Sei sulla pagina 1di 25

NEKEB NEPHI

Three points in the teaching of Jesus connected with I. The family name of a company of post-exilic Nethinim :
this word deserve special attention. Ezra248(ve [Bl v e ~ ~ ~ I A l f = N e h . (usrwScr.[Nl)=x
75o Esd.
531 (voqSa [%A], )EV NOERA)..
I . In Mt. 5 4 3 J , Jesus contrasts the precept given to 2. One of the three famllies from Tel-melah, Tel-harsha,
the ancients, ' Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate Cherub Addon and Immer, that were unable to produce written
thine enemy, ' with his own rule, ' Love your enemies. ' evidenc)eof their Israelite descent : Ezra 2 m=Neh. 7 62= 1 Bsd.
5 37 AV NECOIIAN, RV Nekodan ( v r x w h v [BAI).
T h e former part of the old principle is a verbal quotation
from Lev. 1 9 1 8 6 , and, as the parallelism clearly proves, NEMUEL (5&.lD!, § 4 ; NAMOYHA). I. One of the
' neighbour ' was there synonymous with compatriot. sons of Sirneon; Nu.2612 I C ~424. . If these clan-
T h e Jew was not a t liberty to hate his personal enemies names are traditional records of ethnic affinities, a
(see, on the contrary, Ex. 234f. ; Lev. 1913 ; Prov. better reading would be JEMUEL ( ~ N W ; repou.r]A;
2022 2417 29 2521f. ; Job3129; Ps. 7 4 [SI). nor is he repqh [B]. in Ex.) as in Gen.4610 EX. 615--i.e.,
anywhere required in express terms to hate the heathen. Jerahme'el. This is confirmed by the circumstance
T h e scribes, however, may very well have thought such that a Reubenite bears the same name ( ' Reuben ' prob-
feelings justified from the ban under which Canaanite ably is a Jerahmeelite name; Reuben seems to have
cities were to be put (Dt. 7 z), and from the language used been originally a southern tribe). Further evideiice
in Dt. 15zf. 2013-18 2 5 1 7 - 1 9 Mal. 1 z J , and especially might be produced. T h e patronymic Nemuelite
Ps. 1392rf: All the more natural and indeed inevitable ( v a p o ~ n j X [ e ] roccurs
) in Nu. 2612.
was such a n inference in the strong reaction against the 2. A Reubenite, brother of Dathan and Abiram (Nu. 269).
heathen power which held the chosen people in its grip. T. ti. C.
Jesus, then, taking ' neighhour ' in its accepted sense, N E O C O B O S ( N E ~ K O ~Actsl935.
OC, ' a worshipper,'
pronounces the former half of the Jewish maxjni in- AVW. ' the temple keeper,' R V ' temple-keeper ' ). T h e
sufficient and sweeps the latter half of it away. His word Neocoros is an old religious term in Asia
disciples are to love not only their countrymen, not only Minor, adopted and developed in the imperial cultus
even their private foes ; their love is to reach even those which was so important in the organisation of the
who hate them as members of the Kingdom of God. empire. Originally expressing the devotion of the city
Christianity is to overcome the very opposition which it to the particular deity whose worship was most zealously
creates. T h e author of Lk. 6 2 7 , as is his wont, omits cultivated, the term Neocoros,' or ' Neocoros of the
the reference to the Jewish law and sets the maxim a t Emperors,' came to be connected with the politico-
the head of the discourse imnlediately after the intro- religious imperial cultus almost entirely, and when the
ductory beatitudes and woes. title appears on coins and inscriptions under the empire
The words 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself' occur it signifies 'Warden of a temple dedicated to the
in the summary of the law which Jesus gave the rich young man,
as reported in Mt. 19 16-30, They are absent, however, in the imperial worship.' T h e temple had to be dedicated by
parallel account in M k . 10 17-31 (cp Lk. 18 18-30) and the fact the Provincial Synod, whose president was (in Asia) the
t h a t this is j u s t the point in which the young man fails when Asiarch. It had also to be dedicated to the emperor
Jesus puts him to the proof shows t h a t the words in question do
not belong to the original ;radition but have been added from alone ; it was not sufficient if a particular city dedi-
22 39. In any case they throw no light on the term ' neighbour,' cated a temple, apart from the Provincial Synod, nor
as Jesus understood it. if the eniperor %-as merely received as partner into the
2. In Mt. 2234-40 (=Mk. 1228-34) Jesus, when ques- temple of a n older deity. Coincident u-ith the dedica-
tioned as to the kind of commandment which is greatest, tion of the temple and the appointment of the necessary
quotes as the great commandment Dt. 6 4 ' H e a r 0 priests and other officials, was the establishment of
Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord and thou shalt games in honour of the emperor, T h e title and per-
love the Lord thy tiod.' etc., connects with it another mission to erect the temple was granted by decree of the
commandment from another book, ' Thou shalt love senate in Rome. When by similar decree permission
thy neighbour as thyself' (Lev. 1918). and declares that was granted for the erection of a temple and the estab-
the second is ' like ' - i . e . , in importance-to the first. lishment of games in honour of a later emperor, the city
All the law and the prophets, he says, hang on those received the title 6is Newxbpor ; and spir N e w ~ b p ~ s w h e n
two comniandnients,--i.e., proceed from them-so that a third foundation was made. Apparently no city
multiplicity of enactment disappears in unity of spirit. received more than the triple Neocorate, which was
Here Jesus accepts the love of our neighbour as sufficient, granted first to Pergamos (according to the boast on its
though to him, no doubt, the word had a wider sense coins, which may not be true). Ephesus alone boasts a
than it bore in the Hebrew Code. fourth Neocorate ; but the fourth refers to the worship
3. Once, however, Jesus took occasion to develop of Artemis, which was officially recognised by Hadrian.l
this wider meaning. Asked ' W h o is my neighbour? ' he It is with reference to this worship that the title is used
replied by the parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk. of Ephesus in the ' town clerk's ' speech-for, of course,
1029-39) and then himself asked the questioner, 'Which the old signification of the word, in which sense it could
of these three thinkest thou proved neighbour to him be used by any city that wished to express its devotion
that fell among the robbers ? ' T h e object of Jesus was to a particular deity, still continued even after it gained
apparently to show that one of the heretic and hated the special meaning above explained (cp Wood, A@.
Samaritans could prove himself a better neighbour to a Inscr. vi. 6, p. so). It is, in fact, doubtful whether so
Jew than a priest or a Levite, and that it is therefore early as about 56 A.D. Ephesus could claim the title in
wrong to refuse them the title of neighbour. If this its imperial sense.
interpretation be correct,l Jesus extends the term Of the Asiatic cities mentioned in the NT, the title was
neighbour' in the command ' Thou shalt love thy possessed by Pergamus, Ephesus, Laodiceia, Hierapolis, Phila-
neighhour as thyself,' till it is co-extensive with mankind. delphia, Smyrna.
This wider sense belongs to d ?rA.r]uiov in the rest of See Biichner, De Neocoria: Monceaux, De comniuni Asire
Provinciu, 1886; Ramsay, Cities and Bish. ofphryzia, 1 5 8 .
the NT. According to Paul (Rom. 139) all the law is w. J . w.
summed u p in the command, ' T h o u shalt love thy NEPHEG (>&O). I. A Kohathite Levite, Ex. 621
neighbour as thyself,' and this, according to James ( 2 S), (va+ [BAL], va@y [F]).
is the royal or principal law. W.E. A. 2. A son of Uavid, 2 S. 5 15 I Ch. 3 7 14 6 ( U ~ C X ,v a + d [681
[B] ; vaerx, vaecy, vaoay [A] ; va+ [N, I Ch. 14 61 ; va$cO,
NEKEB (I?;?), J o s h . 1 9 3 3 A V t , R V ADAMI- vrcy, vc@x [Ll). See DAVIU, $3 X I n., NOGAH.
NEKEB.
NEPHI ( 2Macc. 136), RV N EPHTHAI : see N APH -
NEKODA (K$p!, a kind of bird? 5 8 3 ; NEKWAA THA.
[BKAL]). 1 Cp imperial silver coins of Ephesus bearing the type of
1 It is the simplest though not the commonest interpretation Artemis and the legend DIAAAEPHESIA.See Rams. Church
of the passage. See 'B. Weiss, ad Zoc. in Rom. Em?. 143.
3389 3390
NEPHILIM NEPHILIM
NEPHILIBI ( E I 9 $ 1 ~ ~ , riraNTec [BADEFL] ; CP saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak, who come of the
#59PI=KBsil or O RION [q.v.] in Tg.). Nephilim.’ Here ‘ the Nephilim ’ is original ; ‘ t h e sons
( a ) Gen. 64 : ‘ T h e Nephilim arose in the land of Anak,’ etc., is a (correct) gloss. According to this
(or, on the earth) in those days (namely) when the passage the ‘ Nephilim ’ were still to be found when the
1. Biblical divine ones had intercourse with human Israelites entered Canaan (or the Negeb).
maidens; those are the heroes, the (c) Ezek. 3227 : ‘ A n d they lie not Nzith the heroes
famous ones.’ (The words p - w n D J ~and that are fallen of the uncircumcised, who went down to
ohyo YON are here untranslated ; see c and 3.) T h e ShEdl with their warlike equipment. ’ Cornill plausibly
passage to which Gen. 64 belongs, comes in its present ~ o.hya (with 6),
reads o k y for and also w>?J for d ? i .
form from Jl,* whose account of the early men appar- &iya at once reminds one of Gen. 64, where the same
ently did not refer to a deluge (see D ELUGE , 14). word occurs; but it is nevertheless wrong in both
J availed himself of an old mythological story, which, passages : something much more definite is required
however, did not in all respects please him, and from (see § 3). &J (o*>pJ?)must be right. Ezekiel, if this
which he therefore only took very small portions, such view be accepted, does not regard the Nephilim as lying
as were in themselves unobjectionable and appeared under the curse of God. H e also tells us who they
consistent with the other stories which he had to weave were (see § 3, end).
together into a history of the early men. ( d ) Later writers, however, thought very differently.
T h e text must first of all be critically emended : even Kosters In Ecclus. 167. Wisd. 146, Judith167, Bar. 326 f.
(Th. T10 42) infers from D@, ‘for their sin ’ (9,a n early tradi- 3 Macc. 24, we find allusions to the ‘ giants ’ and their
tion of the sin of the b’ne Elo’him (on OgW?, see n. 2). Knowing fate. The author of EnochSf. has much more to
what we d o of the early Hebrew and (still more) of the Bahy- say. H e supplements Gen. 6 1-4 by the statement that
lonian myths, we can attempt t o reproduce the outlines ofthe old
story, assuming the most reasonable corrections of a n imperfect the giants at length turned against mankind to devour
text. them. Upon this the Lord himself interposed. The
‘And so it fell out that when men began to multiply on the chief fallen angel and his companions he punished in
earth and d a u g h t e k were born t o them the divine ones
(b’ni ’hd-’A%him)saw that the human maidens were fair, and the way described elsewhere (see AZAZEL) ; their sons,
took a s wives any that they preferred. [And they taught man- the giants, he caused to perish in internecine warfare.
kind how t o clothe themselves and how to forge brass and This account is closely followed in the Book of Jubilees
iron. And their sons in after-time became heroes, and men (chap. 5). Both Jubilees, however and the fragments of the
prospered under their rule. Now the cause wherefore the Greek Enoch differ from the Ethidpic Enoch in one respect-
divine ones had come down to earth was this. There had been they mention three classes of giants-viz., the Great Giants, the
dissension among the divine ones, some being friendly to men, Nephilim, a n d the Eliud (or, in 1 ~ 6 . 7 Giants,
, Naphil, a n d
some unfriendly. And those that were friendly came down to EIja).l
visit men upon earth. But the lord of the divine ones doubted W e must at once dismiss all theories of the existence
in his heart whereunto the prosperity of men would grow.]
And Yahwb said, T h e spirit of the glorious gods shall not tarry of an early myth of a ‘ sin ’ of the b‘ne klbhim. Neither
longer in habitations of Resh.2 [I will sweep them from the a. originof those supernatural beings nor their off-
earth lest they become too strong. But the divine ones spoke spring were originally regarded as having
soft dords and counselled their lord to wait.]
According to this view of the story, the parents of myth’ sinned.’ There is not even any trace in
those primeval heroes, including Nimrod,’ whom J1 Gen. 6 ~ fof . ‘ war in heaven’ ; any such myth which there
identifies with the ‘Nephilim,’ are the founders of may once have been has perished. W e cannot, there-
civilisation (see CAINITES), and their sons carry on the fore, follow either Lenorniant,2 who compares the Greek
arduous work. The supposed dissension among the myths of the Gigantomachia and the Titanomachia. or
divine ones is in accordance with the Deluge story and S a y ~ ewho, ~ suspects a connection between the ‘ Nephi-
other Babylonian myths. The hesitation of the supreme lini ’ and the terrible beings described in the so-called
God YahwA (who was portrayed as no better than Bel) ‘ Cuthrean ’ creation-story,4which, however, is no crea-
is in harmony with the survivals of primitive theology in tion-story at all. These terrible beings are the brood of
Gen. 322 116 (also J1). A later editor is the author Tiamat the chaos-monster, and are represented (the
of 6 3b, where ‘his days’ presupposes that o i ~ ‘man.’
, narrator has lost hold on the early myth, in which the bird-
precedes-ie., that u. 3n has already become corrupted. like, raven-faced beings are, no doubt, storm d e r n o i ~ s as
)~
Verse 4 belongs to J1, except the words ‘ a n d after oppressing a certain (Babylonian ?) king. till they are
that,’ to which we shall return (§ 3 , ii.). cursed and destroyed. They are, in short, the de-
Then, most probably, in this writer’s narrative followed the stroyers, not (like the heroes of the Hebrew legend)
story in Gen. 11 I 8 which originally began thus, ‘And the the founders, of civilisation. T h e true parallels to Gen.
whole earth was a single family in the wilderness of Jerahmeel,’ 6 1 j lie close at hand ; the sexual intercourse of gods
and ends with ‘and they left off building the city’ (see P ARADISE , and men is a constant feature of ancient mythologies
P, 7) after which may have come the account of the true Noah
(Geb. 9 20-27), and of Cush and (especially) Nimrod (Gen. 108-12) (cp Plat. Crutylus, 33). including the Babylonian (see
who was regarded as one of the ‘famous men,’ the heroes of CAINITES, § sf. ). The later Jews (as the N T shows us)
Jerahmeel. See N IMROD , N OA H. naturally took offence at Gen. 6 a. The first Yahwist
( 6 ) Nu. 1 3 3 3 (E). The account of the episode of the (JJ, however, hands on this part of the old tradition in
Spies also mentions the ‘ Nephilim.’ a And there we perfect simplicity.
1 According to Olshausen the whole of v. 4 consists of glosses I t still remains (i. ) to explain the name NEphilim,’
(Monatsber. der Bed. Akad., June 1878). Budde, Wellhausen and (ii.) to account for the troublesome phrases YON
Kautzsch-Socin, Holzinger, Ball are content with assuming tha; ohyn and i p r r K OJ? in Gen. 64 ; cp also Ezek. 3227.
-J qnx 011 is a gloss. This is only a step in the right direction
(see 8 3), nor may we follow Bndde (E&. U ~ p s c h 3. 0 8 ) in i. I t is not a matter of merely linguistic interest to ex-
reconstructing the old tradition so a s to include a part of v. 4. plain O * % J;~the J race so designated, though mentioned
T h e early pre-Yahwistic tradition m a y b e gathered from m.1.3~. 3. origin of under this name only twice or thrice
J1 adopted the tradition, and connected with it the origin of the
in the O T , evidently filled a large place
heroes called Nephilim (?).
2 T h e present text contains twountranslatahle words (pi, and
,Nephilim. in Israelitish tradition. It is a mistake
OJOI). There has been some disarrangement, and, conse. to regard the name as a mere appellative ; from Nu.
quently, some confusion of letters. Read D,c!’e F31 71;.: lis
1 See Charles, Book of Enoch, 6 2 s ; Q X 6 (1894) 1g5f: 201
~ $ niigwna
2 O‘y?. For - p V , c p Nu. 9 1 g z a ; for ’in ‘h, (Jubilees) alsoJu6ilees (about t o appear{
IS. 48 : for ‘3 ’>OD,S o h 4 18 104. For other emendations of 2 Or&es de rhistoire, 13@&
]ii!and ojuq see Di.’s notes. None of them a r e satisfactory; 3 Crit. and Mon. 91.
4 See C REATION, P, 16 : Zimmern, ZA 12 3 x 7 8
the corruption is more extensive than has been suspected. Yet 5 C p R. Brown, Primitive Constellations, 1 10s.
the material handed down is not irremediably corrupt. T h e 6 [See Jude 6f: a Pet. 2 4 and especially Enoch 154 ‘Whilst
student should notice that Olff, not OiW’p, is thebest Massoretic you were still spiritual, h d y , in the enjoyment of etkrnal life,
reading (Geiger, Jud. Zt. 3 155, Ginsburg). Even that, however, you have defiled yourselves with women. .. and produced
will not produce a good sense. flesh and blood.’]
3391 3392
NEPHIS NEREUS
1 3 2 8 3 3 it is plain that ‘ N5philim’ (if the reading is NEPHTHALIM (NE@eAhEIM [Ti. WH]), Mt. 413
correct) has as definite a reference as the parallel phrase, AV, RV N APHTALI .
b n 5 ‘Xnik,‘ which, as Dt. 211 shows, was the name of a NEPHTHAR (NE@@Ap[AV]), 2 Macc. 1 3 6 RV, AV
branch of the REPHAIM[q...]. It is therefore enough N APHTHAR ( q . ~ . ) .
simply to mention the supposed connection with &ai,
to fall‘ (as if ‘ those who fall on the weak,’ or those
NEPHTOAH (nhg;), only in the phrase ‘ t h e
d

who have fallen from heaven,’ or ‘ those who had been fountain of the waters of Nephtoah’ (’3 ’D ]’Po,nHrH
horn contrary to nature’).2 with J J N (as \ ~ if ‘extra- ~ A A T O C NAC$eCd [BAL], MA@ew [B in !Sal), a
ordinaryones’).“and with & p i ( = \ x = A s s . nabdlu, ‘to locality on the border of Judah and Benjamin (Josh.
destroy’). The name has, very possibly, been distorted 1 5 9 I 8 1 j f ) , generally identified with L q t i , a village
through corruption of the text either of Gen. 6 4 or, more with a large fountain, the waters of which are collected
probably, of Nu. 1 3 3 3 (an editor adjusted the reading in a great walled resqvoir of very early origin, and
of the other passage or passages accordingly). What situated about z m. NW. of Jerusalem on the slope
then are the best authenticated names of the pre- of a hill on the E. side of the W2dy Bet HaninH.
Israelitish peoples of Canaan, and more especially of The locality is undoubtedly ancient, and its situation
that part of Canaan which was referred to in the original may he consistent with the description in the hook of
story which probably underlies Nu. 1317-33) They are Joshua. T h e equation, Nephtoah= Lifts, however, is
Amorites and Jerahmeelites, and it so happens that the rather difficult, and the frequency of corruption in
city with which originally the b n e ‘Anak were con- the name-lists suggests caution. Certainly the name
nected was the Jerahmeelite city of REHOBOTH[q.~.]. Nephtoah ( ’ an opened place ’ ?) is improbable, and the
Among the many distortions of the name Jerahme’el or phrase ‘ the fountain of the waters of N. ’ is tautological.
Jerahnie’elim which the Or contains, it is very credible 1-nin nin5j.n probably comes from a dittographed l*yn (the
that n.59~was one.’ and from 0*59i to p-551 the step is final forms of letters very slowly became prevalent). I n the
list of the towns of Judah we find (Josh. 1534) a place called
easy. This, consequently, was what E said in Nu. Tappuah Enam,’ which is grouped with Zanoah and En-gannim,
1333, ‘And there we saw the Jerahmeelites’ [gloss, ‘ t h e and must have lain somewhere near Timnah (Josh.1510); the
sons of Anak. who belong to the Jerahmeelites and‘I; same place is also prohahly meant in Gen. 38 14.2 as the place
visited by Judah’s daughter-in-law Tamar. Most probably for
the true words of Jl in Gen. 6 4 are these, ‘ The Jerah-
meelites arose in the land in those days.’ C p JEXAH- ning ]*yo $JNin Josh. U.C.we should read (by transposition)
MEEL, 5 4. n2.Y np-\: ‘to Tappuah (of) Enam.’ This may perhaps
ii. It is now very easy to explain nhyn ~ W and H 011 throw fresh light on the boundary of Judah and Benjamin. Cp
TAPPUAH.
p-inN. T h e former phrase comes from n,\Nnni.3, ‘ the Conder has already noticed that Petah ‘Enuyim in Gen. 38 14
Jerahmeelites.’ and the latter is simply an editor’s should be the name of a town, and be identified with Tappuah
endeavour to make sense of n\?nNn. the disarranged Enam in Josh. 1.5 34 (PEFQ, r876, p. 66). Nephtoah he
identified with Etam or ‘Ai% ‘ A t i n , close to the Pools of
letters of &wan>-. ‘ Jerahmeelites,’ inserted as the earliest Solomon, SW. of Bethlehem following Yonra 31a (PEFQ,
editor’s correction of 0.55~. In Ezek. 3227 a similar cor- 1879. p. 95). But the Talmddic traditions are often untrust-
rection is necessary. &yn (like n * \ ? ~in Judg. 143 worthy. T. K. C.
etc. ) is a corruption of n*\Nnny. NEPHUSHESIM ( O ’ D h D l [Kt.]), Neh. 7 5 2 RV=
Thus the origin of the Jerahmeelites is traced by an Ezra 250 AV Nephusim. See N EPHISIM .
early Hebrew writer and also by Ezekiel to the semi-
NEB (79. NHP [BAL]. NHPEI [B in I S.1450]),
divine heroes of primitive culture, such as N IMROD rq.v.3,
the father of Abner (I S. 1450f. 265x4 z S. 28 IZ 3 a 3
the ‘ beginning of whose kingdom was Jerahmeel.’ The
z5 28 37 I K. 2 5 3 2 I Ch. 8 3 3 9 3 6 39 2 6 z 8 t ) .
idea that these heroes and their divine fathers are leaders
in sin is late.
For two competing explanations of I Ch. 8 3 3 93639
T. K . C.
( ‘ N e r hegat Kish’), see A BNER , n. I , K ISH , I. It
NEPHIS (NEI@BIC [B]), I Esd. 521 A V = E z r a 2 3 0 , seems to the present writer extremely probable that the
MAGBISH, 4.v. true name of Ahner’s father was Nadab or Abinadab.
NEPHISH ( I Ch. 5 19), RV NAPHISH. It will be noticed that in I Ch. 8 3 0 Ner ’ is not men-
tioned, hut that ’ Nadab ’ is, while in 9 3 6 we read ‘ and
NEPHISIM (D’D’DJ ; Kri D’DlQq ; on name, see
Ner and Nadab’ ; ‘ Nadah’ in the latter passage is a
below), t h e name of one of the families of NETHINIM rurrection of Ner. Both in 8 3 0 and in 9 3 6 we meet
(q:zj.),, Ezra250 ( N A @ E I C W N [E]. N E @ ? Y C E I M [AL]). with i n l y (Ahdon?) ; this is a corruption of ~ ~ [ , I I H
miswritten Nephishesim or Nephushesim in [I Neh. 752 (Ahinadah). ’ Baal’ which comes between ‘ Kish’ and
(D’DV’DJ,KrE ; O’DWlDJ, Kt. : N E @ ~ C A C[B], €~ ’ A’er ’ or ‘ Nadah ’ is a fragment of Ahibaal,’ one of
-EIM [HI, NE@WCPEIM [AI, N B @ O Y C E I M [L] ; one the two competing names of the grandfather of Saul
of the sibilants IS clearly superfluous) = I Esd. 5 31 m d Abner, and to be explained like Meri(b)baal ; see
Naphisi ( V U @ E I U E ~ [B], va@,cur[A], v e @ w m p [L]). Guthe M EPHIBOSHETH . Similarly ’ Nadab ’ (of which ‘ Ner ’
compares the name NefLsi or iVefzisi on a n ancient seal is a corruption) might be a fragment of Ahinadah (from
in the Brit. Mus. (Rev. Arch.. 1891. p. 109). Since Nedahi ‘ one of the Nadah-clan ’ ?). Both names were
Meunim precedes, Nephisim will probably he a tribal probably written in the margin of some (late) document
name ; cp NAPHISH,a tribe of Ishmaelites.
used by the Chronicler as corrections of p y . Cp
T. K. C. KISH. I, 2. T. K. C .
NEPHTHAI ( N E @ e A l ) . 2 M ~ c c1.3 6 . See N APHTHA .
NEREUS (NHPEYC [Ti. W H ] ) and his (unnamed)
NEPHTHALI (NEc$eAAEIM. Tob. 1 I). See NAPH- sister are saluted by Paul in Rom. 1615 ; cp R OMANS ,
TA1.I. In Tob. 1 2 ‘ t h e city which is called properly EPISTLE TO.
Nephthali ’ [AV] rests upon the false reading K U ~ ~ Wres S Nyp& and ?V“lqpels occur pretty often as names of slaves : e.g.,
ve@8aAak for K U ~ L W res S v+uAeLp [BK], or K U 8 l W V T . V . Domitia Nereis wife of a n imperial freedman and secretary
[A] ; RV has K EDESH NAPHTALI ; see K EDESH , I. CZL vi. S598). ’Lightfoot (Plti&jiand31, 174) cite- from Arc.
fi Archeol. 11 376 a Claudia Aug. L. Nerei’s, related to a mother
1 T h e conjunction of 312 and ,&y in Nu. 13 28J suggests md daughter Tryphaena (i6id. 11 375).
that ply is really a corruption of piny ( A m a l e k t i e . , 5RDni3 According to the (apocryphal) A c f s of Nereus and
(Jerahmeel). 4chilZeus, Nereus was a house-slave of the Christian
2 Views wccessively maintained b y Del. the first in ed. 4
the second in ed. 3, the third in ed. 5 (the ‘hew edition’) of hi; 1 For c 1 - y ~ )ni3n, ‘Tappuah and (the) E n a m ’ read nigni
Gemsis. For the derivation from 4\91,see Aq., Sym., and cp y y 3 ‘and Tappuah of (the) Enam.’ See T APPUAH . I .
the rWv nemor6rov fo1lo;uing &v yrydvrov In Ezek. 32 27 (‘Si), 2 For m y nnm, ‘in the gate of Enaim’ read ’Y pins, ‘ a t
i p r i m o v r a in Gk. Enoch [Charles, 84, 3501. rappuah (of) Enaim.’ Gen. 36 76 ‘and he f s m e d aside to her’
3 Tuch, Knohel, Lenormant.
4 5 corrupted from E , as in $,*a, Gen. 21 22 etc. (see Pmcot.).
loes not favour the reading ncm, ‘in the gate.’

109 3393 3394


NERGAL NETAIM
princess Domitilla. A Nereus occurs in the Acta This gives us the key t o the problems of several sections
Philippi of which the scene is laid in Asia Minor. His of Jeremiah (cp P ROPHET ), and in particular to 39 I 3 5 13.
ashes were believed to have been deposited in the Church T h e results of our criticism of these passages can now
of SS. Nereus and Achilles at Rome. For other legends lay claim to a high degree of solidity. W e should
cp the Bollandist, Acta Sancforum, May 12. probably read nearly as follows :-
‘ Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon and the king of Jerahnieel
NERGAL(h-!!?!; THN€pr€h [B], Swete. THN e p r s h , came to Jerusalem and besieged it’ (u. I h ) . ‘(It came to pass
A om., TON Nlplr€h [L]), the patron deity of CUTHA that) all the princes of the king of Babylon and all the princes
of the king of Jerahmeel came in, and sat in the middle gate,
(4.v.), still worshipped by the Cuthaeans whom ‘ the King -the prince of Jerahmeel, the priuce of Miszur, the prince of
of Assyria’ transplanted to the cities of Samaria ( z K. Nodab, the prince of Cushim, and the prince of the Arabians’
li 30f). C p NERGAL-SHAKEZER. T h e planet sacred (u. 3). ‘And the Jerahmeelites and the Chaldaeans (Cushites?)
to Nergal was Mars, which, like its god, was called pursued them’ (u. sa). ‘Then sent Nehuzaradan, captain of
the guard, and the prince of Nodah, and the prince of Cushan,
Karradu, ‘warrior.’ H e was the god of w a r ; but and the prince of the Arabians, and the prince of Jerahmeel,
earlier h e was the god of the heat of summer or and the prince of Mijgur ’ (2,. 13).
midday. Fundamentally he was identical with Gibil With this we may compare the equally necessary
the tire-god, and a title by which (apparently) he was reconstruction of 341.
known in Palestine was Sarrapu burner ’ (perhaps ‘The word which came to Jeremiah from Yahwb, wlien
connected with o m ? ; see S ERAPHIM ). H e was also Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, and the king of Jerahmeel,
and Mi?.;ur, and ,the Ishmaelites, and the Edomites fought
the god of pestilence, and as such, otherwise called against Jerusalem.
Dibbarra (cp la.), the god of Deathland. Jensen For parallels to some of these corruptions, see
!KusmoL 476) thinks that Ner-unu-gal (of which h i 1 J ERAHMEEL, MIZRAIM. Nergal-iarezer appears to be
IS a shortened form) was interpreted by the Babylonians a very early emendation of a corrupt reading isnthiin
‘ the mighty one of the great dwelling [of the dead].’ (cp BK*), which proceeded from i ~ ni p $~(pn?;[1@1.
His symbol, like that of Dibbarra,’ was the lion. T h e T h e editor, in fact, did his best to give a Babylonian
month sacred to him was Kisilimu (Kislev)--.e., the colouring to the passages, but had imperfect success.
middle of November to the middle of December- T.K.C.,551,3; C.H.W.J..$Z.
possibly as containing the days when the sun appears
t o die (Kosmol. 486). G. Hoffmann ingeniously traces NERI ( N H P E I [Ti. W H ] ) , a name in the genealogy
the divine name Nergal in the corrupt personal ARED- of Jesus (Lk. 327). See GENEALOGIES ii., 5 3.
NEGO, which should, according to him, be read Abed-
nergo (-nergal). C p Uzza, rather Ezra ( Z A 11237f:). NERIAH ( P W , as if ‘ Yahwi: is light,’ 35, 44 ;
c p Abner ; but both names may be altered from the
NERGAL-SHAREZER, or, rather, Nergal-Barezer ethnic Nadab, NSdabi, ‘ Baruch‘ too being a Jerah-
meelite name; NHp[€]lOY, [BKAQ]), thefathcr of Baruch
(Jer. 3212, etc.). I n Bar. 11 Nerias (Wqpiou [BAQ]).
NET. Nets of various kinds were used in ancient
Palestine in fishing, fowling, and hunting.
I. nw!, rpSetlt, any kind of net (LXX gen. G ~ K ~ o v ) also ;
Sereser). T h e name looks like a Hebraised form of
NErgal-gar-nsur ( ’ Nergal, protect the king ’), which is used of the brazen network in the altar (Ex.274f: 3 8 4 ;
i‘pyoy G L K T V U T ~ V ; EV ‘net-work’).
the name of Evil-merodach’s successor, better known as 2. nln, &$rem (something perforated), according to some
Neriglissar.2 According to Hommel (in Hastings‘ DB scholar; a hand-net, but note ‘S’s renderings (Ezek. 26 5 14 Eccl.
lzzgarand Kent (&st. uf fhe 3ewish People. 367), this 726, oq+q ; Hab. 1 15, i p $ i p h q u ~ p o v ); see FISH, $ 3.
prince may be identified with the officer mentioned in 3. le??, mikmdr, Is. 51 zo(i&. [Symm. in Qmg.1) and %JP,
Jer. 3 9 3 1 3 . T h e theory is tempting, because it vivifies makmar (something twisted ? 1) Ps. 141 IO (Lpg.), as well as the
the somewhat dry account of the captains of the king of , Hab. 115f: (EV ‘drag’; A V w ‘Ilue.net,;
Babylon in the Hebrew narrative (but see 5 3).
oay.) and n$F, Is. 198 (oay. and a&. &VWZT~OV; see Swete
H e was raised, to the throne by the priestly party, and
adh.)perhapsadrag-net ; in Is. 51 20, whereapparentlyit means
Nabu-na’id (Stele. col. v. ) recorrnised him as a true
, I
a net large enough to catch an antelope ; hut mn , Ninj is impos-
2, Neriglissar. and faithful friend of his country. sible (see ‘ Isaiah,’ Heb. SBUT 148,zo1).
Neriglissar (559-555)reigned four years 4. i\xQ, md&(from TIS,‘ t o hunt ’) is rendered ‘net’ by EV
all hut four months. H e was. like Nebuchadrezzar and in Job 196 (bX6popa) and Prov. 12 12(AVmn. ‘fortress’ ; RVw.
Nabu-na’id, a great builder of temples, and evidently ‘prey’; the text is unsatisfactory : see Toy). The pl. O’??
bent on consolidating his kingdom rather than on (eqpedpa[~a]) is rendered S NARES (g.n.) in Eccl. 7 26 (EV). From
foreign conquests or alliances. See his cylinder, the same root are derived: a,;,%, specially used of fish in
KB iii. 2 7 1 8 But there was also a NErgal-Sar-ugur, Eccl. 9 12 (A@$.), and ~ J W J ,rendered ‘net’ in Ps. 66 I I (rayis);
son of Bel-Sum-iSkin, who plays a n important part in but the text of the whole verse is unsatisfactory.2 and in Ezek.
the private contracts of Amel-Marduks reign. C p also 12 13 1720 ‘snare’ (rfpt0x.i).
S HAREZER . 5. n*??i?, iZbdkitn, is applied in an architectural sense to the
T h e objection to the ordinary theory is, not that in ornamentation ahout the top of a pillar, I K. 7 r7t (a!?’&’? ‘b

3.
- - /‘
). a title of
“J. I ? Nercal-Sarezer is called K AB - MAG f u n . ,.
obscure signification which is unlikely
7!?$’, ‘nets of checker work,’ cp Jos. Ant. viii. 3 4 , 6icwou
l h d v xahria r~prmrrhc.yp.‘vov). The text here has to be
Underlying to have been assigned by a Hebrew corrected; d e Klo. ad loc. ‘b is properly some kind of lattice-
narrative. writer to so imDortant a Derson. but
that the text of ztu. I 3 5 13 has almost certainly under-
.
work:‘ CD i133w. ‘net-work’ ( I K.71szoar)
T T . ’
. . and ‘lattice’(2 K.
12) ; used also of the meshes of a net, in Job 188 (AV ‘snare,’
gone both corruption and editorial manipulation. That RV ‘ toils ‘).3
some of the names in m.3 13 are corrupt, is indeed In the NT fishing-nets are denoted by the following :-(I)
G ~ K ~ V O V Mt.
, 4 20 Lk.5 5 Jn. 21 6 ; (2) ip$i,EAqu~pov, Mt. 4 18
generally admitted; but it is almost certain that a bolder Mk. 1 1 6 (not Ti.WH): and (3) crariq, Mt. 1347, for all of
theory is necessary. It has been maintained elsewhere which see FISH,5 3. See also FOWLING, 8 8.
(.g., O BADIAH [BOOK], 5 7) that the Edomites and
Arabians took part in the capture of Jerusalem and the N E T N M (We? ),423 RV.
I Ch. See G EDERAH , 2.

carrying away of a part of its inhabitants as captives. 1 >>,=i>3, ‘ t o twist.’ Del., however (and so Ges.-Bu.),
compares Ass. Kamdru, ‘ t o overpower’(Heb. Lung. 4 0 8 ) .
1 Jastrow, R e l of Bn6. and Ass. 529. 2 i1?!&, should certainly be ”$9” (‘abyss‘); V . IIB can
- See Rerossus, Jos. c. A#. 1 2 0 ; Eur. Chron. 49 2 2 8 5 0 2 2 8 ;
then he quite regularly emended (Che.).
and Ahydenus Eus. C h o n . 41 28-32 42 28-30.
3 See MessGschmidt, Die Inschr. der Stele Nadrmaids, p. 21. 3 Cp Ar. Jabakatun, ‘net,’and MH 7 3 > ~ ‘a , hair.net.’
3395 3396
NETHANEEL NETHINIM
NETHANEEL, K V Nathanel ( h J n 1 : c p 9V3nl. worship is shown not only hy the manner in which they
and see NAMES,0 27 : N A ~ A N A H A[BNAL] ; only in are constantly named in conjunction with the other
P and in post-exilic literature, possibly, like Ammiel, classes, but also by the fact that they shared with the
etc., based on a n early tribal name : c p (n-8, Ethan, priests and Levites immunity from taxation (Ezra 7 24).
sx*!n;. Jathtiiel, and p;,Jithnan ; 5 may be a n affor- On the other hand, neither the heads of the Nethinim
mative; so, too, NETHANIAH[ p . ~ . ]may=EthBni, as nor those of the singers and doorkeepers figure as
Pelatiah = Pelethi or Pelathi [Che.]). signatories to the covenant, though they joined in the
I. b. Zuar, a prince of Issacbar (Nu. 1 8 2 5 7 18 1 0 15 [PI).
oath that was taken (Neh. 1030).
2. Hrother of David and fourth son of Jesse ( I Ch. 2 14). See In Jerusalem, Ophel-Le., the southern and eastern
D AVID 5 I col. 1020 n. 3. slope of the temple hill-is assigned to the Kethinim as
3. A'priekt of the time of David ( I Ch. 1524).
4. Father of Shemaiah, a Levite scribe ( I Ch. 246). their habitation (Neh. 326, KaOetuscp [B], v a O [ ~ ] r ~ [ e ] i p
5. b. Obed-edom ( I Ch. 26 4, v a a s icrqh [El). [KA] ; 1121). More precisely, they inhabit that part
6. One of Jehushaphat's commissioners for teaching the Law of Ophel Mhich extends to the Watergate in the E.
(2 Ch. 177). He is mentioned with B EN - HAIL and MICAIAH, and to the tower projecting from the royal palace
both names indicative of Jerahmeelite affinities (Che.)
7. A 'chief of the Levites,' temp. Josiah ( z Ch. 359); in (Neh. 326; see J ERUSALEM , 24). A 'house of the
I E d . 1 9 , a 'captain over thousands ' NATHANAEL. Nethinini ' is mentioned in Neh. 331 ( p @ a v o O e r p [B],
8. A priest of t h e b'nt Pashhur i; list of those with foreign p?flavaOiw [K*vid.], roo p q f l a v a t h [KC."],p?flavua6rvrp
wives (see EZRA I, EzralOza=I Esd. 9 2 % N ATHANAEL
i.. S <end).
I " <
[A]), farther to the N., near the city wall to the E. of
(va8aLqhos [HI).
9. Priest temp. Joiakim (see E ZRA ii., 8 66, S II), Neh. 1221 the temple ( a little to the S. of the Sheep Gate) ; by
(8c.a mg. inf. ; om. HN*A). this only some sort of official or service house can be
IO. A Levite musician in procession at dedication of wall [see meant. A different representation is made in Ezra270
E ZRA ii., 8 13 fl Neh. l ? 36 (om. HN*,\, fiat'avaqh [Kc.a mg. iI'f.1). ( = N e h . 7 7 3 = I Esd. 5 ; c p I Ch. 92, oi 6e80p~vor[BA])
where only a portion of the Nethinim, as also of the
NETHANIAH (>:Jn? and m:lnJ, NaBaNiac[BAL], priests and Levites, dwells in Jerusalem, the others
see N ETHANEEL ). being distributed throughout the ' cities '-doubtless the
I. The father of ISHMAEL (z), z K. 2523 (fia88avrar [A]) 25 :
Jer. 408-41 18).
Levitical cities-in the country. This would assume
2. An Asaphite musician, I Ch.252 (vaeahras [Bl; ZI. IZ that, like the priests and Levites, they were not on
vaeav [HI). duty all the year round, but rendered their services at
3. A Levite priest sent by Jehoshaphat to teach in the cities the temple in regular rotation. As to that, however,
ofJudah (cp NETHANEEL, 7). 2 Ch. 178 (fiavoavmc [B]).
4. The father of JBHUDI (q.u.), Jer. 36 14. we have no further details.
T h e Nethinim who returned from the Exile regarded
NETHINIM (D'l'qJ : 0 1 N A e l N A l O l [AWaL], in themselves (and were generally regarded) as descendants
I Esd. 0 1 ispoAoyAoi [BAL]: c p D'gIl!, NU. 8 1 9 RVmg. a. origin. of the temple slaves who had in ancient
Nethunim). T h e members of the clerical order who times been given ' b y David and his princes'
returned from the exile, according to the lists in Ezra- for the service of the Levites (Ezra8zo) ; a small pro-
Nehemiah, belonged to five categories-priests, Levites. portion of them, as already indicated, were thought to
singers, porters, and NPthiiiim (temple-servants). be descended from slaves given by Solomon (Ezra255).
I n one respect the usus Zoyzrendi varies somewhat : in [For an attempt to solve the problem of the origin of
Ezra255= Neh. 757 the 'children of Solomon's servants' the Nethinim and the ' children of Solornoti's servants,'
are distinguished from the NSthinim and are separately from a new point of view, see SOLOMON'S SERVANTS,
enumerated according to their ' families '; but elsewhere C HILDREN O F , and c p Amer: J. of TheoZ., July 1901.l
they are included under the designation NBthinini ( e . g . , As to this, nothing is reported in the historical books;
in the subscription [Ezra27o, flaurcip (B), uaflrvcrp (A)] but it is to be taken for granted that from veryearly
to the list already cited). A similar variation is seen times there must have been a n inferior grade of
between Neh. 1 1 3 (@BX* om.) and 1121 (bB8**om.). servants at all the greater sanctuaries, and above all at
the fact being that the ' children of Solomon's servants ' the temple in Jerusalem. These were, of course, not
belong to the class of inferior temple-servants called free labourers working for hire-a class of person
Nethinim in any case, but are only sometimes singled unknown to Hebrew antiquity-but slaves in the strict
out as a separate group within it. sense of the word, the property of the sanctuary. Even
These Nethinim constituted a regularly organised the child Samuel was given to the sanctuary by his
class of temple-servants-organised, that is to say, in mother ( I S. 128fi). It is manifest, however, that this
1. Organisa- the manner in which all such classes form of hieniddin was not common among the Hebrews.
were organised in those days, in the form T h e Ol' offers us no other concrete example of it, and
tion. of ' families ' under family ' heads.' Their the later accounts make even Samuel to be something
family registers are kept with the same care as those of quite different.-a Nazirite. to wit. On the other hand,
the other servants of the temple (EzraSzo, uaO[e]~etp another form of h i e r o d u k was common enough : foreign
[ S A ; vaeeru Bb vid. once]). T h e list given in Ezra captives taken in war were given to the temple as slaves
2 4 3 8 (a. 43 ua6Eiurp [R] ; w. 58 vaeervrv [B]. u a f l m i p -as was customary also with other nations. In JE
{A] ; a. 70 Oavtelp [B], vafltuerp [A]) enumerates 35 (Josh. 9 ~ 3 we ) ;(re told even of Joshua that he handed
such families, or subdivisions, of the Nethinim and I O over the Gibeonites to the sanctuary as hewers of wood
families of the 'servants of Solomon.' T h e second and drawers of water. Whatever the actual facts may
recension of this list in Neh. 7 4 6 8 (vaO[e]rverp [RA] : have been in this particular instance, we may be sure
v . 60 uaflEruErve1p [ R*]. ua8ec (vel potius vh0er)ververp [ B"], that incidents of the kind were freqnent, not merely
va@rururrp [K], v a O a u e i p [A]) makes out only 32 families. under David and Solomon, from the moment that
Unfortunately we are not informed whether the 220 there was n great royal sanctuary in Jerusalem. I n
Nethinim who returned with Ezra are included in these all such instances these temple-slaves were invariably
figures or whether there were other subdivisions besides of heathen nationality, not Israelites. T h e older age
those named in the list. In Neh. 1121 it is stated that found nothing to object to in this: and, later, such a
the entire body was under two chiefs named Ziha and writer as Ezekiel. by his rebuke of the practice, bears
Gishpa. T h e first of these two names is given in the witness to the fact that even i n his day foreigneis
Ezra list (24.;) as that of the head of the first of the rendered service of this kind at the sanctuary without
subdivisions enumerated ; whether GISHPA(9.v.) is t o challenge. H e brings it against the Israelites as a
be identified with Hasupha the head of the second sub- particularly shocking charge that they did not themselves
division is very doubtful. take in hand the care of the sanctuary but delegated the
That the Nethinini wrre really regarded as forming duty to others, ' foreigners uncircumcised in heart and
part of the privileged personnel attached to the teniple- uncircumcised in body,' whereby Yahwe's sanctuary
3397 3398
NETHINIM NETTLES
was profaned (447 [cp Che.’s reconsideration of the a s iep66ovXor ( I Esd. 1.5) as well as the Nethinim
passage in Amer. J. of TheoL, July I ~ o I ] ) . T h e (82248) ; this last word, moreover, is also rendered
precept of the law (Nu. 312830) according to which a
definite proportion of the captives taken in war is to be
NaOtwaioc (aLin 529 8 5 49). I t would seem as if the
author made no longer any such sharp distinctions a s
given to the priest as YahwB‘s heave-offering is perhaps had formerly been drawn between the two, but regarded
also to be connected with this ancient usage, although the Nethinim as a mere family (subdivision) of the
it is equally possible that the law may have had refer- temple-servants as a whole, that is to say, of the Levites
ence only to the priests’ and Levites’ private property (cp Wellh. PYOL145).
in slaves. The Mishna (Yt!6Enath 2 4 . Fidd. 4 I) oddly enough still
In post-exilic times the practice which had given regards the Nethinim as’ pur: heathen and prohibits inter-
marriage between them and Israelites. This wholly unhistorical
offence to Ezekiel was, as was to be expected, abolished ; theory rests probably on the view that the Nethinim were of
plainly, however, not in such a sense as to banish those Gibeonite origin (see above, 8 2). How different was the
foreigners altogether from the temple, but only in the view of the post-exilic age is proved by Neh. 1 O z g x where the
sense that they were admitted into the fellowship of Nethinim are represented as uniting with the rest df the Jews
on this very point, recording their solemn vow never in time
Judaism by receiving the rite of circumcision. At all to come to allow their sons and daughters to mamy any but
events, the names of the subdivisions preserved to us Israelites. I. B.
in the lists in many cases betray quite unmistakably
their nou-Israelite origin-such, for example, as the
NETOPHAH (n$@: N E T W ~ A[BRI, NE+WTA [A
in Ezra 2 221, aver. [A in Neh. 7 26 ;om. Bl, vcm+arL [L]), whence
M EUNIM and NEPHISIM(9q.v.; Ezra2so). That the
Netophathite (‘nzb!; usually wfrmpae(+ or w~o+(+, but
Nethinim enumerated in Ezra and Nehemiah were
in 2 S. 23 28 evro+arrmqs [Bl varrw#~aOerqs[AI o r o i +aArra
reckoned as members of the community is a necessary [Ll in z S. 23 zg vrrovc+8er [ B k om.], in 2 K. 25;s vr++ab’rerqc
inference from the fact that they came up with the [Bl: ve8odab’erqs [AI, va7o+a8rnls [Ll, in T Ch. 2 54 ,~ero+a8sr
others to Jerusalem at all. Perhaps it comes to this, [B], I Ch. 9 16 vwcc+arec [E],vrro+arL [L], in I Ch. 11 30 vcb’o-
that reception into the community, which also carried +arrc [B once], voro+a8cr [H once], in I Ch. 27 13 verovc+r
with it promotion to the position of free temple-servants [BA], in Jer. 408 vfw+arc [N] ; in Neh. 12 28 BN*A om.). In
I Esd. 5 18 vcr+aq [R], vrro+aas [A].
(see below, 3 ) , was the reward for the return. I n
Neh. l0zg (waOwclp [BA], waOervcp [ R ] ) the Nethinim A place or district mentioned with Bethlehem, Ana-
are expressly reckoned as belonging to the community thoth, Beth-gilgal, and Gibeah (combining 2 S.2329
and held bound to observance of the precepts of Yahwe. Ezra 2 22 Neh. 726 I Esd. 5 18 [RV Netophas], Neh.
Indeed, at a period when circunicision was required by 12 28). the * villages ’ of which were inhabited by Levites
the law even in the case of private slaves (see S LAVERY ) after the Exile ( I Ch. 916 Neh. 1228). Men of Neto-
such a demand in the case of temple-slaves became a phah rallied round Gedaliah (Jer. 408 2 K. 2523). Neto-
matter of course. phah was also the birthplace of David‘s warriors
Their social position was, as already indicated, at the MAHARAIand H ELER ( z S.23z8f: I Ch. 1130 27131 5 ) .
same time necessarily raised. They no longer appear The site is uncertain. I t is plausible to identify Neto-
3. Change in a s i a v e s in the st6ct meanLg oi -that phah with Nephtoah, which was a place on the border
their position. word, but as free men of the common- of Judah and Benjamin (perhaps Tappuah ; see NEPH-
wealth of Israel. I t is of their own TOAH). This appears to suit the mention of Anathoth
free choice that they accompany the others to Palestine and Gibeah as if not very far from Netophah, but would
(Ezra 8 1 7 f l s v. 17rLjvaQBavap[BA].v. mvaOsrvecp[RA]). require us to take Bethlehem in Ezra221, etc., as a
As free men they pledge themselves t o keep the pre- Renjamite town of that name, which is otherwise un-
cepts of Yahwe (Neh. 1029). Such accession on their known, unless, perhaps, it represents the Beth-jerahmeel
part to the community was not, indeed, in every case which may have been the name of the centre of the
wholly spontaneous. I n many instances special per- clan to which king Saul belonged (see SAUL, § I) ;
suasion was required to induce them to accompany Ezra indeed, the a Beth-gilgal’ of Neh. 1229 (mentioned there
(Ezra 8 1 7 8 ) . Nevertheless, their number is very con- after ‘ the Netophathite‘) may also have come out of
siderable ; in the first list, in addition to 74 Levites, 128 ’ Beth-jerahmeel.’ Conder, however, identifies Neto-
phah with Umm Toba, NE. of Bethlehem (PEFMem.
singers, and 139 doorkeepers, we have 392 Nethinim
and ’ servants of Solomon,’ and with Ezra there came 3 5 2 ) . Bet Nettif, a village in the WBdy es-Sant. nearly
only 38 Levites but 220 temple servants (Ezra 8188). opposite esh-Shuweikeh (see SOCOH), has also been
The distinction of rank between the Levites and the thought to preserve the name Netophah. This may
very possibly be the Beth Netophah of the Mishna
inferior grades of temple servants diminished more and
more as time went on. On the one hand, even in P, (Shea. 9 5 ; cp Neub. Gkog~.128), but is surely too far
the Levites figure merely as a special kind of Nethinim, to the W. to be the Netophah of the OT.
Schxirer (GYIPI 2 184) reminds us of the toparchy of Bethlep-
a gift made by the people to God and by God in turn tenpha (Ti)v Be8Aerrqv$&v rorrapXiav, Niese : Jos. BJ iv. 8 I,
handed on to the priests for their service; and their 0 445) or Betolethephenen or Betolethenepenen (Piin. v. 14 70), a
actual position is not in fact different from that of name which (with Schlatter Z u r 2”opog-r. u. Gesch. Pal. 1893,
p. 354 ; and Furrer) he idedtifies with the Netophah or Beth-
temple servants (cp I Ch. 2328) : all the characteristic netophah of the Mishna. H e also identifies’ both with Bet
functions of worship are assigned to the priesthood (see Ndttif, but does not meet the objection just now mentioned. A
L EVITES ). On the other hand, we find singers and confusion between Nerophah and Nephtoah was natural.
doorkeepers, who in the times of Ezra and Nehemiah T. K . C.
were still sharply distinguished from the Levites (cp NETTLES, in EV the rendering of two different
Ezra 2 4 0 8 , 724, and often), soon gaining admission to words.
the ranks of the Levites (I Ch. 1516 26 18, and else- I. $rip, &irziZ (Job307 Prov. 2431 Zeph.2gf2) is
where). I t is, therefore, not impossible that in the end rendered in RVmS ‘wild vetches.’ @ has q5phawa
the Nethinim too became Levites. I t is at least very dypra, ‘wild brushwood,’ in J o b : but in Prov. and
noticeable that the Chronicler (who also edited Ezra Zeph. they seem to have misread it as connected with
and Nehemiah), in those parts of his work where he is h n . Vg. has ‘thorns’ (spine and sentes), as also
narrating in his own person and not simply reproducing Pesh. in Job. H i ~ z i would
l appear to be the same as
his sources, mentions the Nethhim only once ( I Ch. 92) Aram. Ijoy, and Ar. &uZZw is probably akin. As
-not even when relating the assignment of the Levites,
singers, and porters to their several duties in the sanc- spina is used to render XdOvpos in Geop. 186, and the
tuary by David, although this is precisely the place at Arab. word denotes a vetch, it is now generally held
which some allusion to their having been given by IBoth ‘ Lehem ’ and ‘Gilgal ’ are possible distortions of ‘Jer-

David to the temple might have been expected. In ahmeel.’
the Greek Ezra, finally, even the Levites are spoken of 2 [Gra., Du. read h n
for p i n in Ps. 58 9 (IO).]

3399 3400
NETWORKS NEW MOON
that means some luxuriantly growing plant of the new moon the clans also were accustomed to hold their
vetch kind. For a list of the Palestinian species see yearly family sacrifices ; so, for example, the Bethlehem-
FFP zgof: ; see also Noldeke, M a d . G m n . 55, and ite clan to which David belonged ( I S. 206). T h e
Schwally in ZATW‘10189. second day of the new moon seems also to have been
T o the view that hdrzil is a vetch it is objected that ( I ) in Job solemnly observed ( I S. 2027 34). The story related in
50 7 a shrub or small tree must be meant, and ( z ) in Zeph. 2 9 the I S. 20 shows us clearly what importance was attached
plant is associated with ‘saltpits,’ which woold imply some sal-
solaceous shrub-such as Anahasis articulata, Forsk.-whereas to the feast; it was permissible to no one to absent
vetches like a good soil to grow on. Possibly, therefore, the himself from court on this occasion without adequate
Heh. word was applied somewhat differently from its Aramaic reason. Further, we see that in the life of the people
equivalent.
the new moon in one respect stood on the same plane
2. biop,l @innzG (Is. 3 4 1 3 Hos. 96), and pl. o*!wy with the Sabbath ; on both days it was the practice to
(Prov. 2131t, where EV has ‘ thorns’), may be a general suspend work-day labour, and thus time was made
w-ord for weeds of the thistle or nettle kind. Barth available for other things, such as a visit to a prophet,
(NominnO., § 45) compares Arab. kunzd, which denotes for which servants were not available on other days (cp
useless material or ruhbish. If, however, the meaning 2 K.423). I n the earlier of the literary prophets we
is to he specialised, the most probable view is that of still find the new moon not only placed on a level with
Tristram ( N H B 4 7 4 )that k&mG is a species of L’rtica, the Sabbath as regards rest from labour and business,
the most common in Palestine being U. pilulz)kz. but also ranked with the three pilgrimage feasts in
which is peculiarly addicted to deserted and ruinous general as a religious festival ; as part of the heavy
buildings. I t appears from I s . 3 4 1 3 that the plant punishment of Israel it is said that in exile the new-
meant by @inm% is a t least distinct from thorns. moon celebration also will come to a n end along with
N. M. -W.T. T. -D. the other feasts (Hos. 2 1 3 Is. 1 1 3 ) .
NETWORKS. The great actual importance of the new-moon festival
, .F&sim, CAUL.
Is. 3 18 E V w . ; see for the religious and secular life of the ancient Israelites
2. 5 3f:
kcbir, I S. 19 13 16, R V w ; see B ED ,
l’??, a. Ignored in being thus so abundantly evident, it
3. ’?n, @ray, Is. 199 AV ; 5ee L INEN, 8. laws. becomes all the more surprising that
the new moon is nowhere mentioned
4. i D ? W , &ikdh, in I K. 7 18 Jer. 52 z z j . EV, and 2 Ch. 4 12
either in the Book of the Covenant or in the Deutero-
RV (AV ‘wreaths’), used of the ornamentation on the capitals nomic law. Dillmann’s explanation (Ex.-Lev.I3j 6 3 5 ) is
of the pillars JACHIN A N D BOAZ1q.v.l. On T K. 7 17, and the
further usages of this word see N E T (5). The particular kind of that both those bodies of laws are incomplete, and
decoration intended is quite obscure ; for a purely conjectural above all that ‘ in the new-moon festival a widespread
restoration see de Vogii&’s,reproduced by Perrot and Chipiez, pre-Mosaic custom persisted with great tenacity, the
A r f in/u&a, 1 2 5 1 6 (fig. 164).
regulation of which by positive law was not held to he
5. nvl irwp p?,mikhdr ma‘risek r&eth, ‘a grate (RV
necessary.’ This cannot, however, be regarded as a
grating) of kitwork ’ Ex. 27 4 38 4 ; mikhair alone Ex. 35 16
38 5 30 39 39 (@ && , a, but r a p d r p a 58 4 A , and om. in 35 16 satisfactory solution of the difficulty, for similar ancient
SS jo 39 39). What LP meant by thisappendage t o the altar is un- customs, deeply rooted in popular usage, are frequently
certain; see Di., ad la., and cp A LTAR , 5 9. Mikhdr niay be enough dealt with in the law. In fact, the Book of the
connected with rnakbir 2 K. 8 15 (cp BED, 5 3). or, more proh- Covenant is nothing else than a codification of customs
ably, with rnikrridr (iD3n), for which see NET(^). Theincense-
altar (see A LTAR , 5 II), also, according to Jos. (Ant. iii. 68), had established in actual practice and of prevailing usages,
a ‘brazen grating’ (loxdpa Xpvueia&a detail unmentioned in religious, legal, and other. W e shall be nearer the
Ex. 30 I . truth if we regard as applicable also to the earlier codes
NEW MOON ( d t h ; see below, § I , smalI type). what Dillmann says (Zoc. cit.) with reference to the depre-
The appearance of the new moon signified (see M ONTH ) ciation of the new-moon festival in P-namely, that the
1. Lunar feasts. for the Hebrews from a very early increasing importance of the Sabbath and the preponder-
period the beginning of a new division ance it ultimately obtained, forced the new-moon festival
of time-a new month. The festal observance of the into the background. As soon as the Sabbath came
day on which this happened is also a very ancient to be observed as an independent festival every seventh
custom, certainly going back to a date earlier than the day without reference to the new moon, its celebration
settlement in Canaan, this festival along with the pass- collided Tvith that of the new moon, which fell to be held
over being indeed the only one which in its origin and every 29th or 30th day (see M O N T H ). Yet even this
meaning has absolutely nothing to do with agriculture reason is not quite sufficient by itself, and we are com-
(see FEASTS, § 2). Lunar feasts, it would seem, are pelled to fall in with the conjecture of Wellhausen
common to the whole of antiquity, and among them that (Prol.I2J118) that the ignoring of the new moon in the
of the new moon is the most frequently attested (ep the law is deliberate and intentional, being too conspicuous
evidence in Dillmann, Ex.-Leu.I3J 6 3 3 ) . T h e high to he due merely to chance. T o understand the motive
antiquity of the new-moon festival in particular is shown of this silence it has only to be remembered that it was
by its diffusion throughout the Semitic peoples. precisely with the lunar festivals-and more particularly
Lagarde (OrientaZ. 2 13,K)’connected the Heb. %? ’ t o hegin with that of the new moon, which dated from the very
the festal-celebration’ with the AI. hilGZ ‘new moon,’ a deriva- remotest antiquity-that, among the Israelites as among
tion which would certainly require us to assume the new moon the Canaanites and kindred peoples, all sorts of super-
to have heen the festival j a r excellence (cp on the other side stitions could most readily be connected. Reference
Wellh. Skizzen, 3 107 8). Heh. does not now designate th; h a s already been made to the connection between this
new moon by a name cognate with h i l d l ; it calls it wfn hide< festival and the clan-worships, which in fact strictly
the ‘ N e w ’ [Moon], twice (in the plural) Y& /rodZ&Pm, ‘your speaking were in conipetition with Yahwb-worship.
month-heads’ (Ku. 10 10 28 I I ; vavp?via, veop. ; calende, Vg.
sometimes neonrenia). If in this ignoring of the new moon and its celebration
Still another circumstance speaks for the high anti- the intention of the legislation actually was to depreciate
quity of the feast : its connection with the clan-sacrifices 3. Importance it, or- perhaps even- to abolish it, the
( I S. 206 ; see below). maintained. plan did not succeed. T h e new moon
At all events, the New Moon, according to all our continued to maintain its old imuort-
sources, figures also in the historical period as a very ance in the religious and secular life of the Israelites
important festival, still ranking above the Sabbath. At until long after the exile. If we find the later prophets
new moon Saul was wont to gather round him his whole so often dating their utterances precisely by reference to
court for a common sacrificial meal ( I S. 2 0 4 J ) . At a the new moon (Ezek.261 2917 311 321 Hag.11), the
fact is indirect but conclusive evidence of the popular
1 This-not cis? or ClD,ln,F-appears to he the proper spelling observance of the day. The prophets assume the con-
(BZ., Gi.). On the form of noun see Lag. UeJws. 117A, 181f: tinuance of new-moon observance even in the Messianic
3401 340=
, N E W MOON N E W YEAR
time (Ezek. 46 I 8 , Is. 66 23). . For how long a time im- I t was not till some two centuries after the destruction
portance continued to be attached to it is shown by such of the temple that the Jews began to reckon the new
passages as Judith 8 6 Col. 216. moon by astronomy. The Karzites, however, continued
The legislation ( I ) of Ezekiel and ( 2 ) of P a t last to follow the old method.
takes up this festival. ( I ) According to the sacrificial For the literature of the subject see FEASTS, 5 15.
ritual of the day in Ezekiel (46 I 8 ), it would even seem I. B.
as if the prophet ranked the new moon above the NEW YEAR (a>@?tki,on which see below, n. 2).
Sabbath. The offering he enjoins consists of a young On the civil and ecclesiastical year and the dates on
bullock, six lambs, and a ram ; the accompanying meal- 1,No early which they were held to begin at various
offering i s one ephah for the bullock, an ephah for the periods in the history of Israel, see YEAR,
ram, and for the lambs ‘according to his ability,’ and 6 fl T h e present article will deal
moreover a hin of oil for every ephah. This is more with the New Year only as a n ecclesiastical festival.
than the Sabbath offering by one bullock and the cor- As is shown elsewhere (Y EAR , 1 6), the year of the
responding meal-offering. (2) In like manner P (Nu. ancient Israelites began in autumn ; it was not until the
28 11-15) enjoins for the new moon a larger offering than exile that there came in the custom of placing its com-
for the Sabbath ; namely, two young bullocks, a ram, mencement in spring. The ecclesiastical festival is
seven yearling lambs with corresponding meal- and even after that still held in the autumn. T h e practice
drink-offerings, besides a he-goat for a sin-offering, and of celebrating the beginning of the year with special
of course the regular daily burnt -offering besides. offerings and the like may have been ancient; it is.
These offerings are the same as those prescribed for the however, a striking fact that no mention of any such
Seven days of the Passover feast and of the feast of celebration is found (in the writings that have come
weeks. When the offering is made the silver trumpets down to us) till Ezekiel and Leviticus The
(T RUMPET - BLOWING ) are to be blown on new moon as passage from Leviticus shows that once, at some time
on the other high feast-days (Nu. 10 ro). or other, probably during the exile, the beginning of
With this we must compare the notices of the same the year was ecclesiastically observed on the tenth day
offering to be found in the Chronicler ( I Ch.2331 2 Ch. o f the seventh month, for the tenth is, according to
2 3 813 313 ; Ezra35 Neh. 1034). On the other side, it the law just cited, the first day of the year of Jubilee.
has to be conceded that in one point the new moon The blowing of trumpets which is enjoined is charac-
comes short of the Sabbath and the great feasts : it is teristic also of the later festival of the New Year (see
not marked by a great festal gathering ( d $ m ~ ?and ) below, § 2).
abstention from labour. But ought we not to regard The same day. the tenth of the seventh month, is also
this as indicating an essential lowering of the new-moon to be understood in Ezek. 401, although there the month
festival? A festival of this kind is differentiated by is not specified.2 The day is designated as njdn WNT,
purely practical considerations. By the method of which cannot mean anything but ‘ N e w Year’s day.’
determining the time of new moon (see below, 5 4) it It is certainly also not accidental that Ezekiel has his
is often impossible to tell a t the beginning of the very vision of the new Jerusalem and the new temple on a
day whether it is the festival day or not, and so to New Year’s day. This New Year’s day in Ezekiel is
sanctify it wholly by rest from labour. The appropriate preceded by an atonement solemnity and expiatory
offering, on the other hand, could at all times be held in offerings on the first day of the seventh month (in other
readiness for the declaration of new moon. By thus words, a t the seventh New Moon), exactly as on the
taking up the new-moon festival and giving it a place first day of the first month (Ezek. 45 20 ; cp ATONE-
among the other feasts the law may here, a s in so many MENT, D AY OF).
other points, have been accommodating itself to an In the further development of the post-exilic worship,
already established custom that refused to be repressed. the two seventh-month festivals of Ezekiel by and by
W e shall probably, however. find a better conjectural simply exchanged places. The tenth day became the
explanation o f the difference between the attitude of the great day of Atonement, the first day the festival of the
old law and that of the new to this feast in the considera- New Year. How it was that this so fell out we do not’
tion that the new moon now possessed for the regula- precisely know. Perhaps the change is connected with
tion of the worship a greater importance than formerly : the fact that it was on the first of the seventh month
when all the other festivals had come to be definitely that the returned exiles for the first time resumed the,
attached to fixed days of the month and so to be regu- regular religious services which had been so long sus-
lated by new moons, the observance of this becomes pended. It is natural to assume that a day of such
of fundamental importance for all the rest of the cultus. momentous importance was commemorated yearly. A
W e do not know how the day of new moon was day of penitence had little appropriateness to so joyful
determined in primitive times. A s the length o f the an anniversary, and doubtless. on the other hand, a
4. Details lunar month varies from twenty-nine to
1 Verse 96 is, according to Wellh. (JaAr66.f d.Theol. 21 437).
of practice. thirty days (see M O N TH ), we must sup- a later interpolation, because the blowing of trumpets seemed
pose that, in the earliest days as well as incompatible with the character of a day of atonement. T h e
in those of later Judaism, the punctual celebration of addition comes from the time when the great festival of the
the day depended on direct observation of the moon atonement was held on the tenth day of the seventh month.
2 A different view is taken by, e+-., Siegfried in Kautzsch’s
itself. In later Judaism great care was expended in translation, which here understands the tenth of the first month.
ascertaining with precision the first visibility of the new O n this view, however, it is not easy to see how this day could
moon (cp ,Lf.R i ~ ha-Shun&,
h 1 5 8 2). The synedrium he designated as New Year’s day. If the year began with the
first day of the first month, the tenth day of the same month
assembled in the early niorning of the thirtieth day o f could not very well be observed as the ecclesiastical New Year.
each month and continued sitting, if necessary, till the I f New Year was actually observed on the tenth day of a month,
time of evening sacrifice. Whoever first saw the this will hetuken that the civil and ecclesiastical New Year fell
crescent moon was bound to let the synedrium know of quite apart and in that case all that we know compels us to find
here the ehesiastical New Year in the seventh month, in
it a t once. As soon as the fact was established by harvest. T h e civil N e w Year began on the first day of the first
witnesses, the word ‘let it be sanctified’ was pronounced, month. T h e translation of n2%? W t h ? b y ‘ in the beginning of
and the day was forthwith observed 3s new-moon day. the year,’ a s in Kautzsch, is hardly possible. What is of im-
By fire-signals from the Mount of Olives, and afterwards portance in this passage of the prophet is precise dating ; this
by couriers, the tidings were sent all over the country. being so, the phrase ‘ I n the twenty-fifth year, in the beginning
of the year, namely on the tenth day of the month,’ instead of.
If, however, direct observation of the moon was rendered the simple ‘ I n the twenty-fifth year on the tenth day of the
impossible by cloudy weather, this thirtieth day was month,’ sounds strangely. C p Smend and Bertholet, ad Zoc.
forthwith reckoned as the last of the old month, and the 8 T h e M T is here corrupt ; read with d
3 @l$ ’Y’lFz ;
new-moon observances were held on the following day. cp Smcnd, Cornill, Bertholet, ad loc.
3403 3404
NEZIAH NICODEMUS
day of such associations as these was marked out, as hardly more original than the Hebrew. @'s form
no other could be, as an appropriate beginning for the seems remodelled after the type of Eliezer. T h e open-
ecclesiastical year. That somehow or other it came at ing letter N (in all but 63"'s second form) fell out
a comparatively early date to be thus observed may be through the preceding v. The second a in @ A repre-
inferred also from Neh. 8 1 8 ; that it was exactly on sents n. The Talmud (Sanh. Z.C.) connects Nibhan
this day that in 444 A . D . the first solemn reading of the (final n ) with n31, ' t o bark,' the idol being supposed
new law took place, hardly seems to be a mere coin- to have had the form of a dog ! Norberg (Onom.99)
cidence. has referred to the obscure Mandzan Nebaz, an evil
However that may be, at any rate the law of P sets demon. But of course it is only Assyriology that can
apart the day in question-the first of theseventh month help us, and there being no Assyrian or Babylonian
2. In p, -as a joyful festival. I t prescribes, in the divine name which approaches Nibhaz or Nibhan (per-
first place, that in addition to the ordinary new haps the better form), we must make a closer study
moon offerings and the daily burnt offering there be of the phenomena of the text. Probably Nibhaz is a
presented, a young bullock, a rani, and seven yearling corrupt reading for TARTAK (q.".). T. K. C .
lambs without blemish, along with the appropriate meal
NIBSHAN (j@?g? ; N A + ~ A Z W N P I , NEBCX [AI,
offering: also a he-goat as sin offering. Further, the
day is to be sanctified by Sabbath rest and by a great NEBCAN [L]), the fourth in order of the six cities ' in
the wilderness' of Judah (Josh. 1562). For the ordinary
festal assembly a t the sanctuary( Nu. 29 1-6Lev. -5623-25).
view of the site, see BETH-ARABAH ; but note the caution
The day receives a quite peculiar distinction from the
given below.
fact that on it the trumpets are to be blown (Lev. 23 24). T h e name does not look right. Hitzig (Ps.2 6 5 ) and Well-
From this it derives its special designation as y5m hausen (PYoLP),344) read ]$???-'.e., strictly, the ' furnace'
icrzi'i'dh (Nu. 291 ; cp T RUMPET - RLOWING ). By this, (see Gem 19 24 28 Wisd. 10 7 ; and cp D EAD S EA , 0 4, end). In
therefore, ninst be meant something different from the this case the sites occupied by ez-Zuweiret el-jFLiRE and cz-
blowing of the silver trumpets that marked every new Zusueirez! et-tahiri would be not unsuitable (see Baed. Pal. 144).
nioon (see N E W M O O N , § 3 ) and all the great feasts T h e ordinary biew of the site, however, can hardly perhaps
be maintained (cp MIDDIN,end). I t is probable that P has led
(Nu. 10 I O ) : doubtless. to judge by the analogy of the subsequent ages into a ,great misunderstanding hy puttin5
trumpet-blowing a t the beginning of the year of jubilee, ' Engedi ' for ' En-kadesh. ' Nibshan' (Kibshan) and ' Secacah
mentioned above ($ I ) , what is meant is a blowing on (the preceding name) may possibly be corruptions, the one of
KASZEEL,the other of Halugah (see ZIKLAG). In reality, the
the biphur (-@) as distinguished from blowing on the same place may be intended-viz., HaluEah. P, as elsewhere,
&i+%t-i'dh (qnp). Cp M USIC , $ 5 . treats variants as names of distinct places. T. K . C.
In the law the first day is never designated ' N e w NICANOR ( N I K A N W P ) . I . Son of Patroclus, a
Year.' W e know, however, that it was observed as Syrian general, who was sent by LusrAs, together with
such amongst the Jews, at any rate from the Seleucidan Ptolemy and Gorgias, against Judas the Maccabee, B.C.
era, and Jewish tradition has always regarded it in this 166 ( I Macc. 338. cp z Macc. 88). H e was again sent
light. Dillmanri ( S R A W , 1881,p. 919)has disputed this in the reign of Denietrius ( R . C . 161), and under the pre-
interpretation of i t , pointing out that the economical tence of friendship endeavoured to bring about the fall
year began later, and that the calendar year could have of Judas. In this he was discovered and defeated a t
begun regularly with the seventh new moon only if the CAPHARSALAMA ( I Macc. 726-32). H e met with his
year were lunar, a n assumption which cannot be made. death a t the battle of Adasa, on the 13th of Adar
The seventh new moon, he argues, comes into account (March, 161 B .c.), a day which was afterwards kept as
in the law only because the autumn New Year did not ' Nicanor's day' ( I Macc. 7 4 9 2 Macc. 1536, and c p
begin with the new moon. If, however, as has been MCg. Ta'snith, $ 30 : Jos. Ant. xii. 105). T h e account
indicated above, the civil and the ecclesiastical New in 2 Macc. differs from the abor e in several essential
Year were at that time separate, it was quite pos- particulars. In his first commission, Nicanor- not
sible that even in a solar year the beginning of the Gorgias---is the chief general: and in the second,
ecclesiastical year should be fixed for the seventh new no mention is made of the battle at Capharsalama.
moon. I. B. Nicanor's friendship with Judas was free from deceit,
NEZIAH ( U W , ' excellent.' $ 6 7 ) , a family of Ke- and it was against his will that he was obliged to
thinim in the great post-exilic list (see E ZRA ii., F, g), Ezra254 resume hostilities with him.
(vauovr[B],vrt3ic [AI, purrs [Ll)=Neh. 7 56 (aurra [HN],wtufLa 2. One of the seven deacons (Acts 6 5). His name is mentioned
[A], Y C U L [L])=I
~ Esd. 5 32 ( v a u c r [Bl, vaud [AI, muia [Ll ; in the lists of the 'seventy' given by Pseudo-Dorotheus and
AV NASITH, KV N ASI). Pseudo-Hippolytus : according to the former he was martyred
a t the same time as Stephen.
NEZIB (2'?!9,probably ' sacred pillar' or ' prefect,'
NICODEMUS (NIKOAHMOC [Ti. WH]) occurs in
see S AUL , $ 2 , on I S. 105), situated, according to Josh. the N T only in Jn.31f 750 1939. The name is
1543. in the lowland of Judah (NBC[F]IB [AL], NACEIB sometimes said to have been ' n o t uncommon among
[e]).The Onomastica mention a place Nesib, Nasib, the Jews' ; but the only evidence alleged is Josephus.
7 m. from Eleutheropolis, on the way to Hebron ( O S L ) , Ant. sir. 32-the only instance recognised in Niese's
14218 ; 26:38). and the ruins of B2t Na,rib have been Index to Josephus. 7a'dnith (Hov. Hebr. ad loc.)
found on the E. of BZt Jibniz (cp Gu&. Jud. 111343J ; derives the name of Nicodemon b. Gorion from a story
Ruhl, Pal. 193), near Kh. Kil2 (see KEILAH). In the of divine answer to his prayer, interpreting the name as
list of Thotmes I l l . we find a place Kerti-nazena, and in a contraction of ' because there shone out for him the
one of the Amarna tablets (Wi. 263) Na-si-ma, probably 1 m p i ~ ) . ' Would such a legend have
sun ( i i n - 1 ~ 15
meaning the same place, but hardly a town so far S. as arisen if the name had been ' not uncommon ' 1
the Nezib of Joshua. I n the Egyptian list the name Wetstein, who mentions several Greek instances ot
has a determinative, showing that the word means the use of the name, gives none from Jewish history
'stake.' i w , then, was at one time a synonym for 1. who is except Nicodemon b. Gorion. These facts
mm Asherah.' meant? indicate that the namewasuncommon among
NIBHAZ (TnW with large 1 in M T ; THN ~ B A a z a p the Jews, but that it belonged, a little before
PI. THN A B A A Z ~ P K A I THN NAIBAC [A], THN EB- the siege of Jerusalem, to a ' son of Gorion,' a man of
A ~ l ~ z e[I,]),
p or Nibhan (jR>J, Sanhedrin. 6 3 6 ; extraordinary wealth and high position, frequently men-
MSS, according to D. Kimhi), apparently an Avvite tioned by the Talmudists.'
deity (see AVVA),2 K. 1 7 3 r f . The Greek forms are 1 Smith's D B (1863) says 'Some would derive it from 9 ~ 3 ,
1 W M M , O L Z , May 1899, p. 137J Robertson Smith take: innocent, c ~blood
, ('.e. "sceleris purus"); Wetstein, N T 1 r ~ o ' ;
the same view of 1.~1as a place-name ; cp Nisibis, ' the pillars but there is no mention of Nicodemns in Wetst. 1150, and no
(RSP),204, n. I). mention of this derivation in Wetst. 1 8 j o .
3405 3406
NICODEMUS NICODEMUS
Nicodemon the son of Gorion (HoY.U e h . and Finding one, Joseph, described as a n ‘ hononrable
Wetst. a d Zoc. ) was one of three (or four) 1 sometimes councillor,’ and ‘rich,’evangelists familiar with Tosephus’
2. Nicodemon called E Bouleutai ‘-Le., counsellors- history might naturally identify the-man
4. Jn.,s with the famous Joseph, son of Gorion.
inferences.
b. Gorion in sometimes ‘rich men,’ sometimes ’great
men of the city,’ the wealthiest in mentioned bv that historian as one of two
Jewish
tradition. Jerusalem. His special duty was to appointed to rule and repair the city just before the
Drovide water for the Dilerims that came
. Y
siege.’ Thus ‘son of Gorion ‘ might be inserted in the
u p for the feasts. Besides the legend above quoted con- margin. But Josephus himself is supposed to confuse
cerning the origin of his name, another was that ‘ A s Joseph son of Gorion with Gorion son of Joseph.2 W e
the sun stood still for Joshua, so did it for Moses and have also seen that one of the Jewish traditions about
Nicodemon b. Gorion.’ On the other hand, his daughter, the ‘ counsellors ’ converted the son of Gorion into two
a t whose marriage vast sums were spent, became so persons, calling one the son of Gorion and the other
impoverished, she and her whole family, that she was the son of Nicodemon. Much more easily may we sup-
seen gathering barleycorns out of the dung of the Arabs’ pose that Christian evangelists, finding ‘ Joseph’ in the
cattle. The preservation of this story would harmonise text and “son of Gorion ’ in the margin, might explain
with a Jewish belief that some sin of Nicodemus (who the words as ‘Joseph atid the son of Gorion.’ Then
would seem to have been dead at the time) was visited they might take this son of Gorion to be the weaZfhy son
on his children. Ta‘rinifh, after explaining, as above, of Gorion, the celebrated Nicodemon (or, as they began
the origin of Nicodemon,’ says that his real name was to call him. Nicodemus).
Buni (3112). Now, according to Sanhed~im(Schottg. There appears no authority for the derivation, given above,
2703). a Buni was one of five disciples of Jesus,2 put to ‘innocent from blood ’ for the name of Nicodemus; but it is not
a t all unlikely that, buring the plastic period of interpolation!
death by the Jews. These statements, and the story Lk. confused the name with ‘ Nakemidam,’ ‘innocent from blood
about the daughter, favour the belief that the Talmudic (o,n ,,,>)--the words used by Delitzsch to translate Pilate’s pro-
Nicodemon was regarded by the Jews as a disciple of test Mt. 2724 (innocentfrom U e dlood‘of this just man’-and
Jesus. I t is, a t all events, probable that Jn. identified parAphrased it accordingly (Lk. 23 51, this man had not con-
him with the man whom he calls (3 I ) ‘ a ruler of the sented, etc.’).
Jn.’s statement that Joseph was a ‘ concealed ’ disciple
Jews,‘ and describes as present a t a council of the ( 7 4 5 )
of Jesus can be explained as one of the many con-
‘ chief priests and Pharisees’ ( L e . , the Sanhedrin) under flations of the above-mentioned Zophim, the root of
the name of ’ Nicodemus.’
which (’9s’)closely resembles, and is actually confused
With the aid of Josephus and the LXX it is possible
with (Levy, 4211)‘conceal (p).’ Moreover, when Jn. de-
to indicate the way in which Nicodemon h. Gorion might
veloped Joseph into two persons, Joseph and Nicodeinus.
of passinto the Fourth Gospel as Nicodemus, he may have conflated two statements, ( I ) that Joseph,
3Johannine
. under the shadow, as it were, of Joseph
a conceded discipZe, came to seek the body of Jesus, ( 2 )
tradition: of Arimathza, with whom, in Jn. alone, that Nicodemus came to Jesus under fhe concealment of
~ m a t h r s ahe. shares the honour of burying Jesus night. T h e latter he may have supposed to refer to a
(see JOSEPH[^^^ NT],§4). Josephiscalled
previous occasion.
by Mk.-Lk. (Mk. 1543) ‘an honourable councillor,’ (Lk.
i. Nicodemus. being the official provider of water for
2 3 5 0 ) ‘councillor,’ (Mk. 1 5 4 3 Lk. 2351) ‘waiting for the
~.- .
the DurDoses of Durification in Terusalem. was a very
kingdom of God,’ (Mt. 27 57) rich ’ and ‘ made a dis-
ciple of Jesus.’ ‘ a4rimathsa,’in I S. 1I , represents a
Nicodemus appropriate character in a dialogue
setting forth the doctrine of regenera-
Hebrew ‘ (Ha)ramathaim-zophim,’ supposed to be 4 m. in Jn. tion through soniethinp more than
N W. of Jerusalem. The Targum of Jonathan renders
water. H e is introduced a i ‘ a man ofyhe Pharisees.
this ‘ Raniatha of the scholars of fheprophefs,’ taking
named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews,’ who ‘came to
* Zophim ’ as ‘ place of watching.’ and apparently identi-
Jesus by night,’ and showed such incapacity to under-
fying it with ‘Mizpeh,’ from the root ~ p h(3%) which
stand the doctrine of regeneration from above that he
means ‘watch,’ ‘wait,’ a hope for.’ So here, Mk.-Lk.
was rebuked by Jesus in the phrase usually addressed
appear to have taken n-Bixn. ‘ m-zophim ’ as ‘ w a i t i n g
by the common people to incompetent teachers. In
f o r (the kingdom of God),’ while Mt. paraphrased it as
view of the fact that the doctrine of a ‘ new birth’ was
implying discipleship to Jesus.
familiar to the Jews, Nicodemus’s apparent want of
As regards the statement made by Mk.-Lk. (but not by Mt. intelligence has caused difficulty to commentators, who
n.) that Joseph was a ‘councillor,’ if it is not historical it may
Lave arisen from a metaphorical explanation of Zoihim as have explained it (HoY. Hedr.) on the ground that the
‘watchers,’ ‘rulers,’ ‘counsellors. C p the explanation of IS. Rabbis applied the doctrine only to proselytes, or
1 I (Levy 4aIoa) ‘one of two hundred seers (Zophim) who arose (Schottg.) on the ground of ‘troubled times’ resulting
for Israel’ (and Heh. 13 1~7). O r it may have sprung from a in ignorance of tradition. T h e former view is the more
gloss on ‘Haramah,’i.e., the Ramah,’or ‘ theeminence.’ T h e
root of Ramah, in New Hebrew, is sometimes applied to probable. But Jn. may also be using hyperbole in order
‘eminent’fieo,6le (cp ‘your Eminence’) and once, a t least, with to bring home to readers t h e perverse and wilfill stupidity
a special reference to taking counsel.‘ (as he conceives it) of the Pharisees, by representing the
best among them, a man half convinced of the justice
1 T h e ‘ four,’ mentioned in only one of several traditiops, were of Christ’s claims, as ignoring everything that is ‘ from
made up b y reading ‘ Ben Gorion and Ben Nicodemon.
2 Another of the five was named (Schijttg. 2 703) Nakai (.?$-
i.e. ‘innocent‘-which (see note above) has been suggested by probably sprang from a gloss.) ‘ Ram(ah),’ being conflated as
sank as an explanation of the first two syllables of ‘ N icodemus. ‘eminent ’ might give rise to Hebrew glosses which would
ex lain ML’S‘rich (see the present writer’s Diatess. 518.19).
The name Bunni (RUNNI) >]-J and 713 is given to Levites in
Neb. and Ezra and is sometimes translated v i k , being naturally BJ ii. 2?3. If this son of Gorion was called ‘ Buni,’ as it
confused with Ben, ‘son of.’ See also R ANI and BIN NU^ with nickname, it is worth noting that the word may mean ‘builder.
which i! is often confused. I t betokens post-exilic and Lehtical I t is a p lied to the Sanhedrin (Levy, 12416) as ‘Builders
connection. (spirituady) of Jerusalem.
2 Schiir. i. 2 2 2 8 ‘Gorion the son of Joseph,’ mentioned in
3 [ N W ~ I whno tinnin i n ~111. Note, too, that Kimhi Jos. BJ iv. 3 9 ‘ is probably identical with Joseph son of Gorion
interprets o ‘ g i ~as P,K*~), comparing Ezek. 3 17 etc.] mentioned above’-i.e B j ii. 203. ‘ G o r ~ o nwas
’ killed by the
4 See Levy, 4453a where nifrequently=‘eminent,’andespeci- zealots (BJ iv. 0 I ): at‘ieast if Schiirer (i. 2 230) is right-as h e
ally ‘ fiihre dein Na,siat unter den Grossen (o.ni3) um dich n i t robahly is-in tacitly assuming that the Gorion (Niese, Pouprov
ihnen zu derathen. F o r LXX corruptions in connection with h u d s . roprov) mentioned in B/ iv. 6 T is tbesame as that (Nies;
‘ counsellor,’ cp 2 S. 8 IS ‘ Benaiah the son of Jehoiada (vi*ia;),’ and Huds. r o p r o v , Big. l’oppiov) mentioned in BJ iv. 8 9. Con-
@ ‘ Eanai son of janak (A, /ode, L, Joad) counsellor h p - cerning the murdered man it is said that he was ‘eminent i n
@ovAo~),’apparently conflating. On the other hand, T Ch. 20 14 birth and re utation, but democraFic,’ and that ‘his freedom of
‘ a c o u n s e l / o r ( ~ y rin
~ )wisdom ($2~3)’ is in 6 changed into a speech’ (cp fn. 7 so) ‘ was his ruin. Of course all these tradi-
name ‘Sone (A, /oius) to Melcheias,’ where L conflates ‘Joad tions could only he applied to the Jobannine) Nicodemus by
acou;sehriii wisdom.’ (If‘counsellor’waspartofthedriginal anachronism : but in a gospel of spiritual types and tendencies.
i t may have referred to the local council of Arimathaea; but i; anachronisms are t o be expected.
3407 3408
NICODEMUS NICOLAITANS
above ' and bound up in the grossest materialism. See wedding,' spent a great deal more on the dead body of
(ii.) below. 'the teacher sent from God.' Only it was ' by night.'
ii. Nothing comes of the Pharisee's interview, in It is implied that Mary's affectionate gift of a single
which he declared-apparently describing the secret ' pound ' of ointment, given to Jesus openly while he
conviction of the ruling class to which he belonged- lived, outweighed the ' hundred pounds of spices ' offered
' W e k z o w that thou art a teacher sent from God.' On by the millionaire who gave him scarcely anything in
the next appearance of Nicodemus, he is sitting in the way of support, and nothing in the way of public
council when his fellow- councillors thus address the confession, while he lived, but (Jn. 127) kept his gift
officers who have failed to bring Jesus (Jn. 748), ' Have ' against the day of his burial, ending, as he began. a
any of the iulers or the Pharisees believed on him?' Laodicean.2 He is a Johannine conception, represent-
Nicodemus, a ' ruler' and a Pharisee,' if he 'believed,' ing the liberal, moderate, and well-meaning Pharisee,
did not at least respond to this indirect appeal. T h e whose fate it was to be crushed out of existence in the
Laodicean state of his mind is perhaps hinted at by conflict between Judaism and its Roman and Christian
the words ' he came to Jesus' (but he was) 'one of adversaries. E. A. A.
them,' that is, still a Pharisee. But he pleads-though
NICODEMUS, THE GOSPEL OF, printed in Greek
not for one whom they knew to be a teacher sent from and Latin from various MSS by Tischendorf (Ezmng.
God '-at all events for justice. T h e reply is that, since Apocr. 1853. 18761~)) is a true apocryphon, in the sense
he will not side with his party, right or wrong, he must that it does not come within the category of Old-Christian
be ' on the side of Galilee.' Then comes the astonish- Literature in the stricter meaning of that expression (see
ing saying, ' o u t of Galilee ariseth no prophet.' If OLD-CHRISTIAN LITERATGRE). T h e book professes
the text is correct, the whole narrative is stamped a s to have been originally written by Nicodemus, in Hebrew,
unhistorical; for it is impossible that the Sanhedrin from which language it was translated by a certain
could use such language in the face of the Galilean Ananias about 425 A.D. It consists of three parts, the
origin of Jonah and Hosea, and possibly also Elijah, first and second of which are entitled Lrropuljpam 706
Elisha, Amos, and N a h u m 2
...
111. No mention is made of Nicodemus as protesting
~ v p l o v $pGv 'IqooD XpwroG rrpaxehvra (ai I I o v ~ i o v
I I i X d ~ o u ; the third relates to Christ's Descenstls ad
against the resolution of the council (Jn. 1147-53) to put inferos. Chaps. 1-13 describe the trial of Jesus before
Jesus to death. H e is perhaps alluded to in the words Pilate, his condemnation, crucifixion, and resurrection,
(l242), ' Even of the rulers many believed on him ; but substantially in agreement with the canonical gospels.
because of the Pharisees they did not confess [it], lest Chaps. 14-16, originally by another hand, give a copious
they should be put out of the synagogue: for they report of the debate held by the Jewish authorities upon
loved the glory of men more than the glory of God ; ' the resurrection of Jesus and the liberatipn of Joseph of
but his name is not mentioned till the burial of Jesus. Arimathea from prison. Chaps. 17-27, by yet another
Here he is subordinate to Joseph (see JOSEPH [IN NT] i.), hand, is a lively description of the brief stay of
who alone ' took away his body ' ; Nicodemus does not Jesus in Hades (cp I Pet. 318-20). All three pieces,
come till afterwards. Apparently he is represented as originally written in Greek, are generally held to be
afraid to go to Pilate with Joseph.3 Characteristically Jn. not earlier than the fourth century, and when they
repeats here the wordsexpressive of the Pharisee's timidity were brought together to have been placed under
--which he dropped when he described the protest of the name of Nicodemus which occurred frequently in
Nicodemus (7j o ' he that came to him before ') in behalf them and sounded well. Cp, however, APOCKYPHA,
of justice--' he who at the first came to Jesus by night.'
Nicodemus. however, tries to compensate for want of § 27 (1).
In the Middle Ages this Gospel was widely read, as is shown
courage by the excessive costliness of his offering to the by the many still extant MSS both of the original text and of
dead body of Jesus, 'one hundredpounds weight of myrrh translations, by the traces found in literature of acquaintance
and aloes'-a hundred times as much (measured by with the work and by widely diffused poetical adaptations. Cp
Tischendorf, b.Apoc., Prolegomena ; Willcker, Dus Ev.
mere weight) as the single ' pound ' (Jn. 123 ) of Mary, Nicodenii in der abendliidiscken Literafur, 1372 ; Gaston
and yet the latter was valued at ' three hundred denarii ' ! Paris and Alpbonse Bros, Trois Versiom rimkes de L'&an&e
Probably the ointment was more expensive than the same de Nicod&re, 1885.
weight of ' myrrh and aloes ' ; but still the suggestion is The value of this writing for our knowledge of Old-
unquestionably that Nicodemus the son of Gorion, Christian literature lies in the fact of its containing some
who spent a twelve thousand denarii ' on his daughter's traits relating to the gospel history of which we learn
nothing, or very little, from the NT. w. c. v. M.
1 ' From above.' 'AvoEcv may in certain contexts, mean 'over
again ; but (Fields Otium Nom., ad loc.) ' St. John's writings NICOLAITANS, AV NICOLAITANES ( N I K O ~ & I T & I
furnish no examole of this use of the word. and ... the Heb. [Ti. WH]), are mentioned in N T only in Rev. 2 6 15,
is alwaysLocaI.' Cp Jn.3311911and'23,and NTpussirn;
&o Philo 1482,; rararrvevu8eir dvoErv (and Phil. 1 2 6 3 and 498 and in other old Christian writers-
1. Irenzeus, Tertullian, and others-only
2 442). Menander (Eus. HE 3 26) connects baptism with his own
mission duoeev, and see Hippol. 6 18 quoting Simon Magus. in connection with these two passages. W e may safely
Schijttg. 9 632 quotes Z o h a r commenting on 'the new spirit,' and identify them with the followers of Balaam and Jezebel
on purification 'aquis mundis supernis. Against such evidence
Artemid. Uneirorr. 113 (where the context demands the sen,; referred to in 214 20 (cp B ALAAM , col. 464 ; JKZEBEI.,
'from the heginning')ls futile. As to theargument from Justin, col. 2457). The persons aimed at are apostates who,
see GOSPELS, 0 io1 (2). As regards the rebuke, see the boy's according to the author of the Apocalypse, had been
answer to R. Jeshua, Wor. Hebr. (on Jn. 3 IO) +ID n3n NIR 3nnN
$X>W-, translated by Lightfoot, 'Art thou u wise man in Israel?'
troubling and leading astray the churches of Asia Minor
(not, as Jn., ' fhteacher'). and especially the seven addressed in chaps. 2f. I t
2 If we were to suppose an o dro ped after the final s in has been commonly, but erroneously, thought that such
I'drhaias, the, meaning would be ' t f e prophet is not to arise a description must be intended for persons who
out of Galilee. The omission of o after s (written c in uncial
MSS) is frequent in codex B hut not in Jn. In view of the were in principle more pagan than Christian, and
hyperdramatic hyperbole somitimes found in Jn. it is impossible might therefore be regarded as mere libertines in the
t o deny that the text may be genuine. The actual order of the
words is uncertain, many MSS, e g . XD, putting r&. before &. 1 Wetst., ad Zoc., 'lectns erat stratus XII. M. denariis';
According to Tisch. the Sahidic version read d a p o Q j q s . Nor. e b r . 'the furniture of whose bed was twelve thousai;d
3 Cp Acta PiL (B), 8 11. ' I am afraid,' said Nicodemus [to denars. Another tradition mentions (Hor. Webr. 2449) a
Joseph], 'lest Pilate should he enraged.
alone ... ... But if thou wilt go
then will I alsogo with thee and help thee to do every-
daughter of Nicodemus h. Gorion to whom the wise men
appointe? four hundred crowns of gold for a chest of spices for
thing necessary for the burial. I t is only a conjecture hut a one day.
reasonable one, that, if Nicodemus was the employer'of the 2 If the ohscure and probably corrupt Jn. 127 could be inter-
water-carriers in Jerusalem during the Passover, the 'man bear- reted 'Let her alone. Ought she to keep it (or, would you
ing,a pitcher of water' (Mk. 14 13 Lk. 22 IO) was regarded as his feep it) till the dayof my burial?'-this would bring out the
emissary. contrast &tween the gift of Mary and the gift of Nicodemus.
3409 34'0
NICOL AITANS NICOPOLHS
ordinary sense of that word. W h a t the writer actually Why the Nicolaitans were called so is unknown. Probably
says of them-and there is no other authority to whom the name was given by opponents, and, like ‘Balaam’ and
we can turn-shows them to be Pauline Christians, in
‘ Jezebel,‘ was intended to express censure and reproach.
Perhaps it was originally bestowed by some one before t h e time
other words, believers after the type with which we of the writer of the Apocalypse who had in view some well-known
become best acquainted through the Epistles that bear though now forgotten personality of evil repute. We may be
the name of Paul. Like these, they too had arisen after sure that it does not come, as Irenzeus and Tertullian will have
it, from the deacon Nicolas of Acts65, nor yet, as manymoderns
the churches had already subsisted for some considerable have conjectured, from NimjAaos (vtrriv and A6os)as a rendering
time, a time long enough to make- it possible to point of Balaam=@ahadp=OJl or Op 5ps. This, however
with thankful recognition t o the good work the churches ingenious, is a mere guess.
had done in the past, their patience and fidelity under In the middle ages we meet with ‘Nicolaitans’ who seek to
poverty, oppression, and persecution-in a word, to release the clergy from enforced celibacy; in the fifteenth
century, in Eohemia, ‘Nicolaitans’ anticipated the Quakers
their ‘ first works,’ to their love and faith which, alas, in their repudiation of outward ordinances and in finding a place
are now threatened with extinction ( 2 a f : 5 g IO 13 19 for special revelations by the side of t h e written word. They do
33f: 8 I O 3 2 ; c p P AUL , 35, 40). Their leaders not stand, however, in any real connection with the Nicolaitans
called ‘themselves apostles,’ but in the estimation of of the Apocalypse.
See for these PREIl), S.W. ‘Nikolaiten’; for the first, W. C.
those who opposed them were not such, but were liars van Manen, Paulus, ii., ,891, pp. 244-257 ; for another view, W.
( 2 2 ) . This same consideration it was that led ‘ Paul’ Bousset, Oflen6amng/ohann~s,1896, 238.241. z78J
t o lay such emphasis upon his own apostleship and that W. C. V. M.
of those who wrought with him, a n d to defend it so NMOLAS ( NIKOA&OC). a proselyte, of Antioch, one
persistently (Rom. 1 1 511 13 I Cor. 1191-18 z C o r . 11 of the ‘seven’ named in Acts65 (see D EACONS, 5 5 ) .
115.f: 1 2 1 1 - 1 2 G a l . l r 2 8 E p h . 1 1 Col.11 1 T i m . 1 1 2 7 His name-but only the name-occurs also in more
z Tim. 1I X I Tit. 1 I ) . In Rev. 220 it is brought as a than one of the lists of the ‘ seventy’ (see Lipsius, Apocr.
charge against Jezebel that she calls ‘herself a pro- Ap. -gesch. 1205 ; Erganzungsheft, z ) , and a large body
phetess ’ ; with no less distinctness does ‘ Paul ’ claim of tradition has been connected with it under the sup-
for himself and his followers the gift of prophecy (Rom. position that he was the founder of the heresy of the
126 I Cor. 114 f: 1 2 1 0 zEf. 132 g 141-6 1 4 2 4 31 39). NICOLAITANS [q.~.].
T h e Smyrnzans a n d Philadelphians are warned in NICOPOLIS ( N I K O ~ O A I C[Ti. WH]). Paul, accord-
Rev. 2 9 39 against those who say that they are Jews -
ing to the traditional view.’ writing to Titus exmesses
although they are not, but lie and are a synagogue of 1. Identifica- h ~ intention
s of spending the approach-
Satan ; precisely so does ‘ Paul ’ designate his spiritual ing winter at Nicopolis (Tit. 3 I*), a n d
allies irrespective of descent or birth as the true Jews, tion. desires Titus to ‘ be diligent’ to come
the seed of Abraham, and the rightful Israel (Rom. to him thither. There were many towns cafied Nicopolis.
2z8f: 4 96f: 1 1 1 7 I Cor. lo18 Gal. 3 7 - 9 3 2 9 4 2 2 28 31 ( I ) One founded in Armenia by Pompeius on t h e field of his

616 Eph. 212). though very far from wishing to have victory over Mithridates (65 R.c.), a great military and civil
post and centre of the road system under the Empire (mod.
it forgotten that he himself is an Israelite according Purkh. Strabo, 555 ; Ptol. viii. 17 40. Cp Murray Handbook io
to the flesh and full of tenderness for his people (Rom. AM48). (2) In Egypt near Alexandria (Strabo, 795 800 Jos.
9 1 - 5 IO 11 I z Cor. 1 1 2 2 Gal. 215 Phil. 3 4 f : ) . B/ iv. 11 5). (3) On Mi. Amanns, in Cilicia (Strabo, 676,’Ptol.
v.87). (4) In Bithynia on the Bosporus (Plin. H N 5 3 z ) .
T h e Nicolaitans had their own particular doctrine ( 5 ) On the upper Nestti;, in Thrace (Ptol. iii. 11 13). (6) The
( 6 r 6 a ~ 7;j Rev. 2 15 24). just a s ‘ Paul ’ had his (Rom. 6 17 town still called Nicopnlis (Nihup) near the Danube;Z (7)
Doctrine. 16 17 I Cor. 4 17 717). Their gnosis, their is Nicopolis in Epirus. This enumeration is necessary, as there
sounding of the deep things of God (Rom. no direct evidence as to the identity of the town mentioned
in Titus. The subscription to the Epistle to Titus, according
1033 I Cor. 210), could easily lead to the designation of to which the letter was written ‘from Nicopolis of Macedonia,’
those who were opposed to it and to the new revelation is of no authority.
altogether as being those ‘ w h o know not the deep Considerations a s to the date of foundation or name,
things of Satan’ (oi’rms O ~ K.?‘yvwuav rb /3ufVu TOG or a s to the situation, of most of the towns above
uarav8 : Rev. 224). T h e stumbling-block which the enumerated, are fatal to their claims; and there is a
apostates cast before the Israelites is stated to be ‘ eating general agreement that the place meant was Nicopolis
things sacrificed t o idols and committing fornication ‘ in Epirus, for this agrees best with the meagre data as
(@aye$ Ei6wXJBura Kai a o p v e k a r : 2 14 zo), not because to Paul’s last years derivable from the Pastoral Epistles
they made a mock of all that is holy and trampled on the assumption of their genuineness.
honour underfoot, but because they, like ‘Paul,’ had Nicopolis (the city of victory ‘ ) i n Epirus was founded
~-
set aside the Jewish laws regarding foods and marriage,. bv Augustus in commemoration of his victorv over
freely using food that had been set before heathen a. Environ- Antonius a n d Cleopatra (Sept. 31 R . c . ,
Suet. Aug. 18 ; Strabo, 325). T h e site
deities (Rom. 142 6 14 20 I Cor. 8 1 4 1 0 1 9 25-27), and
contracting marriages within the prohibited degrees chosen was that on which his land forces
which in the eyes of the author of the Apocalypse were had their camp before the battle, on the northern
unchaste unions, just as in the eyes of the writer of promontory a t the mouth of the Ambracian gulf (mod.
I Cor. 5 I the marriage of the Christian who had freed Gulf of Atba). T h e whole surrounding territory-
himself from scruples with his deceased father’s wife southern Epirus, the opposite region of Acarnania with
(not his own mother) was so, or as in the eyes of so Leucas, and even part of atolia-was united in a single^
many Englishmen the marriage with a deceased wife’s urban domain, a n d the inhabitants of the dwindling
sister is a t the present day. For the expressions, see townships were transferred t o the new city (Strabo, Lc.,
Acts 1520 29 2 1 2 5 (cp also C OUNCIL , 11). Dio Cass. 511, Paus. v . 2 3 3 vii. 1 8 8 x. 3 8 4 , Anfhol. Gr.
T h e reason why the identity of the Nicolaitans and 9553). Nicopolis was made a ‘free city’ (like Athens
their allies in Rev. 2 I:, with the followers of Paul has a n d S p a ~ t a )and , ~ it possessed six out of the thirty votes
3. Identifica- not sooner found general recognition, 1 [Howeverimpossible,oncritical grounds, the Pauline author-
although many scholars since Baur have ship of the Epistle to Titus may be, many critics now hdd that
tion, etc. considered that Paul himself was aimed Tit. 3 I Z J is a genuine fragment of the work of Paul, written
shortly before 2 Cor., when Paul (in Ephesus?), unable to count
at in the passage, is not far to seek. Paul’s name on the loyalty of Corinth, was planning to await the outcome in
is not mentioned, and his personality not brought Macedonia and Epirus (Bacon f n f r . fo fhe N T 136; cp V.
before the reader’s attention, so that it was natural Soden, HCiii. 181221 c). Cp Rbm. 15 I~.-ED.]
2 Other places called Nicopolis will be found mentioned by
to see in the allusions a reference to later develop- Ramsay Hist. Geop-. of AM-Palaeapolis in the valley of
ments. No one thought of suggesting Paulinisni t h e Cayiter (105); in Pisidia (=Metropolis, 403); Emmaus
such as is seen in the Epistles and must be dis- [mod. ‘AmwZsl in Palestine was known as Nicopolis in the third
century. Naturally these do not enter into the question.
sociated from the person and period of the historical 3 Tac. Ann. 5 IO, Arrian, Epicl. Diss. iv. 1 1 4 z+ 7i)v Kakapos
Paul. rd)(r)v,bAeJl3rpoL Iupl*dv.
3411 3412
NIGER NILE
in the Aniphictyonic Council representing all Greece NILE. The present name of the great river of Egypt
(Paus. x. 8 2 J ) . Furthermore, the old festival to the comes from the Greek (6 N ~ i h o s ) . This is found a s
Actian Apollo on the opposite promontory was magnifi- early as Hesiod; Homer, however, Od.
cently renewed and enlarged, a quinquennial festival '. Names.4477, calls it iEgyptus (i, ~ t - p a r o s in
( r d " A ~ r r awith
) . musical and athletic competitions, and distinction from 1 APyyvrr7os, the country), indicating,
chariot races and other contests, being instituted and correctly, by this name that Egypt is only the Nile
placed on the same level as the four great Ganies of valley. N o derivation from the Egyptian is possible for
Greece (Strabo. 1. c. ). Herod the Great contributed to the the name Nile.' Whether, according t o a hypothesis
adornment of the city (Jos. Ant. xvi. 53). T h e result of of Movers, NciXos comes from a supposed Phenician
this imperial and other patronage was that Nicopolis *nehel= Hebrew n d k a l ( ' brook, stream ') must remain
became the greatest city on the W. coast of Greece, far doubtful ; neither does a hypothetical Egyptian mutila-
exceeding in importance all other cities of the same name tion of ndhdr ' river ' (Lepsius, Chronologie, 275)
(cp Strabo, 325). present more probability. If the Arabic name of the
Nicopolis was therefore admirably adapted t o be a canal Shatt-en-Nil in Central Babylonia has any con-
centre of missionary work in western Greece-a region nection with the Egyptian river, it would be due to a
3, as yet untouched. An additional reason comparison by the Arabs. T h e Egyptians call their
for the decision attributed to Paul would be river (something like *qyn) or H'pi (earliest ortho-
visit* found if it were certain that Epirus and Acar- graphy in the pyramid-texts e p ) , which, if we may
nania had at this date been severed from Achaia and judge from Herodotus' Kpw@ and Mwqk was probably
constituted as a separate province.' T h e despatch of vocalised e o > ( i).* Although the latest theology tried
Titus northwards into Illyricum (cp z Tim. 410, and to explain the Apis-bull (Eg. e p ) as a personification
see DALMATIA) seems to indicate a reasoned plan of of the Nile, the two names are totally different (cp
far-reaching operations in this quarter. T h e above N o P H ) . ~T h e river's sacred name 4? began at a n
remark assumes both that Paul himself reached early period to be used less than the simple designation
Nicopolis. and that Titus was able to go to him before ' river ' yetor. later pronounced ye'or, yo'or (earliest
the expiration of the winter (probably that of 65-6 A . D . , orthography ytvw. the addition of ur being meant t o
or perhaps a year later) ; but of this there is no proof. express the fact that w had taken the place of the lost
Paul was certainly not a t Nicopolis a t the time of writ- t ; later spelling y w r ) . whence Coptic €loop ' branch of
ing Tit. 3 1 z 3 (see § I , n. I above) ; probably Miletus the river,' distinguished from IAPO, S. Egyptian eispo
and Corinth ( 2 Tim. 420) were stages on the journey ' the Nile ' ; originally y(e)tav-'o(') ' the great river.'
thither. It would seem most probable that Nicopolis This last expression is rendered by the Assyrians
was the scene of his arrest, in the course of the winter. iaru'd (ASur-bani-pal, 41 32 ; c p Delitzsch, Paradies,
Nicopolis fell into decay, and, having been destroyed by the 312)*-i.e., N. Egyptian l ~ p oor IAp(l)-whilst the
Goths, was restored by Justinian (Procop. de a d .4 2). During other expression has become very familiar through the
the Middle Ages the site was deserted for one about 5 m. farther Hebrews as i i w ii+ (in Am.88 mutilated into i ~ ) .
S. on the end of the promontory, and thus the modern town of
Prevesa (npi,%<a) originated. There are many remains of the liy is used exclusively of the Nile (Gen. 41 I Ex. 122 2 3
ancient city. etc. Ezek. 26 3 9 Am. 8 8 9 5 ; in the last two passages with the
See Journ. Roy. G e o , . Soc. 389, Leake, Travels in A? Gr. addition 'of Egypt,' which is frequent with the plural), in the
1 1 7 8 3 491, hlurray's Hand6ook to Greece. For the foundation
of Nicopolis, consult Kuhn, Entsfehung der Studfe der Allen. plural of the Nile branches in the Delta (Ezek. 293,30 12 Ps. 78 44
W. J. W.
Is. 7 18 196 3725), only in Is. 33 21 of ideal rivers (11 p i n 3 . and
in as late passages as Dan. 1 2 5 6 7 of the Tigris (in Job28 IO,
NIGER. N I G ER .
See SIMEON where the sense 'shafts of mines' is forced on it by the corn-
mentaries, the text is hardly correct). T h a t @ mostly renders
NIGHT (d??),Gen. 1 s etc. See DAY. sorapk may be noted. O n the name S HIHOR , see the article
on that word.
NIGHT-HAWK (D?$lQ, tahrnds; r h y z ; noctua), Naturally, the name Gihon of Gen.2 13 does not refer to the
Nile, although already Ecclus. 2427 and Josephus know that
one of the unclean birds (Lev. 111.5 Dt. 1415t). T h e application. Christian writers, of course, called the Nile Gem
true meaning of the Hebrew word is unknown. Tristram after the LXX, in order to show their knowledge of the Bible;
thinks that AV meant by 'night-hawk' the night-jar4 but this is not to be considered as a tradition of auy weight.
(Caprimu@s), a bird of nocturnal habits, of which three T h e question where that second river of Paradise is really to he
sought for, does not belong here. See GIHON,and P ARADISE, D 5.
species are recorded from Palestine; but 6 and Vg.
suggest a reference to some species of O WL (q.z.). Personified, the Nile is frequently figured as a fat,
Among the moderns, Bochart and Gesenius favour the androgynous deity,5 with skin painted blue (like water ;
male ostrich (root-meaning, ' t o treat violently'), whilst 2. Beliefs and sometimes green), wearing a bunch of
others, led by the same root-meaning, prefer thecuckoo. aquatic plants 011 his head and the girdle
ceremonies, of a fisherman around his loins, and
Finally, others have thought of the swallow (so possibly
Targ. Jon. up?!,, and Saad.) ; Niebuhr the traveller presenting fresh water (in vases), lotus flowers, fish, and
fowl. Such representations are found a s early as o n
states that the Jews in M b ~ u lstill call the swallow
statues of dyn. 12. One of the classic school-books,
ta&mis. A. E. S.
dating from the middle empire, contains a hymn to the
NIGHT-MONSTER (n+>), Is. 3 4 1 4 RV, R V W good god Nile,6 'the creator of all good things' ; but he
received less regular worship than the local gods pre-
L ILITH.
siding over the watercourse of some districts (Suiet near
NIGHT-WATCHES (nhy+t), PS.636 [7] 119148.
See D A Y . 1 W. Groffa ne-il--u 'therivers' (Bnll. Znsi. &. 1892, p.165)
would, in correct pronunciation, be n-ierou, which has no
1 See Marq.-Momms., Sfaafmenu.P), 131. Tac. Ann. 2 53(= resemblance t o Nile.
1 7 A.D.) calls Nicopolis a n ur6s Achaire but Ejict. Diss. iii. 4 I , 2 N o etymology is possible. Paronomasias with the root @.
y k s of it as the headquarters of an'&irponoc 'Hsaipov : c p (something like "qun) ' t o hide,' are, of course, not t o he taken
ahn Etrrl. 1435. seriously.
[: Tim. 4 6 (9)-22 may plausibly be regarded as a Pauline frag- 3 Wiedemann, Herodot's z~ueifes Buch, 93, enumerates
ment, though I and 2 Tim., as wholes, cannot be the work of various rare Greek designations for the river (Okeane, iEtos,
Paul. See Bacon, Introd. to ik NT, 135; v. Soden, HC, Neileus, Triton), and some ridiculous etymologies from the
3 181. En.] Greek for the usual name Neilos.
3 Note the use of ( K P ~ 'there ' a n d the tense K & ~ C K'%
I have 4 Delitesch's statement that a word ia-u-72' 'rivers' (?) occurs
determined '-not the epktolar; past, but expressing the mental already in a n inscription of Adad-nirari I. (about 1325 B.c.) is
state a t the moment of writing. retracted in Assyr. Handworted. 203 303.
4 From the time of Aristotle, peculiar attributes have been 5 Mostly differentiated into the two Nile gods of Upper a n d
ascribed to the night-hawk or goat-sucker, and it was supposed Lower Egypt.
to come a t night-time and tear and eat the flesh off young 6 Papyrus Sallier 11. and Anastasi VII. : cp Maspero, Hymn&
children's faces. au Nil,1868 (see also Records ofthc PastPJ, 4 105).
34'3 3414
NILE NIMRIM, WATER8 OF
the first cataract, for example). Temples are nien- to frequently,' so that the proverbial idea about its real
tioned a t Memphis, Heliopolis, and Nilopolis. sourcea may be older than Greek times.
At Silseleh (between Asugn and Edfu), where the T h e true beginning of the White Nile (cp EGYPT.
sandstone range, in pre- 5 6) is now sought in the Kagera river, 3" S. of the
historic times, had separ- equator, so that the total length of the Nile is about
ated Egypt and Nubia, 4000 miles. Its six cataracts are all situated N. of
certain ceremonies and Khartiim. Whilst it has many affluents S. of the loth
sacrifices from time im- degree, N. of this it receives only the 'Atbara and the
memorial welcomed the Blue (better Black - i . e . , turbid) Nile, the rivers
Nile a t the yearly com- Astaboras and Astapus of the Ancients. T h e yearly
mencement of his rise- inundation is chiefly due to the Blue Nile, which brings
L e . , a t the entering of the water of the Abyssinian winter-rains. The swelling
the inundation into Egypt of the river is noticed in Khartiirn in the first days of
proper. T h e ' Nile- May, near the first cataract about June Ist, a t Cairo a t
festivals ' ( N d & ) 1 were the end of that month. T h e maximum is there reached
celebrated through the in October (E GYPT , § 7). The classical writers are
whole country a t that approximately correct in speaking of 100 days of swell-
time. ing. T h e water becomes turbid and red (for sonic days
Some of the religious it is coloured green by parts of rotten water-plants) ; it
rites have survived to the turns clear again when the river begins to sink. With
present day in Christian the exception of the time of the 'green Nile,' the water
or Muhammedan disguise, is pleasant and wholesome.
such as the celebration of The great importance of the yearly inundation, which
the 'night of the drop' alone makes agriculture possible in Egypt, was well
(falling now on the 17th known to the Greeks ; less generally known was the
of June), originally the necessity of artificial assistance by dykes, canals, and
night in which tears of machines for lifting the water, which makes the life of
Isis weeping over Osiris the Egyptian peasant so hard. In antiquity, the in-
cause the Nile to rise.2 undation seems to have been somewhat more abundant,
Also the 'feast of cutting the d a m ' in August must as old water-marks show,S but hardly more regular.
date from pagan times.3 Too high inundation causes great ravages, especially in
T h e true causes of the yearly rise of the Nile were, of the lowlands of the Delta; an insufficient rise, on the
course, not known to the ancient Egyptians ; for this their other hand, brings a failure of the crops and famine.
3. Sources and geographical horizon was too narrow. T h e most desirable rise was considered to be 16
( I n dynasties eighteen to twenty-one, Egyptian cubits4 Bad years in consequence of a
year,y rise. the pharaohs had a certain rule over ' small Nile ' 5 are mentioned frequently from the time
the valley as far S. as the sixth cataract, and even before of the middle empire (see EGYPT, 7, n. 2, on a legend
that time [E GYPT , 9 471 commercial expeditions may of seven years of famine). The rising of the floods was
have penetrated farther S . , but neither into the highlands accordingly observed with great .anxiety by means of
of Abyssinia nor to the equatorial lake-regions.) The official Nilometers-ie., graduated wells (most famous
ancient Greeks discussed the mystery with special are the ancient one of Elephantink and that from
interest (Strabo, 136 ; Herod. 2 1 9 8 , etc.) ; the correct Arabian times on the island of R6da a t Cairo). Re-
) ~found first in
explanation (the tropical ~ i n t e r - r a i n sis ligious services for the purpose of imploring the granting
Aristotle (iMefeor. i. 1 2 19). Herodotns ( 2 1 9 ) wonders of ' a great Nile ' are known from all ages, from pagan
a t the lack of interest in the problem which he found down to Muhammedan times. Whether the annual
among the Egyptian priests ; they were, indeed, per- sacrifice (to the Nile) of a virgin a t Memphis is historical
fectly satisfied with the old mythological explanations, may be doubted-at least for the Christian age of
exactly as they taught to the last days of paganism the Egypt, to which Arab writers wish to attribute it. C p
childish geography inherited from the most primitive for all the preceding remarks, EGYPT, 5 6f.
period : the Nile has his source or sources a t the scat W. M. M.
of Osiris, in the realm of the dead, which is both in the
NIMRAH (3;??), Nu.323. See BETH-NIMRAH.
Lower World and in heaven ; it comes to light a t the
first cataract, flowing in two whirlpools from two NIMRIN, WATERS OF (nr
'fountain-holes' (&-e&') ; one river runs N., the other cp BETH-NIMRAH ; much less probably ' limpid waters '),
S . ; as the northern branch empties into the Mediter- a stream in the land of Moab (Is.156, N ~ M H P E I M
ranean, so the southern river ends in the Indian ocean.6 CBQ"'g.1, NEBPIM [KJ NEMPEIM CAQ"1. N E B H P ~ I M
W e see here the tendency to confine the name Nile to [rl; Jer.4834, N E B ~ ~ I NP I , -M CN1, NEMPEIM[QI.
the part flowing through Egypt N. and S. of Elephantine BBPIM [A]). T h e elegy on Moab (see I SAIAH 11., § 9 )
and Phil=. The endless course of the river is alluded complains that ' the waters of Nimrim are becoming a
desolation ; withered is the grass, gone is the herbage,
1 Described by Heliodorus, 9 9.
. . Wiedemann, Herodot's
Cp
m e i f e s Buch, 365. 1 'The circle of gods does not know whence thou art,' d Z
1873, p. 1.29; only the souls of the dead will see lsis 'revealin;
2
. Isis'oftears
' night drop, according to this myth
weeping.' According to anothe;
from heaven in the
version, she LoFrns the Nile m his secrecy,' Rook o f f h e Dead, 146.
in t h e lower world where her dead husband lies. A varlant 2 Kniitgen, Die Ansichien der A Zten uberdie NiZqueZlen, 1876
makes the river come out of Osiris' body itself. Thus the (Wiedemann, 2.6. 113).
statement of Greek times identifying Osiris and the Nile is 3 Cp especially those at Thehes, A'Z 34, 1896, I I I and 95.
intelligible, as well as the {mportanceof Isis in the preservadon The strange water-marks at Semneh in Nuhia (LDii. 139)
of all organic life, due, in Egypt, entirely to t h e irrigation. See which would show that, in dynasty 12, the Nile rose ther;
helow on the earliest form of these myths combining Osiris and (above the second cataract, where the river may not yet have
the invisible source. [Cp G . Margoliouth, Liturgy offheNile.] broken through) 25 ft. higher than nowadays, are best left aside
J A strange tale of the Talmud to the effect that Joseph's (cp col. 1208, n. 2, end). In Egypt proper the (very slow)
coffin rested in the depths of t h e Nile, has no parallel in raming of the ground by the alluvium may have changed the
Egyptian customs. The sacred river seems to have been kept conditions somewhat. The frequent assumption that t h e fields
from defilement by corpses, in great contrast to the negligence are raised faster than the bed of the river is, however, disputed.
of the modern Egyptians. 4 Cp the sixteen children playing round the famous statue of
4 Half correctly Anaxagoras : the melting of snow in the the Nile in the Vatican. The height varies however con-
Ethiopian mountains. siderably according to the locality. Does ,?,xteen apbl to
5 Cp Odyss. 4477 Girrr*c rrorap6c? Memphis?(Plut. 2s. 43, Arist. 2361, give fourteen cubits for%.)
6 This view is found in Greek writers, and already in the 6 Decree of Canopus, 1. 7, Greek text, I. 16. The Greek text
Petershurg tale, written about r g m B.C. translates by i p p q i a .
3415 3416
NIMROD NIMROD
verdure there is none.' It is not a prophecy of what Hebrews the idea of ' rebellion ' ( J i i ~ is )obvious. T h e
God will bring about ; the picture is not merely antici- 2. Earlier connection of the hero who bore it with
pative ; the barbarity of foemen is to blame ( z K. 3 19 25). theories foreign cities, hou-ever, shows that it is
The picture is completed in Is. 159 (emended text), which of name. merely a Hebraised form of a foreign name.
states that ' the waters of Ninirim (see DIMON) are full Sayce formerly ( T S B A 2 2 4 3 f l ) . Grivel ( i b .
of blood ' ; the warriors of Moab have been cut down on 3136 J), and Wellhausen ( C H 3 0 9 3 ) have combined
its banks, and the stream is reddened w*ith gore (cp Jer. Nimrod with Merodach (Marduk), who was originally
482, where M ADMEN [q.v.] should be Nimrini). This the local god of Babylon, and is said to have had four
apparently explains the cry of woe (v.8 ) which echoes dogs (Jensen. K o ~ m o Z .131). Apart, however, from the
from the S. to the N. of the land (see EGLAIM).Pre- reference to Kimrod's hunting (if 17s is correct), there is
sumably Ninirini itself is in the S. of Moab. It is there- no parallelism between the two, and it was therefore a
fore not the same as B ETH- NIMRAH (4.v.)or Kimrah- more plausible idea of G. Smith the Assyriologist ( T S B A
ie., Tell Nimrin-at the foot of the mountains opposite 1205 and elsewhere), Maspero (Daws o f Civ., 1899, p.
Jericho, though apart from its situation the Wiidy 573), P. Haupt (A:zmrod-epos),and A. Jeremias (Zedz~bnr-
Ninrrin, as the lower part of the W. So'aib (cp HOBAB) i\.imrod) to identify Nimrod with the legendary hunter
is called, answers to the description of the former state king of Erech, whose name is now read as GilgameH
of Nimrim.l W e mikt look for a trace of a Nimrini (see CAINITES, ENOCH). and with whom one of the
farther S. ; in fact, it seems doubtful whether Beth- cities (Erech) mentioned in the traditional text of Gen.
Ninirah is not too far N. to have been reckoned as 1010 is closely connected. Even this parallelism, how-
Moabitish. ever, is incomplete, and the name remains unexplained. l
According to Euaebius and Jerome (OSi21, 28432 ; 143 11) the Haupt and I-lilprecht have. therefore, looked out for a
place intended is one which was known in their day as flqvva- historical personage whose name might conceivably be
papcrp, 6ennamerium and lay to the N. of Zoar (at the extreme
S. end of the Dead S;a; see ZOAK). Either the reference is to worn down into Nimrod. T h e hero selected is Nazi-
the Wady en-Numera which traverses a region now waste and maratta12 (14th cent. B . c . ) , one of those warlike KaSSite
stony, but perhaps n& so in early times or if not t h e name kings of Babylonia (see CUSH,z ) who were constantly
which was once a plied more widely has)liniered dere by the invading Palestine, and continued their intrigues in that
caprice of fortune.g
country to the very end of the Egyptian rule.
Tristram speaks of the ' plenteous brooks gushingfrom
The contract tahlets of the KaSSite period are said to abound
the lofty hills into the Gh6r en-Numeira ' ( L a n d o f ilJoab, in such abbreviations as that of i i a j for NazimarattaS. The
4 6 J ) . T h e name, which may possibly contain a relic theory is well thought out. This KdXite king might conceivably
of totemism (cp L EOPARD), was apparently not very un- have been remembered as a representative of the KaSRite kings,
common. See O S 2 ) ,28422,14232, for another evidence and have been credited with the conquests of other KaBHites. It
should be noticed, however, that the synchronous history of
of this (it is the great WZdy Nimreh in Haurnn, E. of Assyria and I3abylonia states that NazimarattaB was defeated at
Shubha, that is meant). T. K. C. Kar-IKtar-akarsalby Adad-nirZri I., king of Assyria, which was
followed by an extension of the Assyrian frontier ( K B 1 197 ;
NIMROD (7iP2, tht2: [I Ch. 1 TO Mic. 5 5 1 : NEB- RPPI,3 3 0 ; cp BABYLONIA, f 47).
p u b , NEBPUN [E and fi in Gen. 1091 ; NABPWAHC This identification of Nimrod, however, is not free
1. Biblical [v.L NEBp.1, !os: 1. A son of Cush, and from objection. If Nimrod had been represented solely
one of the primitive heroes (Gen. 1 0 8 8 as a conqueror, it would be adequate on
references. [JJ, I Ch: 1rot). There is much that is 3. Prob~ble
key to legend. the grounds mentioned above. H e is
singular and exciting to the curiosity in the account of more especially represented, however,
Nimrod. T h e sons of Cush in Gen. IO7 (P) are the as a great founder or fortifier of cities, and Haupt's theory
representatives of peoples ; but here is a son of Cush does not throw any light on this representation. More-
who, however legendary, is n o mere genealogical fiction, over, the difficulties connected with the names of the
but apparently the first of the imperial despots known cities and with the phrase gibb5r sdyz'd, 1;s i3!, remain,
t o the Israelites. His name was evidently as familiar and as a point of method we ought first of all to seek to
to those from whom the tradition in Gen. 1 0 8 8 is derived clear u p these names in the light of probable conclusions
as it was to the people of his own country ; and if we attained elsewhere in the criticism of traditional names
could only understand what is said about him, we ought (see, e.g., SODOM).
to be able to restore the name which underlies the form The least serious difficultyis that connected with ! l 1?1
: (EV
?
Nimrod. It is stated in the tradition (vu.IO-,,) that his a mighty hunter) in Gen. 10 yz. This phrase can hardly be right.
rule began in Babylon, and then extended to Erech, Esau was surely the great mythical hunter of the Israelites. If
Accad, and Calneh in the land of Shinar, from which GilgameS, the hunting king of Erech, is to he identified with
country he went t o Assyria, and founded Nineveh, Enoch (see CAINITES, fj 6 ENOCH), we must suppose that he
was despoiled of his repudtion as a hunter to please Israelitish
Kehoboth-Ir, Calah, a n d Resen. Several of these names,
taste. For 1 : 12? there are plausible alternatives-to read
;
however, are obscure. Even SHINAR and ACCADhave
lh,as in a. ab, or to regard 1's as a corrupt fragment of
not been explained beyond question, whilst C ALNEH,
some word meaning 'ruler' or 'leader (most probably
R EHOBOTH-I R, and especially RESEN still remain in a
high degree doubtful. T h e description of Ximrod in <judge,
. general, prince '). The second alternative is preferable :
it was as an able ruler andgeneral, not as a hunter, that 'Nimrod'
v. 8 j : is also somewhat puzzling. ' H e began to be a made his reputation and was remembered in apopular song.
mighty one (133,yiyar, see GIANTS) in the earth. H e The key to the nakes will be found hy recognrsing the Arabian
Cush not only in Gen. 106J, hut also in 71.8. It follows from
was a mighty one in hunting (T? iha) before Yahwe; this that, as in Gen. 14 and elsewhere, the editors ofthe traditional
therefore, it is said, like Nimrod a mighty one in hunt- text have made a huge mistake, through starting with a wrong
theory. The following restoration may not be in all points
ing before Yahwk.' W e also meet with the phrase ' the
correct ; but it probably approaches the truth. For we
land of Nimrod,' parallel to Assyria, in Mic. 5 6 [SI.
This too has not been adequately explained (see § z , should almost certainly read ?p,'and he smote' (to suit l?p).
end). The suggested restoration of the text makes the passage Fead
Rrustons supposition that Nimrod hen Cush is the name as follows :-'And the beginning of his kingdom was Jerahmeel
symholised hy the mystic number in Rev. 13 18 is, we may fear, in the land of Seir. From that land he went forth into Geshur,
only a curiosity.
1 No one would now explain 'Nimrod ' as Na,mra;uddu, ' the
T h a t the name ' Nimrod ' must have suggested to the brightly shining ' or Namra-zit 'the brightly riqing.
2 See Haupt, hndouer Revih, July ,884 (' The Language of
1 This is the view of Ges. Hi. Del. Che. [formerly], Bld.- Nimrod the Cushite '), and cp UniiversifyCircu/nrs (Baltimore)
Socin ('probably'), and espehall; Wetistein (see Del. Gen.N, vol. xi. no. 98 (May 1892)~
and Hilprecht Assyriaca. This vie;
572). was accepted as probable by Sayce ( A k d . March 2, 1895 ; cp
2 Ruhl (Pal.272)) Di. This view suits the identification of Pat. Pnl. 269 ; Ex#. T 8 180) and Cheyne (Acnd. March 9 and
Horonaim with the ruins near the WZdy ed-DerZ'a (Ruhl, 272). May 11, 1895). MarattaS is stated to be the KaSSite god of
Horonaim is mentioned in the elegy just before Nimrim. hunting.
3417 3418
NIMSHI NINEVEH
and smote Hebron Rehoboth, Jerahmeel, and Beersheba, which T ISHBITE, Z AREPHATH. Jehu (whose name perhaps
is between Hebron)and JerahmeeL’1 =Jehoel= Elijah= Jerahmeel) may therefore have been
On the possible or probable connection of the Nimrod passage
with Gen. 6 7-4 and 11 1-8seeNEPHILIM, and on the Jerahmeelite an adventurer from the far south. T. K. C.
origin of early Hebrew stories bee PARADISE
NINEVEH (nq’!, NlNEYH [NHNEYH, NHNEYII,
Now as to the name of the conqueror. @AD gives it
as Nebrod, which is alniost certainly right. It is prob-
Ninive; classical H NINOC, Ass. Ninaa, Ninua ; Lk.
ably a condensed form of Bir-dadda, which is given else- The 1132. ‘men o f N i n e v e , ’ ~ ~ A p oNINEYEITAI
c
where (see BEDaD) as the probable original of Bedad. name. [Ti.WH], Lk. 1130 Ninevites ; and so N IN ~ Y -
Considering that the conqueror spoken of must have ITHC [ATob. 11211 NINEYHTHC [K Tab. 2.1).
N o satisfactory derivation of the name has been given ;
been prominent in Hebrew tradition, we may without
nor can be till the question has been settled whether the
nudue boldness assume that the Husham hen Zerah and
the Hadad ben Bedad in the list of Edoniite kings (Gen. city was originally peopled by a non-Semitic race. The
ideogram seems composed of those for ‘house’ and
3 6 3 4 f . ) have been rolled into one by Hebrew legend.
Husham is probably the original of the CLISHAN-RISH-
‘ fish ’ (cp JONAH [BOOK], 5 4). This has suggested to
some (Tiele, BAG84. go) the connection of Igtar, the
A T H A I M [ p . ~ . ]of Judg. 37-11, whose name should be
city goddess, with afish-goddess, daughter of the god Ea.
read Cushan from the land of the Temanites.’ That
A non-Semitic derivation of Ni-na-a has been attempted.
this oppressor was traditionally king of Edom, not
So far as -na is concerned, Delitzsch was of opinion
Mesopotamia, is probable from the Kenizzite origin of
that it nieans ‘ resting-place ‘ (Pur. 260). We might
Othniel. His real name may have been Bir-dadda;
also explain Nin-ia, ‘ m y lady,’ comparing the many
‘Cushan’ is a term descriptive of his origin, not his
by-names of Mar as ‘ the lady’ ; if it could- be shown
name. So Hadad b. Bedad would be really the son
that Nin, ‘ lady,’ had ever passed into Semitic.
of the so-called Cushan-rishathaim, and his conquests a
Nineveh is said (Gen. 10 1 1 ) to have been founded by
may have been added to those of his father to com-
Nimrod in Assyria. This may ke taken to assume the
plete the legendary picture. T h e main point, however,
previous existence of the old capital XSur. The mention
is that Nimrod ’ led the Jerahmeelite migration from
with it and Calah of Rehoboth-Ir and Resen as forming
Edom into S. Canaan; this may well be a historical
the Assyrian ‘Tetrapolis,’ may be due to a desire to
fact. W e now understand the parallelism of ‘ land of
balance the Babylonian Tetrapolis (in Gen. 1010). At
Nimrod’ and ‘Assyria‘ in Mic. 5 6 [5]. i i w ~(Asshur)
any rate, there is no reason to suppose that in early
is constantly used in lieu of -IWI (Geshur), and refers to
times these four formed a continuous city. [For the
a district on the border of S. Canaan. C p M ICAH
bearing of this remark and for criticism of the traditional
[BOOK], 4, MIZRAIM,2 b.
text of Gen. l O m - n , see N IMROD .] In later timeswith
T h e theories considered above differ radically from
such historians as Ctesias and Diodorus the name
one which had considerable vogue formerly. and was
Nineveh may simply have denoted a province, the
4. Nimrod accepted by Hitzig ( B L 4332 J?), Tuch
Assyria proper between the four rivers. There is.
( ( h e r i r ( z ) , 183). and Finzi (Ricercite, ,542)
however, no proof that, in the Sargonide period up to
not a myth‘ -viz., that Nimrod was originallv. not the the fall of Nineveh, Calah was subordinate. Each city
legendary first king of Babylon (?), hut th; constellation
retained its separate SuRnu or prefect, and in the
of Orion. T h e Chronicon Puschafe (ed. Dindorf, 64)
official lists Nineveh stands below Calah. Great
says that the Persians assert of Nimrod that he became
a god, and was identical with the constellation of Orion ; emphasis has been laid on the approximate correspond-
ence of a tetrapolis formed by Nineveh, Calah, Khor-
c p the Arabic name of Orion jubbdr = Heb. gibbJr,
sabad, and Keramlis with the dimensions of Nineveh
iix?, the title given to ‘Nimrod’ in Gen.IO8f: (see
given by Diodorus, and with a forced interpretation of
O RION ). I t is just as plausible, however. to make the vague phrase in Jonah (33). ‘ a n exceeding great
‘ Nimrod’ into a solar hero (so Goldziher in 1876) on city, of three days’ journey.’ Against this must be set
the deceptive ground that it is said in a Midrash that the results of Jones’ survey of the ruins and district
365 kings (equal to the days of the solar year) ministered ( J R A S ~ ~ S ~ ~There J ? ) is
. no trace of a common
to him. Cp ENOCH, 2. wall. Moreover, the separate cities of Nineveh, Calah.
Jewish Aggada made Nimrod the founder of the Tower of Babel and Khorsabad are fortified as strongly towards the
(Jos. Ant. i.4 zJ), and, by a still further licence, imagined him
to have persecuted Abraham, because the patriarch interior of the assumed city as on the exterior. In
6. Jewish would not worship his false gods (cp Josh. 242). sales of land in Nineveh itself, the road to Calah i s as
&&a. The latter legend migrated to the Arabs (cp Koran, frequently named as the ‘ king’s highway ’ to Arbela.
Sur. 21 52-69), and several mounds of ruins even Nineveh was situated a t the NW. angle of an irregular
now bear Nimrod’sname, especiallythe well-known Birs Nimrod
(see BABEL TOWER O F ) . trapezium of land which lay between the rivers Husur
On the n’ame and application of ‘ Nimrod’ cp also Lagarde, 2. situation. (Khuurar) on the NW., Gomel on the
‘Armenische Studien ’ in Abh. Ges. Gait. 22 77 and Niild. ZDAfG NE. and E., Upper Zab on the SE. and
28 279 (Persia called ‘ house of Nimrod ’ in an old Syrian book) ; S . , and Tigris on the S. and W. In extent this plain
a n d on earlier explanations of t h e name, cp Dr:in Guardian,
May 20, 1896. T. K. C. is 25 ni. by 15 m., and contains.the ruins of Nineveh a t
Kuyunjik and Nebi Yiinus, of Diir-Sargon a t Khor-
NIMSHI (’%?, NAME[C]C[f]l [BAL]), ancestor Of sabad to the NE., and of Calah to the S. of Niniriid.
J E H U (9.”. ) ; cp ISSACHAR, § 4 ; I K. 19 16 ( N A M E C ~ E I The whole plain has a gradual slope from the low
[R. om. -41) 2 K. 9 2 (AMECEI [A]) 14 ( N A M E C C ~ CA”1) range of Jebel Makliib and the hill of ‘Ah-eS-qafrB to
ZD ( NAME[C]C[E]IOY [BA]) 2Ch. 227. Thenameshould the Tigris on the W. This plain was for those days
probably be Aniashai (a more plausible form than amply protected on three sides by the two rapid broad
A m a ~ a i ) . ~Jehu was ben Jehoshaphat = ben Sephathi, currents of the Tigris and the Zab, the hills on the NE.
‘son of a Zephathite’ ; also ben Amashai=ben Yish- and the river Gomel a t their base. The weak NW.
maeli, ‘ son of an Ishmaelite.’ Elijah and Elisha, who, side was partly protected by the Husur, in winter
according to different versions of the tradition, pro- impassable but in summer easily fordable. T h e floods
moted Jehu’s accession, were both, it has been sug- caused by the Husur were frequent and destructive;
gested elsewhere (P ROPHET, 7).Zarephathites. Now on one occasion sweeping away part of the palace and
Zephath and Zarephath are designations of the same exposing the coffins of the kings. A series of dams
famous place on the border of N. Arabia. See S HAPHAT , was therefore constructed (mapped and described in
1 There is much dittography, as often ( e g . , I S. 1 I) where the
‘ Topography of Nineveh,’ / K A S 3 1 8 8 ) which con-
name ‘ Jerahmeel’ i s concerned, See Crit. Bi6. trolled the floods and filled the ditches and moats of
2 On these see Winrkler, G f 1 192.
3 The initial I comes from dittograpby (accidental repetition 1 [For the probable origin of the very strange topographical
of a letter). note in Jon. 3 jb, see PROPHET.]
3419 3420
NINEVEH NINEVEH
Nineveh. One of these ditches runs over 2 m. with a I i&UR-BAI\I-PAL, § 1 1 ) , and the Kuyunjik collections
breadth of 200 ft. and was lined with a rampart on the 4. History. of tablets in the British Museum in-
city-side. T o these dams there may be a reference in clude many commercial documents, there
Nah.26[7], ' T h e gates of the rivers are opened.' are materials from native sources for its municipal history
T h e city on the river-side of the Tigris extended and topography. Till these are published and under-
about 24 m., its N. wall measured 7000 ft., the stood it would be rash to dogmatise on conjectural
eastern wall was nearly 3 m. long, and the southern grounds. Gudea, king of LagaS (about 2800 R . C . ) ,
about 1000 ft. T h e city thus formed a narrow long records having built (or rebuilt) a temple of I h r a t
strip against the Tigris, pierced at right angles by the , Nineveh ( K B 3 5 ) . Dungi, king of Ur (about 2700
Husur, the waters of which could,
by closing the great dam, be sent
round the moats instead. The
actual extent of Nineveh proper is
about 1800 acres or about two-
thirds the size of Rome within
Aurelian's Wall. It would con-
tain a population of 175,000 on
the allowance of 50 sq. yds. to a
person. Outside this citadel city
lay the ' outskirts' ( & n d h ) , which
seem to have had a n independent
municipal existence under their own
Juknu (or tukintu = lady-governor).
Farther afield and apparently close
to Khorsabad lay Rebit Niniia, or
the piazza (see REHOBOrH-IR). In
the case of a siege, doubtless the
whole population of this outlying
neighbourhood would take refuge
within the city moats and walls.
Nineveh was first localised in
modern times by Rich, Resident at
3. lYIodern dagdad for the East
explorations. India Company about
1820. Sir H. Layard
by his explorations definitely fixed it
at Kuyunji& (1845-47 and 1849-

'$he excavations were continued by


H. Rassam (1854). G. Smith (1873.76),
and again Rasiam up to 1882. The
enormous mound of Kuyunjik s e p r -
ated from that of N e k Yimis'by-the
Khausar, marks the site of Sennachcrih's
palace, covering quite 100 acres. It
has been explored to the extent of ahont
60 rooms ( 5 are 150 ft. square), all
panelled with sculptured slabs of ala-
baster. The entrances to the palace and
to the principal halls were flanked with
colossal winged bulls and human-headed
lions some 20 ft. high. Close beside
this palace was one built by Esarbaddon
where the sculpture was of the finest
character: but the entire building has
not heen explored. The moung of Nebi
Yilnis, surmounted by the tomb of
Jonah,' is a sacred spot to the Moham-
medans and could not be explored
properly. Hy sinking a shaft within
the walls of a private house, however,
some sculptured slabs were recovered
and the Turkish government opened out,
latert part of a palace of Esarhaddon
Outside these mounds excavations were
made at two of the great city-gates and
showed them to have been built by Map of Nineveh.
Sentiacherib.
l'he architecture of theie palaces is exhaustively dealt with B .c.), left an inscription in Nineveh, unless indeed this
in Fergu~son'sPalaces of A ineveh and Persepo/is Restored was carried there by some Assyrian royal antiquary.
(see d i o Perrot and Chipiez, A r f in Chaldea and Assyria).
It should be noted that each palace was in itself a fort, and T h e Amarna tablets (1500 B . c . ) name Sineveh twice
would require a separate attack. The mounds formed a sort of ( K B5 ; see under ' Nina '), each time in connection with
Acropolis to the town which was walled, moated, and protected IStar. T h e earliest native notices are on the votive
by oiltlying forts.
Withiti this enclosure and surrounding the palaces were bowls of Shalmaneser I. (about 1300 B . c . ) . These
extensive orchards and eardens. It is not oossible to decide short notices ( K B l 9 : 3 R,pl. 5 , no. 3 - 5 ) are to be
from the superficial appearance of the ruindwhether any part read in the light of Tiglath-pileser's reminiscences of
was densely populated by dwellers in streets of houses. The Shalmaneser (G. Smith, 4 s . Disc. 248). Shalmaneser
houses unless all huilt of sun-dried brick without stone must
have left more evident remains. 'l'he inscriptions, however, imply claims to have renewed the temple of litar ( 3 R 5 , no. 4).
streets, as well as orchards in Nineveh, so that a house abutted From later notices we gather that Samsi-Adad (about
on three sides against other houses. 1821 B . c . ) built a temple of IStar, k-MaS-maS and
T h e history of Nineveh is of course that of Assyria : may have renewed Gudea's. Shalmaneser 1. ( 3 R 3,
but as most of the Assyrian documents known to us no. 12)relates that his father Adad-nirari (about 1845
come from A h - M n i - p a l ' s palace in Nineveh (cp B . C . ), after an expedition into Babylon, brought back

3421 3422
NINEVEH NISROCH
the gods of Babylon, Merodach and Nebo. and built received with great caution till the data of the inscrip-
them temples. He also built a palace in Nineveh as tions have been worked out.
well as at ASur and Calah. Mutakkil-Nusku and The date of the fall of Nineveh has been placed in
ASur-rcS-iSi (1150 B.C.) continued to build at Nineveh. 608-7B.c. I t was due to the overwhelming onslaught
Sennacherib, however, found Nineveh still a ‘ wretched 5. ItB fall. of the Manda hordes. Whether the Baby-
poor place,’ and to him its chief development is due. lonians took any active part in its capture
There were already a factory, an arsenal, a temple, and awaits decision. Nabonidus in his recently discovered
some fortifications. The place was short of water in stele (Scheil, Keceuil de Travaux, 1 8 1 5 8 , and Messer-
summer and flooded in winter. The waters of the Tigris Schmidt, Mitt. der Voorderas. Ges., no. I ) gives us the first
and the Husur (Khausar) were unpalatable. being full published inscriptional reference to the fall of Nineveh.
of szlts, and the inhabitants depended on ‘ the rains of The pious king regards it as a retribution from the gods
heaven for drink’ ; Sennacherib, therefore, brought an for the desecration and spoliation of their temples by
aqueduct from the hills (XB2117)right into the city. Sennacherib. He does not attribute any share in its
He raised both the wall and the rampart ‘mountain destruction to the Babylonians, but claims the invader
high.’ He erected therean ‘unrivalled’ palace(Meissner- as an ally of Babylon, and emissary of Marduk.
Rost, Bau-inschr. Sanh.), built in two portions, one in Actual details as to the fall of Nineveh are scarcely
the Hittite style, the other in the native Assyrian. This to be expected from its own inscriptions. T h e contri-
is now buried beneath the Nebi Yunis monnd. H e laid bution made to the question by the state of the ruins is
out a paradise with all sorts of exotic plants, and small, but definite as far as it goes. Most of the

L L ”
hewasslaini;K.’1937Is. 3738). The two
established a kind of zoological garden. Stables for most prominent explanations are : ( I ) to omit n and ch
the royal stud, magazines for war-material, extensive as, possihly. accretions, and restore i ~ [ ~ ] - - i . e . , ASur,
offices for all departments of state were closely attached to whom Sennacherib in his inscriptions repeatedly refers
to the palace. At the same time he repaired the king’s as ‘ m y lord’ (so Schr. KAT(*),329) ; or ( 2 ) to read
highway and made a new channel for the Husur. As q ~ the , ‘ constr. state ’ of Nusku, a god connected with
a conseqnence Nineveh became and remained the
Nabti, and also identified with Gihil, the fire-god (so
capital and centre of Assyrian empire and culture,
soon rivalling in wealth and importance Babylon itself, in the main Sayce, TheoL Rev. 1873, p. 27; Hal.
Here this same king, Sennacherib, brought the chief R E / , 0ct.-Dec., 1881, p. 183; Del. Calwer Bib.-
spoils of his capture and ruthless spoliation of Babylon Lex., 1893, p. 630). On Nusku. see Jastrow, ReL of
and other Babylonian cities. Here also he was murdered Bab. and Ass.; G. Hoffm. Z A 11260& But to
(681 8.C.). In what sense the word ‘capital‘ could ignore n and ch altogether is hazardous. On the
be applied to Nineveh before Sennacheribs time, it is other hand, it is not likely that one of the less-known
hard to see. I t was ‘ the court-residence ’ under ASur- deities should be specified as Sennacheribs god. We
bel-kala (about 1050 B .c.), who has left an inscription must wait for further light,’ remarks Kittel (Dillm.
upon a statue found at Kuyunjik, probably that of a Jes. 329). Light on the name Nisroch, however, can
captured goddess. Ahr-na+paI (about 880 B.C. ) also hardly be expected, the presumption being that, like
made it his chief seat during the completion of his great other names of Assyrian and Babylonian deities in the
works at Calah. T o Sennacherib is due its position as later narratives, it is corrupt. W e may suppose it to
capital without rival till its fall. Esarhaddon and be miswritten either ( I ) for 7k[1]3p, ‘ Anumelech’ (the
ASur-bani-pal maintained this position. Under the ’ Anammelech’ of MT, 2 K. 1 7 3 1 ; see S HAREZER ),
last kings ASur-edil-iliini and Sin-Sar-iSkun, sons of or (2).more probably, for ?,in, Mardnk (the ‘Merodach’
ASur-bani-pal, the history of Nineveh becomes very of MT). T h e pointing reminds us of ii??,which has
obscure. The relations of classical authors are to be also been lately identified with 1 1 ~ ~ .
3423 3424
NITRE NOAH
I t may he pointed out here that the name ‘Adrammelech,’ in the Deluge-story of Jz. However, most probably the
given to one of Sennacherib’s murderers, is almost certainly, original name of the hero of this narrative was not
like ‘Nisroch,’a corruption of ,173 Marduk. Probably it stood
criginally in the margin as a variant to TDJ, and made its way Noah, but Enoch; the final 1 in ,In became effaced, n
into the text at the wrong point. Cp Che. E.rj.T9429 and J were transposed, and. other editorial reasons prob-
fx898). ably facilitating this, the hero of the Deluge and the
Meinhold (/tsu+zrz&hZungen, 1898, p. 72J) thinks azh in Q ’ s inventor of wine (who belongs to a narrative of human
form of Nisroch may represent aku, the Sumerian name of the origines which had no Deluge) were, infelicitously
moon-god. The view is as improbable as a similar explanation
of ~IESHACH and SHADRACH (qg.u.). T. K. C. enough, combined (see D ELUGE ). It is worth noticing
that according to P the Deluge lasted 365 days-ie., a
NITRE (ln,,nither: Prov. 2520 [RVmg. %DA] ; solar year-whilst 365 years are stated in Gen. 523 to
Jer. 222t [RV LYE]), as now used, denotes potassium have been the duration of Enochs life. The coincid-
nitrate, which is often found as an efflorescence on the ence is hardly accidental (cp also D ELUGE , 16, n.).
soil in dry hot districts. T h e ancients, however, Noah, however ( i . e . , the true Noah mentioned by
certainly meant by v h p o v or nitrum a carbonate of soda JJ, was more than the inventor of wine : he represents
(nntron). This salt occurs native in W. Europe, Egypt, a. Place in fhe first halt, or rather the starting-point.
India, etc.; the natron lakes in Egypt, dreary as the in the migration of the group of peoples.
country is. are visited for the sake of the famous with which J1 connects the Israelites, from
Christian monasteries. The best natron is that taken their earlier home in Babylonia, or rather (see P A R A D I S E )
from the low ground surrounding the lakes, which is in N. Arabia. H e was. therefore, not a divine hero (like
not covered by water. m?, nither, as representing a other mythical inventors of wine) but personifies the
mineral alkali, is opposed to n*lb, bfiyith, which re- starting-point of the migrating Hebrews which may in
presents a vegetable alkali (see L ~ ~ a SOA n d P). Mixed the original story have been placed in the Jerahmeelite
with oil, it was apparently used for washing clothes Rehoboth, so that Noah would correspond to T ERAH
(see Jer. 222). in the document on which J2 appears to be based, just
What ‘vinegar on nitre’ (or ‘soda’) in the received text of as S HEM ( 4 . u . ) corresponds to Abraham. There-in
Prov. 2520 can mean, is not obvious. ‘The effect of the acid a soil suitable for the culture of the vine (cp N EGEB ,
vinegar on the alkali natron would he to destroy the efficiency 7),Noah ’ began to till the ground ‘ (Gen. 9 zo)-i. e . ,
of the latter,’ an idea quite unsuitable to the context. Q has ‘a5 according to this early fragment he was the first nomad
vinegar for a wound.’ See Toy, ad Zoc.
who became a systematic agriculturist ( a duplicate there-
NO. See N O - AMON . fore of Jabal). His name agrees with this. I t describes
NOADIAH (?I:?$ hif
as , ‘ YahwA promises,’ $ 3 3 : him as no longer a wanderer (12 : cp Gen. 4 I,), but
probably an ethnic, cp Moadiah, Maadiah, Neariah). ‘ settled ’ (m) ; pi ‘ rest ’ ( =nil ; cp Driver, Sam. xxxii. )
I. b. Binnui, a Levite, temp. Ezra, Ezra833 (maser [BAI]
ronSa [A*], roaSSrrn [L])=MoETH son of Sabhan [Rd
might refer to the dispersion referred to in 119. His
SAE~ANNUS] I Esd. 8 63 (pod3 (TnBawov [BAl, rornBrra [ I,]). special service to civilisation was that he ‘ planted a vine-
2. A prophetess or (6)prophet, an opponent of Nehemiah, yard.’ T h e consequences are described in Gen. 9 zr-a3.
Neh. 6 1 4 (r~el v o d i m T@ npo++g [BKI, I741 uw.1 TG np. [AI, I61 and, naturally enough, are not referred to by later
ma? TV rrpoqqriSr [L]). writers. It was enough for them that Noah was ‘ a
NOAH (ni ; NWE [BAL, occasionally Noall), son of righteous and a blameless man,’ and, like Enoch,
Lamech in the Sethite genealogy, chief survivor from walked with God’ (Gen. 6 g P). As such he is well-
1. N ~ ~ the e .Delnge, and second father of mankind, known to Ezekiel (who doubtless had a fuller J E than
Gen. 628-32 (P, but in v. 29 JJ, 6 8 - 9 1 7 2 8 we have); see Ezek. 14 1420, and cp ENOCH. He is
(P, J, R), I Ch. 1 4 ; also the first husbandman to plant also one of the heroes praised by Sirach (Ecclus. 44 171: ),
vines, Gen. 9 20-27 ( J1). Hommel has lately derived who says that, ‘ in a time of extermination he became a
* Noah’ from Nuh-nnpiBi, which he prefers to S i f - representative ’ or ‘ successor ’ (I’Snn, dudAAaypa), and
nupi3il as the name of the hero of the Babylonian that ‘for his sake there was a remnant.’ The second
Deluge-story. Isaiah, or his continuator, mentions him as the hero of
The ideogram (UD) before naflitfi may in fact mean ‘to the Deluge (Is. 549), and several didactic references
P f y , or quiet,’jufiu&u: and n+u is a synonym forjujluhu. are made to Noah in the New Testament.
n usage, however, nu& is found only with Zi66i (heart) and W e can now arrive at a more definite conclusion as
ka6itti (liver), not with najifti (which, moreover, generally
means ‘life,’ not ‘mind ’). to the name of this personage which was originally, not
I t is a more important objection that the hero of the Noah, but Naham. T h e clans called
Deluge-story cannot have been the Noah of Gen. 9 20-27. *’ “eponym‘ N A H A M and N A H A M A N Iprobably
Either there were two Noahs-a most improbable view revered this hero of legend as specially their her&
-or Noah in the Deluge-story is incorrect (see below). eponyms, and it may perhaps be more than a mere
Ball’s ingenious argument in favour of Nub-napisti chance that the prophet Nahum (whose name probably
(Teacher’s Bible. 1898) is therefore unavailing. This sprang out of a clan-name) is called ’ & ~ n , which (see
scholar (in SBOT,Gen. ) would correct i23ny in Gen. 529 E LKOSHITE) admits of n o certain explanation, and may
into unI; (bravanadmi +pLas),whilst Wellhausen retaining plausibly be corrected into *!qwun h&e:koZi--i.e., the
the text imagines a second form of the name, Noham Eshcolite. Cp P ROPHET , 5 39.
comforter.’2 Wellhausen’s view is the more plausible. Fragments of a lost Apocalypse of Noah (mentioned in Jubilees
10 21) are to he found i n the Book of Enoch : cp APOCRYPHA,
It is, however, not impossible to suppose that Lamech I 17 ; AYOCALYPTIC, $$ 24. 57. I n one of these (ch. 106) the
merely plays on the name Noah (cp Gen. 175). H e birth of Noah is described, and the description suggests that in
may be pointing prophetically to some refreshment the Aggada of the time Noah had become assimilated to some
extent to Enoch. He appears, in fact, just like a solar hero or
which man, wearied by his labour on the ungrateful soil, even like the ‘Ancient of days’ himself(see Dan. 7 9 ; cp 106).
will receive through Noah. Almost certainly his speech See DELUGE; ENOCH ; SHEM ; H AM ; J APHETH . T. K. c.
alludes to the discovery of the properties of the vine (cp
the use of ‘comfort‘ in Jer. 167). It is true, such a 1 The suggestion of this theory is diie to Budde, Urgrsch.
reference does not at all suit the rdle played by Noah 4468 The whole chapter deserves a careful perusal : cp Kue.
Th.T, 1884, pp. 1 2 6 3 But the hypothesis that the earlier
1 Sit-napisti should mean ‘rescue of life ’ : the phrases us€ tradition connected the ancestor of the Israelites, not with
mflilti and ana nafl3uti u p occur. Hut if Scheil’s reading SHINAR, URO F THE CHALDEES, and HARAN, but with Geshur,
of a fragment of a new Deluge-story is correct the name is Pir- I r Kadesh, and Rehoboth (also with Hauran) necessitates a
mfiati. See DELUGE, 8 2, n. 2, and (I 22. change in the geographical setting of Budde’s theory.
We. De xenii6us, 38, n. 3 : cp Ber. rub& % 25 (on Gen. 2 For tj“ which cannot follow $p, read &n$ but render
529) ‘According to R. Johanan, name and expianation do nor this, not ‘to plough,’hiit ‘to cultivate.’ The same meaning is
tally. Either he named him Noah, or he named him Nabman. required in Job 4 8, Hos. 10x3. Cp Ass. r r c h , ‘to plant, sow,
See further, $ 3. cultivate’; erc.ii(i&i) ‘ tillage’(Am. Tub. 55 I).
110 3125 3426
NOAH NO, NO-AMON
NOAH (m$ ; N O Y [so ~ too in L for Neah Josh. 19 131, As capital of the fourth nonie of Upper Egypt, we
a daughter of Zelophehad (Nu. 2633[374, NOYCA [F]; may assign to Thebes a very high antiquity, though
27 I 36x1 Josh. 173). Probably the name of a town or 2. History. before the eleventh dynasty, which was of
.district; cp N EAH , which, however, was in Zebulun. Theban origin and resided there, it was
See H OGLAH, MENUHAH. nothing more than a mediocre country town. Its
greatness begins with the rise of the New Empire.
NO or NO-AMON ([fiD$] g l ) is the name of a After the expulsion of the Hyksos the eighteenth dynasty
large Egyptian town. 6 in Nah. has ' part of Ammon ' adorned it with temples and palaces which found no
[fiepis Afifiov] ; elsewhere 4 d S rbhts. Vg. equal in antiquity and, even in ruins, claim our highest
Name* AZexernndria (rendering Amon by ' popu- admiration. The nineteenth and twentieth dynasties
-1orum ' : so also AV with ' populous No '). added to its splendour, though some kings now began
The passages are : Nah. 3 8, where the past power and the to reside in the N. of Egypt. The succeeding dynasties
recent downfall of No-Amon are held up as parallel to the neglected Thebes : but it was still the largest city of
future destruction of Nineveh. Jer. 4625 threatens with future Upper Egypt, and the high priests of Amon, residing
punishment 'Amon from No ( N b , Q5 erroneously, sbv A p p o v there, were unrivalled in wealth, even after the failure
( d v ) vibv a&+= 732,Vg. funzulfumAZexandz+), and Pharaoh of their attempt (in 21st dyn. ) to rule the whole country
and Egypt.' Ezek. 30 14-16 mentions No (N6, Hex. in various as Pharaohs. Homer's glowing description of ' hun-
forms) three times, once parallel with Zoan-Tanis,z twice with
S I N [ q . ~ . ] . [On the possibility of going behind the present text,
dred-gated Thebes ' (ZZ.9 382) may date from a much
and recovering an older form of these prophecies see PATHROS,later time. The repeated sieges in the wars between
5 2, PROPHET, 8 39, etc., and C r i t . B < ~ . - T K. . c.'] the Ethiopians and the Assyrians seem to have largely
T h e tradition given by 65-Diospolis ( L e . , Theba?, diminished its population. I t is not certain to which
Thebes in Upper Egypt)-is doubtless correct, as the of these conquests by the Assyrians Nahum's oracle
combination of No with Am(m)on the local god of refers. T h e first-by Esarhaddon in 670- seems to
Thebes sufficiently shows. Nahum, too, distinctly in- have been rather a peaceful occupation : the second by
dicates that the great capital city of Upper Egypt is ASur-bani-pal (667) and the third (663 ?) were accom-
meant ( ' Ethiopia was her strength and Egyptians in- panied by a plundering of the city, and might have
numerable '). Less favourable to the identification is impressed themselves more deeply on the prophet's
the description (n. 8) 'situated among the rivers (or mind, cp u. IO. Cp N AHUM , z ; P ROPHET , 5 39.
Nile-branches ?), that had the waters round about her, There is no evidence or probability that Cambyses
whose rampart was the sea, (and) her wall was of the exhibited himself at Thebes in that character of sense-
sea' (better read: whose strength was the sea- or less destroyer in which he WRS represented to the
waters ? 3 - a n d [e] water her walls). Here the prophet Greeks. The Ptolemies still did some building and
Beems to represent Thebes after the model of most repairing a t Thebes ; but their foundation, Ptolemais
Delta-cities-ie., situated on the plain on an artificial (orPsois, el-Menshiyeh), which becamethe most populous
mound, surrounded by canals. city of Upper Egypt, seems to have contributed much
I t would be difficult to use the term 0: strictly in connection to the decay of the old metropolis. The various great
with Thebes, which had the Nile only on one (the W.) side. revolts against the Ptolemies, especially those under
Thebes may indeed have had moats with water on two other Ptolemy V. Epiphanes and under Ptolemy X. .Soter 11.
sides, hut scarcely to the E. Evidently the prophet was not
acquainted with the locality of the remote city. (Brugsch Did.
(who is reported to have besieged Thebes for 3 [?I years),
Gkogv. 291, insisting on the encircling waters, identified Go with finally, a siege and storming by Cornelius Gallus (29
a city in the NE. of the Delta in which he tried to find Rameses; B. c. ), also an earthquake in 27 B. c . , did much to bring
but his only reason was that Amon once had a temple there.) ruin to the great temples ; the immense population of
T h e Hebrew name No (cp the Hexaplaric form Nois) former times seems to have dwindled down to some
is best elucidated by the Assyrian form Ni-' (+vowel?) scattered villages from zoo B.C. onwards. T o Strabo
i n ASur-bani-pal's reports (see Del. P a r . 318, etc.). ( 2 1 B . C . ) Thehes was only a city of ruins, exactly as now.
The Assyrian Ni is clearly identical with the Egyptian The modern ruins of Luxor, Karnak, and Medamut mark
expression Nt,4 ' t h e city,'-Le., ' the metropolis'- the extension of the city proper from S. to N. T h e
which is actually found on the monument^.^ Probably suburbs on the western bank of the river may, at certain
we should vocalise Ne'e( t). times, have been considerable ; Rameses 111. even seems
to have built his residence at the S. end of this part ( a t
1 Transposing and taking K$ as=n!b. The Hexaplaric Medinet Habu) ; but, in general, the W. side of l h e b e s
versions have h k p (=re) A,.~ov. (called the Meninonia by classical writers) belonged only
2 Cornillreadswith@ Noph=Moph=Memphis inn. 15 instead to the dead and their worship. The long row of temples,
of No. Certainly the threefold repetition of the name without skirting the edge of the arable land like a selvedge, from
ap rent reason is strange and unpoetical. Medinet Habu to Kurnah. served only for the worship
?This connection with the 'sea' led to an ahsurd identifica-
tion with Alexandria--' per anticipationem ' Jerome said. U;, and memory of defunct kings. Behind them, thousands
'sea,' however, can be used of large rivers such as the Nile (Is. of tombs were hewn in the rocks of Drah abu-I-Negga.
195); or we may emend into O:q, 'water.' ShEkh 'am-el-Kurnah, Kurnet-Murrai, etc. The kings
6 The earliest passage seems to he in the had their tombs in more remote valleys (at Biban el-
46x3 Golenischeff papyrus of the twenty-first Mulkk) which could easily be shut off by walls. T h e
dynasty (KPc. Traw. 21, gg) ; Spiegelherg frequent attempt to explain Nahum's description of No
n~ ( o j . c i f . 53) has furnished an example fro?
(as surrounded by the Nile), by the situation of Thebes
ahout the same time. As for the pronunciation, the sign 'city
stood for nwf, n u y f ; the word itself is written ny, z, etc. In on 60th sides, is, consequently, very weak. The ancient
the royal name +ouse'vqr it appears as nd, in a Protocoptic name2 is of uncertain pronunciation, probably to be
text (Ai,1883, p. rog) as NE. On the demotic form which is read W&;e(t).Why the Greeks called the city Thebes
traceable to Roman times cp Griffith, Stories of the High is uncertain ; Lepsius's explanation by the name of the
Priests, 97. Evidently thk Assyrian and Hehrew orthography
represents an earlier form. Cp Brugsch, D i d . Ghagr. 316. quarter of Karnak, 6 p e ( t ) , with the article t-bpe, is
6 Brugsch (G. 2 ~373, . etc.) supposed as the Egyptian proto- highly improbable.
type "if-aa '
e- (i.e., theconsonants nf-'(')t;vocalise
The local divinities of Thebes were the triad Amon
(Ammon of the Greeks, AMOYN in later p r ~ n u n c i a t i o n ) . ~
a1 n Mut (or Maut), and Khonsu. Many other divinities
approximately nc(/)-n [in later pronnnciation]), 'the great city, also had temples there. In earlier times the divinity of
the capital.' The Assyrian transcription would permit also the
reading 'U for '74, necessary for this etymology. The Egyptian 1 See Winckler, A O F 1480.
g.roup of signs, however, is not found for Thehes in the Inscrip-
tions, and the Hehrew orthography, by its close identity with the
Assyrian form, makes it clear that we have no 'Ain at the end.
3427 3128
NOB NOBAH
the neighbouring Hermonthis. Montu, held the first awakened the suspicions of critics. In the present state
3. Divinities. place also in Thebes ; later, Amon ob- of criticism we cannot make any use of Neh. 1132, for
tained pre-eminence and, with the rise the list in which Nob occurs is too probably the com-
of Thebes, became the official chief god of Egypt, a position of the Chronicler, and in v. 32 the mention of
function which he kept till after the time of Alexander. Nob (omitted in BK*A of 6) is evidently suggested by
Thus he was adopted as chief deity even by the Libyan IS. 10 32.
neighbours of Egypt, and the Ethiopians paid him a W e have to ask, therefore, Does the name Nob
fanatical worship as their national god. The Greeks really occur in Is. l o w ? The answer must be in the
accordingly identified him with their supreme god Zeus, negative. In both parts of a. 32 there
and called his city Diospolis magna (in distinction from 3. Criticism are clear indications of corruption.
Diospolis parva in Middle Egypt ; mod. Hii). Amon of Is. 1032.
The text should run ihy: q i 5 # n y x ?
has, when represented in human form, a blue skin, ' on the hill of God he takes his stand,' and at the end
and bears two immense feathers on his head, evidently of the verse the inappropriate and superfluous phrase
in imitation of the earlier god Minu of Koptos. In o h * n y x is a corruption of o . n h nyIi ' hill of God,'
animal form he is represented as a ram, mostly distin- which was originally a marginal correction of the faulty
guished by the sun-disk on his head, thus indicating reading which opens v. 9. Was there any specially
his solar nature (which, of course, is secondary). On sacred hill in the line of march between Geba (now
the vehement persecution of Amon by Amenhotep IV., Ieba') and Jerusalem ? Of course, it has to be very near
who even tried to erase the name Amon on all earlier the city. There is one-the northern summit of the
monuments, see E GYPT , S 56. Mt. of Olives, identified elsewhere (see D ESTRUCTION ,
A description of the remarkable ruins of Thehes, among which
the great temple of Karnak (chiefly the work of Thotmes III.), M OUNT O F ) as ' the summit where one worships God '
that of Luxor (huilt by Rameses Il.), and that of Medinet-Habu ( 2 S. 15 32) and ' the mountain of those who worship'
(Rameses 111.) are the most remarkable, cannot be given here. (zK. 2 3 1 3 emended text). It is noteworthy that Dean
W. M. M. Stanley (Sin. and Pal. 187) had already proposed this
NOB (2j; NOMBA [BL], NOBA [A]; but in I S . summit as the site of the city of Nob. Probably there
2211 NOM,!A& [B], NoBae [A]). The name occurs in were houses near the sanctuary ; but there is no evidence
1. Name, the story of David's wanderings ( I S . 21 I [z], of the existence of a town there.
2 2 9 II 19), also in a vivid prophecy commonly Nob is also said to be referred to in I S. 211 20919.
assigned to Isaiah ( I s . l O p ) , and in a list of Benjamite I n the first two passages, however, the Hebrew text has
cities (Neh. 1132). There is also probable evidence of 5. 7 3 , which it is arbitrary to explain as
the existence of such a name elsewhere than in Benjamin 4, in meaning ' t o Nob ' (with the locative
(cp Guerin, Judde, 3349). ending), because not only here, but also in 22 I I 19 Q re-
W e find a Nd, N E of Fik in JaulZn, on the road to cognises a dissyllabic name. One is at first inclined
Damascus and a BZt N?ida alittie to the right of Yrila(Aijalon),
which Roilinson identifies'with the @ToavvaB or Bethannaba to read the name Nubbah and to identify the place with
of Eusebius and Jerome (USPI 218, 4 6 ; 90, q),four (or, as Bet Niiba (see above) ; but the situation of E t Niiba is
moPt said eight) R. m. E. of Lbdda ( B R 364); Eusebius and unsuitable ; the ' priests' city ' ( I S. 22 1 g j cannot hare
Jerome themselves, indeed connect this name with the Anab of
Josh. l l z r 1550, but are'in error (see ANAR). Jerome else- been very far from Gibeah of Saul (I S. 229). Poels
where mentions aplace called Nobe (cp M T in I S. 21 I n?i), near (see reference below) thinks that Nob was the name of
Lvdda, which he identifies with Noh the city of the priests (see the summit, on which the sanctuary of Yahwe stood,
B E , I.c.; Buhl, 198, and cp ISHBI-BENOB,NKRO). and that towns (viz., Gibeon and Kirjath-jearim) stood
If the name Nob (hitherto unexplained) is really a on either side of this bill. This is too boid, but points
mutilation of 'Anab, ' grape-town,' as suggested else- in the right direction. Plainly Gibeon is meant.
where (see A T H A C H ) , we cannot he surprised at finding is a corruption of n y ~orl p 3 3 ; from 2 S. 21 6(We., Dr.,
the name in different parts of the country. Bu., Lohr, also H. P. Sm., read n r n ' i a ~pyx13 we learn that
'The rather difficult task remains, however, of identify- Giheon stood on or near 'amountain of Yahwe.' Poels acutely
points out that the dread act of vengeance in 2 S. 21 which was
ing the Noh mentioned in I S., Is., and Neh. I t may too important a n event t o have escaped record id the life of
2. Identification. be plausibly inferred from Is. 1032 (6 Saul, must have been the massacre related in I S. 22. 'In
<v [75]66y) [corrupt]) and Neh. 1132 Gibeon, on the mountain of Yahws,' the offence of Saul was
(vop [KC.aml..inf.LlBK*A om. ) that Nob must have lain expiated by his children.
Nob, therefore, the ' city of the priests,' where Ahime-
a little to the N.o<Jerusalem, between 'Anntii (Anathoth)
lech of the house of Eli ministered (I S . 211 cp 143),
on the E. and Bit f?uninri (Hananiah) on the W. W e
and where David deposited the sword 0: Goliath (In
require some high point from w!iich Jerusalem shall be
I S. 1 7 5 4 l ' i n his tent' should be ' i n the tent of
visible ; et-'Zsiwijeh, which has been proposed by
Yahwe ' '9 h 3 ) , was Gibeon, where, according to tradi-
Kiepert and others (cp Baed.PJ 117f.), will therefore
tion, was ' t h e greatest high place' ( I K. 3 4 ) . S o
not do - indeed, this place corresponds rather to
inferior sanctuary can be intended ; no other name than
LAISHAH
(4.v.).
Gibeon (or Gibeah) can be the original of the mutilated
T h e tivourite sites are ( I ) on the ridge on the N. side of the
upper Kidron valley (SW of el-'ls5wiyeh), called by the Arabs and corrupted form Noh. This view will be confirmed
Fady, 'breast ' (see Valentiner, ZUMG 12 1% ; Miihlau i n if the view presented elsewhere respecting the Shiloh
Riehm, W W 6 ) : (2) the hill of Scopus (or m & w = D ' ? S ) from where Eli ministered be accepted. See GOB, SHILOII.
which Titus and his legions looked down on the Holy City Resides the usual helps, cp H. A. Poels, L e sanctuairc Lfe
(Wilson, PEFQ. 1875, p.95; Huhl); and (3) the village of k'irjafh+arinr: dtude SUY le lie u de cwlfe, etc. (Louvain, 1894).
Shu;frit, on the hill to the left of Scopus, where Gukrir. placed
the ancient hlizpah (Grove in Smith, D B ; Conder, PEFQ, NOBAH (n2j ; Judg., NABAI IBIS-e@[A], -BE [Ll ;
1875, P. 1%). Nu., -Bay, [BAL]. NOH [Vg.]).
There bas, however, perhaps been a fault of method I . A (Manassite?) clan nhich conquered K E N A T H ,
in the investigation as hitherto pursued, and the fact and gave it the name of Nobah (Nu. 3242). Cp M A N -
that there is no trace of the name Nob either in the 4SSEH, § 9.
lists of priestly cities, or (except in a passage which 2. A place on Gideon's route in his pursuit of the
must refer to the NE. of Palestine) iii the Talmud,2 or Manassite kings (Judg. 811). Though it is mentioned
in the modern Palestinian topography, ought to have ogether with Jogbehah, this does not prove that the two
,laces were near each other. See G IDEON , 5 2. where
1 The etymology of the name ('the hidden one') which the
priests of the latest time assumed, certainly does not give the 'eason is given for accepting the view that Nobah is
original meaning. Perhaps, like the representation (see above, he mod. /innmuit, in Haursn, NW. of Salhad (see
B 3). the name has some connection with the god Minu of Coptos. KENATH) ; old names have a tendency to reappear.
Unaccented, it becomes Amen. T h e Amarna tablets write
Amanu. T. K. C .
2 See N a b . G&Y. 23 ; Buhl, 96. 1 ' To Jerusalem ' should be to Saul ' ($in&.
3429 3430
NOBAI NOPH
NOBAI (pb,Kt., or Neb& $3’3, Kr. ; BW NAI [BK], of the principal cities of Egypt. Thus in Is. 1 9 1 3 it b
w $ a r [AL] one of the signatories of the covenant (Neh. 1019); parallel with Zoan-Tanis, in Jer. 216 with
He corresdonds to the fifty-two ‘men of the other N e b Name‘ Tahpanhes, which proves that it must h a r e
(Neh. 733), or ‘of the other Nob’ (Meyer). ‘Nobai’ should belonged to northern Egypt. Jer. 44 I , enumerating
either he ‘Gibeon’ (Pp),or better-see N ~ ~ ~ - ‘ N e d a h i ’ the places where colonies of fugitive Jews had been
(’??J). T. K. C.
formed in Egypt, proceeds from N. to S. (Migdol,
NOBLES. T h e rendering of :- Tahpanhes. Noph, Pathros) ; Ezek. 3016 (Sin [read
I. O ’ Y @ r h (lit. ‘free,’ an Aramaism). The ‘elders and Syene ?], No, Noph) seems to arrange from S. to N.
nobles’ of Jezreel are twice referred to in the story of Naboth’s Hitzi Smend, and Cornill try, however to correct the name
here. reads its consonants but does not)recognise the name ;
judicial murder (I K. 21 8 11, where Ki. regards Pin? as a late Memphis, however, in Ql!g. (see Swete) Sym. Vg. Syr. On
post-exilic gloss, but cp Dr. fntr.W 188); and the ‘nobles and the other hand, Corndl wishes with @ to read Noph, v. 15
rulers ’ of Jerusalem are frequently conioined in the narrative instead of No, so that Noph would stand parallel with Sin.
of Nehemiah (Neh. 2 16 4 8 13 [14 191 5 7 75). As Wellhausen Jer. 4 6 1 4 (Migdol, Noph, Tahpanhes) does not seem
(fjG(’J1, 19.)and Meyer (Ent. 132) have pointed out, hlrirn and
sr,anim (O~JJD) seem to he used as convertible terms (Neb. to be arranged in strict geographical order ; but the
6 17 compared with 1240, 13 I I with 13 17). In Is. 34 12 (400 repetition of the statement that Noph belonged to those
B.C. or later) reference is made to the / r d f i r n of Edom, and in cities in which the exiled Jews settled is important,
Eccles. 10 17 the land is said to,be happy whose king is ‘the son confirming the position near the Eastern frontier of
of nobles,’ RVmg. ‘a free man. (6 renders &rcpor, except in
I K. 218 II [A; om. B], Neh. 13 17 Eccles. 10 17 ;Ae$Ofpor, and Egypt. Ezek. 3 0 1 3 mentions it, evidently, as the most
Is. 34 12.) See further, G OVERNMENT, 0 26. important city where ‘ t h e princes of Egypt ’ reside.
2.,!:?’O addirzrn ( J i i ~ ‘to, be wide, great ’), are referred All this points to Memphis, which the versions read for
fo in Nah. 2 6 (EV ‘worthies’ A V w . ‘gallants’) 318 (RV Noph throughout. Strangely, the correct orthography
worthies,’ AVmg. ‘gallant onis ’) Jer. 14 3 (Judah and Jeru- is found in M T only in one passage, Hos. 96, where
salem) Jer. 253436 (figurative) 3021 (RV ‘prince’) Zech. 11 I Moph (+-only here-AV M EMPHIS , following the
Neh. 35 (of Tekoa) 1030. The nobles of Judah took part with
the ,‘captains of hundreds’ and the ‘governors’ at the corona- versions) is the principal city or, perhaps, the political
tion of Joash (2 Ch. 23 20). @ has p L V T ~ V ~ thrice, S iqupd- capital of Egypt to which the Jews shall be led back.
q m r once, 8uvaroi (2 Ch.), Suvaurac &ah. 3 18), and dswpqe~ [On the (possible) underlying text see P ATHROS , 5 2.
[BNI, -PV [AI (Neb. 3 5). PROPHET, and Cht. Rib.-T. K. C.1
3. D’QRB, purtenrirnfcpPers.frutumu, ‘first’ ; but Sym. and The consonants Noph of MT were defended by de Rouge
Pesh. translate ‘ Parthians,’ and the originality of the reading (Rev. ArcMoL. New Ser. viii. 127. Lenormant, 1 I 2 2 ~ 1 5 ’
’9 IS strongly questioned in C r i f . Bi6.) Dan. 1 3 (AV ‘ princes ’) E. Meyer, G x , I350), who tried to &plain Noph as Napata.‘
Esth. 1 3 69. (6 h a Bv806or in Esth.’; in Dan. e a U ~ r ~ [cod. or This ought, however, to have the ending -t, i l r ; moreover
871, + o ~ @ o ~ ~ [ F ] L Ysop.
. [BQI?, A Theod.].) Noph is a city of Egypt, not of Ethiopia; no Jews would fl4
4, 5. l’??, nd@ (Job 29 IO), yi],nridi6 (Nu. 21 18,etc.). See to Napata, etc.
P RINCE. T h e name of the city’ is written in EgyptianMn-nfr?
6, 7, 8. O’F??, d?&n (Ex. 24 I r , ‘the chosen ones’? but see vocalise M e a - n o ~ e r later
, Men-nufe or shortened Men-
nefe, Menfe. This abbreviation was borrowed by other
BDB, s.v.), %lz, gEddZ, lit. ‘great one’uon. 3 7),’13JJ, nikA&,
nations as MQp@ts (RiIwqhr on coins ; cp Targumic
lit. ‘honoured one’ (Ps. 1498, cp Is. 2 3 8 s ) .
ML‘phis),Assyrian &fernpi, il4impi. T h e Copts wrote
9. ,?!’lC h&+ih, Is. 43 14. See SBOT,‘Is.’, Heh. ed., udZoc. Menbe, Membe, &fernc, Mefee, whence Arabic Manj
LO. ?’.m-zir,I& Lam. 4 7, RV ; see NAZIRITE, g 3. (sometimes Munf?) and later M @ c . ~ Thus we should
The NT terms are : expect the pronunciation Mtph in Hebrew ; the present
11. @ V L A M ~ S , Jn. 4 46, lit. ‘king’s officer ’ so RVmg. and
12. e i y v r i s , Lk. 19 12, EV nobleman (in )oh 13, @ for no. 7).
punctuation M6ph, N6ph needs e ~ p l a n a t i o n . ~On the
etymology in Egyptian, see below (5 2).
NOD (Yb),Gen. 416. See C AIN . Memphis is one of the most ancient cities of Egypt-
NODAB (2YJ; N A A ~ B A I W N [BAI. NHAAB. KAI that is to say, a small city, called < the White Wall ’
N ~ A I B A I W N [L]), the name of a tribe which adjoined 2. origin.(cp Herod. 3 9 1 , Thuc. 1104), stood there in
the trans-Jordanic Israelites, I Ch. 519 (see H AGRITES ). the earliest times as the capital of the first
It is mentioned together with Jetur and Naphish, who nomos of Lower Egypt. In it stood the temple of
in Gen. 2 5 1 5 [PI and I Ch. 131, are two of the last three Ptah which gave the city (and later Memphis) the sacred
sonsof Ishmael, thelast-namedson beingKedemah(g. v. ). name Hu(t)-Ka-pta+,’ temple of P t a h s likeness,’ whence
Very possibly 3111, Nodab. is equivalent to 3-13, Nadab, the name ‘ Egypt ’ seems to be derived (cp EGYPT, § I ).
a Jerahmeelite name. Kedemah, being doubtless a T h e antiquity of the temple and of the quarter of
corruption of Jerahmeel (see K ADMONITES , REKIM), is Memphis in which it stood was p r ~ v e r b i a l . ~T h e later
a fitting alternative for Nodab.’ Blau ventures to find Egyptians used to call king Menes the founder (Herod.
a n echo of Nodab in the village Nud26e. SE. of the 2 9 9 ) . and that claim is observable already on inscrip-
Basra in Haurgn. *r.K. c. tions of the nineteenth dynasty.6 Whether it is his-
torical truth may remain an open question ; Herodotus’
N O E ( N W ~ [ T ~ . W H ]Lk.336,etc.,RVNo~~(p.v.).
), report of Menes’ making a large dyke, 100 stadia S. of
NOEBA (NO&& [BA]), I Esd. 5 3 1 = Ezra 2 4 8 , Memphis, is certainly erroneous. It is questionable
NEKODA,I . whether any kings resided in the vicinity before the
third dynasty. Manetho calls the third dynasty Mem-
NOGAH (3Jj, as if sunrise,’ § 72),a son of David, phitic, and, to judge from the pyramid of king Zoser
I Ch.37 1 4 6 (vayar -ye8 [B] vaye -0 [AI, -7 [14a(n)l; vrrp, a t Sakkiirah, its kings built very near Memphis. We
vnye [Ll). In the p k l l e l lisfla S. S’the name IS omitted in MT
(similarly B B A ) , it is supplied in L ( v a y d ) and in B s second can then, with the following Memphitic ‘ dynasties of
list (“ayes); cp ELIMELET, I , and see D AVID , 5 I T n. Manbtho, notice a continual shifting of the royal palaces
NOHaH(;l@, ‘rest’ ; IWA P I , N W A [A], NOYAA and court-cities (traceable now only by the pyramids
which were built W. of those residences) in that region
[L]), a name in a genealogy of B EN J AMIN (9.v.. 5 9,
ii. p ) , I Ch. 82 ; perhaps corrupted from Naaman (cp 1 Brugsch, Did. G h g . 259.
J Q R 1119). C p M ENUHAH . I A

NON ($), I Ch. 727. See N UN .


NOOMA ( NOOMA [A]), I Esd. 935 RV=Ezra 1 0 4 3 , 3 See L. Stern, Z A , 1885, p. 148.
NEBO, IV. 4 After t h e analogy of No? may also have become *qq
and then *+ whence 7j.
NOPH (95) occurs frequently in the prophets as one 5 Cp Pap. Anastasi, iv. 63.
6 2.4 30, 1892, p. 44, calling the god ‘the Ptah of Men-na.’
1 Precisely so the improbable nriy in Ps.22 25 [a41 may be a n What name is intended by the Uchoreus whom Diodorus calls
emor for npyIrl. the fouqder of Memphis is uncertain.
3431 3432
NOPH NUMBER
from Medhn in the S. to Abu-RoZsh in the N. Finally, material. Thus the ruins of Memphis, still described by ‘AM
the great king Pepy (Apopy?) I. of the sixth dynasty el-latif (about IZW A.D.)and Abulfeda as very remarkable hare
built his tomb and city directly W. of the ‘White disappeared almost entirely. Of the city itself nothibg of
general interest remains but two large fallen monolithic statues
W a l l ’ ; and this city lasted and imparted its name tc of Rameses 11 probably identical with the statues described
the resulting complex of earlier and later settlements. by Herodotus &d Strabo as flanking the entrance to the great
From that time dates the history of Memphis, under temple of Ptah. The immense necropolis, on the border of t h e
desert has been better preserved, containing the three great
the classical name-ie., from the time when the pyramid pyradids and smaller remnants of some forty others, t h e
Men-n&-, a good- resting,’ was erected. Although mysterious, gigantic sphinx of Gizeh, and thousands of tombs
the old temple of Ptah-Hephzrstus and the surrounding (although the earliest and most remarkable of these monuments
did not belong to Memphis proper; see above).
quarter, forming a kind of citadel by its separate wall,
W. M. M.
was always recognised as the city proper and furnished
the religious name (see above), the new name Men- NOPHAH (ngj), a place in Moab, mentioned with
xefe(r), even in the latest time, always written with the Medeba in Nu. 21 30.1.
sign of the pyramid, prevailed. The text, however, is very uncertain. QE has rrai al ~ V V & K E C
Memphis was situated some I O m. S . of modern (a&w) k r rrpou&Cavuav =Gp i d M o a @ : i.e., no, becomes lnB1.
Cairo, W. of the Nile. By position, between northern Delitzsch, Dillmann, and Strack prefer WR n?: ly ‘ s o that fire
and southern Egypt, near the S . end of the Delta, it was was kindled as far as Medeba,’ whilst G. A. Smith (HG, 560).
well suited for being the capital. The mounds a t the suggests n p y , and changes W?,’D l y to l??p-$e‘on the
modern villages of Mit - Rahineh a and el -Bedrashen desert ’ (cp Pesh.).
mark the principal part of Memphis : that it really ran NORTH, NORTH QUARTER, NORTH [UTTER-
150 stadia from N. to S. (Diodorus) is doubtful. The MOST PARTS OF THE] NORTH WIND. See E ARTH
mounds of Abadiyeh and En-Nagiziyeh seem to mark [F OUR Q UARTERS o ~ ] , a n d W ’ i ~ m
akOCONGREGATlON
; [MOUNT
the N. end of the city proper. Besides the quarter OF], and Cp BAAL-ZEPHON, I.

mentioned above, we read of those of ‘ t h e Southern NOSE JEWEL (qy? DQ), Is. 321,and Nose-ring
wall,’ of ‘ t h e balance of both countries,’ of ‘ t h e life of (PI?), Jndg. 8 24 RVmg., EV ‘ earring,’ Exod. 35 22 RVmg., EV
both countries.’ ‘ The life of both countries,’ situated
‘earring.’ See RING.
on the bank of the river, contained, around the temple
of Ptah Nefer-ho ( L e . , ‘fair of face’), a Phcenician NOVICE ( NEO+YTOC ; neqhytus; I Tim. 36t). A
settlement, with a temple of the ‘ foreign Aphrodite ’ better rendering would be ‘ neophyte,’ literally ‘ newly
( =Astarte ?). T h e description in Herod. 2 112 does planted,’ ‘newly put forth,’ ‘a fresh sprout.’ T h e
not enable us to determine whether this ‘camp of the meaning is, as AVmS has it, ‘one newly come to the
Tyrians ’ was a bazaar of the foreign traders or a colony faith.‘ The metaphor is sufficiently explained by the
of deported captives given to the temple as serfs. T h e use of v e 6 ~ v s o vto render pa?, n&a‘, n‘yp,~, ncfi‘im, in
many divinities and sanctuaries to which the inscriptions Job 149 Ps. 14412Is. 5 7 , and ht,JithiZ, in Ps. 1283.
and the classical writers refer cannot be enumerated ve6@. is used by Aristophanes (Pollux) : also in Egyptian
completely here. They include the local divinity Ptah papyri of second century A.D. (Deissmann. Neue Bi6ei-
(figiired in human form, usually standing, and explained studien, 48).
as the ‘divine workmaster,’ and creator of the world The classical adjective w i c i u s , almost equivalent to n m u ,
as demiurgos), who had three different forms and three and applied to new wine to a slave who has recently lost his
Iarge temples here. Sokaris was the local god of the freedom, and the like, decame, in ecclesiastical language, the
technical term for acandidate for admission toaccmobium, whilst
western part, therefore of the necropblis (near the ncoplryfe was applied to all the newly baptised (Y(+TLUTOL).
modern SakkZrah. which name is, possibly, the same
as Sokaris; cp ISSACHAK, 6). The latest theology NUMBER. T h e Hebrews, like the other Semites,
expressed numbers by the decimal system. That system
tried to find the emanation of the combined Ptah-
1. Ths Ssmite was devised before the separation of the
Sokaris-Osiris in the famous Apis (/lap)bull. Origin-
Semites from the Hamites, since it is
ally, this black bull with various mysterious marks, system of common to all the Semitic peoples and
afier whose death a search for a successor was held
throughout all Egypt, sometimes for a long time, must
numbers’ to the hieroglyphic -.. Egyptian.
-.. The
names even of some of the numerals are the same in the
have been a separate local divinity.3
Memphis was the most important city of Egypt and two families of languages.
Thus in Semitic ‘ t w o ’ is expressed by the root &, fa,&,
the principal royal residence until the rise of the eight- in Old Egyptian, Coptic, and TamaSeq by sn: ‘six’ in Semitic
3. History. eenth (Theban) dynasty. The kings of by the root (contracted [except In Ethiopicl-eg., Heb.
the eighteenth dynasty began to neglect Si), in Hamitic by sds (which appears in Tamdeq though con-
tracted in Egyptian to s ~ ) :‘seven’ in N. Sem& by SF, S.
Memphis ; but they still resided there occasionally, and Semiticsb’,Egyptian sf& ‘eight,’SemiticSmn,smn, tmn, &m,
the second place among all Egyptian cities remained Coptic, smn; ‘ nine,’ N. Semitic tE‘, S. Semitic ts‘, TamaLq
undisputed to it. It does not seem that the storniing tzz’.
by the Ethiopian P[i]‘ankhy, by the Assyrians, by The method of treatment also is the same; in both
Cambyses, etc., depopulated it very much. It outlived the tens are formed from the units by using the plural
Thebes and Says, and continued to be populous among Df the former.’
the Ptolemies, who treated it as a kind of second capital, The native Hamitic system is, therefore, the decimal.
although Alexandria drew off all wealth from it. They Behind this there lay a quintal system based on the fingers of
even were crowned there (cp Rosetta Inscription, 1. 7, ,ne hand. This is still found in some of the languages of the
more backward of the Hamitic races, ~5 the Bedza, Biliu, and
etc.) as pharaohs. Sinking very slowly in population, Chamir (cp Miiller, op. cit., 306). In the Semito-Egyptian group
Memphis survived as a city until the Arab conquerors [he decimal system had developed before their separation.
built a new capital very near i t , on the opposite bank The Sumerian system of numbers was sexagesimxl.
of the Nile, as Fostat or Old Cairo. The measurements of time in Babylonia, where day and night
This completed the depopulation of Memphis. The stones were divided into six equal parts, cannot, as lhering has pointed
of its old palaces and temples were conveyed to the new capital : >ut, have arken among a people who used the decimal system,
modern Cairo, too, has been very largely built with such lot therefore among Semites. His theory that these divisions
,f ;ime aros; in keeping the time of labourers2 is, however,
1 Also the etymology mnw.nyr, ‘good monument,’ occurs
,uperficial. There are sexagesimal systems in many parts of the
Petrie, Ilendereh, vii. 13 I). Later etymoloqies like 6 p p s
~~ ___
{=m,, Coptic mone) b aOiv ( n f n u ) or T+OF ’OuiprSos (as ‘the 1 Cp Erman in ZDMG 4693-129, and his Xgyjtischc
good god ’), given by Prutarch (de Iside, 20)) are worthless. 7ramtnatik, 14;-147; Steindorff,Kojtische Gramnrafih,157fl;
From a n Egyptian n a m e meaning ‘alley of sphinxes’ (after Brugsch, Guamn/aire HiProglyphigue, 32-35 ; Zimmern, Vcr-
W.Spiegelherg). One of the mounds is said still to have the rleichtnde Gramtnatik dersrmitischen Sjrachen, 179.182 ; and
name Tel(l)-Munf. Friedr. Miiller, Gnrndriss der S#rac/rwissenrchujt, Bd. Ill.,
d The Apis-tombs near Sakknrah were discovered by Mariette 4ht. II., 305.
in 1851. 2 Cp Ihering, Evolution ofAryan, 1 2 1 8

3433 3434
NUMBER NUMBER
world. They originate in a mystical addition of zenith and T h e sacredness of four (y;?~, arbu'; Syr. ar6a';
nadir to the four points of the compass.1
duuapes) was probably derived 'from the fact that the
As the early Semitic Babylonians borrowed their 4. Four. compass has four cardinal points. I t is re-
system of writing from the Sumerians, they also to some garded as sacred in widely different parts of
extent borrowed this system of numbers. From the the world more often than any other number (cp Amer.
period of the oldest known writing, the Semites, who Anthrop. 1155). C p the Bab. phrase 'the four quarters
appear to have been In Babylonia in prehistoric times, of the world' (Kibrut i d i f f a ,see E ARTH , I ) ; and in
mingled elements from their decimal system with the connection with this note the Hebrew ideas about the
sexagesimaL This is shown by the presence of a special four winds (see W INDS) and the singular theory of the
sign for ten.2 I n later inscriptiotis the decimal system origin of the name Adam in Or. Si6. 324-26, SZuv.
gradually supplants the other. Thus in the Mesopo- En.3013f: (ed. Charles, 41). T h e number came to
tamian valley the native Semitic system reasserted itself. denote completeness or sufficiency, which accounts for
Among the Hebrews, so far as we know, it was the many biblical details. Thus there are four rivers of
system always in use ; but before the time of the Macca- paradise (Gen. 210) ; Jephthah's daughter is bewailed
2. The Hebrew bees there is no evidence that the four days (Judg. 1140); Nehemiah's enemies sent to him
Hebrews expressed numbers by figures. four times (Neh. 64) ; God sends four kinds of pestilence
system. Numbers were, during these centuries, (Jer. 153) or four sore judgments (Ezek. 1421) ; four
written in words. This is the case-on the Moabite horns scatter Judah (Zech. 1IS$) ; four angels of
Stone, in the Siloam Inscription, and throughout the destruction are sent from heaven (Rev. 9 13-15).
OT, including the Book of Daniel. In later Hebrew T h e number four is used similarly (though by no
numbers were expressed by letters of the alphabet ; but means exclusively) in the measurements of sacred furni-
no such notation for numerals as that used by the ture-e.g., in Solomon's temple ( I K. 7). in Ezekiel's
Phoenicians appears among the Hebrews3 temple (Ezek. 41-43), in the tabernacle of the P docu-
At an early time in the history of man certain numbers ment (Ex. 2 5 3 and 3 6 8 ) .
were regarded as having a sacred significance. In this In like manner the guardians or bearers of the throne
respect the Hebrews were no exception. Three, four, of God appeared in fours to different seers (Ezek. 1 and
seven, ten, twelve, forty, and seventy were either sacred 10 Eth. En. 4028 Rev. 468 56814 6 1157 194).
or had a symbolical force. Multiples of four were also used. Thus we have twenty-eight
Three ,@t( SciZZ; Syr. PZdh, ~ p & ) is the simplest of in the measurement of the curtains of the tabernacle, forty as
indicated helow (8 8) four hundred used to express the idea of a
these numbers, and was widely considered sacred. I t was large number (Gen. i5 13 Judg. 21 12 and often), and 4w,am in
3. Three. so regarded by the Babylonians before the great exaggerations(Judg. 202 77 2 Ch. 13 3).
birth of the Hebrew people, and its sacred Seven (v~p, St%'; Syr. Se6u", &d), the most sacred
character in Israel may be due to Babylonian number of the Hebrews, was also sacred among the
influence, unless-as is probably the case-it goes
much farther back to primitive Semitic society. One of
the earliest indications of it in Babylonia is the great
'' Babylonians, where seven planets were
seven' known and each represented a god,' where
there were seven evil spirits,2 and the underworld was
triad of gods, Anu, Bel, and Ea, which appears in the surrounded by seven walls.3
inscriptions of Gudea, about 3000 B.c. They represent The greetings in the Amarna tablets show that
respectively heaven, earth, and ~ a t e r . ~ seven had a sacred significance in Palestine at a n
Probably the origin of the sacredness of the number early date, and indicate that it was also sacred in
three is to be found in the fact that to primitive man the Egypt. W e know that it was held sacred in India by
universe appeared to be divided into the three regions the Vedic people (Hopkins. op. cit.). T h e sacredness
represented by these gods. This cause rendered the of seven probably originated in the fact that it is the
number sacred among the Vedic peoples of India.5 sum of three and four, but among the Babylonians a
Its sacred or symbolical use among the Hebrews the great impetus must have been given to its use by the
following instances will illustrate :-David is given the fact that there were seven sacred planets ; by the influ-
choice of three. plagues into each of which the number ence of Babylon it became very popular with other
three enters ( z S. 24 13 I Ch. 21 1 2 ) ; Elijah stretches Semites.
himself on the dead child three times ( I K. 1721);Daniel Ihering (Evolution of fhe Aryan, 113) holds that the Sabbath
prays three times a day (Dan. 6 I O ) ; Tartarus is divided was of Babylonian origin and arose from the sexagesimal system,
into three parts (Eth. En. 2 z 9 ) ; there are three princes which we have seen was native with the Sumerians. They
worked six days and rested the seventh. If this he true, possibly
of Persia ( I Esd. 3 9) ; Ezra waits three days for a vision we should see in it the primary cause of the sacredness of seven.
( z [4] Esd. 1358 1 4 1 ) ; the plagues of the Apocalypse Cp SABBATH. Some anthropologists hold that seven arose from
destroy a third of all that they attack (Rev. 8 9 and a sacred six by the addition of unity (cp M'Gee, o#. cit. 6 6 3 J ) .
12) ; the twelve gates of the heavenly city face three The most liberal application of the number seven
towards each of the points of the compass (Eth. En. 34 2 among the Hebrews is found in comparatively late Apoca-
35 I and 36 1-2, also Rev. 21 13) ; and a t last the divine lypses, where direct Babylonian influence is probable-
nature is under the same influence conceived by the early e.g., the seven planets appear (Slav. En. 273) ; seven
Christians as a trinity (Mt. 28 19); planetarydeities(Eth. En.213-6);there are seven heavens,
Multiples of sacred numbers came in time to have a sacred or one for each planet ( S h v . En. 3 to 20) ; Seven circles of
symbolic character as twenty-one (Eth. En. 69 z), thirty (Slav. heaven (Slav. En. 481) ; then the earth and moon are
En. 36 I J ) , t h i r t y k x (Eth. En. 90 I ), and many others. Con- divided into seven corresponding parts (Eth. En. 735-8 ;
nected with t h e symbolic character of three is its use to indicate z [4] Esd. 6 5 0 5 2 ) . T h e week of seven days, early associ-
that a course of action or a series of events has passed a normal
point (Am. 1and 2 Prov. 30 15-31 and z Esd. 16 29-31). ated with the seven planets,4 gave to P the idea of the
creative week (Gen. 11-23). From these came the notion
1 Cp M'Gee in Anrerican Anthro#oZogist, 16568 that seven enters into the constitution of man-he is
2 Cp the Blau Monuments Ani. Journ. of Arch. new ser. made of seven substances and has seven natures (Slav.
4 pl. iv. v., and ] A O S 22 ;18&, also Cuneifom Texts .f En. 308f.). Corresponding to this is the conception
British Museum, pts. i. iii. v. vii. ix. and x. #passim, and the
-
inscription of Mainshtu irba in Scheil's Tcxtes Plamites ~
that there are seven rivers in the world and seven islands,
sinritiques. and that frosts come from seven mountains (Eth. En.
3 See Lidzbarski Novdsem. E#igr. 1 1 9 8 77 4-8).
4 Cp Jastrow's keligion of BaJylonia and Assyria, 1078;
and King's EaJyZoyan ReZiDm, 14.
5 Cp Hopkins The Holy Numbers of the Kig Veda,' in 1 Jensen's Kosmologie, 1 0 1 8
Oriental Sfudiei o / f h e Oriental Club ofPhiLade(phia, 1 4 T 8 2 Jastrow, o j . cit., 264.
6 MT in 2 S. 24 13 reads ' seven years ;hut thls, as Houbigant eremias, Bab.-Ass. VorsfeZlzingenvom Leben nach dem
saw long ago (1777), and all recent critics agree, is a mistake for T:d! 15.
three,' which Q3and Ch. have preserved. 4 jensen, loc. cif. ; Gunkel, Schd#fung und Chaos, 301.

3435 3436
NUMBER NUMBER
T h e sacred character of seven shows itself in every in the mount forty days (Ex. 2418 3428) ; Elijah fasted
period of the Hebrew ritual; we hear of seven altars forty days ( I K. 198) ; Christ did the same (Mt. 4 2
built, seven sacred wells, seven lamps, blood is sprinkled Mk. 113 Lk. 4 ~ f).; and the ascension occurred after
s e w n times, etc. (Gen. 7 2 1 . 2128-30 I K. 1843 Dt. 169 forty days (Acts 1 3 ) .
Ezek. 4022 41 3 Lev. 14 Nu. 23 and 29 passim, and Seventy ( n - p w , f i b ' i m ; Syr. Sab'in, 2/36op$Kovra) has
elsewhere). C p BEER-SHEBA, 3 ; WRS Hel.Sem.(2), a sacred or symbolical meaning in five cases. Seventy
181f. 9. Seventy. palm trees grow in a n old sacred spot
Closely connected with this is the thought that seven days is (Ex. 1527); here 7 x IO seems to be the,
a sacred or fittinq period of time (cp Gen. 8 10 12 50 IO Exod. 7 25
Lev. 8 33 Dt. 16 4 Josh. Gpassinr, Ps.12 6 [71 Apoc. Bar. 20 5 2 141 origin of the number ; seventy elders of Israel g o u p
Ead. 7 3 o f . Acts 21 4 27 Heb. 11 30, etc.). into the mount (Ex.241 9, J ) , and out to the tent (Nu.
From this usage seven came to express a complete or round I l z 4 $ , E ) ; in the latter passage Eldad and Medad
:umber(JoblzMic.5sEsth.l102g 1Esd.SbToh.38 ~ M a c c .
etc.).
t I M t . 2 2 z ~ - ~ 8 M k . l 2 ~ 0 - ~ 3 ~ c t s 6 3 1 9 1 4Once (Dt.71) (an. 26f.) make up the number to seventy-two ; 6 x 12
seven is equated with ' many. or six for each tribe is, therefore, probably its origin here,
T e n (ig, 'Liey; Syr. 'Zsar, &%a) had acertain symbolic though the former explanation is also possible if
character, in part because it was the basis of the decimal Eldad and Medad are not included ; seventy ' souls ' go
6. Ten. system, and in part because it is the sum of down to Egypt (Gen. 4627 Ex. 1 s ( P ) and Dt. 1022 : in
three and seven.' Its simplest use is to denote these passages the number is made u p artificially to the
a round or complete number, as ten lambs, ten shekels. ideal 7 x I O ) ; seventy years (Jer. 25 I I J ) , or weeks of
ten men, ten virgins, ten talents, etc. This usage years (Dan. 9 2 4 $ ) , must elapse before the restoration
runs through both Or and N T (cp, e.g., Gen. 21 I O 22 of the kingdom ( L e . , 7 x I O years) ; and seventy dis-
Josh. 2214 Judg. 1710 z K. 209-11 Job 193 Jer.4128 ciples are sent forth (Lk. 101 17). On the seventy, or
2 [4] Esd. 5 46 Rft. 2.5 I 28 Lk. 19 passim, Rev. 2 I O etc. ).
seventy-one, or seventy-two peoples of the Table of
A more sacred use of ten is found in the ritual. Not Nations (Gen. l o ) , and on subsequent Jewish and Chris-
only were there tithes, but also sacrifices and manyimple-
learning ( Z A T C V ~ ~ I - 12038-43 4
-
tian beliefs, S. Krauss has written with great fnlness of
[1899, goo]; c p
ments of the sanctuary were arranged in tens (Exod.
261 16 Nu. 7 28 and 29 passim, I K. 6 and 7 passim, Driver, Deut. ---_q q q f ).
I

z Ch. 4 passim, and Ezek. 45 passim). I n Lk. 10 T the reading is uncertain and the explana-
Because of this sacred character ten is used in apoca- tion difficult.
lyptic symbolism (Dan. 772024 Rev. 12; 131 17371216). Many MSS, including NACL and other authorities read
;,98opr$rovsa (so Treg. lisch. Weiss) whilst BDMR and many
Twelve (i$y o.xi, PnPm 'Miir; Syr. Pre'sar, G d S e K a ) other authorities read >,68op$;ovra 86: (so WH). The number
derived its &;red character from the fact that it is the may perhaps be chosen to represent the peoples of the earth,,
., Twelve. product of three and four, helped no doubt each of which should have a Christian messenger' cp Dt.
328, where 6 makes the number of peoples equal thit of the
by the fact that the Sumerian sexagesimal angels2 (h '33 instead of k ? W : '33). Cp, however, Zahn,
system had made the number of months twelve. T h e Einl. 2 392.
most obvious application of its originating principle is
Two other numbers fall to be considered here on
found in the fact that the gates of heaven (cp Gen. 2817)
account of the use made of them in the Apocalypses.
were conceived as twelve-three facing each of the four
( a ) T h e first of these is three and a half, with its deri-
points of the compass ( E t h . En.342 351 361 f. and
vatives. Scholars agree that the 'times, time, and half
Rev. 21 12-14). From each of these in turn the sun goes
forth (Eth. En. 723, SZav. En. 14 and 15 passim). Of
kindred nature is the idea that the tree of life bears a
fruit for each of the twelve months (Rev. 222).
Because the number was sacred the tribes of Israel also the half week of Daniel 927, stand for three years
were made u p to twelve (Gen.35~2421332 4928 Nu. a n d a half. Meinhold ( D a n . 304) holds, on the basis
144). That this was in part an artificial reckoning, the of Dan. 927, that the three and a half is a broken seven.s
shadowy existence of some of the tribes, as Simeon, Cornill holds that its origin is to be found in the three
shows. Similarly the tribes of Ishmael were made and a half years of the persecution of Antiochus.' If
twelve (Gen. 15.20 2516). See G ENEALOGIES i., 5 5 ; we could be sure of a Hebrew origin, one of these ex-
TKIBES. planations might be accepted. Gunkel has, however,
Many representative men and things were made twelve to with great probability traced the origin of this number
accord with the number of the tribes (Ex. 24 4 Nu. 17 2 6 Josh. with other apocalyptic imagery to Babylon, and holds
4 j a s s i v 5 etc.). For this reason the 'disciples' were twelve (Mt.
19 28). that the three and a half represented the half of Kisl@v,
T h e number twelve for all the reasons given entered and the three months, Tebet, ShSbZt, AdBr, the time
into Hebrew ritual (Ex. 1527 Nu. 339 Lev. 245 Nu. 7 from the winter solstice to the festival of Marduk-the
passim. Jer. 5 2 z o f : Ezek. 4316 etc.). time covered by the period of winter-Le., the period of
As a symbolic number twelve was chosen to express the supremacy of T i B n ~ a t . ~If this be its origin, the
completeness (2s. 2 r s I K. 1020 Rev. 121). application to the years of oppression, on which all
T h e O T tribal usage and the N T apostolic are com- scholars are agreed, would be most natural, as would also
bined in the Apocalypse and produce twenty-four (Rev. its explanation as a broken seven (Dan. 927). There
4410 5 8 1116 194). have been various attempts to define more precisely the
Forty ( n * y p c , nr66'im ;Syr. arbc'in. TeuuapdKovra) three and a half: the 2300 evenings and mornings ( =
1150days: Dan. 814); 1290days(Dan.l211); 1335days
was a symbolic, if not a sacred number. Its simplest
(Dan. 1212) ; with these we should put the 1260 days
8. Forty. use is to denote a somewhat indefinite period
of Rev. 113 126 and the 42 months of Rev. 1 1 2 135.
of time the exact length of which was not
Scholars who insist on the unity of Daniel explain these
known. Thus the wilderness wandering was forty
differences of statement in that book by supposing that
years (Ex. 1635 Am. 210 5 2 5 Ps. 9510 etc.) ; but c p the author conceived the coming of the kingdom as
MOSES, § 11,e. Probably this and several similar periods
a progressive event, the different stages of which are
(cg.,Judg. 311 531 828 131 and I S. 4 18) are intended
to represent a generation, since the period from the 1 Cp Dillmann on Gen. 46 27.
Exodus to the building of the temple is counted ( I K. 6 I ) 2 According td Stade (ZATW53oo 118851) and Bertholet
as 480 years or twelve generations.* In some instances (ad k)who . orefer 6 ' s readine. Dt. 32 8 is Derhaos
. an inter-
= ~ ~ ~
a semi-sacred character attaches to forty; thus Moses was polation' as reflecting a late M i B
3 So &so Behrmann, Dan. 50, and von Gall, Einheit d. Dan.
1 M'Gee would seem to account for it as nine plus unity 92.
(i,e., 6+3+1). Cp 0). L i t . 664 672. 1 Si&. Jahrurochm Dan. 2 2 8
2 Cp Moore, Judges, xxxviii. Schojfung und Chaos, 3 0 9 8 ; cp CREATION, i 16 (6).
3437 3438