THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA
Ahimelecb
It may also he lejri'iKi as well as in Gon. R. v. 10. mentioned that those miixims tlmt do not occur in the Syriiie version. liit are nut with in the others, may also be pariiUeleil hy ral)liinieiil siivings (compare, for instance, the Shivonic version. io. 27. with Sanh. 112/<. and the Armenian. No. 100, with Pes. ^9/-). From all the precedinjr it seems fair to conclude that the Ahikar nia.xiins represent some ancient collection of .lewish iKijiwlar proverbs, which at a later period were combined with the legend of the liaby-
lonian sji.ses. Lejiemls anil jiroverbs then traveled together Ihrouirh Europe and Asi.i. In addition to the abovc-menlioneil versions of the Ahikar stcvry. the Hindus, like most of the European nations, possess the legend, as Heiifey has shown; although he. unac(|uainted with the true facts, dcsRelation to ignated India as the original home of Hindu the story. It is reinarkalile in this the connection that thi' ilinilu version be Version, trays many iiointsof resemblance with points which obtain in no the Talmudic luaterial Thus, for instance, one other forms of the story. of Vicaklia's problems was to det<'rmiue the se. of two serpents which had no dislinclive marks about them: botli task and solution are found in the Midrash on Proverbs (i. 1) related of King Solomon. In the Hindu form of the legend and in cognate forms, it is coMsiilered the higliest trium]ili of the sage to distinguisli which cud of u wooden rod was situated downwaril in the tree in which it grew, and which end ujnvard. In the Jewish Solomon legend the same question is <lescribed as being the last and the most dillicult of those i)ropounded by the queen of Sheba to the king, and its solution is exactly in accord with that of the Hindu version (see the Yemen Midrash described by Schechter, in "Folk-Lore," 189(1, pp. 349-3.58). Although the weight of the preceding testimony is in favorof the suggestion that the Ahikar legend and the system of legends and maxims connected therewith point to a Jewish substratum, the material extant hardl_v warrants the conclusion that it is a [jroduct of genuine Jewisli folk-lore. For a purely Jewish work here is too little religious material in it a fact which in the postexilian period for this is the earli-
—
I
— —
Jewisli
est date ])o.ssible is somewhat surprising. The Ahikarof the Book of Tobit
and the Ahikarof he legend have man)' t
stratum,
points of similarity; but it can not be said with certainty that they are identical. That the Ahikar legend tinds employment in the New Testament is true only to the extent that some proverbial sayings of the Ahikar collection a])pear in the latter in a somewhat moditied form, which may really only show the extent to which the legend had spread, and not a strictly literary connection. Of the Ahikar legend proper, the New Testament contains absolutely no traces, Halevy and Heudcl Harris to the contrary notwithstanding.
BIHLIOCRAPHT
Benfey,
Dii-
Klmic Dirnr.
in
AuxJnnil,
18.'>fl.
I't .va/., and espeeiully .511 ct sci/.; Conybeare. IteinJel Harris, and Agnes Smith Lewis, The Stifrw'f Ahikar^ London, ISiW (contains the Aniltic, Smar. Armenian, 'and Greeic te-xt.s, with a transljition of the t1r>;t ttiree. as well as a Slavonic versiun and an c.xhaustive iiitntduction): C<)squin, in licruf Itihlitmr^ viii. .Td it ,s* */., .'ilo ft .^t (/.; (ijuster. in Jimrual nf thf UiiUKl Aniittk' Siiriilji. l;»«i, p|i. ;iiil ii M'l. ii-ontaiiis a Ru-
lip. 4.'>"
Fhi:!ish tnilisliiliori); Halevy, in Ufviw Snttitifiucviii.'^itt .'<tii.: .lairic, in /f,i/;<(Nh';o>(7i« '/i it.<fhrift, 1. 107 ct ncu-: Kuhn, ihid. pp. V^ ct seq.i Lidzbai^lii. in Z. D. 3/. G. xlviii. tj71 ct .vc*/.: LMc Xcu-A rnm<Iif<cbcti }Ia)nliichriftcn. I. ii.;,Meissner, in Z. D.M. U. pp. 171 c( mi;. ; Keinach, in liev. Kt. Jiiu'cs, x.xviil. 1 ct sea.
manian version and an
L. G.
AHIMAAZ
Brother of Anger"): 1. Father of Ahinuam, wife of Saul (I Sam. xiv. 50). 2. Com{•'
mis.snry-gcneral of Solomon in Naphtuli, who married Basmath. the daughter of Solomon (I Kings iv. 1.")). 3. Son of Zadok, who, with Jonathan, the son of Abiiithar. brought David the news from the camp of Absalom luid, after the battle between the king's forces under .loab and those of Absidom, ha.stiMied to tell David of the victory, outrunning the Ciishite who had started some time befoic him (H Sam. XV. 36, xvii. 17-20, xviii. 19 ftxei/.; I t'hron. V. 34 et seq. He is mentioned in the list of liigh pri(sts G. B. L.
AHIMAAZ BEN PALTIEL
Liturgical poet,
and author of n family chronicle: born in Capua, Italy, 1017; died about" KMIO in Oria. Yery little is known iibout his life. He came of a family some of whose members are well known in Jewish literature as .scholars and poets: for example, Hanancel, and his nephew Amiltai ben Shephatiah. Ahimaaz had two sons. Palliel ami Samuel. The following family tree, reaching up to the middle of the eleventh century, is based on data given by Ahimaaz in his "Chronicle
":
Amiliai
I.
I
Shepballah
Papolconl.
d. c. 88«
(Vila, 23)
Auiiltui
II.
Kassia m. Ha.sadyab
AInliel
Paltlel
I.
Sbabbetbal
I
I.
I
Hanani'cl
II.
I
I
I I
(A daugbter)
Paltiel a.
II.;
I
Samuel,
Papo-
Ha-sadyab II.
m. Allmvcni. i
I
Samuel
I
I
I
Shah-
d. inns, betbai II. leon II.
iW9
II.
PamellII.:b. 988;
d.
10«
1
AHIUAAZ;
b. 1017; d.
about 1060
I
Sub-
A
290
Paltlel IV.; b. 1088
Samuel
III.; h.
1014
Benjamin of Tudela mentions an Aliimiuiz ben Paltiel in Amalfi in southern Italv, in the vcar 11()2 (see his "Travels." ed. Asher, i. 13, 14). this may well have been a descendant of his earlier nameknown that two brothers of the grandsake for it is fat her of Ahimaaz ben Paltiel were sent with presents
to Paltiel by the prince of Amalfi (see "Rev. Et. Juives," xxxii. 147) In a list of twenty-two Ki/i/iah (elegiac) poets (Italy, fifteenth century?), Ahimaaz ben Paltiel is mentioned as the author of two jioems; and a Mahzor of the Koman rite attributes to him a .selihah for the Feast of Esther. Ahimaaz is better known as the compiler of the "Chronicle" mentioned above, which, though intended merely to glorify his own immediate ancestors, gives much important information in regard to the history of the early Jewish settlements in such towns as Oria, Bari, Otranto, Gaeta, Benevente, Capini, Amalfi, and Pa via in southern The Chron- Italy, AVritten about one himdrcd icle of years before Abraham ibn Daud, it Ahimaaz. covers a [jcriod (8.50-10.54) our knowledge of which is extremely scanty; the only information hitherto having been obtained from a few inscriptions and from notices in the works of Shalibethai Donolo, who also was a native of Oria. Only one manuscript of the "Chronicle " is known to exist it is in the library of the
