils, and spelt, as an ingredient in bread (Ezek. 4:9!).

The Hebrew name is also found in Aramaic and Arabic. It may refer to the dark colour of the grain, since dahanun means 'smoke' and duhnatun 'a smoky colour'. As it is in modern Egypt and Palestine the name of the common millet, Panicnin miliaceum, L., this is probably the plant intended ; it has been cultivated in Egypt since prehistoric times. Another kind of millet, Andropogon Sorghum, Bed., is also grown in Palestine (see Tristram, NHB 470): with this De Candolle (Orig. 306) is inclined to identify the Heb. dohan, but remarks that the modern Arabic word is applied to the variety saccharatus. Andropogon Sorghum seems to have had an African origin and to have been cultivated by the ancient Egyptians.

N.M. W.T.T. -D.


(Nl) ; EV in Judg. 9:6, 9:20, 2 K. 12:20, House of Millo ( O n 3).

LXX's readings are Judg. 9:6 /3r)<VaaAiov [bethmaalon] [R], juaaAAcoi/ [maallon] [A], 6 <HKOS juaAAui/ [L] ; 20 jSijfyxaa^wi/ [ B], /maa. [A], L as before ; 2 K. 1220 olK. jiiaaAw [BA], L as before; 28.69 i K. 11 27 r| d/cpa [BAL]; i K. 9 15 24 om. BL, rr\v /tieAu) [A]; i Ch. 11 8 om. BNA, r| a<cpa [L] ; 2 Ch. 32 5 TO (WArj/u/ua [BAL].

Generally supposed to be the designation of a kind of castle or other fortification.

(a) In Judg. 9:6, 9:20, some identify it with the Tower of Shechem (vv. 46-49), a view which Moore pronounces 'very doubtful'. For a probable solution of the problem, see SHECHEM, TOWER OF.

(b) In 2 K. 12:20 [12:21], Joash is said to have been slain 'at Beth-millo (on the way?) that goes down to Silla'. So RV. But N^D IT/I is probably a corruption of S£OTT, which is a (correct) gloss on N^O. Render, therefore, simply, 'at Beth-jerahmeel'. See JOASH.

(c) In 2 S. 5:9, 1 K. 9:15, 9:24, 11:27, 1 Ch. 118, 2 Ch. 32:5 it would seem to refer to some part of the fortifications of the citadel of Jerusalem. Probably, as in (a) and (b), NiVa is a corruption of ^NcnT. The most probable text of 2 S. 56:8 shows that the original population of Jerusalem was Jerahmeelite ; and that of Is. 29:1, that it was sometimes called ( Ir) Jerahmeel - i.e. , city of Jerahmeel (see Crit. Bib.}. Winckler, however (GI, 2251), thinks that Beth-millo is an expression for a temple ; he compares Ass. mullu = tamlu, a terrace or artificial elevation (cp Targ. NIV^D). Within the fortification (miss) of the ancient Jerusalem was the sacred hill with its sanc tuary ; round this, for security, David built his house (2 S. 5:9). It was the same Beth-millo i.e. , sanctuary which Solomon, according to Winckler, restored ; the tradition that the temple of Solomon was erected on a new site being late and incorrect. See JERUSALEM, 21, and TEMPLE. T. K. c.


(MNA), Lk. 19:13 RVmg. See MANEH.


(Job 28:1, N% lO, AV mg, RV 'mine' ; LXX, TOTTOC o66N riNCTAl; 1 Macc. 8:3 [KATAK PATHCAI] TOON MerAAAooN EV 'mines'.

1. Were there mines in Palestine?[edit]

From passages like Dt. 8:9, 'A land whose stones are iron, And out of whose hills thou mayest dig copper', and 33:25, 'The bolts be iron and bronze', we might naturally infer that there were mines in Palestine. When we consider, too, that Solomon had his own workmen in the Lebanon who hewed out stone and prepared timber for his buildings (1 K. 5:13-18 [5:27-32]), it would not be strange if he also had miners. There may be a reference to this in a notice in LXX of 1 K. 2:461c, which precedes a reference to his building of Oepfj.a.1 [thermae] (see TADMOR) in the desert, nai ZaXw/xwy fjp^aro dvoiyeiv TO. SwatrreAfuxra rov Aifidvov, if Winckler (Alttest. Unt. 175; GI, 3:235, 3:261) is right in assuming that Swayr. [dunast] covers a Hebrew word meaning 'mines'. That iron was found in the Antilibanus, and copper in the Lebanon, is certain (see COPPER, IRON). It is not easy, however, to find such a Hebrew word as is required. 1 In Job 28 we have a somewhat technical description of mining operations ; but the probability is that it refers to the mines of Upper Egypt and the Sinaitic peninsula. It is not, indeed, less interesting on that account, and it is fitting that the imagery employed in eulogising wisdom should not be ex clusively derived from Palestine. There is, however, so much corruption in the text (cp GOLD, SAPPHIRE) that one may justly hesitate to institute a comparison between the details of the poet and those of a careful collector of knowledge like Pliny, except as regards the obviously sound portions. It is true that v. 1 refers to the washing of gold (ppj, properly 'to filter, strain' ), such as is described by Diodorus (see GOLD, 2), and v. 2 to the smelting of copper, whilst in v. 4 RV quite correctly renders, 'He breaketh open a shaft' (the marginal rendering of v.4a, 'The flood breaketh out from where men sojourn' may be suggestive, but can claim no philological plausibility). The only other direct reference to mines is in 1 Macc. 8:3, where the Romans are said to have told Judas the Maccabee of the successful efforts they had made to win the gold and silver mines of Spain. In truth, the mineral wealth of Spain was such that that country seemed to the ancients a veritable El Dorado (see Posidonius, ap. Strab. 145+)- See, further, AMBER, COPPER, GOLD, IRON, LEAD, SILVER, TIN.

Our result thus far is disappointing. Mining was not and could not be as present to the mind of a Jew as it was to that of an Arab. Such a saying as that ascribed to Mohammed, 'Men are mines', 2 - i.e., they produce only what nature inclines them to produce ; they cannot produce what is not already in them, - would have been impossible in the mouth of a Jew (cp Mt. 7:16-18).

2. Metallurgy.[edit]

There are, however, many references to metallurgical operations.

  • (a) Smelting supplies one of the most favourite figures to Jewish teachers. There is a striking passage in Ezekiel (22:18-22) where the process of the smelter, who blows the fire in which the copper, tin, iron, and lead have been placed, is compared to the judgments about to come on the house of Israel. The same image, however, is also used for consolation - e.g., in Is. 1:25 (cp FURNACE). See Pliny, HN, 37:47, and Rawlinson, Phoenicia, chap. 10.
  • (b) The casting of images and other sacred objects (Ex. 25:12, 26:37, Is. 40:19, 1 K. 7:46) of gold, silver, or copper, is also mentioned, but not the casting of objects of iron.
  • (c) The liammering of metal, and making it into broad sheets (Nu. 16:38 [17:3], Is. 44:12).
  • (d) Soldering and welding (Is. 41:7) ;
  • (e) polishing (1 K. 7:45) ;
  • (f) overlaying with plates of gold, silver, or copper (Ex. 25:11-24, 1 K. 6:20, 2 Ch. 3:5, Is. 40:19). FURNACE, JOB, 1 1.

These operations seem to have been carried on to a considerable extent among the Israelites. We learn, however, that in Solomon s time it was necessary to obtain Phoenician assistance in executing the metal work for the temple (1 K. 7:13+). See, further, FURNACE; HIRAM, 2; HANDICRAFTS; JOB, 11.

1 Wi. suggests n l7j;3 ; but his arguments are not very convincing.

2 Wellh., Muhammedin J/>rtYa (Vakidi), 424.


(T^, 1 K. 10:15, Jer. 25:24; elsewhere 311?, pointed on the assumption that the word means 'mixture' - i.e. , a 'mixed multitude' [almost always with art. ; see below] ; eTTIMIKTOC, CYM., TON AAON TON ANAMeMifweNON [L in Neh.]). In Jer. 25:20, 50:37 it is supposed to mean the foreign mercenaries in the Egyptian and Chaldaaan armies respectively (cp ARMY, 9). In 1 K. 10:15, Jer. 25:24, Ezek. 30:5 it is more difficult to give a plausible justification of the rendering, since here the word undeniably has an ethnographic significance. The most critical course is, probably, in all the passages mentioned, to point any, 'Arabia', though a middle course is preferred by some scholars (see ARABIA, 1). In Jer. 25:24 it is obvious at a glance (cp LXX and Aq., Theod. in Qmg) that there has been dittography (see ARABIA, 1) ; mingled people is the makeshift of an editor who had to evade this. In Jer. 25:20 'and all Arabia', which is the correct rendering of the consonants of the text, should be omitted, as due to a scribe s error (cp v. 24) ; in Jer. 50:37 the Arabian population in Babylonia is referred to.

The same word, without the article, occurs in Ex. 12:38 (where an, ignored by EV, is dittographed), Neh. 13:3, where it is rendered Mixed Multitude. In the former passage it is supposed to mean the colluvies of various races which accompanied the Israelites at the Exodus (cp Nu. 11:4, Dt. 29:11 [29:10], Josh. 8:35); in the latter, the Ammonites, Moabites, and others, with whom Ezra found that the Judaean Jews had had intercourse, contrary to Dt. 23:3+. It is plain, however, that to produce a proper antithesis between any and Israel the former word ought to be the designation of a people i.e., we ought in both passages to point any, Arabians (so, in Neh. I.c., E. Meyer, Entst. 130). THE MIXED MULTITUDE is also the rendering of fjpspxn in Nu. 11:4.

f]OB3Kn is usually taken to be a synonym of an any (Geiger, Urschr. 71, after Sam. anany), and to mean the non-Israelites in the host of the Hebrews. However, if any means 'Arabians', rpsst( must be a corruption of some word of similar meaning. A more probable cor rection than Q DMtr, Shasim - i.e. , the Shasu of the Egyptian inscriptions, is D rijns, 'Zarephathites'. See MOSES, ii, ZAREPHATH. A connection with Osarsiph (Manetho's name for Moses) or with Asaph can hardly be thought of. T. K. C.

1 Aquila and Symmachus, in accordance with MT of 2 Ch. 9:14, actually read any in 1 K. 10:15; & (TOV irepap [BA], iv TO> nipiiv [L]), however, presupposes "yrr (cp z>. ^) t.e., the country beyond the river (cp EBER).


(P;JP), 2 Ch. 31:15, Neh. 12:17, 12:41. See MlJAMIN.


i. The word most usually so rendered is rnU b, mesareth (AeiTOYPrOC; minister), p\.. of JVC* 'to serve' (in a free and honourable capacity, as distinguished from 131?, which denotes the service of a slave). See Ex. 24:13 (Joshua), 2 S. 13:17-18, 2 K. 4:43, 6:15, Prov. 29:12; fem, in 1 K. :15. In later writings, it is specially used of the service of God or of the altar (Is. 616, Jer. 33:21, Joel 1:9, 1:13, 2:17 ); see also Ps. 103:21 10:44. It is noteworthy that where the Hebrew text of Sirach (4:14) gives .rrnsj D e-np Twa. 'Ministers of holiness are her (Wisdom's) ministers', the Greek uses two different verbs, ol AarpeiWres avTy XeiTovpyr)crovffu> ayiif).

2. n^B. Ass. palahu, to fear or worship, is used in Ezra 7:24 of the ministers of the house of God. The same verb is met with in Dan. 3:12, 3:14, 3:17-18, 6:17, 6:21, 7:14, 7:27 (0o/3er<r#cu, Xarpfi fti , Soi Xfi etc).

3. For | .is (2 S. 8:18, 1 K. 4:5 ) see MINISTER (CHIEF).

4. virri/xTrjs Lk. 4:20, Acts 13:5, RV 'attendant'.

5. didKovos [diaconos] Mt. 20:26, Mk. 10:43. See DEACON, i, and MINISTRY, 40.

6. \tiTovpy6s [leitourgos]

  • (a) A minister of God, generally ; Rom. 136, Heb. 1:7 ( = Ps. 104:4 ).
  • (b) A minister of Jesus Christ, Rom. 15:16, where itpovpyovvTa rb tvayytXiov TOV 0(ov follows - i.e. , 'doing the work of a priest of the gospel' (Jowett).
  • (c) Applied to Christ, as the sole officer or administrator in the true sanctuary, TWV dyiuv \tiTovpy6s, Heb. 8:2.

In Acts 13:2, \fiTovpyovvruv afiruv rij} Kvpiif} is of course metaphorical, and alludes to the doctrine of the NT and of certain psalmists that prayer is the most acceptable sacrifice. Note that \eiTovpyovvTuv is followed by vrjffTfvdvTwv ; prayer and fasting are naturally combined. In Heb. 10:11 the same verb is used of the OT priests ; so \tirovpyia. in Lk. 1:23 Heb. 8:6, 9:21. Figurative uses of \tnovpyia. in Phil. 2:17, 2:30, 2 Cor. 9:12 ; cp Rom. 15:27. - Of the more special use of \dTovpyia, connecting it with the office of the Holy Eucharist, there is no trace in the NT. It is usually said that the ordinary Greek usage gives no suggestion of the application of \tiTovpytu found in the LXX and the Greek NT, though here and there in Diod. Sic., Dionys. Halicarn., and Plutarch Xftrovpyos is used of priests. 1 It has I>een shown, however, that \ttTovpytu and \eirovpyia are often used of ministering in the temples in the Egyptian papyri (for references see Deissmann, Bibel-studien, 138).


(filS), the title of an office in the courts of David and Solomon, 2 S. 8:18 (David's sons, AY^APXAI): 20:26 (Ira the Jairite, lepeyc) ; 1 K. 4:5 (Nathan, not in LXX{BL}) in RVmg. This rendering expresses the view of Baudissin 2 and Buhl 3 (Ges. < 13 -Bu.< 2 >). 'Probably', says Baudissin, 'the title of priest was attached, honoris causa, to kings sons and high officers'. H. P. Smith, Lohr, and others support this view. 'The traditional exegesis', says H. P. Smith, 'has difficulty in supposing David s sons to be priests in the proper sense, for by the Levitical code none could be priests except descendants of Aaron'. The Chronicler is supposed to have already felt this difficulty; in 1 Ch. 18:17, we read 'And the sons of David were the chief beside the king' (RV 'chief about the king' oi irpwroi didSoxoi. [diad&xov L] TOV fiacr. ). Robertson Smith 4 quotes 2 S. 8:18, along with 2 K. 10:11, 12:2, as proving that the higher priests were grandees. (See also Driver, TBS, 220.)

But (a) in 1 K. 4:5 jnjj, 'priest', is followed by ,nyn 'friend'. 'Priest-friend' is impossible ; Hushai was a 'friend', but no priest. Plainly ps is a gloss, which in LXX has actually expelled the word which it sought to explain. jn3 } therefore, would seem to be the wrong word. (b) In i K. 4:6, as Klost. has shown, we ought to read, not ntrriN, but iiy rrm ; Zabud then was a j,no (corrupt surely) who was Azariah's brother and the officer over the palace. In Is. 22:15 the governor of the palace is called a jab- 5 Obviously pb or Q jab (as the case may require) should be substituted for jns or D jrts in 2 S. 8:18, 20:26, 1 K. 4:5. David s sons, then, and Zabud, son of Nathan, were sokenim, - i.e. , 'chief ministers' or administrators (see TREASURER), or, to adopt another current title, 'friends' (see FRIEND). In 1 Ch. 18:17 we should perhaps read n lnS c - 33b v,n, 'were David's administrators'. The emendation was incidentally suggested long ago for 2 S. 8:18 by Hitzig (on Ps. 110) ; independently the present writer has given the same view in a more complete form with a discussion in the Expositor, June, 1899. T. K. c.

1 Cp Cremer, Lex., ET, 764.

2 Gesc/t. des A T Priestcrthutns, 191.

3 Samuel, 310.

4 Article Priest, 1 F.BW.

6 The argument holds, even if the passage has to be emended (see SHEBNA).