OLEASTER OLIVES, THE MOUNT O F
The much discussed work of Papias was probably a
commentary on one or more of our canonical gospels
(s<e‘GosPELs, @ 65, 94).
’ Memoirs ’ or ‘ Commentaries ’ (‘Tyrouv$para)-by
Heracleon, according to Origen-collected by Brooke
(TS14, 1891)belong to a commentary on the Fourth
Gospel (see C ANON , 69).
On fhc Resurrection of the Dead (yrcpl dvaurducws
edited by Schwartz, TU 4 2 ) was written by
V C K ~ ;S V
Athenagoras in answer to objections to the doctrine of
the resurrection and in exposition of the arguments in
its favour that can be drawn from the writings of philo-
sophers, or from the constitution and destiny of man.
The literature of the subject is immense. I t includes all
studies, whether older or more recent, on the N T , the Apostolic
Fathers and other Christian writers of the
46. Literature. first two centuries. For brevity‘s sake we
may refer to the ‘ Introductions to the N T
(see P AUL, $ 51) ; Harnack, A C L 1 1893, 2 I , 1897 ; Kriiger,
ACL, 1895, and ‘Nachtrage,’ 1897. W. C. v. M.
OLEASTER (]ne
yg), I s . 4 1 1 9 RVmg,, EV OIL
TREE (4.u.). Cp OLIVE, § 2.
OLIVE (Ill! ; ~ A a l aGen. 811 Ex. 2720 3 0 2 4 etc.)
is often meutioned in O T as well as several times in NT.
1. E t y m o l o ~ . The Hebrew name (zdyith),is found in
Aram., Eth., and Arab.. but not in Ass.
In Arab. znyt usually stands for the oil, and a longer
form zuytzin for the tree.
Guidi’s inference (Della Sede, 37) that both the name and the
culture of the oliw were a comparatively late im ortation into
Arabia-supported by Strabo’s statement ( 7 8 3 about the
Nabatzan country & ~ a p r o p $ woAX7 whiqv Ihaiou, and the
fact that various words for lamps were borrowed by Arab. from
Aram.-is accepted by Frankel (147)~hut denied by Hommel
(A+. u. A b h n d l . 99).
The origin of zrlyith was formerly sought within the
Semitic languages in ,Inm, a to be bright ’ (cp 1.1, Ges.
Thes. ) ; but Lagarde in a brilliant article (Mitth. 3 2 1 4 8 )
maintains a derivation from Armenian trtth, which may
also be the source of Egyptian djoeit or dj8if. a word
which, in a slightly different form, is found in an early
Pyramid text (Hommel, Z.C.). If this etymology be
accepted, it has an important bearing on the history
both of language and of civilisation. The word would be
a n example of a very early loanword incorporated from
without into the common Semitic stock, whilst the
knowledge of olive cultivation might be inferred to
have reached Egypt on the one hand and Palestine on
the other from some early seat in Asia Minor-prob-
ably Cilicia. Lagarde thinks, in view of the fact that on
the S. coast of Asia Minor the wild olive ‘forms veri-
table forests’ (De Candolle, Origine, 225). The
Arabic word passed along the N. coast of Africa into
Spain, and was also borrowed by Persian and Turkish.
The Greek and Latin words are of quite independent
origin.
Although in Gen. 8 I I a branch of wild olive seems to
be intended, everywhere else adyith denotes the culti-
In Neh. 815 this is
2. References. distinguished
vated variety.
from the oleaster (Ele-
agnus angustifoZiu). if that is the correct identification of
‘Z: &?men (see O IL T REE). The two terms are brought
together in a distich of Ben Sira (Ecclus. 5010, Heb.
text)-
A5 a luxuriant olive (n?~) full of berries,
And as a wild-olive tree (1”” p)with hranches full of sap.
No wonder that references to the olive tree abound ; it
is as characteristic of Palestine (Ut. 8 8 ) as the date-
palm is of Egypt, and shares the notice of Hebrew
writers with corn and the vine. Once we find the
phrase n:! P??, ’olive orchard’ (Judg. 155). The
special epithet of the olive is py21-i.e., ‘luxuriant‘-
not ‘ green,’ for the leaves of the olive are not strikingly
F e n . The uses of its oil, for lighting, as an ingredient
m food, and as a salve or ointment, are too familiar to
1 See Driver on Dt. 122.
3495
need illustration, nor need we refer here to G ETHSEMANE
Cq.v.1: Olive trees stand as an image of fresh beauty
combined with fruitfulness (Ps. 528 [IO] 1 2 8 3 Jer. 11 16
Hos. 146) ; the process of a beating ’ or ‘ shaking ’ the
trees to bring down the ripe fruit is referred to1 in Dt.
24 20 (for the law about gleaning cp Ex. 23 11) Is. 176
2 4 1 3 ; and the treading or pressing out of the oil in
Mic. 6 15.
In Rom. 1117-24 we have a n allusion to the process of graft-
ing, which has since ancient times been applied in order to grow
branches of the finer cultivated olive upon the stem of tk
oleaster (&ypr.‘ha~oc); the writer, for the illustration of hls
argument, imagines a reverse process-the grafting of wild olive
branches upon the cultivated plant.
The area over which OZea europen, L., is found grow-
- _
ing spontaneously is so large
- that it is almost impossible
3. Rome of to say where or how early it may have
been first cultivated. As De Candolle
‘live* lo$. cit. 223 j!f ) shows, however, its range
may not in e&i; times gave been so extensive. The
Egyptians certainly knew it very early as a ciiltivated
plant. The Greeks believed Attica to have been its
earliest home (Herod. 582), and it was cultivated among
them from a great antiquity. The Syrian cultivation
may reach back at least as far as either of these (cp
Lagarde, Z.C. ), and Schweinfurth and other botanists
incline to the view that the olive was of African origin,
and thence spread along the Mediterranean region.
N. M.
[Two passages in the Psalms seem to require notice here : (a)
Ps. 5 2 8 [IO] and (6) 1283. In passage a olive-
4. PSS. 5 2 8 trees in the temple-courts may justly surprise US,
12g3. for there is no trustworthy evidence that trees
were planted there. Most probably the text IS
in disorder, a s the vertical line called Pasek suggests. If we
may read-
And I, the poor and needy one, ]1’3Nl ’)$! ’)HI,
In the courts of the house of my God, . n h n-3 niisn>--
the difficulty is removed without violence (Che Ps.(z)).
In passage 6, there may he an allusion to the way in which the
olive tree propagates itself. When the trunk decays, fresh stems
spring from the roots and agroup of olives takes the place of a
single tree. As the barent stem decays, the suckers grow up,
tall and strong, in their place, so that It may perhaps he a true
tradition that in the famous olive-grove of Gaza (see GAZA, I 4)
no trees have been planted since the Moslem conquest.-?‘. K . C.]
N.M.,§§I-~;T.K.c.,§~.
OLIVES, THE MOUNT OF (O’n’.]? lg, Zech. 1 4 4
6is; 7b opos TWV dativ [e,NT, Jos.]; mons Oliuarum;
in 2 S. 15 30 O’T!? &Jll, ?j
bvaj3dcw d., clivus,
7.
1. Names. ‘ascent’; in Acts iI, 6poF Tb K&+ww
Gharivor mons q u i v o c a z b Oliveti, ‘ the mount
s.
called OllVet ’ [Olivet alsd in z 15 30 AV ; cp Jos. Ant. vii. 9 a]),
afterwards called by the Jews nnann in, mons unctionis (on
the expression n‘nwn;? l?, 2 K. 23 13 see below, and cp DE-
STRUCTION [M O U N T OF]), and still later mons luminum (ex-
plained in the Middle Apes a s referrin; to the multitude of
lights burning in the various sanctuaries on the mount) or also
nzons tt.ium hmin~rin-with reference to the triple light (a)of
the temple, (6) of the rising sun, (c) of the oil of the olive trees,
according to the rabbis ; Cp PEF , 1897, pp. 75-77,307-308--or,
more correctly, according to R e f n d , mons trrum culminum
(from its three summits ; see below), and a t the present day
/ e h d ez-Zeittin, or more commonly, jedel+rzir (sometimes
Je6el TZZY ez-Zeit).
The name applies primarily in a general way to the
whole ridge (on the limitation to a part of this chain,
see below [3]), conling from the NW.,
2.
but stretching N. and S. for about
2: m. on the E. side of Jerusalem, beyond the ravine of
the Kidron valley, thus forming a sort of rampart
parallel to the Bezetha and Temple Hills (see sketch map
above, col. 2410). Geologically the formation is a hard
cretaceous limestone (called by the Arabs mizzeh), with
superimposed strata of soft cretaceous limestone (Sen-
onian. called by the Arabs Kukzileh), and quaternary
deposits on the summit. The mount is easily climbed
in a quarter of an hour from the Kidron ; it is less stony
1 ‘ In many arts of Spain and Greece, and generally in Asia!
the olives are featen down by poles or by shaking the boughs
(EB(9)17 762).
2 Conder, T e n t Work, 2 261.
3496
 OLIVES, THE MOUNT OF
than some others near it, and formerly was rich in
various plantations, especially (as the name implies)
olive plantations ; the number of these has greatly
diminished. There are three distinct elevations separated
by depressions in the ridge.
( I ) Theelevation on the N., where the house of Mr. Gray Hill
now stands (2690 ft. above sea level) currently known as Mt.
Scopus(hut wrongly, the true Scopus hiing more to the W., beside
the N i h l u s road a t the point called RLs-el-Meshirif; cp PEFQ, people went to ’ the mount ’ for branches of olive, etc. ;
1874, pp. 94, 11:); the native name appears to be es-SuwLn.
( z ) That on the S. now known as Jebel H a p e l - H a w a
(Mount of the Belly f: the Wind), 2395 ft., having the village
of Siloam on its western flank. By Jose hus (Bf v. 12 2)
it is called ‘the hill overlooking the ravine of &loam’ ; by tradi- ward and westward valley to make way for the fugitives.
tion 6por rrpouoX0iuwaros. u~av6dhov.Gra$Bopls ntons oJen-
sion>s or scundali, being identified with the hill’spoken of in
I K.117 as ‘before ’ (’1?-5y) Jerusalem, in connection with the
pagan sanctuaries set u p b y Solomon for his foreign wives,l and
also with the hill (to be regarded, however, a s distinct), which
in 2 K. 23 13 is called n.nwy lg (EV, mount of corruption,
RVmg. ‘or, destruction’). For a discussion of this phrase,
which c a s uniritelligible to the translator of @, see DESTKUC-
T t o N [M OUNT OF]; the hill intended by it was probably the
Mt. of Olives properly so-called, and as for the sanctuaries
situated ‘on itlright hand’-i.e., to the S.-they may have stood
on the Jehel Batn el-Hawa hut equally well may he supposed
to have been on’the hill c h e d by tradition the Hill of Evil
Counsel, now locally known a s the Jehel Ahn-Tiir, t o the S. of
erusalem beyond the W i d y er-RabPbi. The Jehel Bat” el-
& . awa IS separated from the Mt. of Olives proper by a sharp de-
pression, through which passes the road to Bethany, and in
which are situated the new abattoirs of Jerusalem.
( 3 ) Between the tx-o already mentioned is the Mt. of
Olives proper-the distance from Jerusalem is variously
given as 8 furlongs (Acts 112, ‘ asabbath day’s journey’),
5 furlongs (Jos. A n t . xx. 86) or 6 furlongs (Jos. B/
v. 23)-described as before (>&e) Jerusalem on the
east ( q n ) . Zech. 1 4 4 ) , on the east side (mzr~)
of the
city (Ez. 1123), and over against (Karhvavri) the temple
(Mk. 1 3 3 ) . Here again three culminating points have
to he distinguished. The first, on the E. (2664 ft.),
is now marked hy the conspicuous Russian tower ; the
second ( 2 6 3 6 ft.). farther to the W., exactly faces the
temple ; here stand ( t i ) the chapel of the Ascension on
the site of various Christian buildings, the oldest of
which goes back to the time of Constantine; (d) the
Arab village of Kefr et-Tiir, first mentioned in the
fifteenth century ; ( c ) several other sanctiiaries ; the
third, more to the N. (2684 ft.), is locally known as
Karm eS-SeyyHd or Karm Abul-Hawa, and to tradition
as Viri Cali/&; see below (§ 5). A carriage road,
made for the Empress of Germany in 1898, leads from
the NHblus Road to Viri Galilzi and thence onwards to
the Chapel of the Ascension.2
The view from the Mt. of Olives is very extensive.
Westward, it commands a bird’s-eye view of Jerusalem,
in the form of a theatre,‘ as Josephus expresses it (the
summit is 218 ft. above the Harani). T o the NW. is
seen Neby Samwil, and to the N. the mountains of
Benjamin and Ephraim ; to the S. are those of Judah.
and, in particular, the ‘ Frank Mountain ’ (Bethlehem
is not visible ; but from the top of the Russian tower can
be seen the hell-towers of the Church of the Nativity) ;
to the E. are the arid mountains traversed by the road
from Jerusalem to Jericho (Bethany is hidden), the
Ghor, the Dead Sea, the mountains of Gilead and
Moab. Those, however, who claim to have seen Jerash,
the greater Hermon, Ebal and Gerizini, the Mediter-
ranean, are in error.
In the O T the Mt. of Olives is mentioned in four
3. OT places :-(u) 2 S.1523-161. David, in
references. flight from Absalom, crosses the Kidron
and climbs U D the other side to where,
according to KV, ‘God ;vas worshipped’ (RVmg,,
1 A later tradition, going as far hack as 1283 A.D., places here
not the heathen sanctuaries, hut the harem of Solomon.
’2 The we4tern flank of the Mt. of Olives has heen from early
times, and still continues to he used for purposes of burial.
The most ancient of the tombs,’caves transformed into sepul-
chres, are now called (haselessly) ‘Tombs of the Prophets,’ and
are situated to the SW. of the Latin buildings. C p H. Vincent,
Rrvue b’ibfique, 10(1go1), pp. 72-88 ; PEFQ, 1901, pp. 309-317.
3497
’ where he was wont to worship God ’ ; AV less cor-
rectly, ‘ H here he worshipped God ’) ; on the other side
he descended to BAHURIM (q.v. ; unidentified). ( 6 )
Ezekiel (1123) sees the ‘glory of Yahwk’ going forth
from the temple and resting on the Mt. of Olives ; cp
432. where, conversely, the glory of Yahwk comes to
the temple from the E. ( 6 ) In Neh. 815 it is said : the
various interpreters understand the Mt. of Olives here.
( d ) Zechariah ( 1 4 4 ) sees YahwP in the great day plant
his feet on the Mt. of Olives, which is cleft by an east-
Later rabbinical Judaism attached the rite of the red heifer
(Nu. 19 ; Mish. Parah, 36) to the Mt. of Olives, where alw at
the appearance of each new moon a fire was kindled visible as
far as from Karn Sartabeh. A Jewish legend fixes the abode of
the divine Shekinih bn the M t . of Olives for three and a half
years.
The N T references are five :-(a) Mt. 21 I Mk. 11 I
Lk. 1929 (Jesus crosses the Mt. of Olives on the day of
his triumphal entry into Jerusalem) ; (6)
4.
Mt. 2 4 3 Mk. 1 3 3 (scene of his discourse
references’ concerning the temple) ; ( c ) Lk. 21 77
Jn. 8 I (Jesus withdraws-for the night-&, ‘according io
Lk. was his habit-to the Mt. of Olives) ; ( d ) Mt. 2630
Mk. 1426 Lk. 2239 (mentioned in connection with GETH-
S EM AN E [q.v.]); ( e ) Acts 1x2 (after the ascension, the
apostles return from the Mt. of Olives). Christian
tradition, resting undoubtedly on the last-cited passage,
but also influenced by Zech. 1 4 4 , has, since the time of
Eusebius (about 315 A.D.). regarded the summit of the
Mt. of Olives as the scene of the ascension : a sanctnarv
II. Bcene of
was erected ‘on the ridge’ ( I d rijs
the sscension. drcpwpdar). which varied in the course of
centuries : from the fourth centurv on-
~, ~ ~
wards there has been shown one of the footprints (now
right, now left)of Jesus on the rock(again an echo of Zech.
144). In Lk.2450 the scene of the ascension is placed
very definitely at Bethany (he led them 8ws r p b s BvBaviav
AV, ‘ as far as to Bethany,’ KV less correctly, ‘ until they
were over against Bethany ’). Unless two conflicting
accounts be admitted, that ofLk. must rule, the passage
in Acts saying merely that the disciples returned from the
Mt. of Olives. ‘ There can be. no doubt that Lk. means
to say that he led them to the place called Bethany’
(Tobler, 83). It may be added that in the time of
Jesus there were houses on the top of the Mt. of Olives.
The tendency to multiply sacred sites, so often shown
by tradition, has caused the scene of the apparition of
the angels (‘ Viri Galilzi,’ Acts 111 ; see above, $2. [3]) to
be separated from that of the ascension itself. Afurther
designation, Galilza (which is not to be confounded
with Viri Galiki), is the result of a harmonistic effort to
bring Mt. 28 IO (cp v. 16), which speaks of an appear-
ance of Jesus on a mountain in Galilee, into conformity
with the indications of Mk. and Lk., which make Jeru-
salem the scene of the manifestation. The attempt is
old and has been often repeated ; the last to make
it is R. Hofmann, whose argument is interesting but
unconvincing. Cp GOSPELS,§ 138.
From the fourth century (Bordeaux Pilgrim, 333) onwards
through the Middle Ages and down to the sixteenth century 1
in accordance with the tenaency of tradition t o bring all tie
biblical sites as near to Jerusalem as possihle, pilgrims were
shown the scene of the transfiguration as well as that of the
ascension on the Mt. of Olives. T h e similarity of names ( M t
Tabor, Jehel e!-TBr; and Mt. of Olives Jebel et-Tor) may
possibly have contrihuted to this error. Tieinterest of the Mt
of Olives for the Christian lies more in the mountain as a whole
than in any particular part of it. A: the Ahbe Le Camus (Voyage
aux P u p Bibliques, 1 2 5 2 ) has it : Quand !es reliques sont des
monta nes on peut admettre leur authenticuk.’
Tohfer, h e SiloaRqueNe rrnd der Oelbew 59’3r3 ; Reland
PulrPsti%a,52 337-341 ; Robinson, Bi6licalR%earch~s in Pubs!
h a @ ) , 1 ~ 7 4 . 2 7 5604-605: Phys. Ceogr-
6. Literature. ofthe HL, 40s. ; Berggren, Reisen, 394-97;
Furrer, IVundcnmgenl’4, 8r-85; art. ‘Oel-
berg’ in Schenkel’s Bi&l-Lexikon, 4 355-356 : Thomson, Tkr
.
Land and the Book, 2 410-422 433-437 ; Schick, ‘ The Mount of
1 Hans Stockar, pilgrim of 1519; Hez’mfaJwfuon]cmsukm,
18, Schaffhausen (1839).
3498
 OLYMPAS
Olives,' PEFQ, 1889, pp. 174-184; PEFMS z 30; Jerusalem
398-404; Doubdan, Yoyaqe de la revre-Sainfe, 119116253-270,
with a map o n p. 100; Wallace /emSalem fhHoly, 117-124;
Buhl, G e o p . des alien PaZaitina, 94-95; Fraas, Aus dem
Orient, 57-58 202 (Geological); R. Hofmsnn, Galilea aufdem
Oelberg, 1896, 53 pp. ; ZDPV 13 (1890) 98 (Van Kasteren);
Fkderhn, La Tern-Saintc, xviii. (I~oI), nos. 2 , 8-12.
LU. G.
OLYMPAS ( ~ A Y M ~ A ca, contracted form of OAYM-
n l o h w p o c ) is saluted in Rom.lG15; cp R OMANS ,
3s 4, I O. Later legend (see the Y ~ O M N H M A of Peter change Omri would be the strange phrase of an anonymous
and Paul of the pseudo-Symeon Metaphrastes) said that
he was ordained bishop of Philippi by Peter, and
beheaded with Herodion at Rome when Peter was
crucified.
OLYMPIUS ( O A Y M ~ ~ O C[AV]), z Macc. 62. See to the worship of Baal. I t is remarkable that we are
JUPITER.
OMAERUS (MAHPOC [B]), I Esd. 934 AV=Ezra
1034, AMRAM,2.
OMAR (V$K ; (,.)MAP [BADEL]), one of the sons of (af*@p[eIr
Eliphar ; Gen. 36 I T (opav [ADEI)15 I Ch. 136.t Probably a
corruption of Jerahmeel, like IRAM (so Che.) in Gen. 36 43 I Ch.
154.
OMEGA. See ALPHA.
OMER (Py), Ex.1636 etc. See WEIGHTS AND
MEASURES.
OMRI ('??2?may either be an ethnic like Zimri, and
many of the names which now close with ?I9, instead of
9 [see NAME^. nerhnns rCD O M A Rfrom ~ Terahmeel
>I
[Che.]; or, it may b; put fd; ?I:lpq,
I L
OT
' worshipper of Yahwk,' cp Arab. names
references' ' h i r and 'Omar, and see Robertson
Smith, Kinship, 265J ; in Aram. inscr. '11DV[CIS z, same S. Palestinian district is probably referred to,
no. 1951 and 1DUn [ i b . , no. 1731, cp J AMBRI ;
ZAMBp[€]l [ B a r but occasionally &MBP(E)I), AMBPI
[L], A M A ~ I N O C [Jos. Ant. viii. 1251). I. Father
of Ahab and King of Israel (900-875 B.c., Schr. ; On-jerahmeel'), Hab. 37 ('On shall be affrighted'),
890-879 B . c . , Kamph.), I K. 16 15-28. H e was
originally 'captain of the host,' and was besieging
Gibbethon, a Philistine town, when he heard that his
royal master Elah had been slain by ZIMRI(9.v.) At . Bethel of Amos and Hosea was probably the sanctuary
once he left Gibbethon and canle to Tirzah and besieged
the usurper Zimri, who, finding himself unable to hold
out, closed his reign of seven days by a voluntary death
(see Z IMRI ). But the victor had yet another rival to
fear. T IBNI b. Ginath and his brother Joram (cp I K.
1622 6 )were in arms agalnst Omri, and it was not
until they died that his authority was secure.' That he
had the eye of a statesman is clear from his selection of
SAMARIA (4.u.) as capital in preference to T IRZAH.
His struggles against the Aramaeans of Damascus
were not particularly successful; he had to concede
certain privileges to them in his own capital ( I K. 2O3?),
and was forced to surrender several Israelite towns. in-
cluding, it would seem, the important Ramoth-gilead
(223) ; see B ENHADAD , 5 2. The meagre accounts of
him in the O T are supplemented slightly by the Moabite
inscription.
From the stele of Mesha we learn that Omri reasserted his
claim to Moab and gained :hold on Medeba and the surround-
ing district which was retained by him for some ears (cp AHAB). present.
The thoroAghness of the subjection is proved %y t h e enormous
tribute paid to Israel by Moab (cp 2 K. 3 4). See MESHA.
Omri is the first Israelite king to be mentioned on the
Assyrian inscriptions, and the widening of the political
2. assprian horizon of Israel marks the commence-
references. ment of a new epoch. I t is possible that
Omri himself paid tribute to Assyria, and
through its help obtained the throne (cp Ki. 2259). On
inscriptions from the time of Shalmaneser 11. (854)
down to Sargon (720) we find the northern kingdom
1 Knowing as we do, the manner in which late revisers have
endeavoured i o synchronise t h e events of the two kingdoms of
Israel and Judah, we cannot, by comparing v. 15 with 2,. 23, fix
the length of Omri's struggle with Tibni at four years (see
CHRONOLOGY, 5 7).
3499
ON
designated as m i t Bit-gumri, 'land of the house of
Omri ' ; or simply ma6 t f u m r i . land Omri.' ' Jehu
even is called the 'son of Omri ' (Schr. K A T 1 9 0 8 ).
The use of this phrase shows how great was the reputa-
tion which Omri enjoyed abroad (Stade, however, sup-
poses that the Assyrians did not learn of the existence
of Israel till Omri's reign, and that, as years went by,
they clung to the original name, without troub!ing to
it [GVI 1521l). Another sign of the influence of
prophet in Mi. 6 16, ' the ' statutes of Omri ' ; but the
text is doubtless corrupt (see M ICAH [BOOK], $ 3).
The dynasty which he founded lasted for half a century,
and was only overturned by the hatred of the prophets
told so little about him. Cp HISTORICAL LIT., 5, 7.
2. b. Becher, a Benjamite, I Ch. 7 8 ( q . ~ a p [ r l r a[BAL]).
3. A descendant of Pharez, I Ch. 9 4 (app.p[c]~ [FA], ap&r [L,
whoappears to identifyomriand IMRI,a n a m e which B A omits]).
4. b. Michael, of the tribe of ISSACHAR ($ 4 n.), I Ch. 27 18
!BLl, a w p r [AI).
ON (11s ; A Y N [Bl, AYNAN [AF], AMNAN [L]), b.
Peleth, a Reubenite, the associate of Dathan and Abiram
(Nu. 16I ). The name On seems to have attached itself
to Jerahmeelite territory; hence it is parallel with
Cushan and Missur, according to an almost certain
restoration of Hab. 37, ' O n is affrighted, the tents of
Cushan are in dread,2 the tent curtains of Mi+r
tremble.' See D ATHAN A N D A BIRAM , and cp JERAH-
MEEL, $ 3. PIBESETH.
The names On, Onam, Onan, Ono, Ben-oni point to
the existence of a clan and of a district in the far S .
called On, and there is a group of passages in the
Prophets, commonly much misunderstood, in which the.
viz., Am. 1 s ( ' a n d inhabitants from Rehoboth-on'),
v. 5 ('Bethel [the southern Bethel in the district of On?]
shall become Aven '), Hos. 108 ( ' t h e high places of
Ezek. 3017 ( ' the young men of On and Jerahmeel ').
For the explanation and justification of these readings
see Cn'f. Bid.; we can only mention here that the
of the golden calf (cp PROPHET, 5 35), not far from
Haliisah ( = D a n ? ) in the Negeh. It is also by no
means impossible that under the present Egyptianised
story of Joseph, there lies an earlier story, which laid
the scene in N. Arabia, and gave Joseph for a father-
in-law a priest of On, a Zarephathite (pi3 wa=*mir).
Note that On in Nu. 161 is ' b. Pe1eth'-i.e., a Pele-
thite (= 2arephathite)- and that R EUBEN appears
originally to have been a southern tribe (see PELETH);
also that in Neh. 62, for reasons given elsewhere (see
C r i f . Bib. ), the place of meeting suggested to Nehemiah
was probably, not ' in [one ofl the villages in the plain of
Ono,' but ' in Jerahmeel, in Rehoboth of On ' (cp Am.
1 5 above) ; and lastly, that in Neh. 1135 we should
probably read for ' Ono, Ge-haharashim ' [RVmg,], 'On
of the Geshurites' (see G ESHUR , 2). Every one of these
corrections throws light on a dark place in the OT
writings ; hence their introduction into a work like the
T. K. C.
ON (IW, 1
:. ; HAIOY noAlc ; HELIOPOLIS), the city
of POTIPHERA [g.~.], the father-in-law of Joseph (Gen.
1. Name. 4145 50 4620 ; also Ezek. 3017 [b ; see
AVEN]). also mentioned as Beth-shemesh in
Jer. 43 13 (so M T and d ; but the text needs correction ;
see BETH-SHb;MESH), and in the true text of Is. 1918
(cp K' Symm., see H ERES , CITY OF), and in d of
Ex.1 1 1 ( K A ~W N [L, u p (unless this is a misprint in
1 For the designation of a nation as the 'house' of a king or
of a founder of a dynasty cp Hos. 5 I . Mesha, too, speaks of
t h e hausc of Omri's son (L'7). Cp Wi. K A T I S ) , 247.
2 So Perles (Analehien, 66) and Nowack ; hut i i s n must also
be restored for I913 Yi ~ .
3 In Gen. 41 45 IOU a6Ais [A*], IAiov a. [All, 41 50 46 20 IALOV
a. [A].
35-
 ON
Lag.)] H E C T I N H A I O Y rrohic) as well as in Jer. 4313
(a gloss on H A I O Y rrohic).
The name of the Egyptian ‘ On ’ (for the S. Palestinian
‘On,’ see preceding article) is written ’ a w l (the initial
Aleph would admit also of being read as a y).
According to a famous mythological text (Destr. 1 9 ) ,
the name would be etymologically connected with the
word preserved in Coptic as 6 ~ ~ ‘millstone,’
1 , so that
the w would have to be read before the n. The
late pronunciation On is, a t any rate, traceable, not
only in 6, but even in the Assyrian Unu (Asnr-bani-
From the famous temple of the sun-god the city
was perhaps also called Z‘e(r)-RZ‘, ’ house of the sun-
god ’ ; cp the Greek and Arabic designations. s
On-Heliopolis, situated very near the southern end
of the Delta, E. of the Pelusiac branch of the Nile,
2. Importance. was, perhaps, the oldest city of Egypt.
W e find, at least, that from the texts
of the pyramids to the latest theological writings it is
described as the holiest city, the favourite place of the
sun-god whence it is easiest to find access to heaven.
In its temple ( ‘ the House of the Prince ’) was a sacred
tree which is identified with the tree from the branches
of which the sun-god rises every morning, e t c 4 The
earliest divinity worshipped there seems to have been
Atum(u). figured in human form, and explained by
the later theologians as the setting sun. RE‘ and
Harmachis were also worshipped. A god explained
as the Heliopolitan form of Osiris had the name
Sep (cp Osarseph, the name of Moses in Manetho
[JOSEPH ii., § I ]). The most sacred animal there was
the bull called MnEvis by the Greeks5 The name of
the high priest (wr-m’) ‘greatest in seeing‘ ( L e . , ob-
serving the stars) and his sacrificial costume, covered
with stars, point to the high reputation of the Helio-
politan astronomers and astrologers. Even in Greek
times the learning of those priests ( A i y u m i w v XoyrB-
T ~ T O L ,Herod. 2 3 ) was so famous that Greek philosophers
like Plato and Eudoxus were said to have visited them
to study their wisdom. So important was the city
to which Potiphera (cp JOSEPH ii., 3, 1 1 ) was said
to have belonged.
Heliopolis was the capital of a nome (the thirteenth
of Lower Egypt), but seems never to have played any
3. History. political part except, perhaps, in the time
of the Hyksos who are said to have re-
sided (?) there.
Being situated near the W . end of Goshen. on the
road from Goshen to Memphis, On had, later, a very
large Semitic population. As early as in the time of
Rameses 111. a quarter inhabited by some thousands of
Asiatic ‘Apuriu is mentioned, and before the foundation
of Alexandria Hrliopolis doubtless ranked high among
the cities with a partly Jewish p ~ p u l a t i o n . ~The Jewish
city Onion and the temple of Onias (see O N I A S , § 13 ; cp
2 Delitzsch (Pur. 318) would compare this U n u with Hermon-
this near l h e h e s which had the same name in earlier times.
As, however, its name a t a later period always received the
addition rP4i), ‘the southern’ or Montu ‘of [the god] Month,‘
in opposition to the northern ‘On,’ Delitzsch’s idea is highly
improliahle. Cp also CIS 102a, z (Bloch, Glossur. 14) nira IN.
3 Diodorus 1 1 2 concludes from the name that the sun-god
founded the city. On the Egyptian form see Brugsch, Did.
Giop-. 4 0 9 8 (with caution).
4 It is, certainly, not accidental that, after the downfall of
paganism, the Christian Egyptians always reverenced a tree in
or near Heliopolis, claiming that it had protected the Virgin
hlary and the child Jesus on the flight to Egypt. The tree of
Mary, shown a t present, was planted somewhat over zoo years
ago.. No doubt it is a successor of the holy persea tree of
antiquity.
5 T h e sacred bird of On, the dnw, 6 y m u (a crested heron),
was considered as a symbol of the morning sun ; the strange
fables attached to it I,y the classical writers (Herod.273, etc.)
are not found on the monuments. C p PH‘ENIX.
6 T h e statement of Juba (in Plin. 6 177) that it was founded
by Arabs evidently refers to the same fact.
3501
ONIAS
DISPERSION, § 6, and ISRAEL, 71) were near it, and
several ne&?bouring ruins have, at present, names
pointing to Jewish communities--e.g., TelI el- Yahzidiye.
‘the hill of the Jewess’; a ‘Vicus Judzeorum’ occurs
already in the Roman itineraries. 65’s addition to
Ex. 1II is quoted above. T h u s the eastern frontier of
the Delta was occupied by a continuous line of Jewish
settlements.
At the beginning of the Roman period, Strabo (p. 805)
describes the city as deserted, although the great temples
had still their population of priests. The ruins near
the modern village el-Matariye are, at present, very
insignificant ; the only considerable remnant of the
great temple of the sun is an obelisk erected by User-
tesen I. of the twelfth dynasty. The Arabs called the
city ‘Ain esh-Shems, ‘ fountain of the sun.’ Whether
the sweet well’ near the sacred tree of el-Matariye
furnished the name, is doubtful ; the ruins of Heliopolis
are, at any rate, too far N. for us to regard the well
as the sacred basin of the sun-temple. w. M. M.
ONAM (D$. 5 77 ; on the name cp GENEALOGIES
i., 5 5, n. 2 ; J ERAHMEEL , 5 2); and see ON i., ONAN).
I. An Edomite clan (Gen. 36 23, wpav [AEL], -p [Dl ; I Ch.
140, wvav [HA] w a y . [Ll).
2. A Jerahmhelite sept or clan (I Ch. 2 2 6 o<op [BI, ouvopa
[A], avav [L]). See JUDAH, JERAHMEEL, 5 2.
ONAN (j$K. 5 77 ; AYNAN [BADEFL], cp O N i.,
O N A M ) ,one of the five sons of J UDAH ( q . ~ . )Gen.
, 354
8-10 4 6 1 2 Nu. 2 6 19 I Ch. 23.
ONESIMUS (ONHCIMOC [Ti. WH]) according to
Philem. I O , is the name of a runaway slave Christianised
by Paul and sent back to his master with our canonical
‘ Epistle of Paul to Philemon.’ Later tradition makes
him bishop of Ephesus. Another Onesimus is mentioned
in Col. 4 9 as a Christian at Colossae, who has recently
been with Paul. According to some he is identical
with the person called a slave in Philemon, and accord-
ingly that epistle is held to be earlier than Colossians.
Attention has frequently been called to the meaning of the
name (Onesimus= ‘useful’) and doubts on that account have
heen thrown on the historicity of Onesimus or, a t least, of the
Onesimus of Philem. IO ; so far as appears, however, without
sufficient ground. A slave called Onesunus is really intended,
although his presence in this place is probably a fiction, and the
name borrowed froin Col. 49. See P HILEMON [EPISTLE].
W. C . Y. M.
ONESIPHORUS (ONHCI@OPOC [Ti. W H ] ) is men-
tioned twice in 2 Tim. Apparently we are to suppose
that he was dead when the epistle was written, for in
both places his ‘house’ (family), not he himself, is
placed in the foreground. (a) In 116-18 the divine
mercy is besought for his house as a reward for his
mercy to Paul (cp Mt. 57). It is assumed that Timothy
knows the details of his ministry to Paul perfectly well,
but it is a pleasure to Paul to refer to his repeated kind-
ness, not only at Ephesus but also a t Rome : ’ he oft
refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chain ; but
when he was in Rome, he sought me out very diligently
and found me.’ ( a ) At the close of the epistle (4x9) this
kind friend’s house or household is specially saluted
together with Prisca and Aquila.
Here two MSS (46x9) contain the insertion, Asrspsv rqu
yvvpma a w o u x u Biparav [ 9 ~ - rar
] Zqvova TOUT VLOVF (~UTOU,
which, though it stands after ‘ Prisca and Aquila,’really belongs
to ‘the house of Onesiphorus’ (cp Acta Pauli et Tlreclre, 2).
ONIARES (ON[E]IA A ~ H C[AYid. KC.aYid. V”, see
Swete]), I Macc. 1220. See S PARTA.
ONIAS
Name ($ I). Murder of Onias 11. (I 8).
References (8 2). Josephus and Onias IV. (§ 9).
Date of Onias I. (5 3). Trustwortbiness of 2 Macc.
Date of O n i a 11. (5 4). (B 10).
His official position ( 8 5). Conclusions (5 11).
Hisrelation to the Tobiads (86). Date of Onias 1V. (8 12).
Identity of Onias 11. and 111. Temple in Heliopolis ($ 13).
(ii 7). Literature (5 14).
1 T h e Virgin hlary is said to have washed the child Jesus in
it, a n indication that the well was sacred in pagan times.
3502
 ONIAS
Onias ( o N ~ ~iscthe
) Greek form of a Jewish name
which we find borne by various persons chiefly of
origin in the third and second
1. Name. priestly
centuries B.C. It stands sometimes for
Heb. jjnv (Ecclus. 501 ; Iovmu [BIN*]) ; sometimes for
Heb. ?.in, which occurs amongst the names in the
inscription of the Bne-Hezir on the so-called Sepulchre
of Jacob in the valley of Kidron near Jerusalem.' Both
forms come from the same root (in, pn), and the mean-
ing of both is the same.
In the printed texts of the Talmud the name usually appears
as iq)n (H6ny6) ; but it is noteworthy that good MSS also ex-
hibit the form jiqin> (NEhanyon : Schiir. GJWJ 2 546, (3) 3 99,
ET 4 288). As 1qn is equivalent to the older Hebrew form nv,n,
both the Hebrew forms (nyn and i ~ n y )are represented by the
Gk. 'Ovias.
Unfortunately it is impossible to say in any individual
instance whether the Greek name 'Oviar represents the
one Hebrew form or the other.
The following is a list of the persons known to have
2*
htiz?:son of Jaddus or Jad-
dua (Jos. Ant. xi. 8 7 [J 3471, xii. 25 [§ 431; cp Neh.
1211) ; see § 3.
(6) Onias 11.. son of Simon I. the Just (Jos. Ant.
xii. 25 [J 441 xii. 41-10 [s 156-2241) ; see $5 4-8 11.
(c) Onias III., son of Simon 11. (Jos. Ant. xii.410
[J 2251 (=xiii. 58 [J167]), 51 [J 2371); see § 7f. 11.
( d ) Onias IV.,son of Onias 111. (Jos. Ant. xii. 51
[I 2371, 97 [J387]), or son of Simon (Jos. Blvii. 102
4231) ;. see 8 9-13.
( e ) Onias, third son of Simon 11. (Jos. Ant. xii. 5 1
[J 2 3 8 8 ] ) , usually called Menelaus (cp xii. 97 [J§ 383-
3851) ; See § 13 ( e ) .
(f) Onias. a pious Jew, killed at Jerusalem in 65 B.C.
(Jos. Ant. xiv. 2 I [gJ 22-24]).
(E) Onias, father of John, who was sent along with
others by Hyrcanus to Rome (Jos. Ant. xiv. 10 IO
[I 2221).
Of these seven, (f) and (9) may be left out of account
in this article as being of no importance for our present
purpose ; on the other hand it will be necessary to
bring together and to sift everything that our sources
contain with regard to the first five.
( a ) Onius Z.- As regards Onias I., we know from
Jos. Ant. xi. 8 7 (J 347) that his father was Jaddus (or
Jaddua, Neh. 1211), from Ant. xii. 25 (8 43)
Date Of that his son was the high priest Simon the
Onhe I. Just. According to Ant. xi. 8 4 6 ( J 3228)).
Jaddua was contemporary with Alexander the Great.
Of this synchronism, however, Willrich (Juden u.
Gnklrcn, 22) has argued that it must be given up, the
whole of the Jewish Alexander-legend being unhistorical.
This, no doubt, goes too far ; the synchronism may be
correct even if the details of the story be imaginary.
We can no longer rely upon it, however, for determin-
ing the date of Onias. Onias 1,'s son, Simon [I.]
the Just, appears in Ant. xii.25 (J 43f.). as the pre-
decessor of Eleazar who, according to the epistle of
Aristeas. lived in the time of Ptolemy 11. Philadelphus
(285-247 B.c.). According to this, the date of
Onias I. would be somewhere about 300 B.C. The
epistle of Aristeas, however, cannot he regarded a s
a first-rate chronological authority, and Josephus does
not seem to have had at his disposal any complete
list of the Jewish high priests from which he could
have taken Eleazar (Willrich, ut sup. 111). We
next turn, therefore, to the Simon who is mentioned in
Ecclus. 501 : ' The greatest among his brethren and
the glory of his people was Simon. son of Johanan
(Iovrou [*BIN*], Ovtou [BBb Wa]) the high priest.'
By comparison with the high priests of the post-exilic
Jewish community named in Josephus. this Simon has
been identified with one or other of two persons-either
1 [Chwolson, Covpus Insw. Hcbr. no. 6 ; cp Driver, TBS
23. I
3503
ONIAS
with the Simon [I.] the Just, already mentioned, or
with Simon [II.] whose father, according to Josephus
( A n t . xii. 410 [J 224]), would seem also to have been
named Onias (see below, J 7 J ) . l h e splendid eulogy
passed in Ecclus. 50 I 8 gives the idea of an important
personality whose merits did not allow him to be
forgotten by posterity. Now, unquestionably the
history supplies us with only one man answering such
a description-Simon the Just ; Josephus also praises
Simon [I.] though briefly (Ant. xii. 25 [J 431). whilst
as regards Simon 11. he chronicles only his father's
name, his sons' names, and his death (Ant. xii. 51
[J 2371 4 IO [J 2251). In all probability, therefore,
those scholars are right who take Ecclus. 501 as re-
ferring to Simon [I.] the Just (see, however, ECCLESI-
AST I C US , $7). In that case' we shall do well to place
him somewhere not too early in the third century. If
Simon lived somewhere about 250 B.C. then the ap-
proximate date for his father, Onias I., will be about
280 B.C.
(6) Onias ZI.-According to Jos. Ant. xii. 41-10
($5 156-224), Onias 11.. at first sight, appears to have
4. Date of been contemporary with Ptolemy 111.
Euergetes (247-221), Ptolemy IV. Philo-
Onias II. pator (221-204). and Ptolemy V. Epi-
phanes (204-181). His father was Simon [I.] the
Just, but he did not succeed his father immediately.
being under age at the time of his death. On this
account, according to Ant. xii. 25 (44) I and 41 (0 157).
the high-priestly dignity was held first by Eleazar.
brother of Simon and son of Onias I., the high priest
of the Epistle of Aristeas, and afterwards by Manasseh.
an uncle of Eleazar (perhaps a brother of Onias I.?).
Whether the succession of high priests, and in particular
the minority of Onias 11. here given, rests really upon
tradition has been rightly doubted by Willrich ( I I O ~ . )
and Biichler ( 4 0 8 ) . Josephus seems to have as-
sumed the minority of Onias simply in order to make
room for the Eleazar of the epistle of Aristeas; of
Manasseh nothing is elsewhere known. I t is therefore,
to say the least, doubtful whether these data have a
historical character. On the other hand, we do possess
a trustworthy narrative-however amplified and dis-
torted by various unhistorical anecdotes-in the associa-
tion of Onias 11. with the rise of the Tobiad Joseph as
farmer of taxes (Ant. xii. 41-10). Willrich (96f.) takes
the narrative as referring to the opposition between
Menelaus ( =Joseph) and Jason (= Onias). Wellhausen
regards it (ZlG(9, 242) as being 'on the whole un-
historical although not on that account altogether
worthless.' Biichler ( 4 3 8 , 91f.), on the other hand,
has successfully shown that the twenty-two years of the
revenue-farming of Joseph can be understood only of
the time of the Egyptian kings Ptolemy IV. Philopator
(221-204 B.c.) and Ptolemy V. Epiphanes (204-181
B.c.) and must be placed somewhere about 220-198 B.C.
This does not harmonise indeed with the words with
which Josephus (Ant. xii. 41 [J 1541) introduces the story;
the reference to the marriage of Cleopatra the daughter
of Antiochus 111. (222-187)with Ptolemy V. Epiphanes
allows us to reckon backwards only from 193. Never-
theless, the Egyptian revenue-farmer Joseph and the
things attributed to him in the story, are compatible
only with a period of Egyptian lordship in Palestine, in
other words before 198 B.C. W e may regard it as
made out that the mention of Euergetes thc father of
Philopator in 4r (J 158) is a later (and erroneous)
insertion in the text (see Niese, ad Zoc. ).
From this narrative (Ant. xii. 41-10)can be drawn
the following details of the circumstances and conditions
I
5. His oficial then existing.-After the Egyptian
governor of Coelesyria, Theodotus the
position. Etolian. had in 219 invited Antiochus
111. to the conquest of the CoelesGian province, and
its southern portion had received Syrian garrisons in the
course of 218, Onias 11. discontinued payment of twenty
3504
 ONIAS
talents of tribute to Ptolemy I V . , believing that the
Egyptian suzerainty over Jerusalem was at an end
( A n t . xii. 41 [S 1 5 8 J I ) . Though this sum is spoken
of as in behalf of the people ( 6 6 d p TOO XaoO qbpos),
we are not to understand by it the tax or tribute which
the Jews as a whole had to pay to Ptolemy, but only a
due which Onias 11. had to pay on his own account,
and which therefore he provides out of his private
revenue ( k T& isiwv). It is closely connected with
the personal position of Onias I I . , which is sometimes
described as a presidency ( T ~ O U T ~roij U ~XaoO) and as
a rulership (Eipxeiv),sonretimes as a high-priestly dignity
) as a high-priesthood ( L ~ ~ x L E ~ w - thwefore, at some earlier date have abandoned the
( & ~ X L E ~ U T L K +T L ~ T )or
alivq) ( A n t . xii. 42 [gg 161-1631), If he goes on with the
payment he retains his dignity : if he discontinues, he
loses his office and at the same time exposes to peril the
Jewish inhabitants of the land (§ 1 5 9 ) . We thus see
that the dignity he holds is dependent on the king and
mixed up with politics, and thus is not in any necessary
connection with the Jewish high-priesthood.
Such,a state of matte,rs is easily intelligible so far as the
expressions ‘ presidency (rpourada TO; AwS) and ‘ rule
( i p x e w ) are concerned ; hut the phrases ‘ high-priestly dignity’
(bpxwpairri) T L J ~ + ) and ‘ high-priesthood ’ ( B p x ~ e p o ~ u qare
) would seem, is designed in its own fashion to establish
surprising ; the position of ‘ ruler ’ depended on the w ~ l lof the
foreign overlord of the Jews, but that of high priest was purely an
internal affair of the religious community. The narrative of
Ant. 124, however, proceeds on the view that the presidency
( ~ ~ O C T Q U L703
Q AaoC) and the high-priesthood ( b p x y w w q )
over the Jews were now at last inseparable, so that a high priest
who should become divested of his political position (at the
head of the people) conferred by the king was thenceforth no
longer in a position to retain the spiritual ofice.
Buchler seeks to solve the difficulty with regard to
the chief-priesthood (dpxiepwulivq) by supposing that
the Ptolemies and Seleucids nominated for the separate
provinces governors-general (urparqyoi)who, in addition
to their own proper (political) designation, bore also the
title of chief priest (dpxiepds) or even-so far as Jeru-
salem was concerned-had to exercise certain rights as
regarded the sanctuary (cp 2 Macc. 3 4 : Simon is ’ over-
seer of the temple ’ [ 7 r p o u ~ d q s700 LepoD] as an official
of the king). According to this view-in support of
which Buchler ( 3 3 ) adduces certain inscriptions in
addition to 2 Macc. 34-in A n t . xii.4 I f. it is only
this political chief-priesthood ( C i p x ~ e p w u h q )that comes
into account, not the spiritual headship of the Jewish
community. Onias 11. must in that case have been
chief priest (6px~epL;s)in a double sense ; but this is
hardly credible.
The decision of Onias 11. to go over to Antiochus
111. was premature. His grand-nephew. the Tobiad
Joseph, judged the & a t i o n more ac-
6. His rela- curately. He cast in his lot unreservedly
tion to the with the Ptolemies, was skilful enough
Tobiads. to ingratiate himself with the Egyptian
envoy in Jerusalem,and received from Ptolemy IV. the
official positions which until that time had been held
by Onias [ A n t . xii. 43 (I 1 7 2 f : ) I (and, moreover, had
nothing to do with the farming of the taxes in southern
Syria 144 (§ 1 7 5 3 ) ] ) . This occurrence had an im-
portant bearing upon the position of the high priests of
the Jews in Jerusalem. Until now the spiritual head of
the community had been at the same time its repre-
sentative in its political relations with the foreign over-
lord ; now the care of these ‘foreign affairs’ was
dissociated from the priestly office and committed to a
secular person-the Tobiads were Benjamites (2Macc.
3 4 : and see 12). The change meant a substantial
diminution of the high priest’s power and gave rise to
many disputes within the community, Joseph having
asserted and maintained his new position as fully as he
could a5 against the high priest.
The struggle between the elder sons of Joseph and the
youngest, Hyrcanus, as also the setting-up by Hyrcanus
of a dominion of his own in the trans-Jmdanic territory
( 1 8 2 B . c . ) , where in 175 he cominmitted suicide from
fear of Antiochus IV. ( A n t . xii. 47-911 [# 196-222,
22’3-2361) render it very probable, if not even certain,
3505
ONIAS
that Hyrcanus held by the Ptolemies to the end whilst
his elder brothers went over, very likely before 198, to
the side of the Seleucids. Only under such a presup-
position can we understand the political attitude of
persons with whom z Macc. makes us acquainted. T h e
brothers Simon, Menelaus. and Lysimachus, that is to
say, necessarily (on account of Menelaus) belong to the
Tohiads; according to Ruchler ( 3 4 3 ) they are the
sons of Joseph with whom the narrative of A n t . xii. 4911
(S§ 2 1 8 3 , 2 2 8 8 ) deals. Simon under Seleucus IV.
( 1 8 7 - 1 7 5 )has the position of ‘overseer of the temple’
( n p o u r d n p TO; i e p o l : 2 Macc. 3 4 ) ; they must already,
cause of the Ptolemies. The high priest Onias, on the
other hand, according to 2 Macc. 310 stands in connec-
tion with the ‘ Tobiad’ Hyrcanus ; he is the opponent
of the elder brothers and now, therefore, in all prob-
ability is a friend of the Ptolemies. According to
2 Macc. 3 the mission of Heliodorus, who is represented
as having attempted at the command of Seleucus IV.
to violate the temple treasure in Jerusalem, ought to
fall within the time of his priesthood. The legend, it
the actual fact that in spite of the royal command the
treasure remained untouched. How this immunity was
secured remains uncertain ; perhaps it was on account
of the excellent relations subsisting betwen Heliodorus
and Onias 11.
The personalityof Onias 11. ap ears in totally different lights
inAnt.l2+andinzMacc,3J Infosephushefiguresasanarrow,
covetous man, in 2 Macc. as celebrated for his piety, his zeal for
the law, and his effective solicitude for the city and the com-
munity. This diversity of judgment is to be accounted for by
the difference of the sonrces. The narrative of Josephus is
written in the interest of Joseph the tax-farmer, perhaps by a
Samaritan (Willrich, 99 ; Biichler, 8 6 8 ) ; in z Macc. 3$ we
hear the voice of an uncompromising friend of the temple a t
Jerusalem.
(d and c). In what has been said above, the Onias
’’
o f ~ ~ ification
of 2 Macc.3 has been identified with
Identity Onias 11. The correctness of this identi-
~ ~ must
~ Lbe*further examined.
111111 **A.
On the data of Josephus it is more
natural to take 2 Macc. 3f: as relating to Onias 111.
For, according to A n t . xii. 410 (I 2 2 4 ) , Onias 11. died in
the reign of Seleucus IV.,he was succeeded by his son
Simon (11.). who in turn was succeeded by his son
Onias (111.) who died at the beginning of the reign of
Antiochus IV. Epiphanes ( A n t . xii. 5 1 ) . On this view
the close of the high-priesthood of Onias II., the whole
of that of Simon I I . , and nearly the whole of that
of Onias I I I . , all fell within the period of Seleucus IV.
According to 2 Macc. 4, on the other hand, no Jewish
high priest dies in the beginning of tne reign of Anti-
ochus IV. ; it is only at the instance of Menelaus (after
1 7 2 ) that Onias is murdered (4303), that is to say. at
a period when, according to Jos. A n t . xii.51, Onias
111. had already been dead for some years. If, accord-
ingly, the Onias 111. of Josephus is the person intended
in 2 Macc. 3 3 , it would be necessary to suppose that
the events of z Macc. 3f: happened precisely in the
closing years of Seleucus IV. Even so, however. the
‘contradiction between Josephus and 2 Macc. with regard
to the death of this Onias would remain,
A further circumstance, moreover, requires to be
noticed. Josephus names Simon (11. ) as having been
high priest between Onias 11. and Onias 111. ( A n t .
xii. 4 IO [I 2241) and informs us ( 4 11 [S 2291) that Simon
11. held with the elder sons of Joseph on account of
relationship, and thus not with Hyrcanus. This state-
ment remains unintelligible if we hold this Simon to
have been an Oniad ; for the Tobiad brothers were all
alike related to the Oniads through the mother of their
father Joseph ( A n / . xii. 42 [I 1601).
Buchler ( 3 9 3 ) seeks to dispose of this difficulty by
supposing the Simon 11. of Josephus to be in truth
the ‘overseer of the temple’ ( T ~ O U T ~ S TTOO ~ iepoD)
named in 2 Macc. 34, the Tobiad who ’for kinship’s
3505
 ONIAS
sake' held by his full brothers, not his half-brother
Hyrcanus ( A n t . xii.46 [§ 1 8 6 8 1 ) ; that in the source
followed by Josephus he was called chief priest (dpxr-
epelis)-as a king's officer named by the Seleucids-that
Josephus had understood the word wrongly as referring
to the Jewish high-priesthood, and thus included Simon
in the list of the high priests. The statement of Josephus
in A n t . xii. 411 [§ 2291 really does speak in favour of
this supposition. In that case, Simon 11. would have
to be deleted from the list of Jewish high priests. This
would carry with it the further consequence that Onias
11. was immediately succeeded by Onias 111. It is
contrary, however, to old-Jewish customs for father and
son to bear the same name. Thus we are led finally to
the supposition that Onias 11. and Onias 111. are one
and the same person. The same conjecture has already
been put forward by Schlatter and Willrich (114).
The murder of Onias, however, spoken of in 2 Macc.
470- 8 - is open -
. to grave doubt. He is there represented
8. Murder of as having been craftily put to death by
Onias II. Andronicus a t Daphne near Antioch
.-
after the expulsion of Tason f,1 7 c - 1 ,7.,7,) .
Formerly this datum used i o be regarhed as so certain
that, as a rule, the obscure words in Dan.926-nq:
n*t$-were explained by reference to it. Of late, how-
ever, great doubts have been expressed. Wellhausen
and Willrich have pointed out that, according to
Diodorus Siculus (xxx. 72) and Johannes Antiochenus
(ap. Muller, RY. Hist. GY. 4, p. 5 5 8 ) the regent
Andronicus puts to death the son of Seleucus IV.
a t the instance of king Antiochus IV., and subse-
quently is himself punished with death. Both scholars
are of opinion that 'the circumstances of the murder of the
prince have simply been transferred to the high priest,'
and therefore that the narrative of 2 Macc. 4 3 0 8 as to
the death of Onias is false. Certainly the account just
given of the end of Andronicus is more credible than
the story in 2 Macc. Strictly, however, it does not
follow that the murder of Onias a t Antioch is a pure
invention : it is possible still to hold it true even if one
were to come to the conclusion that the participation of
Andronicus or other details in 2 Macc. 4 are unhistorical.
It is surprising it must he admitted that Josephus should
know nothing of'this singular end of'a Jewish high priest.
The words in Dan. 9 26 are, taken by themselves so indefinite
that they cannot supply confirmationof what is aai6 in 2 Macc. 4.
Moreover, they have recently, and doubtless with greater truth,
been taken by such scholars as Renan Baethgen, and Well-
hausen as referring to the cessation df the legitimate high-
priesthood altogether, in parallelism to v. 25, where the inaugur-
ation of the high-priesthood after the exile is brought into
prominence.
Thus, the question of the death of Onias turns wholly
upon that as to the degree of confidence we can repose
in a Macc. as to this matter (see below, 5 I O ).
According to another view this Onias did not die at
- .
all as hieh Driest in Terusalem. but having fled from the
Y
hostility of his many enemies in Jeru-
9.
and Onias Iv. salem, the Tobiads, founded in Egypt,
under the oatronaee " of Ptolemv VI.
Philometor, the Jewish temple in Leontopolis. This
view is based upon the short statement in BY i. 1I
( S I 3 1 - 3 3 ) , and has recently been advocated principally
by Willrich and Wellhausen. Elsewhere (I SRAEL ,
5 6 9 6, col. 2 2 6 1 ) will be found a brief statement of the
construction to be put on the events of 175.170 B . C .
according to this view. The struggle between Onias
and his brother Jason, of which neither Josephus nor
2 Macc. have anything explicit to say, is after Willrich
( 8 8 8 ) to be drawn from the narrative which Josephus
(xi. 7 I ) gives regarding the high priest Johannes (=
Onias) and his brother Jesus (=Jason).
The present writer is now, however. inclined to
question the justice of this view. In any case it must
be carefully borne in mind that Josephus nowhere
affirms that the founder of the temple a t Leontopolis
ever held the high-priestly office in Jerusalem. In A n t .
3507
ONIAS
xii. 97 (I 387) 51 (I 2 3 7 ) xiii. 31 ( 5 62) and xx. l o 3
(§ 2 3 6 ) the Onias who migrated to Egypt is represented
as having been son of the high priest Onias 111. to whom
a t home the path to the high-priesthood was barred. In
BY vii. 102 (§ 4 2 3 ) this On%s is the son of Simon (so
also in Talmud : Z A T W 6281), 'one of the chief
priests in Jerusalem ' ( E & T& Pv 'Ifpoaohhfiors cip~iep&wv);
this addition is found also in BJ i. 1I (f 31) (€is TGY
dpXtE$wv); only in 3 3 does the phrase run, more
briefly, ' the chief priest Onias ' (6 6'hp~~~peds'Ovias).
r .
I here can be no question that this last expression has
to be interpreted in the light of what is said in 31 :
Onias is there for Josephus not one who is actually
discharging, or has discharged, the functions of a high
priest, but simply a member of one of the 'chosen
families out of which the high priests were selected
(Schurer, GJVi3)22218 ; cp Buchler, 1 1 8 ) . Nor does
the fact that he is described as son of Simon carry
us any further than this. An opinion has indeed
been expressed that ' Onias, son of Simon' ('Ovias
Zipwvos 1116s) is here only short for 'Onias, son of
Onias, son of Simon ' ('Ovtas T O G 'Oviou T O G Xfiwvos).
This, however, is nothing more than a harnionising
co-ordination with A n t . xii.97 xiii.31 and no reliance
can be placed on it. Whether Simon the father be
really the high priest Simon ( A n t . xii. 41: [I 2241) or
another person, it is impossible to determlne. In any
case this at least is certain : the Onias who migrates
to Egypt is nowhere spoken of by Josephus as having
held the high-priestly office. W e are therefore com-
pelled, in the end, to distinguish this Onias from Onias
111.
I t can hardly be merely accidental that 2Macc.
says nothing of a flight of Onias into Egypt, but on the
Trust- contrary relates the murder of the ' pious '
high priest Onias a t Daphne, whilst
of a Mace. Josephus repeatedly recurs to the flight
of Onias but says nothing of the violent
end of a high priest at Daphne. This suggests that
the author of aMacc. (or his source) may have in-
tended to depreciate the worth of the Onias-temple in
Egypt and for that purpose makes Onias the brother
of Jason, who was regarded as the founder of the
Onias-temple, to be murdered near Antioch so that :he
connection between the high-priestly Onias and the
temple in Leontopolis may be completely severed.
Such an intention would be in excellent agreement with
the tendency of zMacc. to uphold the dignity of the
temple of Jerusalem. It would result that the murder
of Onias itself, not merely the attendant details, had
been invented.
Baethgen ( Z A T W 6 [188S].EO)has adduced the execution of
Onias-Menelaus (Ant. xii. 9 7 [$ 334J1) to explain the origin of
the statements in 2 Macc. 4 3 0 s With this narrative, however,
fall to the ground at the same time two other assumptions :
namely, t h a t the murdered Onias is identical with the high
riest Onias (11. or 111.) and that Jason ( z Macc. 47) raised
fimself to the high-priesthood as opponent of Onias. This is of
importance for ourunderstandingofthe events of theperiod. The
last high priest Onias, according to Ant. xii. 4 IO (I 224), died
in the beginning of the reign of Antiochus 1V.
The result of our discussion of Onias 11. and 111.
may be summed up as follows. Onias 11. was prob-
ably the last legitimate high priest of
11' Conclusions* the Jewish community in Jerusalem.
H e held this office for a long time, having entered upon
it in the time of Ptolemy IV. Philopator,-at latest in
220, and continued in the discharge of it till the
beginning of the reign of Antiochus IV. ( 1 7 5 - 4 B . C . ) ,
that is to say, some forty or fifty years. From this
period begins the series of those high priests whom the
Seleucid kings nominated in virtue of their own might
and in defiance of Jewish right : Jason, Menelaus,
Alcimus : the author of the book of Daniel refuses to
take account of them.
As objections to this solution of the problem may
conceivably be urged the length of the term of office
assigned to Onias, also the disappearance of the Simon
3508
 ONIAS
named in Ant. xii. 4 IO. The student who finds these
objections too formidable to be overcome, may hold by
the statements of Ant. xii. 1 IO. According to what we
read there, Onias 11. will have heen high priest until the
first year of Seleucus IV., then Simon 11. will have
held the office f o r a short time and heen succeeded by
Onias 111. as the last legitimate high priest till 175-4.
In that event the statements also of 2 MRCC. 3f: will
have to be understood of Onias III., not as was said
above ($5 5.8) of Onias 11. On such a view, it is true,
one must abandon hope of explaining why it was that
Simon held by the elder sons of Joseph (6th ri/v m y -
ykveiav : Ant. xii. 410[§ 2291).
For the sake of completeness it ought also t o he mentioned
that in Josephus ( A n t . xii. 4 IO [$S zz5-zz71) Onias 111. receives
a letter of the king of Sparta, Areus, in which the Jews are
invited, on account of relationship through Abraham, to enter
into close alliance with the Lacedzemonians. The transaction
thus alleged vanishes on examination iiito air ; Areus I. reigned
in 309.265, Areus 11. died somewhere about 255. aged eight
years. Cp D i w & u s i o N , $ 21,and Hiicbler, 1 2 6 8 , who explains
the fable of r4ationship between the Laced;emonians and the
Jews by the settlement of Jews in the Dorian Cyrenaica.
( d ) Onins ZK-We have already seen that Josephus
nowhere designates Onias IV. as an actual high priest.
- ( $ 9 above).' I n BY 1 1 (5 i ~ ) - i tis
la' Date Of recorded of him that he expelled the
'Ilia* IV* Tobiads from Terusalem. The same
action is intended as is referred to in Azt. xii.51
( # 2 3 9 s ) and 2 Macc. 55f: where it is attributed to
Jason. Jason and Onias, according to Ant. xii. 51
( # 237f:) z Macc. 47, are brothers. The historical
accuracy of this relationship may be doubted ; for the
closely connected assumption that Onias I I I . , Jason,
and Onias=Menelaus, were all of them the sons of
Simon the high priest (Ant. xii. 51 [I 23831) is certainly
false.
Two brothers with the same name are (I. P ~ i o n 'unlikely;
Menelaus (=Onias) is the well-known leader of the Tohiads
(I 239 ; 2 Macc. 5 2 3 8 : ) and does not belong a t all to the high-
priestly families (cp the contrast in Alcimus, 2 Macc. 14 3).
Josephus erroneously reckoned him as so belonging because he
felt hound to infer his high-priestly descent from the fact of his
bearing the high-priestly dignity; but z Macc. 4 24f: is here
plainly right : mjc p2v A p ~ t ~ p w W t q0;SBu
r P&ov +ipov. Jason
1s represented alike by Josephus and h y z M a c c . 4 a s the
adversary of the Tohiads ; doubtless he helonged to the party
of the Oniads ; he and the Onias who migrated to Egypt were
party allies ; whether they were brothers as well must he left
undetermined. It is a t least possible, if not probable that
Josephus inserted Jason's name in the list of Jewish high ;riests
for the same reason a s that mentioned already in the case of
hlenelaus. Jason was in any case, however, a n Oniad and
belonged a s such to the high-priestly families. Nevertheless
the question of his relationship to Onias 111. is in a different
position from the same question as regards Menelaus.
The attempt to expel the Tobiads from Jerusalem
brings us down into the very thick of the conflicts under
Antiochus (cp BJvii. 102 [I 4231). It happened about
170 B.C. when Antiochus IV. had undertaken his first
expedition against Egypt and the report of his death was
being circulated in southern Syria. Jason hurried back
from the trans-Jordanic territory whither he had with-
drawn from hlenelaus in 172-1, received the support of
the people of Jerusalem, and compelled Menelaus and his
followers to take to flight. These betook themselves t o
Antiochus I\'. and induced him to restore Menelaus at the
point of the sword. This was done as Antiochus was
returning from Egypt in 170. Jason fled first to the E.
of the Jordan and subsequently to Egypt. probably to
Cyrene (Ruchler, 126f.), whilst Onias betook himself
to the court of Ptolemy VI. Onias' flight thus falls to
be dated in 170-169 B.C. The situation is stated quite
differently in Josephus (Ant. xii. 97 [§ 3871 xx. 103
[# 2361).
Onias is represented in Jos. as not having left Jerusalem until
Alcimus had been raised to the high-priesthood by Antiochus
V. Eupator, and he saw himself superseded. This date (163.2
H .c.) appears to he too late. Still the intervention of the
Romans in 168 did bring about a certain cessation of hostilities
between the Seleucids and the Ptolemies, so that political
fugitives from Syriacould no longer hope so readilyfoor a favour-
able reception at the court of Alexandria. Moreover, in Judzea
itself, about 163 the national resistance to the Seleucids was
3509
ONIAS
already organised, and it is difficult to see any reason why Onias
should at that date set off for Egypt in order to cool his hatred
of the Greeks.
According to what we learn from Josephus (c. A?. 2 5
[I 4 9 8 1 ) the Jewswho accompanied Onias to Egypt seem
13. The temple to have played a prominent part in
in Heliopolis. the army of Ptolemy VI. Josephus
speaks of Onias and Dositheus as
generals of the entire army and adds that in the war
between Ptolemy (VII. Physkon) and Cleopatra (the
widow of Ptolemy VI. ) Onias adhered to Cleopatra and
took successful part in the operations in the field. The
sons also of Onias, Helkias and Ananias, were entrusted
by queen Cleopatra (108 and 104 B . c . ) with the conduct
of the war against her son Ptolemy Lathurus (Ant.
xiii. 10 4 [$# 285 - 2871 - following Strabo - 13 I
[$ 348$]). Special interest attaches to the building of
the Jewish temple in Egypt which is attributed to Onias.
It is fully dealt with in what so far as we can judge is a
genuine passage in Wvii. 102-4 ($420$). Onias seeks
to gain Ptolemy VI. to his purpose by urging political
considerations ; the building of a Jewish temple, and
full freedom granted to Jews for the exercise of their
religion there, would win over all Jews to the Egyptian
side. Ptolemy accordingly granted him a site in the
nome of Heliopolis, 180 stadia from Memphis. Onias
caused this site to he fortified and erected his temple
in such style that it had the appearance of a citadel
sixty cubits high. As a whole it did not resemble the
temple in Jerusalem ; only the altar and the sacred
vessels (oivabfflanz), apart from the golden candlestick,
were the same as in Jerusalem. The temple was
endowed with land so that the priests had a liberal in-
come. Jealousy o f Jerusalem is represented by Josephus
as Onias's motive. The whole district was called a Onias's
land' (3 'Ovl6u [xhpa]). This temple lasted longer than
that of Jerusalem.
T h e Jewish diaspora in Egypt was profoundly moved b y the
fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., and 1,upus the goveruor fearing
that the temple of Onias might become a religious centre for
revolutionary movements, received from Vespasian, in answer to
his own representations, orders to demolish the structure. Lupus
a t first merely closed the temple; hut his successor Paulinus
made it completely inaccessible after having plundered it of its
furniture (&vaB&ara). This was in 73 A.D. Josephus repre-
sents it as having stood for 343 years, on which reckoning i t
must have been founded about 270 B.C. This date, however, is
absolutely excluded by the foregoing data of Josephus himself;
there must he some error in the figures. I t IS usual to assnme
243 as the original reading ; this would give 170 B.C. as the year
of foundation. W e may conjecture that the plan and its execu-
tion were not earlier than the desecration of the temple in Jeru-
salem by Antiochus IV. in 168, but also earlier than the granting
of freedom of worship by Antiochus V. in 163.
The data supplied by Josephus in Ant. xiii. 3 1 8
($5 66-70) lo4 (9 285) exhibit considerable discrepancies.
The two letters incorporated-that of Onias to Ptolemy
and Cleopatra, and their answer to it-are both without
a doubt mere literary fabrications, of which the answer
is still more worthless than the other. In Onias's letter
the site for which he asks is an old disused sanctuary
in the enclosure (dx6pwpa) of rural Bubastis (dypia
BOI?/~UTLS); in the answer it is a ruined sanctuary of
rural Bubastis ( d y p f a BOI@UTLS) in Leontopolis in the
district of Heliopolis (cp Ant. xii. 97 xx. 1 0 3 ) . It is
customary in accordance with this last statement to
speak straightway of the temple in Leontopolis ; it is
questionable, however, whether the various definitions
of the site exactly agree. According to Ant. 3 r ( $ 67),
lo4 (5 285), the temple was built after the model o f
that in Jerusalem. The sole motive, according to 31
( # 63) was the personal ambition of Onias ; its erection
is spoken of (32 [# 691) as sinful and a transgres-
sion of the law. The discrepancy of the accounts gircs
Buchler ( 2 3 9 8 : )occasion to conjecture the real question
to be whether it was a (Jewish) temple of Onias or a
(Samaritan) temple of Dositheus that was actually built.
From the indications regarding the temple in B/ vii. 1 0
Buchler is rather inclined to conclude that it was
Samaritan ( 2 5 5 ) . Against this inference, however,
3510
 ONIONS
weighty considerations can be urged. Had the temple
been Samaritan, assuredly the allusion to it in Is. 191s
would not have been admitted into the Jewish Canon,
and the Mishna would not have found it necessary to
discuss the question whether sacrifices and vows in con-
nection with the Onias temple were valid also for the
' temple of Jerusalem (Schiirer, GIV(3J399).
( e ) For the Onias named hy Josephus in Ant. xii. 5 I (s 238J)
as the youngest son ofSimon 11. see MENELAUS.
Besides the works on the Hisiory of Israel cited in ISRAEL,
5 116, see Baethgen in ZA TW 6 277-282 (1886) ; A. Schlatter, of the hut or tent and a fire of charcoal is placed at the
in St.Kr. 1891, pp. 6 3 3 8 , in Jason von
14. LikatUre. Kyretre, 1891, and in ZATW14145 8
(1894); H. Willrich, Jude- I(.Griechen,
1895 ; Wellhausen, GGA, 1895, pp. 947- 5 7 , A. Biichler, Die
Tobiaden I. die Oniaden im 21. MaR,&h'erbuche u. in der
verwandten jiidisch-hee(lmisfi~chenLiterafur, 1899 ; B. Niese,
h7n'tik der beiden Makkahierbiichzr, IF; H. Willrich, In this hot air bath, the fumes of the drugs sink into the
Judaica, IF. H. G .
ONIONS ( b j y 2 , ~ g ~ i for m ,cognates see BDB ;
& ) , for by the ' mixed multitude' and
~ p o [ ~ ] ~ ylonged
the Israelites, Nu. l l 5 t . The onion ( A l l i u m Cepa, L. )
of Egypt has always had a high reputation (Plin. N H
1963. 101, Jnv. 1 5 9 ; cp Wilk. Anc. Eg.PI, 225 f.).
Hasselquist (Travels, 290) speaks with enthusiasm of
their sweaness and softness. Very possibly, however,
the original story (see MOSES, !$ 5 J ) meant the onions
grown in the Negeb near Zarephath, ' mixed multitude'
being due to corruption. See E. H. Palmer's descrip-
tion of the country (N EGEB , 5 5 J ) . Cp ASHKELON we decide not to touch the Hebrew text, for there is
(end), FOOD,!$ 6 , and see Low, 7 4 8 and De Candolle,
On'gine, 5 2 8
ONO (iiu tis
or ; cp ONAM, ONAN ; usually U N O
or OYOV, generally a u o [Ll, once wvav (I Ch. 8 12, 8,where L
has uv0vI ; the Onus of I Esd. 5 22 EV, is simply a transliteration
of the Gk. genitive.
A town near Lydda (Neh. 6 2 ; cvw [B]. WYQ [KA])
which, if the text be right, should include the so-called
'valley of the craftsmen' (Neh. 1135 [BK'A om.] I Ch.
414). See C HARASHIM , VALLEY OF. Thebiblical notices
are all post-exilic ; but the mention of the place (under the
form Auanau or, as W. M. MOller gives it, '0-'no) in the
Karnak list ofThotmes 111. (no. 65)proves its antiquity.
It may be safely identified with the modern Kefr ' A n d ,
about z m. to the NNW. of Lod. It was in 'the
villages' of the 'plain of Ano' that Sanballat and
Geshem proposed to have their meeting with Nehemiah
(Neh. 62). See HADID,LOD. The text, however, is
very doubtful; for a probable restoration see O N , i.
(end).
ONYCHA (n!n@, P W : ~ ; EX. 30341.; O N Y E ;
onyx; cp Ecclus. 2415, O NYX , EV), oneoftheingredients
of frankincense, generally believed to be the operculum
of some species of marine mollusc. The operculum is a
horny or calcareous plate attached to the foot of certain
Gasteropodous molluscs the function of which is to close
the aperture of the shell when the animal has withdrawn
into the interior. It is not possible to identify the
species of mollusc used; very likely more than one
furnished the material. The name suggests a claw or
nail-shaped object and this corresponds with the shape
of the operculum of the genus Strombus, one species of
which, S. tvicon'us, IS found in the Red Sea; but its
operculum is small and insignificant. Fusus, another
genus which is common in the Red Sea, has also a claw-
shaped operculum and is known to have been used in
recent times as ,an ingredient in perfumes. Murex,
another accessible genus, has a more substantial oper-
culum which may have been put to the same use. When
burnt these opercula give off a strong aromatic or pungent
odour. They were well known to the ancients, by whom
1 For the root cp AI. sahala, 'to peel ' (so Di.), less probably,
Syr. ZhaZ, 'to drop,' or more correctly ' t o filter,' whence Boch.
(erroneously) thought of bdellium. The meaning ' peel ' is
supported by Pesh. and Targ. nwz, the rendering of Targ.
Ps.-Jon., probablyrepresentsthe Costrrs sjeciosus (Law no. 305).
Cp Winer s.v. 'Teufelsklaue for the view that &&'eth is
amber, s e i K. G. Jacob, Z D d G 43 354 (1889). '
3511
ONYX
they were sometimes used for medicinal purposes (cp
Diosc. 2 IO ; Pliny, HN 32 46 ; the Arab. Kazwini, 1140 ;
Ges. Ths. 1388 ; and Di. a d l o c . ) .
Onycha is still largely used throughout Nubia and
Upper Egypt as an ingredient in the complicated per-
fumes with which the Arab women scent themselves. It
is gathered along the coast of the Red Sea and trans-
ported inland. The method of scenting the person is
as follows :-a small but deep hole is made in the floor
bottom of the hole ; upon this a handful of drugs, which
include ginger, cloves, myrrh, frankincense, cinnamon,
sandal wood, onycha, and a kind of sea-weed is thrown,
The woman then crouches over the hole enveloped in
her mantle or tope which falls from her neck like a tent.
skin, and the perfume is retained for a considerable
number of days; see Sir S . Baker's T h Nile Tributaries
of Abyssinia, London, 1868. A. E. S.-S. A. C .
ONYX (Dg&). This is EV's invariable rendering,
though RVmg. gives ' beryl ' at Ex. 28 g 20 35 27 Job 28 16
I Ch. 292. For the versions (which differ
*'
greatly) see B ERYL , where Dillmann's
rendering beryl' is supported. Kautzsch
( H S ) retains the Hebrew term '?'$ham (stone)' un-
altered for D?W. This is perhaps the wisest course, if
apparently no safe explanation of ngY even from Assyri-
ology.'
Experience shows, however, that the readings of the traditional
text in references t o precious stones are hy no means always to
be trusted. It is probable that the names of recious stones
became corrupted even in documents used by 8, and one can
easily believe that this writer made up his list of recious stones
(as he made up his genealo 'cal lists of names7 by including
corrupt variants. We have afeady found one probable case of
this (see J ACINTH), and we are now on the track of another.
&ham as a proper name is certainly corrupt (see
S HOHAM ) ; it is also corrupt as the name of a precious
stone, and the true form of the name is that with which
in Ex.2820 3913 and Ezek.2813 it is combined, viz.,
a&,
. : I + ydSCph%. T h e corruption was very easy, and
wherever the ydPphZh-stone was referred to outside the
lists in Exodus and Ezekiel the name appears to have
been editorially corrected (miscorrected) into Zham.
What, then, is theydScphU-stone? Kautzsch replies.
'the onyx.' But let us reconsider the question in the
a. Identifi- light of our present result, which appears
to be new-i. e . , taking into account the
cati~tioapassages in which (asthe text stands) the
Wmm-stone is specially mentioned, but not the ydScphih.
From Gen. 2 12 ?&am appears to have been plentiful in
Havilah. But both the situation of H AVILAH [q.v.]
and the reading of the text are uncertain, and it would
take too long to discuss them here. T h e Sham-stone
is called ' the precious Siham ' (Job 28 16), and is singled
out as the gem p a r excelZence in Ex. 35 g 27a I Ch. 29 2.
From E x . 2 8 9 8 it appears to have been specially
adapted for engraving upon (Ex. 28gfl). Now it can-
not be denied that the onyx would have been suitable for
the purpose mentioned in Ex. 289, and that the variety
Aled S ARDONYX [sa.1 was very highly valired by the
ancients. But it must be remembered that every one of
ihe stones specified in Ex. 28 17-20was to be engraved
with the name of one of the twelve tribes, so that there
IS no compulsion whatever to prefer the onyx for the
iiham. So far as relates to the passages in which
vdPphth occurs, we have seen already (see J ASPER ) that
.he opal best satisfies the conditions imposed by them.
lonsidering too that the opal specially deserved the title
If ' precious ' applied to the !Cham in Job 28 16 (where
t is even combined with the sapphire), we may safely
$fer ' opal ' as a probable rendering, wherever M T gives
:ither ydfephZh or Sdzam.
1 According to Jensen (ZA 10 [18951372) fhhmn would repre-
ent an original A7zm * which could not in Assyrian give
a(rS)mtu, the word whiih some (see BERYL) connect withS&zam.
3572
 OPHEL
We must not urge in favour of the onyx that the finpst onyxes
have for ages been brought from India, for the view that Havilah
and I’ishon were in India is confessedly antiquated. l‘he char-
acteristics of the onyx are ointed out elsewhere (see C HAL -
CEDONY , $ I). I t may be a d f e d that it was probably that variety
of chalcedony which presents a red layer that originally suggested
the name ‘ onyx ’ (from &ut, ‘ a nail ‘1,since the contrast between
its layers remotely resembles that between the flesh-coloured
part of the finger.nail and the white /unuZu at its root.
O NYX is also used in Ecclus. 24 15 in the sense of
ONYCHA [q.ZJ.]. T. K. C.
OPHEL (bv?, ‘the hill,’ MI zz [M ESHA , § 3 ] ) ,
the SE. slope of the temple hill (see J E R U S A L E M , 0 r9), z Ch.
27 3 33 14 Neh. 3 26J 1121 (without article in Is. 32 14, RVmg.
‘ Ophel,’ AV ‘forts,’ RV ‘the hill,’ and in Mic.48 R V w .
‘ Ophel,’ AV ‘stronghold,’ RV ‘the hill ’). In 2 K. 5 24 we read
of a n Ophel (AV ‘tower,’ E V ‘hill ’) at Samaria.
Three of the passages enumerated need consideration.
( I ) If the text of z K. 5 2 4 is right, Elisha’s house stood
close to an Ophel ( (hill’)connected with the fortifications
of Samaria. But the statement that ‘ when he (Gehazi)
came to the Ophel, he took them from their hand, and be-
stowed them in the house’ is too strange to be admitted
as probable. Klostermann’s emendation $ m ~ ,‘ the
recesses (?) of the house,’ is hardly satisfactory ; n y m ,
’ the ascent’ (cp I S . 911)is suitable and may be righi ;
D and 2 are easily confounded.
( 2 ) In Is. 5214 the ‘hill ’ and the ’ watch-tower ’ are
not to be found in d ; they may be a later insertion
(Bickell, Marti) ; cp Neh. 325-27.
( 3 ) Mic. 4 8 stands in a context full of textual error (see
M ICAH , BOOK OF, § 4).
In Crit. Bib. it is maintained that 2,. 8, in its original form,
probably ran thus :-
And thou, 0 Jerahmeel [Jerahmeel], Zion’s people-thy
foes I will collect,
And there shall come the Ishmaelites, the Geshurites,
and the Smalekites.
‘Jerahmeel ’ is the old name of Jerusalem ; Isaiah (one may
venture to assert) plays upon it very beautifully (%l ~ f ;:see Lo-
RUHAMAH), and the late prophetic writer of nlic. 48f. imitates
gim. The first ‘ Jerahmeel’ is represented in M T by migdul,
tower,’ the second by ‘eder ‘ophel(flock, hill). C p EDEH, and
for a similar suggestion in Gen. 35 21 see Crit. Bi6.
T. K. C.
OPEIR ( T H K ; in 6 spelled in eight ways but usually
[in B always1 with initial u ; o + a p [ACI, ou+ap [AELI,
uo+[elcp [BNAI uou+eip [BNAQI’L etc.], uw+apa [AI, aw+cipa
[BLI, u w h p a ’ [ B A I ; Vg. alwa& Ophir, except Ps. 4510
deuurufo [following e Gra~ptiuyJ,Job 2424 aureof, 28 r6 InA@
Is. 13 12 06rizol [=Ar. i6riz?]; Pesh. transliterates). There ma;
he a trace of the spelling Sophir in Gen. 10 30 (n!?b, ‘ to Sophir’
=a@, ‘ to Ophir’ ; see GOLD, 0 I c).
According to Gen. 1 0 2 9 I Ch. 1 2 3 Ophir was a son of
Joktan. In the time of Solonion the place so called
1. Biblical was the source of gold and other costly
references. objects imported into Palestine ( I K. 10
IIZZ). The objects mentioned i n I K.
1922 are gold, silver, Fenhabbim. &@him, and t u k k q y i m .
Senha6bim may be a combination of ivory and ebony ’
(see E B O N Y , (j z b ) ; hut it may also be an error for
0x7 ’KIN (Klo.), ’ onyx-stones’ (but see ON YX).
I n this case p 3 n l Q‘DP will be best explained as corrupted
from adittographed ,]an, bipindu (the name of a precious stone,2
corrupted elsewhere in O T ; see TorAz). The usual explanation
of &iPhinz and iukkiyyim is extremely improbable; it is not
supported by BBL, nor are ‘apes and peacocks ’ referred to by
the Chronicler. In I K. 928 onlygold ismentioned ; hut in 10 I I
almuggim-timber and precious stones are referred to. Almuggim
wa4 most prohably a rare hardgrained wood from Elam.3 See
ALDIUG, APE. P EACOCK , EBOXV. IVOKY.
1 On this word, and on Invpov, which some connect with
Ophir, see CRYSTAL d‘ GOLU 0 I.
2 The peculiar apbro&atenek of this suggestion will appear
from a reference to Gen. 2 12, where, accordma to a critical
emendation which seems to represent a t a n y rate one stage in
the history of the text, the &ipindu-stone as well as the &’mrn
and gold, came from Havilah ; c p G OLD , 8 T (6).
3 I n M T of 2 Ch. 2 8 171 Solomon sends for almug-timber from
Lebanon, instead of Ophir, and critics have reproached the
Chronicler for ignorance. But r~>,$a (the initial 13 is ditto-
graphed) is simply a n incorrect variant for p j & ~‘,almuggim.’
Exactly fhe same error is made in ,Cant. 3 g where ‘wood of
Lehanon should he ‘a1mug;timher ; cp 310 where ‘purple’
(‘argamk) should be ‘almug. See Cn’t. Bi6.
35’3
OPHIR
Ships (unless, indeed, as Kittel supposes, it was only
a single ship; cp 6, pla ... were despatched
thither by S OLOM ON [q.n.] in conjunction with Hiram,’
and at a later time JEHOSHAPHAT [g.”.] would fain have
followed his example ( I K.928=zCh. 8 1 8 I K. 1 0 1 1 ~ 2
= z Ch. 9 IO 21 I K. 2248f. = z Ch. 2035-37). Hence in
poetry and late prose ‘ gold of Ophir’ = fine gold,’
Is. 1312 Ps. 4510 [MT] Job 2816 I Ch. 294, and even by
itself Ophir can mean ‘ fine gold ’ ; so, e.g., in Job 22 24,
and possibly in Ps. 4510 (see GOLD, I e ) .
Respecting the site of Ophir there are five views which
claim to be considered :-
I. Lassen (Zndirche AZterfhumskunde, 1538 f.), fol-
lowed by Delitzsch, identifies Ophir with the Aberia of
Ptolemy, the Abhira of the Sanskrit geo-
2‘ graphers, which was on the W. coast of
OPhir‘ India, near the mouths of the Indus. To
this view there are serious objections.
That India is meant, was held long ago by Vitringa, Bochart
a n d Reland, and has the authority of Jos. ( A d . viii. 64), wh;
says that the land formerly called Z&+rrpa, hut now Xpuuij,
belongs to India. @, too, probably means this by its u + ~ p
(and the like); c p the Polyglot Arahic version of Is. 1312
(WiFd). I t is usual to refer t o the Coptic vocabularies in which
India is called Sophir,a and t o the old city of Z o h a p a (Ptol.) or
OGarrapa (Arrian), which was on the W. of Malahar in the
neighhourhood of Goa. There are, however, four serious ob-
jections :-(I) A maritime trade with India hardlyexisted prior t o
the seventh century B.c., and the Jews a t any rate cannot be as-
sumed to haveknown India before thePersian periodfsee INDIA).
( 2 ) The objectsmentioned in I K. 10 I I 2 2 d o not a t all necessarily
point to India (see ALMUGTREES, APE, PEACOCK). ( 3 ) T h e
Indian gold that was exported took the form of gold dust. (4)
Gold was not imported from Barharike-the port for Aberia and
the Indian Delta. See Arrian, Pen$lus, 39, where a full list of
Indian exports is given, and cp Peters, 50; Keane, 5 3 8
2. Peters (DasgoZdene Ophir Salomos, 1895) warmly
advocates the identification of Ophir with the mysterious
r u i n s of Zimbabwe in Mashonaland discovered by Mauch
in 1871 ( 3 17’ ~ 30” E. long., 20’ 16’ 30” S . lat.), in a
district between the Zambesi and the Limpopo sown
broadcast with the ruins of granite forts and the remains
of ancient gold-diggings in the quartz reefs. Peters also
thinks that Ophir and the Punt of the Egyptian inscrip-
tions are identical, and that they are situated in the
modern Rhodesia. Certainly gold was abundant there
in antiquity, and topazes and rubies are said to be found
in the Revwe river near Sofala. The very name Ophir
Peters finds preserved in the name Fura (about 15 m. S.
of the Zambesi), which he traces to Afur, by which name
the Arabs of the sixteenth century knew this district.
(Cp the summary and criticism in Keane, 30-35.)
There are two special objections, however, to this view :-(I)
This SE. African district wasunknown to the ancients,and even to
the Arabian geographers before the thirteenth century. ( 2 ) Punt
was, according to Maspero(Duwn o f C i v . 396,n. 6), the country
hetween the Nile and the Red Sea, though the name was after-
wards extended to all the coast of the Red Sea and to Somali-
land, possibly even to a part ofArabia. I t is o n l i i n the extended
sense that Punt can come into consideration (cp EGYPT, 8 48).
3. Benzinger suggests identifying Ophir with the land of
Punt-Le., the Ethiopian coast of the Red Sea with the
opposite coast of Arabia. This partly coincides with
Sprenger’s view (Alte Geogr. Arad. 4 9 8 ) that Ophir
was on the W. coast of Yemen. It is quite true that
ingots of gold were sent from Punt as tribute to
queen Ha‘t-Iepsut ( ’ Hatasu.‘ 18th dyn.). But Punt
was not, like Ophir, the land of gold par exceZ/elence;
gold only figures amongst other precious objects, the
first of which are ‘ the good woods of Tannter’
(the land of the gods-ie., the holy land), &my or gun1
arabic trees producing green ana, ebony, and pura ivory.
4. T o the preceding identifications there is this ad-
ditional objection that the inclusion of Ophir among the
sons of Joktan points to an Arabian locality. It is not
enough, however, to prove the abundance of gold and
silver in ancient times on the W. coast of Arabia between
the Hijaz and Yemen. For, not to lay stress on the
1 T h e notice in I K. 10 zz was misunderstood by the Chronicler
2 Ch. 9 21)) who supposed the phrase ‘ Tarshish ships ’ to mean
‘ships that went to T rshish.’ See TARSHISH.
2 Champollion, L’&ypfc sous Zes Plraraom, 298.
35’4
 OPHNI
three years’ voyage to Ophir and back mentioned in
I K. 1022 (see below, 5 3, end), we should have expected
the journey to this part of Arabia to be performed by a
caravan (cp 10 IS) ; the queen of Sheha came from SW.
Arabia by land (102).
5. Glaser (Skizze, 2 3 5 7 8 3 6 8 3 ; cp Sayce, PSRA,
Oct. 1896. p. 174, Keane, pp. 43fi)places Ophir on
3. Probable the E. coast of Arabia, stretching up the
Persian Gulf. So, too, Hommel (see
references in A H T . D. 216). who derives
. 1 I I .
Ophir from Apir, an old cuneiform name for that part of
Elam which lay over against the E. Arabian coast, and
hence,for that coast itself. This he connects with a theory
that from an early date there was commercial intercourse
between Elam in the E. and Nubia in the W. by Ophir,
and, accepting the present writer’s theory that ‘ alniug ’ as a
name for a rare kind of timber used for building is derived
from Ass. elammaku (see ALMUG,vol. i., col. 12o)--i.e.,
‘ Elamitish ’-he claims the almug-timber as one of the
exports from Ophir. This is a rather attractive view.
Of course the objects taken in by Solomon’s agents at
Ophir would not in all cases be products of Ophir.
From the inland region as well as from more distant
parts, merchants would bring their wares to the em-
porium at Ophir. This was evidently the farthest
point of the voyage. There is nothing to prevent us
from supposing that Solomon’s ships first sailed along
the Egyptian coast, then along the Somali coast, and at
last along the coast of Arabia till they entered the Persian
Gulf.’ How they trafficked with the natives, we are not
told ; but Naville (Tempk of Deir e2-Bahari, 315) ex-
plains how the objects brought by the men of Punt to
the Egyptians sent by H d t - k p s u t were goods to be
exchanged against the products of Egypt. Such, no
doubt, was the course pursued by the agents of Solomon.
A word must he added here on the remarkable statement of
I K. 10 22, ‘ For the king had a t sea Tarshish ships with the
ships of Hiram ; once in three years came the Tarshish ships,
and brought gold, silver, ivory,’ etc. Ophir is not mentioned
here, and the passage most probably belongs (see Kittel’s com-
mentary, hut cp Burney in Hastings, DB 2 %sa)to a late re-
dactor. If so, it would not be necessary to charge the redactor
with having exaggerated (through ignorance) the length of the
voyage to Ophir. T o go all round Arabia, stopping perhaps on
the way, and a t any rate waiting long a t Ophir, must have
required a considerable time. T h e redactor possibly had an
old notice beside him, which he abbreviates. This old notice
probably used the expression ‘Ophir-ship,’ which we may perhaps
find in @ of 9 26 (reading with Klo. vairv o+rpa for vairv ir&p OW).
See also J. Kennedy, ‘Early Commerceof Babylon with India ’
3 R A S 1898, pp. zqr-288; ‘Ophir’(revised by Kessler) in Riehm’s
H W B h 2 1 1 3 8 8 ; Soetheer Das Goldland Ogriir 1880’ Leng
Ojhir u. die Ruinen won Z>m6a6ye 1896 ’ A. K.’ Keaie; Th;
GoZd ofOjhir, 1 9 1 (virtually identikes Op’hir with SEPNAK).
T. K. C.
OPHNI (93, meaning unknown ; ‘ stench ’ ? 5 106 ;
om. BBA2
A@NH [L], UAS& [Pesh.], aphni [Vg.], cp
ufni, ~ + N E IOS(2)94102 2 2 4 3 ) , a Benjamite city, grouped
with Chephar-ammoni and Geba (Josh. 18 24). Before
seeking to identify it, we must be reasonably sure of the
name. 31oyn and 32iayn stand side by side ; the strong
probability is that dittography has come into play, and
that one or the other of the words should be cancelled.
Now Josh.1811-28 belongs to P, in whose time the
existence of a n Ammonite (or Jerahmeelite ?) village,
or a village which had been Ammonite, would not
surprise us (cp P AHATH -M OAB , TOBIAH).If, on the
other hand, we prefer ha-Ophni (so M T reads) to ha-
Animoni, how is ha-Ophni ( ; . e . , Beth ha-Opbni. scarcely
Chephar ha-Ophni) to be accounted for? There is no
obvious meaning, no obvious identification. Probably
there is no such word as Ophni.
With Gophna(mod.Jzym-; see Baed. 214), soimportant in later
timec, we can hardly identify it ; Gophna would he rather too
far N. (so Buhl, PaL 173). Resides, mod. Jifna presupposes an
ancient name I?!, ‘vine’or nm?-n’?, ‘place of vines.‘ T h e
valley in which JifnZ stands is one of the most fertile in Palestine.
On Gophna see Neubauer, G d o p . 157. T. K. C.
1 So Kessler.
2 H-P, however, citeax$v[elr, a + o q and aiQns in certain MSS.
3515
ORCHARD
‘ a h i n d ’ ? ; roc$apa [BL]).
OPHRAB (?I???, I.
A town mentioned in I S. 1317 as on one of the roads
taken by the marauding Philistines from Michmash.
It was towards ‘ the land of SHUAL,’ and from the con-
text we may infer that it was to the N. of Michmash.
Probably the same as 2.
2. A town in Benjamin. in P s eastern group of
cities, Josh. 1823 (rs+paOa [E], a + p [A], a+apa [L]).
Perhaps the Ephraim of z S. 13 23, and to be identified
with the mod. et- Tuiyibeh (see E PHRAIM ii.). Though
too far N. for a Benjamite town, the circumstance that
a place of this name is mentioned in I S. 13 16f. in con-
nection with Geba of Benjamin may have seemed to P
to justify placing Ophrah in Benjamin (cp HPSni. ad
Zoc.). Whether it is the Ephraim of Jn. 1 1 5 4 is open
to question ; this place, near the wilderness of Judah,
was very possibly En-cerem ( ‘ Ain Kdn’m).
3. The city of Gideon (Judg. 611 24 827 95), called
‘ Ophrah of the Abiezrites’ (624). It lay in W. Man-
asseh, and was apparently within an easy distance of
Shechem (see 95). If Fer‘atH, 6 m. WSW. of NHblus.
is not PIRATHON (P.v.), it is somewhat plausible2 to
identify it with Gideon’s Ophrah. The name ‘ Ophrah,’
or perhaps Ephrath, may occur, disguised as ‘ Deborah ’
in Judg. 4f:
One of the many examples of the textual and consequently
historical errors of the early editors seems to he connected with
the name of Ophrah. Underneath the story in Judg. 4 there may
he a record of a great battle between the Israelites and the
Kenizzites under their king Jahin and his general (siris).
patriotism of the Israelites was stirred up by the ‘judge,The or
ruler, of the time, whom we know, in Judg. 6-8, a s Jeruhhaa!
or GIDEON(g.v.), but in Judg. 4 a s Deborah-ie., ‘Ophrah
(Ephrath). In Judg. 44f: we should perhaps read ‘And Ophrah
[a prophetess, n g l o s s ] , wife of Zelophehad, judged Israel a t this
time. She was of the family of M a y i of the house of Jerahmeel,
in the land of Ophrah (Ephrath). I t is probable that hot!
‘Jerubhaal’and ‘ Ephrath’areearly corruptions of ‘JERAHMEEL
( q . 7 ~ ) . c p L A P I D O T H , and See crit. Bi6.
l5 usually eQpaBa; @A cQparF in 827 95, and @L +pa in
B I T E 27.
4. (yoeopa [A], +pat? [L]). , The eponym of a Judahite clan
called Ophrah, which traced Its origin to Meonothai (Maon?),
I Ch. 4 14t. T h e genealogy is Kenizzite. T. K. C.
OPOBALSAMUM (qp?, i+@h), EX.3 0 3 4 RVmE.,
EV STACTE (4.v.).
ORACLE. For ‘ oracle’ in the sense of a snper-
natural message or advice obtained by supernatural
means, see D IVINATION , MAGIC. In EV the w-ord
represents the following Hebrew and Greek terms :-
I . T h e ‘oracle of God’ (2 S. 1623) is simply (so mg.) the
‘word of God’ (Da?k$ 127, M y o s 706 Be06 cp Jer. 1 2 and
often).
2. I n N T , A\6y~a,3 literally ‘words,’ everywhere rendered
‘oracles,’ is used of the hlosaic laws (Acts 7 38, cp Rom. 3 z),
the doctrines of the Christian religion (Heh. 5rz), and the utter-
ances of God spoken hy Christian teachers ( I Pet. 4 IT).
3. T h e word ‘oracle’ (l’?q, d&r) as applied to a part of the
temple a t Jerusalem (1 K. 6 5 16 19 f: 7 49 8 6 8 z Ch. 3 16 [here,
however, 1’37 (Berth. Ki.), Le., ‘necklace,’=lower border of the
capital, should be read] 4 20 5 7 , Q a , ¶ [ ~ l ~ once
p, Saj3epp [AI, once
X p v F a n o v p l [ B a ? b ? m g . ] ; Ps. 282, va6s) we owe to Aq.,
Sym. and Vg.4 who wrongly, hut not unnaturally, derived
the Heb. from dibbzr to speak (hence X p q p a r r u q p i o v [so
Ba? b? mg. I K. 8 61, orarulum). T h e d&r is properly the
innermost room of the temple (so RVmg. Ps. Z.C. ; cp Ar. dubur,
dabr, hack)-the holy of holies-wherein dwelt YahwS as mani-
fested in the ark. A similar place was to he found in every
temple (e.g., of Baal, z K. 10 2 5 , C5L acc. to Klo.) ; it is the
Assyrian paraRku (see Jastrow, K B A 627), the Gk. 8Svrov
(adytam), and is a survival from the primitive times when the
temple was built before the cave wherein the deity was supposed
to dwell (cp Gr. p+pov from nl#, ‘cave 7. See TEMPLE.
ORATOR. 1. VI+ lh!,
ztJcin ld+aK IS. 3 3 , RV
‘enchanter.’ See MAGIC.
2. bjrop, Acts 24 I . Cp TERTULLUS.
ORCHARD. I . D3?8,pavdZs; napah~icoc, Cant.
4 13. See PARADISE.
2. drros. Bar. 671 1701. See GARDEN.
1 A corruption of the Greek text may well be supposed.
2 Conder, PEFQ, 1876, 197 ; cp GASm., HG 329, n. 3.
3 Often in C5 for j$, the priest’s breastplate.
4 Theod. oscillates between Saj3ap and Xpqparrsnjprov.
3516
 ORDINATION
ORDINATION. See HANDS, L AYING ON OF.
ORE (lg),Job 2224, RVmg. See G O L D , MINES.
OREB (319,‘raven,’ § 68 ; but see below; a p ~ B
[BK-RTLJ) and ZEEB (2&T, ‘ w o l f ’ ? § 68, ZHB
[BKXRTL]), two Midilnite princes in one of the t\vo
stories of GIDEON (q.v.), corresponding to ZEBAHand
ZALMUNNA in the other (Jndg. 7 25, cp Is. 10 26). They
are said in the narrative to have been slain, the one
upon the Rock of Oreb ( m j v - i ? x ; soup [wpqp], aouparv,
A ) , the other a t the Winepress of Zeeb ( ~ i q. - > .. ? !; L U K E @ - R I N G ; on those for the nose and ear, see AMULETS,
rq@ [BAL], 76 K O L X ~ 700 ~ L <qp [Symm.], raK+ 75 K .
[Theod.]). but ‘ Isaiah’ (if the text is right) speaks of
‘ t h e slaughter (defeat) of Midian a t Orebs Rock‘ (a
du 7bry BXIJCcws, Symm. aoup Xwp?lp). The discrepancy
cannot be explained away. Stade and Wellhausen
assume a different tradition. But how improbable that
the defeat of an army should he localised at a rock,
either by a tradition or even by a late editor of Isaiah
(Che. Zntr. 1s. 5 5 ) !
Hence the probability that 1,s and j p ?are corrupt, and this
justifies us in doubting the pointing of ~ i and y the consonants
of IN,. ‘ Raven and ‘ wolf‘ are plausible names, no doubt, and
yet they must be wrong. The solution is plain. 13s is a cor-
ruption of 1% ; 3p.;. of n?l (a variant of >e!),and n x or 381
comes from >‘?I. The original story simply told of the capture
of Zebib (‘the long-haired,’ from the Arabic), prince of the
Bedouins (‘ the desert-dwellers’),and the bringing of the head of
the prince of the Bedouins to Gideon on the other side of Jordan.
For Zebib, cp the well-attested reference to ‘Zabibieh queen
(garrat) of Aribi,’ who, like Menahem of Samaria, paid tribute
to Tiglath-pileser in 738 B.C. (Schr. KAT121 253=COT 1245).
Tradition loves to double; cp Rft.’s two blind men of
Jer,icho with klk.’s Bartimaeus. I n the present case this was
facilitated by the presence of false readings side by side. I n
Judg. 7 25 read simply, i;?i-$F 3 5 TT 222 l e Y?I-n? !’$13
12yQ jiyl!-5F W’?? 3;p l e ddl,. In Is. 1026 weshould
probably read 19 X l l Y n p ? , ‘ like the defeat of Oreb prince 7 25. See EPHOD.
of Midian ’ ; 2lp may already have been misread as rjy, ‘raven,’
when Is. 10 26 was written. T. K. C .
OREB (CLoreh), 2 Esd. 233 AV, RV HOREB.
OREN (]$S, ‘ fir ’ or ‘ cedar ’ or more probably ‘wild-
goat’ ; A ~ A N[AI, A ~ A I AKAI AMBPAM [Bl, A ~ A M[L]),
a Jerahmeelite family-name ( I Ch. 225). See A RAN ,
and cp JEKAHMEEL, 5 2 a.
ORGAN (2?W),Gen. 421, etc., RV ‘pipe.’ See
M USIC , 5 46.
ORION (7Q3 ; a p e i w ~[Job 3 8 3 1 ? also Is.l310];
on d in Job 9 9 see STARS, J 3 c n. ). Since kesd, ? Q:,
means ‘ fool,’ most commentators have supposed the
name to allude to a myth of a giant who strove with
God and was chained to the sky for his impiety.
Such mythsdoexist,and Tg. substitutes &, ‘giant,’for $03.
Cp NIMROD. h7esil, !”a?, however, ought not to be confounded
with n&EZ, $31 (see FOOL), and the term cords ’ in Job 38 31
is hardly that which would be most naturally suggested by such
a myth. Cp Delitzsch, ad Zoc.
KJssiZ has been thought to be a Hebraised form of Ru-
siZ, one of two Babylonian names of Orion, the other
being S q i or E b u ; with the former name some com-
pare that of the a wild hunter’ Sahu, in one of the
Pyramid texts (hlaspero,Duwn of Civ. 108 ; cp Hommel,
Der Ba6. Urspr. der 2g. KuZfur, 40). Ka-si1 is said
to mean ‘ opening of the path ’-viz., to the under-world
(on which and on the twofold application of the name
see Hoinmel, in Hastings, D R 1218 u). Stucken. how-
ever (.4stralny2hen, gi), connects KJ’il withkesel, ‘thigh,‘
and compares a n Egyptian name for the Great Bear
meaning ‘ thigh ’ or ‘ club.’ Followed by Winckler
( G I 2 8 z ) he connects the story of Abraham with the
myth of Orion (not 2Zsji.l) ; Winckler (GZ2138) even
makes N ABAL (q.v.)a development out of Orion. T h e
plural form KEsilim occurs only in Is. 13I O , ‘ The stars
of heaven and the Orions (EV ‘constellations’) thereof,’
3577
OSPRAY
#here ‘ Orions ’ is held to mean ‘ Orion and stars not
ess bright.’ 6 ,however, has simply 6 ’Op[c]rwu ;
Qpfov K*] ; possibly the test originally ran, ‘ The Bear,
Pleiades, and Orion ’ (see ’ Isa.’ SBOT, Addenda).
Egyptian theology placed the ‘ noble soul of Osiris ’ in
3rion (Brugsch, Eel. u. Myth. 301). T. ti. C.
ORNAMENTS. T h e ornaments mentioned in the
I T are treated in special articles. On ornaments for
.he Lead, see CHAPLE’r, C ROWN , TURBAN, V EIL ; on
.hose for the neck, see C HAINS , N ECKLACE. PERFUME,
R ING ; on those for the Land and arm, see C HAINS ,
BRACELETS, R ING : on those for the body, see GIKIILE,
MIKROK; on those for the feet, see ANICLETS,
jAA-DAL, etc. See also, in general, DRESS, 5 5,
STONES [PRE:CIOUS].
General terms for ornaments are : I .,!a, keZZ (for
passages in which it occurs see JEWEL, 7),an orna-
nient mostly of precious metal with perhaps a jewelled
Inset.’ F Z i often has a very general meaning, vesseZ.
In N T K ~ U , U O S has the same sense of ornament in
Zeneral.
2. ’y,‘ridi ( m y = m y , ‘ to put on’; cp a h alynn,Is.
61 ~ o a n dHos. 213[15]) used of men, Ex. 3 3 4 , of women,
Jer. 232. In Ezek. 1 6 1 1 ‘ridi is the generic name applied
to many forms of ornament.
3 . nil:??, migdanith, Gen. 2 4 5 3 2 Ch. 2 1 3 Ezra 1 6
( a precious things ’) may mean ornaments. In the first
of these passages they seem to form the m&ur or price
paid for the bride (Di. ).
4. Special terms rendered ornament in E V :
i. h,+ZE,Prov. 25 12 etc. ; see BASKETS, NECKLACE.
ii. >;$, Ziwyah, Prov. 1g, AV (KV ‘chaplet ’); see CHAPLET.
iii. nliZf(, ~ifhuddElt,Is.3022, AV (RV ‘plating’). It is
T I
properly the gold sheathing of the wooden idol-images ; cp Dt.
iv. le?, p ’ j ~Is., 61 I O , AV (RV ‘garland’). See T URBAN.
Y . D*fll?@, SuhEronim (of camels), Judg. S 2 6 , AV ‘orna-
ments,’ RV ‘crescep’ In Is. 3 1 8 (of women) AV has ‘round
tires like the nioon. See NECKLACE.
vi. D”p?$, ‘EkEsznz, Is. 3 18, AV ‘tinkling oruaments,’ RV
‘ anklets.’ See ANKLETS. The Hebrew prophets (Is. 3 18-23
etc.) rehuked the excessive use of ornaments by women. Cp
also 1 Pet. 3 4 I Tim. 3gf. I. A.
ORNAN(I???), I Ch. 21 15 etc. See ARAUNAH.
ORPAH (TI??? ; o p + ~[BBL]), daughter-in-law of
Naomi (Kuth 1 4 14). See RUTH.
ORTHOSIAS ( O p e m C l A N [AKV]). RV Orthosia,
I Macc. 1537. According to Tab. Peut., 30 R. m. S.
cf Antaradus on the coast of Phcenicia.
OSAIAS ( W C A I A C [A]), I Esd. 8 43 = Ezra 8 19
JESIIAIAH(4.w.. 5 ) .
OSEA. I. (yosta)4 Esd. 1340. See HOSHEA, I.
2. (Osee) 4 Esd. 139, RV Oseas. See HOSEA.
OSHEA (&%@lTI),Nu. 1 3 3 AV, RV HOSHEA.
OSNAPPAR (lBJD$), Ezra 4 1 0 RV, AV ASNAPPER
(g.v.).
OSPRAY (TI:?!?, ‘ o m e y i h ; A A I A I ~ T O C , form un-
certaiii [see Swete]). one of the unclean birds (Lev. 1113
Dt. 1 4 1 z t ) . Evidently some bird of prey is meant, such
as the ospray (osprey) Pundion Luliaitus, zoologically
one of the I’andionidre allied to the family Falconida?.
This bird is essentially a fish-eater, and may he seen
poising in the air, then suddenly dropping like a stone
into the water, to emerge in a minute with its prey, just
as Pliny ( H N 10 3) describes the haliaetus as doing.
Osprays, however, are somewhat rare in Palestine.
Tristram inclines to regard the term ‘ozniyyah as generic,
and would include several species under it, such as
1 The setting seems to be intended by npJwn, Prov. 25 I I ;
see BASKETS.
3518
 OSSIFRAGE
the Short-toed, the Golden, and the Imperial Eagle.
The first-mentioned of these is specially abundant in
Palestine, and not unlike the ospray (NHB, 184).
Knobel rather boldly explains ‘ozniyyah as ‘ the
bearded,’ and identifies the bird with the Ossifrage :
in this case p&es ( ~ 2 ;3 see OSSIFRAGE) would be some
other sort of vulture.
The ospray has also been recognised in Job926 (Ill$?.
‘vulture’), where, for 32. ni’lp-ny 35$;, ‘they pass like the
ships of reed ’ (V), we may read ?lip: ni*q-oy Eiig ‘surely
they pass by like osprays’ (cp E3 ai Zunv).
T. K . C.-A. E. S.
OSSIFRAGE, RV GIER-EAGLE (DTP ‘ breaker ’ ;
r p y y ’ ) , one of theunclean birds (Lev. 1 1 1 3 Dt. 1412t),
is the Gypaeffus barbatus, commonly known as the
Llimmergeier. a most magnificent bird with wings
stretching I O ft. across. In some respects this species
is intermediate betweenthe Vulturidie and the Falconidae,
with one or the other of which it is classed by different
writers. Some authorities state that the Gmmergeier
lives on offal and garbage ; but undoubtedly a t times
it attacks living creatures. As the name Ossifrage
indicates, this bird is fond of bones, which, when small,
are swallowed, but, when large, are said to be carried
aloft and from a height dropped on a rock with the
view of breaking them. Snakes and tortoises are
subjected to the Same treatment, and thus killed. The
Lammergeier breeds early in the year, the nest being
placed on an inaccessible ledge of rock amongst the
gorges it frequents. The species has a wide distribu-
tion, extending across Europe and Asia; but it has been
exterminated, or is in process of becoming so, in many
places. This grandest of the vultnre tribe is perhaps
referred to in the Eulogy on Wisdom.
In Job 28 8 RV gives ’ The proud beasts have not trodden it ’ ;
but yflw ‘pride’ is most questionable, and for VFW ‘>a we
should probably read OlF ’4s2 ‘the young vultnres ’ (lit. ossi-
frages) II ‘ t h e CORMORANT’ (q.v.). See also OSPRAV.
It is also practically certain that in Job 925 the com-
plaint of Job is that his ’ days are swifter,’ not ’than a
post ( y ! ,+?),’ but ‘than an ossifrage3 (o?$n).‘ W e
thus get, in m.25 f., all the three swiftly-flying birds
of prey grouped together in Lev. 1113 Dt. 14 12.
A. E. S.-T. K. C.
OSTRICH. The ostrich (Le., Sfruthio camelus) is
mentioned several times in the EV, and is the correct
rendering of three Hebrew words.
I. y s - n a (my’ ‘I,nW), bath yu‘iituih, urpouO6r (4 times)
uc~p$v(3 times). struihio in Lev. 11 16 Dt. 14 15 Job302
Is. 1321 3413 4;(m Jer. 5039 and Mi. 1 8 RV, where A S
erroneously has OWL [V.U., I], AVmg. ‘daughter of the owl.
The Hebrew name seems to mean ‘daughterof greed,’in allusion
to the bird’s voracity, or ‘daughter of the desert,’ cp the Arabian
name of the ostrich, ‘father of the plains’ (see BDB).
2. n’p, urpou8iov (Lam. 43, Kri.), plur. of a form closely
related to the above.
3. 0 ~ 2 1rspao(livow,4stnrthio(Job
, 39 13,AV,PEACOCK [g.v.]),
supposed to be derived from the hoarse melancholy cry which
the ostrich makes; hut G. Hoffmann acutely suggests P’!Y:
(cp 2), which Budde and Duhm adopt. On the ostrich-section
cp J OB ii., 5 IO.
+ 37p7i, auda (Job 30 13, AV), and
5. n$, veuua (2.AVmg.), receive antiquated renderings ; see
STORK.
The ostrich (Sfrufhio camelus) a t the present day
hardly extends northward of the Syrian desert which
lies E. of Damascus, though there is historical evidence
that it was formerly more widely spread in the E.
1 ypu$ an,d yy$ of B - p $ and ypu$ of A in Lev.
2 am, miswritten 110, became ynv under the influence of
in v. 8 6. On ynw in Job41 21, see LION.
3 1 and 9 are confounded, <.E., qyg, z S.23 3 5 = * i y ~ ,I Ch.
11 37. 73 of course could with especial ease be mkwritten for 8.
4 It is equally probable that rrprropiwww= n~sy](transliterated
by W.c.A) and that the name of the bird has fallen out.
3519
OUCHES
portions of Asia.’ Full details respecting the habits of
the bird would be superfluous here. I t will be sufficient
to mention that in the breeding season ostriches assemble
in troops of four or five-one cock and the rest hens.
The latter lay some thirty to forty eggs in a common nest
scooped in the sand, over which they brood in turns,
the male taking the main share. Around the nest are
scattered a number of unincubated eggs which are said
to serve as food for the young when hatched ; their
presence may explain the reflections on the care of the
ostrich for its young, found in Job3915. The ostrich
is several times referred to as inhabiting desert places
(Is. 1321 3413 4320 Jer. 50391, and its great speed when
running did not escape the observation of the writer of
Job39 18-an allusion which would show that the ostrich
was hunted in his time. At night it emits a hoarse
melancholy note, compared by Tristram to the lowing
of an ox in pain, and on this account it is mentioned
along with the jackal in Mi. 1 8 Job3Ozg.
The ostrich was one of the unclean birds (Lev. 1116 Dt. 14 15)
and is not eaten at the present day, as ageneral rule, save amon;
the African Arabs. The fat of the bird is sometimes used as a
medicine. The feathers have always been esteemed, and at the
present day the Arabian chief will bind a tuft of ostrich plumes
around his spear-head as a sign of rank.
For later Hebrew details of the ostrich (un*ay~, 31517 [ n ~ l ) ,
see Lewysohn, Zool. d. T a h , 5 240.
A. E. S.-S. A. C.
OTHNI (’Jn&’; r O O N E l
[B], roeNi [AI, 0 8 N l
[L] ; cp O THNIEL ), a doorkeeper, son of Obed-edom
(I Ch.267).
OTHNIEL (k’y9!n&’, 5 39 ; rof3oNiHh [ B A L ] ; cp
GOTHONIEL), a Kenizzite clan (cp I Ch. 413), described
as the younger brother of CALEB, who settled at
Kirjath- sepher (Debir), and married ACHSAH [q...]
(Josh. 15 17 Judg. 113). His deliverance of Israel
(properly S. Judah) from the Edomites (read D i e for
Diu), or rather the Jerahmeelites (nya] is probably a
T-:
corruption of ’m~in~, a gloss on m?), is briefly narrated
in Judg. 37-11 (see C USHAN -R ISHATHAIM , JUDGES, 5 5).
Comparing I Ch. 2713 and v. 15, we are led to suspect
that Othniel and the Zarhites are closely connected.
Nor is it hard to justify this. h m y has not yet been
explained, but is probably only another form of in” ;
E THAN , we know, was an Ezrahite or Zarhite. The
southern clans became more and more prominent in
the later period. Cp K ENAZ . T. K. C.
OTHONIAS (oeoNiac [SA], I Esd. 9 28 = Ezra
1027, M ATTANIAH , 7.
OUCHES (n\Y?h, miSP@fh; JY2W. to inter-
weave? Ex. 28 II 13 14 2s 39 6 13 1618 ; the word also
occurs .in Ps. 45 14 [ Kpoc(c)WTOC] ; cp also Ex. 28 20,
B’yqm, CYNAEAEMEN~. €N xpyciw). First, as
to the word louche.’ I t arose by a very early error
( I a nonche ’ being mistaken for ‘ an onche ’) from an
adopted Old French word nouche, nosche, ‘clasp,
buckle,’ and seems to have acquired the sense of ‘ gold
ornament.’ I n Ex. it is clear that the gold settings of
the engraved stones are intended ; these settings were
not solid pieces of gold, but formed of woven wire
wreathed round the stones in cloisonnl work, a sort of
filigree. How this wire was produced we learn from
Ex.393 (cp E MBROIDERY, 5 3).
In E x . 396 13 E3 has acprut~~aAopivour
and o v v 8 d r & a , but
in 2813 $ 2 5 and 39 1618 ~ U T L ~ ~ U (which
I C ~ S also occurs in
I Macc. 4 57, where EV, improbably, however literally, ‘[small]
shields’). This appears to be a g o d rendering. By ‘little
shields’E3 means what we call rosettes ; these were of filigree
work, and to them were attached the chains of gold by which
the (d5ett or BREASTPLATE [g.v.] of the high priest was kept
firm.
I n Ps. 45 14b [13b] the same word occurs, AV render-
ing ‘ her clothing is of wrought gold,’ RV ‘. is in- ..
1 ‘ The ostrich appears on the elaborate decoration of the royal
robes and upon cylinders. Perhaps it was considered sacred‘
Perr.’and Chip. Art k ASJ. ii. 153, and figs. 75, 76.
3520
 OVEN OZORA
wrought with gold.' If, however, nnm in 2". 1 4 0 should unto the screech-owl' (IJ'Og 'nh The passage continues, 'We
be r e a d iyi,]~-i.e., ' p e a r l s , ' or p e r h a p s (see col. 8gSf.j all groan like hears, and mourn sore like doves.'
4 corals ' or ' corallites '-it becomes possible t o c o m b i n e (6) Ps. 39 12 [ I I ] , ' 1: the midst of deep gloom grope, I a m
become like the owls. The passage continues, All my piety
this word with 2,. 146, a n d render ' o f pearls woven in is like spider's webs : surely a (mere) breath is all piety.
gold (lny niyxwn) is her garment.' Brit Wellhausen (c) Ps. 588, 'On the highway let them walk in obscurity, like
( S B O T ) ,in t a k i n g this view, disregards H e b r e w metre. owls which never see the sun. In the third of these passages
I t is surely better t o follow PITS division of t h e verse, Tg., which misunderstands om, imagines n w ~ to denote the
mole (,ee M OLE , 2). Sce Che. SBOT, ' 1s.' Heb. 201 f; ;
a n d t o render ' Brocade of gold is h e r raiment ' (Che. P*aZnrsl.t.
Ps.I'L)), N e x t as t o t h e identifications. We m a y plausibly
Duhm rearranges the clauses unsatisfactorily. In Prov. 25 I I
nrrlwn probably underlies the much-disputed word nv3$n ; a
identify t h e . yaniuph - ( 4 j with t h e Bubo ascdaphus.
fine proverb is thus restored to the group of passages with which 2. . T h i s is o n e of t h e commonest
we are dealing (see BASKKTS, col. 499, esp. n. I). T. K. C.
Identifications species of t h e E a g l e Owl. It
sometimes resorts to' burrows i n the g r o u n d , but also
OVEN (Van, tanniir; K A I B A N O C ; cZibanus; E x .
frequents caves a n d mines, a n d is specially a b u n d a n t
83[72s] Lev.24[not 6 B ] 7 9 [ 6 3 9 ] 1 1 3 j 2626Ps.219[101 Lam.
5 IO Hos. 7 4 6 j : Mal. 4 I [3 191 Mt. 6 30 Lk. 12 as). See F URNACE , r o u n d t h e Idurnaxin Petra. T h e kjs ( 5 ) may be
j, BREAD, 2, C , and COOKING, 8 4. Curine glaur (so T r i s t r a m ) , a sub-species of C. noctua,
a bird of ' grotesque actions a n d ludicrous expression,'
OVERSEER. I. Tpe, p i k i d ( JlPD, i n Heb. a n d which nevertheless w a s t h e classical emblem of Pallas
Ass. implying supervision or control), is used in Jer. 20 I 20 26
z Ch. 21 I I 31 13 Neh. 11 22 12 42 of various temple officials Athene, a n d is s t a m p e d u p o n t h e coins of Attica.
(ra&uTapdvop, dawran)r, r r p o u r i ~ c ,Irriurtoms), superintend- B u t w e must n o t be t o o s u r e of a n y identifications.
ing ' Levites,' ' singers,' or ' the house of Yahws ' ; see T E M P L E T h e n a m e s of owls a r e generally derived f r o m their
S ERVICE . The word is also met with in Neh. 11 9 14 (daiu-
IOITOF). is used of a military officer in Jer. 52 25 1 I 2 K. 25 19 hoarse cry, a n d need not h a v e been applied w i t h
( d ~ t ~ ~ d n )and ~ ) , is applied to ZEBUI.(q.z,.), Ahimelech's officer a n y strictness. B o t h t h e divisions of t h e s u h - o r d e r
( ~ I T ~ U K O I T O Sin
) , Judy. 9 2s. to Pharaoh's overseers (rnrrdpxar) in Striges (called respectively Striginae a n d Alucinae) a r e
Gen. 41 34, and to the officers ( r t w p d p p ~ )appointed throughout represented in Palestine. T o t h e Striginze belongs t h e
the empire by Ahasuerus to find a successor to Vashti (Esth.
2 3). Slrir JIammea, or Barn-owl, a n a l m o s t cosmopolitan
2. lQ[ild, Spr, Prov. 6 7. See S CRIBE . species, which h a u n t s t h e r u i n s of t h e H o l y Land. I n
Palestine T r i s t r a m also f o u n d t h e Ketupa ceyZonensis, a
3. nXjD, rncnas;Z&, 2 Ch. 2 18 34 12 ( ; I T ' u T ~ ~ / sof) , super-
species of a n essentially I n d i a n ' g e n u s with bare legs
intendents of the corvbe. The word occurs also in the titles of
fifty-five Psalms, where it is rendered ' Chief Musician ; hut see a n d fish-eating h a b i t s ; Asio otus, t h e 0. vuZgaris of
M USICIAN , C HIEF . s o m e , t h e Long-eared Owl, which inhabits woods,
4. ;niurorroc, Acts 2028: cp Acts 120, AV, 'his bishoprick especially in N. Palestine ; A . occipifn'nus, or S h o r t -
(imurtomj) let another take,' hut RV 'office' with mg. 'Gr.
overseership.' See B ISHOP , MINrsrRu. e a r e d Owl, found only in winter ; Syvnium aluco, the
T a w n y Owl.' a woodland species which i n Palestine
OWL. T h e owl is mentioned at least twelve times has a gray, not a tawny, h u e ; Scops gzu, whose
i n A V ; a n d t h o u g h a strict examination of passages specific n a m e is derived from its c r y , c o m m o n in t h e
displaces t h e owl for s o m e of them, i t reappears in s p r i n g : a n d t h e Bubo ascaZaphus a n d Can'ne glaux
others where its presence has been forgotten,
(see above).
T h e Heb. w o r d s t o b e considered are :-
Frequent representations of the white and horned owl are
I. n1p (nil?) na, 6ufh (dZn2h) ya'dnEh, Is. 1311, etc. A V ; found in Egypt. The owl does not appear however to have
RV o&CH [p.v.l; 2. n$+, /ifith,1s. 34 14, AV Screech-owl, borne at any time a wcred character amoAg the E b p t i a n s
hut see L ILITH ; and 3. dSP, &i#@z, Is. although many mummies have been found in the necropolis o?
Thehes. A. E. S.-S. A.C.-T. K. C.
1. OT references. 34 AV Great owl, undoubtedly a
reptile, see S E R P E N T (8 I [SI). The re- OX ( w f[BRA], YlP, cp Gen. 2221 [A] ; Vg. IDON),
maining names are thoce of ' unclean ' birds, mentioned as such ancestor of Judith (Judith S I ).
in Lev. 11 r7J Dt. 14 16,0
4. ILGI:, yan&i$h. This bird is grouped in the legislation OX (lid, etc. ), EX. 2017 etc. See CATTLE.
with the &if&& (see CORMORAYT), and the kgs (see below, 5)? and,
like the KAVEY,is used by a prophet to typify the desolation of OX, WILD, RV ' A n t e l o p e ' (kn,Dt. 145 ; D W , Dt.
Edom, Is. 34 1 1 (TldY, yan&?#h, RVlw. BITTERN). The word 33 17). See ANTELOPE, U NICORN.
may he the same as the Ass. &2$u (from d x 2 # 7 ~ ) , a bird which
frequents ruins (Utl. Prof. Sox : ZDMG 40719, n. I). Both OX-ANTELOPE (De?),NU. 2322 RV'W, AV UNI-
here and in Lev. @ understands the Ibis (see H ERON ). CORN (4.v.).
5. Di>, kas, EV 'little owl.' In Ps 1026 [7] the 'k8s of the
ruins' is parallel to the '&i'ath of the desert' (see P ELICAN ). OX-GOAD (YP?? TDP), Judg.331. See AGRI-
6 both here and in Lev. gives ~ ~ r t r i r t i p &or screech-owl ; Tg.
CULTUKE, § 4.
Onk. in Lev. Wlp2 which is Ass. kudu. We cannot venture to
connect the name with Di> 'hag,' and on this ground to identify OZEP (Pyk; MOM [SA]). I. 3. Jesse, b r o t h e r
the bird with the pelican (Boch.). of DAVID( q z , 5 I a, n.) ; I Ch. 2 1st (auw [L]).
6. n F v p , finSineth, R V 'horned owl'; AV 'swan' (see 2. A Jerahmeelite, I Ch. 2 25 (auav [B], auwp [L]). See
S WAN), Lev. 11 18 ( m p $ v p i o v [Bl, -pdv [A] ; Dt. 14 16 t (c)~,%q J ERAHMEEL , 0 2.
[BFLI, q9vq r.41). The position of the name in the lists favours OZIAS (OZ[E]IAC [BAL]).
RV, which hasalsoancient authority(Targ., Sam., see Di.-Rys.). I. IEsd. 5 31 RV. See UZZA.2.
The restoration of the owl to certain passages where its 2. IEsd. 8 2 RV. See Uzzr I .
presence had previously been unsuspected is an important 3. (ic.. Uzziah: O&zc IBa.blj b. Micah of the tribe of Simeon,
result of textual criticism. In Is. 59 IO qV!? (AV ' a s in the agovernorof B ~ T H U L l A ( J u d i t h 6 1 5 7 2 3 8 g 2 8 3 5 ) . See J UDITH ,
night'; R V 'as in the twilight') should no doubt he ??I:? 'like BOOKOF.
4. Mt. 1 8 9 AV. See UZZIAH.
the owl.' I t is 1I to O ' I ~ U N I , which should certainly he nnwlns.
The word nnwjn (see 6) has indeed been unfortunate. It is repre- OZIEL (OZEIHA [BRA]), ancestor of Judith (Judith
sented in the text of Ps. 39 12 by Dan) and W - N ; in Ps. 568 by 8 I).
~ a andn nwN. and in Is. 59 IO, as we have seen, by the hitherto
unintelligible n * i n w ~ .The sense produced by the required OZNI (+!tK), and OZNITE (+?y?),NU. 2616. See
restorations is as follows :-(a) Is. 59 IO, 'We grope, as blind EZRON, I.
men, by the wall ; like those who have no eyes, we feel our way ;
at noonJay we recemhle ( ~ J $ W C >the ) owl ; we are hecome like OZORA ( e z w p ~[BA]), I Esd. 934 AV, RV EZORA
(p."~.). See also M ACHNADEBAI .
1 The owl, however, is sometimeseaten in Arabia, see Doughty,
A r . Des. i. 305, 604. 1 The name aDco ha? really been interchanged with that of
2 Cp Di. on Lev. 11 17. Frd. Del. formerly(Ass. Studieiien, 100; the Strix, so that S. stridula is the Tawny Owl and Syrnilrm
Neb. L a n ~ 33)
. connected DiJ with Ass. Kaszis7~,hut, as he aluco the Barn-owl ; but in this article recent custom has been
points out himself (Prol. So), this is rather a falcon. followed.
113 3521 3522
 PMRAI
PAARM (’YS; @ a p a a i [AI; a~$apsi [Ll: for
QW see below), one of David’s heroes (2 S.2335), a n Arbite
(id., a man of Ar2b in Josh. 15 52 [?I), or rather Archite. The
reading ‘ Archite’ is suggested by the [ o v p a r l o f p ~ s rof @E, and
the b a p a x a e i c of @ A (see ARCHITES).
In I Ch. 1137 the name
is corrupted into Naarai ben Ezbai, where ‘ Ezbai ’ ( ‘ 2 1 ~plainly )
comes from ‘Arbi’ (Arbite). See N AARAI .
PACHON (riaXCdN [A, om. VI), 3 Macc. 638. See
MONTH, 4.
PADAN (RV PADDAN) -ARAM (n?F I”,
II?? ; ( H ) M E C O ~ O T A M I A (THC) c y p ~ A c[BADEL],
less often without C Y P I A C [ADEFL] ; piif every-
where), a geographical designation found only in P
(see Gen. 25 20 28 2 5 6 f. 31 18 33 18 35 g 26 46 15 48 7
[Sam., 6,Pesh.. but MT only 1~31). A prophetic
writer (Hos. 1212 [IS] ; see J ACOB ), speaking of Jacob’s
flight, has the phrase 02: a?@, ‘the field (or [see
FIELD], the highland) of Aram:’ There is no reason
to doubt that P, as the text of Genesis now stands,
regarded Jacobs family as settled at Haran before
entering Canaan, and when we consider the large
amount of corruption in the proper names of Genesis it
is not too bold to regard 173 as a scribe’s error for iln.’
‘ Paddan-aram ’ may therefore mean ‘ Haran (Hauran ?)
of Jerahmeel.’ Cp NAHOR.
For attempts to identify Paddan-aram and to explain the
first part of the name, see A RAM , S 3. T h e suggestion of
Tomkins connecting Paddan-Aram with the land of Patin on
the Orontes may also be mentioned.2 Other scholars ( c g .
Sayce, Crif. and Mon. 200) compare Paddan with Assyria;
jadanu. ‘road,’a synonym of &atranu,‘high road.’ Delitzsch
(Par. 135)~however, states that the ideogram kar, which in one
glossary is translated b Assyrian gimZ, ‘garden,’ SkZu,‘field ’
In another is explained $#admu, so that tadan might be th;
equivalent of the Hebrew Gdeh field’ (but why not Zdch
Arum, as in ‘field of Aram’ in dosea?). I t is also stated that
an ancient Babylonian king Agu-kak-rime assumed the title of
‘king of Padan and Alvan ’ (Rogers, OIctZines of Hist. u~P&zr&
Ba6yZonia, 1895, p. 40). T. K. C.
o ~ .,
PADDLE (ln:),Dt. 2313 E V , R V r n g . S ~(q.v ~ 2).
~ Egyptian and Babylonian influence can be traced.
PADON (five abbrev. name, § 52 : @&AWN [BKAL]),
a family of NETHINIM in the great post-exilic list (see E ZRA ii.,
I g), Ezra 2 44= Neh. 7 47 ; in I Esd. 5 zg PHALEAS (+daiov
[BAD.
PAGIEL (h’g;% @aralHh or -rEHh CBAFLI),
prince of Asher ; Nu. 113.
T h e name, if original, would come rrom 4 ~ 3 3‘to
, meet with,’
and h, ‘God.’ T h e old lists, however (especially P’s), are
largely made up of corrupt and distorted names, and no name is
so frequently and so variously distorted as Jerahme’el. ‘Pagiel,
still further distorted, becomes PELEG. T. K . C.
PAHATH MOAB (2ylD rill?, 70 ; i.e., ‘governor
of Moab’: + A A ~.MWAB [BKAI, 4, U ~ O ~ M E N O.M. Y ( C ~ G K O Sis
[L]), a Jewish family known in post-exilic times, which
consisted of two branches, Jeshua and Joab (see Ezra
26 1Esd.511 Neh.711; alsoEzra84=1Esd.831, Ezra
1030 Neh. 311 lO14[15]). In Ezra89 the Joab-branch
is reckoned apparently as a separate clan.
AccordingtoEzra84 the b’ne Pahath-moabunder Eliehoenai(?)
numbered 200 males, a figure which seems more credible than
the 2812 given in Ezra26 (+aha&oaS [B]). Other members
of the family are enumerated in Ezra1030 (+ad yo@ [BNl)=
I Esd. 931 (see ADDI,I), and an6ther, HASSHUB (q.”.), is men-
tioned in connection with the repairing of Jerusalem (Neb. 3 11,
+aa,9 poap [BN]). I t was represented amongst the signatories
under Nehemiah (Neh. 10 14 [IS] +aa8poaj3 [B]). In I Esd. 5 T I
EV, the name appear5 a s PHAA;H-MOAB (+Oahrrpwaf3 [el),and
i6.8 31 AV ( p d p w a p [RI, +yo@ p0aS [LJ.,
The interest centres in the origin of the names
Pahath -Moab, Jeshua, Joab. Many have supposed
1 Bruston ( Z A TW7 [r887], 207) has already emended the
1-15of Gen. 48 7 into pn.
2 Cp Sayce, RPP)3 88 ; Tornkins, Bab. and Or. Record, 3 3.
3523
PAINT
P
that the first of these names records the fact that the
ancestor of the clan in pre-exilic times had been
governor of Moab; Smend (Listen, 10) compares the
obscure passage, I Ch. 422. There is no evidence,
however, that the official title pe&ih, n c ~ was , in use
before the exile, and I Ch. 422 is not very solid evidence
for pre-exilic history (see S HELAH ). Probably there is
an error in the text; the different passages have no
doubt been harmonised by an editor.
‘ Moab! may probably be right ; cp CHEPHAR-AMMONI in
Josh. 1824 (P). Since, however there are several cases of the
corruption of ‘ Missur’ ( = t h e N.’ Arabian hlugri ; see MIZRAIM)
into ‘ Moab,’ and“in the lists of post-exilic families ‘ Pahath-
moab’ occurs near SHEPHATIAH (4.v.) which is probably a
disguise of SSphZthi (=SSrEfZthi ‘belonging to Zarephath’) and
‘ Arab ’ and. ‘ Elam ’ (bo’tb disguised fragments of ‘ J e r a h m h ’)!
it is most probable that ‘ Moab’ should be Missur’ ; Pahath
can in this case very easily be corrected. For nn, in Josh. read
Tappiigh ; the Tappiihim ’ are probably mentioned as a
N. Arabian tribe in the original text of Gen. IO13 (see MIZRAIM).
Those of them who bore the name b‘ne Shiia‘ or Sheba‘ (so we
should read instead of Joshua) were specially the inhabitants
of SHEBA or Beer-sheba. Probably ‘ Joab,’ which can hardly
mean the general of David (Meyer, Enfsf. 146), is a corruption
of ‘Arati (Arabian). Indeed David’s general may himself have
been really called ‘Arabi. T i e name ‘ Pahath-moab ’ is therefore
by no means a n unsolved enigma (Hastings, 083639); it u rn
be explained by a textual and historical criticism. T. K. c.
PA1 (’Ye), I Ch. 150=Gen. 3639, see PAW.
PAINT. The art of painting was but little developed
among the Israelites ; see COLOUKS,§§ 1-5. In Ezek.
8 IO EV speaks of idolatrous forms ‘ pour-
Art Of trayed ‘ (”I??;Jnpn, to cut, carve) upon a
painting’ wall ; but the literal rendering is ‘ cut’ or
‘ carved ’ -they were probably scratched upon the
plaster-though a parallel passage (2314) suggests that
such carvings were often filled up with paint. Here
no doubt, a s well as in the walls painted ( n ~ xpterv)
,
with vermilion in Jehoiakim‘s building (Jer. 22 14),
The rude daubs found on old lamps and pottery in Palestine
can scarcely be called paintings nor have we any reason for
supposing that the colouring of iAages referred to in Wisd. 1314
(KaraXpLuap pihry K a i $&EL; ...
cp 154 o r r a y q w w &-
uarr\we~wX p l j p a o r v ) was any more artistic.2 l e e POTTERY.
It is in the Babylonian age, moreover, that we first
hear of eye-paint (Jer. 430) ; it is true, the context
a. E y e - p ~ t . permits us to conjecture that the
custom was not much approved of by
respectable women (see v. 31), and it is probably to the
Persian age that we ought to refer the effective contrast
drawn in Is. 3 2 4 between the brand on the forehead or
hand of a slave-woman and the elegant paintings or
tattooings on the fair skin of a lady. The use of rouge
) nowhere mentioned, except inde&d once with
reference to idols (Wisd. 13 14, RVmg. : see above).
Things have changed in Palestine since then. Even
in the time of Josephus painting the eyes was not
perhaps altogether creditable (cp the singular story
in BJ iv. 9 IO) : at any rate, it was a special mark
of luxury. At the present day, however, it is general,
not only in Egypt, but also, among women of any
position, both in Palestine and in Arabia (see below).
The eye-paint which was used was composed of a black
powder, known in Egypt as rne~tern,~ and usually mixed
1 T h e statements in Nah.’2 3 [4] cannot he accepted without
xiticism. see Che. J B L 1898, p. 106.
2 On the Grecian mitom of staining images with red or
vermilion cp Frazer Paus. 3 Z O J
3 Cp Copt. Stim,’etc., Eg. sdm or sdmt; cp W M M a s cited
3ext col n. 2. The act of painting the eye5 was called . s e d e t
and the ;art painted semfi. From these words are derived th;
;k. r r i p p ~uri@ aAd our ‘stibium,’ cp Ar. ifhmid, uthmud,
:tc.,,whenc;, through the Romance languages, comes the word
antimony.
3524
 PALACE
with oil to make a kind of paste. The idea was to
increase the prominence and beauty of the
3. Its com- eye (yip ‘ to rend,’ of the eyes, Jer. 430)
position.
by staining the eyelids and brows with
the powder. This is clear from the enlarged form of
the eye in ancient Egyptian pictures (cp also Juvenal,
Sat. 2 9 3 ; Pliny, E?. 62).
T h e elements of this powder were the sesquisulphuret of
antimony, the black oxide of copper, the sulphide of lead ; even
the powder’ of lamp-hlack, of burnt almonds, or frankincense
might he used. Antimony was the most precious kind, hut had
to be imported from the moit remote countries (India? Europe?),
and was extremely rare. See EGYPT, 5 39, Budge, Mummy.
229J, Wilkinson, ,472~. Eg. 2 348, Erman, Lit;: in Anr. Eg. 230,
and ZDMG, 1851, pp. 236 & For Arabia, see Doughty,
Ar. Des. 1585.
In Hebrew this paint was called ~ 3 pzik;
, ~cp z K.
930 (1183 n ~ own1
y RV, ’ she painted her eyes ’) * and
Jer. 430. In post-biblical times the usual word is hi,
(cp the verb Ezek. 2 3 4 0 [u~ipl{opar]=Ar. k ~ h & a Z a ) . ~
PSkoccurs twice in an apparently different sense. In Is. 54 11,
it is foretold that the stones of the new Jerusalem shall he laid
in 3)g (EV fair colours,’ R V w . antimony ’), which may he a
figuiative expression for the black asphalt-mortar that was
used in buildings of ancient Jerusalem (Guthe Th.LZ 1892
p . 26). Ewald, Wellhausen (PmZ. E T , 391), Cheyne (ShOT):
and Marti, however, after @, would read B?f, ‘emerald,’ and
possibly the same change is required in I Ch. 29 2, for v~
9 3
(AiOouc aoAurrAcic) ; cp commentaries ad lor.
Kohl bottles have been found in Egyptian tombs
together with needles for applying the powder ; some
of the bottles are divided into cells to contain (it would
seem) mixtures of different colours or qualities. Similar
receptacles were doubtless used among the Hebrews :
one of J o b s daughters bears the characteristic name
vq-pp .
(‘ paint-horn ’) ; but see K E R E N - H A P P U C H .
I
S. A. C.
PALACE.4 Of the eleven words rendered ‘ palace,’
2, 3, 4, and 9 offer some special points of interest.
1.( q h ) n.2, 82th (hammkZek), a simple and natural phrase,
usually in E V and always in RV rendered ‘ t h e
1. Terms. king’s house’ ( I K. 9 I IO 10 12, etc. ; cp H OUSE ),
thou h :i 2 Ch. 9 I I and occasionally elsewhere
AV has ‘king’s paface.
2. Another word meaning royal or stately dwelling-place is.
S!’?, k&ii (2 K. 20 18 Is. 13 22, etc.), ultimately perhaps a
BDB ; cp Haupt, Amcr. Journ. , f P h i f zt.
loan-word through Ass. from Sumer. e- aZ ‘great house’; so
1887, pp. 273f: ;
C. Hoffm. Phon. Inschr. 25 n. I (from h p ‘ to inclose ’).
3. iiny ’armbn, 1/0i~, occurs mainly in the prophetical
books(Is.252 3214 Jer.3018Am.1471orz; seealso Ps.48414
[3 131). M T has isan n q TinlN, ‘citadel’ (but E V ‘palace’)
‘of the king’s house’ in I K. 16 18 2 K. 15 25. Here, however,
Q3 (Lvrpov, &avriov [RA], dv [Ll), and Jon. ( i i i i - ~ = p i i i ~may
),
point (see Klost.) to the conjectural reading j n i i u = b v 8 p I h v or
IvSpeIhv (Herod. 134, etc.), the men’s apartment or hanqueting-
hall (cpMoore’s suggestion, PORCH, 3). In z Ch.36 19 n,ni3ni&,
‘all her [Jerusalem’s] palaces,’ represents the $111 n y s , , ‘every
great house,’ of 2 K. 25 9.
4. ni&q, ’aimdnbfh, in Is. 13 2 z t (AV ‘desolate houses ’
AVmg. ‘palaces,’ RV ‘castles’) ought probably to he r e d
n i ~(Pesh.,l ~ Tg., Vg. ; Di. and most). The alleged sense
‘castle’ for Ass. ahnafiu (Frd. Del. formerly [cp BDB]) is not
made out.
5. p a , harnrbn, Am. 4 3, where AV takes as = p ~
1Perhaps from a root = ‘to grind to powder’; cp Syr. efhfiakkak.
May we connect with ~ ~ K (ori O S yea-weed) ‘red colour’; cp
Lat. fucus, fucare, rouge dye? &’have we a mere accidental
coincidence ?
2 W3fM in O L Z , 1900,. p. 399, proposes to read OnDni (a
denom. of onD ; see preceding col., n. 3) instead of obni ; a n in-
genious but not altogether necessary change.
3 Whence (through the nouns &a&, kihdi) by successive
changes of meaning comes the modern ‘Alcohol.’ I t is perhaps
hardly necessary to mention the old supposition that an allusion
to the practice is made in O’I’Y nh?@p, Is. 3 16 (cp +,
fucarc).
4 Lat. Palafiurn (z/pa, ‘protect ’), the name of the first of
the ‘seven’ hilk of Rome to be built on, that on which Augustus
fixed his residence.
352.5
PALACE
But see HARWON, to which add that, according to Cheyne,
1iniz seems to be a corruption of h a m . (Jerahmeel). See
‘PROPHET, $8 Io, 35.
6. and 7. ai*>, n\qi*>,dirah, diraniyyafh; Gk. pa‘prc. See
C ASTLE , 3, and cp J ERUSALEM , col. 2425 and n., col. 2428 ; also
T EMPLE.
8. ”TU, +ih; Cant. 8 9 (RV ‘turret,’ R V w ‘battlements’),
Ezek. 25 4 (RV ‘ encampments ’), Ps. 69 27 [ 2 5 ] AVW. (EV ‘hahi-
tation,’ R V w . ‘encampment’). See CAMP, 5 I.
9. p H , ’ajjkden,in Dan. 1145, of the 111BH h N ‘the tents
of his palace ’-i.c. ‘ the tents which form his (Antiochus’s) head;
quarters.’ An Aram. loan-word=Old Pers. a+arr‘rna ‘palace
(u see BDB). But the supposed sense is not good, and the
loan-word is unexpected. See ELYMAIS ; PERSEPOLIS.
TO. aAA$ Mt. 26 3, etc. ; RV COdRT LF.n.1.
TI. n p a r r i p r o v Phil. 1x3, etc. See PKETORIUM.
Of David’s palace all we are told is that it was built
by carpenters and masons sent by Hiram king of Tyre
=.
6-8. ( z S . 511). Of the palace buildings of
2.
Solomon, on the other hand, we have a
somewhat detailed account in I K . 5-8 ; this description.
however, is not such as enables us to form a clear con-
ception of all the details. Apart from the fact that the
text has been greatly worked over and is very corrupt.’
the description itself is very unequal. Whilst the
temple (upon which the attention of a later age naturally
concentrated itself) is described with great fulness,
we learn of various secular buildings little more than
~
the names. It is plain that the buildings intended for
the king’s private residence were less known to the
author, simply because he had little or no access
to them. H e seems to have been a priest, or at all
events not a palace official. As regards the royal
harem, moreover, it will be obvious that the author
could not be in a position to describe it. To this
must be added a certain want of skill on his part :
that he was unpractised in this kind of description is
shown, not only by the awkwardness of his style, but
also more particularly by the fact that he often leaves
out of sight and omits altogether those very points which
are most important of all for enabling the reader to
form a picture of a building. Finally, to us still more
than to the old copyists the technical expressions are
often very obscure, indeed quite unintelligible. In these
circumstances we must give up all hope of reaching
a complete understanding of our present text (cp below,
§ SJ).
So much, at least, we can clearly gather from the
description : that the buildings of Solomon formed one
3. The courts. great whole, a mutually connected
group. T h e group was all contained
within a single enclosure (nti?. i m ~ )made, ~ of three
courses of great hewn stones (hip; o m ! ) , and a course
1 On the contents of these chapters, cp Stade in ZATW
3 129-177 (1883), and the commentaries of Klostermann, Ben-
zinger, and Kittel. The narrative does not come before ns in
its original form ; it has undergone much redaction and received
many additions, especially in that part which treaty of the
temple and its furniture. Moreover, it has suffered greatly a t
the hands of copyists, so that it is now one of the worst preserved
texts we have. There are various reasons for this ; hut the main
one undoubtedly is that much of the architectural terminology,
and indeed much else of the often difficult technical description,
was no longer intelligible to the later copyists, who had not the
objects themselves before their eyes. To supplement the de-
.
scription from other sources is possible only in the case of the
temple; as regards the rest of the buildings now under con-
sideration, we have no other accounts whatever.
As for the date at which the description was composed, Stade
lays weight principally on the fact that the templeby that time had
already absorbed all the main interest, and that the royal castle
had taken a place of only subordinate importance, which W X ~far
from having been the case in Solomon’s time, or that of his
immediate successors. On the other hand, however, it has to he
observed that in the description itself there is not wanting evi-
dence which goes to show that this phenomenon is due to the
redaction merely, and that in its original form this predominance
of the temple was not observable. T h e present order, for
example, which makes the building of the royal residence, one
might almost say, a mere incident between the building of the
temple and the preparing of the temple furniture, and brings in
the dedication of the temple as the closing scene of the whole
undertaking, cannot be the original one.
2 ,?in means both ‘court,’ and also the wall enclosing it.
3526
 PALACE
of cedar beams above ( I K. 79 12 ; c p Benz. ad roc.).
Within this enclosure lay all the separate buildings and,
more particularly, the temple, which in turn lay within
an enclosed court of its own. This is referred to as the
inner court (n???go %:; or n ’ p B ? nix’ n-3 i?n ; I K.
636 7 126). In Jer. 3610 this court containing the temple
is called the ‘ upper ’ (AV ‘ higher ‘) court ; one went
down from it through the ‘New gate’ to the king’s
house (Jer. 26 IO). This is a fact to be borne in mind :
the palace lay on a lower level than the temple, and
accordingly we are to understand that the ‘ great court ’
was lower than the temple court, which rose above it as
a higher terrace. This temple court also was enclosed
by a wall of three courses of hewn stones, surmounted
by a course of cedar beams. Like the temple, tha
royal palace, together with the harem, was surrounded
by its own enclosure. This is called in the description
of the buildings ‘ the other court ’ (nv!? i!gz ; I K.
78), but elsewhere ( z K.204) ‘the middle court’
( a p n ? is??). From the standpoint of this last narra-
tive-for Isaiah goes from the royal palace through the
middle court into the city-the temple court is the
I b
L
5
1I - - ..........
1
. .5:::
----nu--
FIG. plan of the buildings of Solomon (after Stade).
i. ‘Great court.’2. ‘Second court.’ 3. ‘Court of the Temple.’
4. House of the forest of Lebanon. 5. Hall of Pillars.
6. Hall of Judgment. 7. Royal Palace. S. Harem. 9.
Temple. IO. Altar.
‘ inner,’ that containing the royal palace proper is the
‘middle,’ and that in which the state buildings are
situated is the ‘outer’ court. T o infer, however, that
this last was a distinct court separated o f f like the two
others by an enclosing wall of its own is not necessary ;
it is excluded by the formal description, which knows
nothing of any such court. As the subjoined plan
shows, it is perfectly possible that this court may simply
be identical with that portion of the great court which
contains these state buildings. Neither did the state
buildiugs require to be shut off from the great court by
a wall of their own ; for access to them, as distinguished
from the temple and the king’s private palace, was free
to every one. Further, as regards the relation of the
two smaller courts to the great court, it seems probable
that the great court enclosed the two inner courts on all
sides, so that the outer containing wall at no point
coincided with any one of the inner walls (see plan).
Conversely, there is much to be said for the view that
the two inner enclosures-that of the temple and that of
3527
PALACE
the royal palace-were separated only by a party wall
(see plan), so that the king could go directly to his
palace-sanctuary and court-chapel without having to
pass through the great outer court that was open to
every one.
The architectural description enumerates, apart from
the temple, the following five buildings _ _
- as belonging to
4. Position the one group we have spoken of :- ( u )
the house of the forest of Lebanon ( I K.
of the
buildings. :;7 1-5); (a) the hall of pillars (76) ; (c)
hall of judgment ( 7 7 ) ; ( d ) the palace
Ea); ( e ) the harem ( 7 8 6 ) . If we as-
sume the writer to ‘have’followed a certain order in his
description, the enumeration just given will answer to
the respective situations of the buildings, so that the
visitor to the royal castle would first come upon the
house of the forest of Lebanon (4 in plan); next in
order he would come to the state buildings (the hall of
pillars and the hall of judgment: 5 and 6 in plan);
behind these, he found enclosed in a court of their own
the buildings set apart for the king’s own use-dwelling-
house and harem (7 and 8 in plan). Lastly came the
temple (9 in plan). Thus the king’s palace lay ‘ in the
midst’ between the temple and the public buildings
(see above, $ 3). That the palace properly so-called
lay in immediate juxtaposition with the temple is
expressly testified moreover by Ezekiel, who charges it
as a sin against the kings of Judah that they had defiled
the holy name of Yahwb by ‘ setting their threshold by
my threshold, and their doorpost beside my doorpost,
and there was but a wall between me and them ’ (Ezek.
437f: ).
The configuration of the ground enables us to draw
more precise conclusions as to the position of the
buildings. As h a s been shown elsewhere (J ERUSALEM ,
$5 16-20,and plan), the ‘city of David,‘ Zion, and Moriah
are practically the same; that is to say, the city of
David, the palace of David, the palace of Solomon, and
the temple lay all of them upon the eastern hill. The
ancientcontour of this hill has been adequately ascer-
tained by excavations (cp JERUSALEM, col. 2410. plan).
I t is an exceedinglynarrow spur of a high plateau which
first runs from NW. to SE., then, at a point a little to
the S. of the S. wall of the modern Haram, turns its
direction from NNE. to SSW. In this direction also
the hill gradually sinks in terraces, till it suddenly falls
away at its southern extremity. The eastern and
western flanks are still steeper than this abrupt southern
slope. By small side valleys the hill is divided into
three summits (cp Benz. HA 43), and of these only the
middle terrace, now occupied, broadly speaking, by the
Haram enclosure, presents an area-level, or at least
capable of being levelled-of appreciable size (about
xoo metres, 328 ft. in length, and 40.50 metres, 131-
1 6 4 ft. in breadth), which is situated approximately in
the centre of the Haram enclosure. It is here that
nature on the last hill has provided her site for great
buildings. T h e fall of the ridge towards the SE.,
moreover, was also not so great but that it was pos-
sible, without excessive labour, to erect some additional
buildings on the ridge at a somewhat lower level.
Nowhere else on the E. hill w a s there space for any
considerable aggregate of buildings ; the ground would
have first required to be made by gigantic substructions.
Now, many considerations support the conclusion-and
there are none against it-that the temple of Solomon
stood approximately where the ‘ dome of the rock ’ now
is-more precisely that it stood to the W. of the sacred
rock, on which, doubtless, the altar of burnt-offering
stood (see T EMPLE). With this as a starting-point, it
becomes practicable to infer the sites of the remaining.
buildings with some degree of certainty. The whole
complex of buildings, we may he sure, occupied much
less space than the modern Haram. For the external
walls of the Haram are, speaking broadly, the work of
Herod, and he, as we know, considerably enlarged the
3528
temple area. Moreover, so far as Solomon’s buildings
are concerned, we are precluded from assuming sub-
structions similar to those which astonish us in the work
of Herod by the statement that the great outer wall
consisted of only three courses (see above, 9 3 ) . Such
a thing could not possibly be said of any wall like that
which we now see. W e shall therefore be fully justified
in proceeding on the assumption that the buildings of
Solomon adapted themselves as closely as possible to
the conditions of the site. In that case the royal castle
can only have extended in a southerly or south-westerly
direction from the temple, following the ridge and
descending in terraces. Nrither eastwards, nor west-
wards, nor northwards from the temple could space
have been obtained without making great substructions.
All the incidental notices of the buildings in question in
up into the house which Solomon had built for her
(I K 9 2 4 ) .
The house of the forest of Lebanon ( I K. 71-5)is
House of described more fully than any of the
forest of others ; hut the description, in precisely
the most important points, cannot be
Lebanon. made OUt v;ith any certainty, The ,lame
is derived from the upper story resting on 45 pillars
3529
of cedar of Lebanon, arranged in three rows (so @BAL;
fig. 2 ; MT, four rows) of fifteen pillars each. Cedar
beams upon these support the superstructure, which is
also roofed with cedar. According to the text as it now
stands, what we are to understand is most probably a
large hall above which was a second story containing
chambers (see fig. 4). The ground floor was a single
formed at the same time the front aall ; this would
give an interval of (50f3 = ) 16.6 cubits ( 8 . 2 5 metres,
27 ft.). This would be for cedar beams a very
great span ; the other interpretation is therefore the
more probable. The more moderate span thus given
is further diminished by the beams above having
‘ shoulder pieces’ ( n i a g ; so 6 ,
Bprai ; in v. 76 for M T
n\nB, ‘beams’; cp fig.‘3). The height of the building
is given as 30 cubits. If of this total we allow some
7 cubits for the upper story, and another 3 cubits for
its plinth, roof, and floor, there remains for the hall
itself a height of 20 cubits, which presents no difficulty.
That therows were three appears from u. 36, where the
pillars are forty-five and the row contains fifteen.
2 On the assumption that the cubit intended is the longer
cubit, see WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
3530
For a hall of these dimensions the window openings
would have to be many and large. With regard to
these, however, a s also with regard to the doors and to
the stairs for reaching the upper story, the present text
leaves us entirely at a loss, zv. 4b and sb being quite
unintelligible. AI1 we can gather is that the windows
and doors were four-cornered, as distinguished from the
entrance (e.g.)into the holy of holies, which was five-
cornered (631). the lintel being in two pieces and form-
ing an angle. Very possibly the front wall, and perhaps
also the back wall, was broken by some pillars so as to
gain more light. This is assumed in fig. 2. This hall
of pillars no doubt served, as also Josephus informs us
( A n t . viii. 52, § 133), as a place of assembly. The
upper story was, we may conjecture, divided into
separate chambers. We may perhaps conceive the
arrangement to have been that three longitudinal walls
rested upon the three rows of pillars on the ground
floor : this is at least the most natural, architecturally
speaking. In these three walls, doors and window
openings facing one another must have been pierced
for the admission of light ; this may perhaps be what is
referred to in vv. 4b 56. In connection with the stairs
which we must imagine somewhere, there will have been
in the upper story some corridor or passage from which
the chambers on either side opened. As to the dark-
ness of the chambers on the inner side we need not
trouble ourselves, for we learn that this house of the
forest of Lebanon was not inhabited but served as an
armoury ( I K. 1016f: Is.228; cp 392).
When we consider how few are the certain data we
possess regarding this building, it is not to be wondered
6. Other at that other interpreters of the text have
theories arrived at quite different conclusions from
ofit. those suggested above. (i.) Furthest re-
moved from this conception of the building
as a large hall with pillars and an upper story, are
those attempted reconstructions which agree in assum-
ing an open enclosure surrounded on all sides by a
shallow building. In the lower story this building was
arranged as a covered portico : the three upper stories
consisted of series of chambers (so Keil, Thenius.
Klostermann). W e are not called upon here to ex-
plain in detail how the various writers have sought to
bring this reconstruction into agreement with the wording
of the text : but we may say that more or less violence
is done to it by all of them ; nowhere does it make any
mention of a courtyard or of a three-storied building or
of a portico : such a reconstruction, moreover, demands
the assumption of a greatly increased number of pillars
(Thenius for example gives 400 to his court of pillars).
(ii. ) More attention is due to a third attempt at recon-
struction by Friedrich (see below, § 11); it is indeed
hard to reconcile with the present text, but as against
this difficulty it has to be said that it finds a strong
support in the history of architectural art. A close
examination of Assyrian buildings in particular leads
Friedrich to a characterisation of the Phmnician-Syrian
3531
architecture that differs considerably from that hitherto
current. H e has adduced strong reasons for believing
that the most original and simplest form of the Phce-
nician and Syrian palace was a walled parallelogram,
the interior of which was completed by constructions of
wood in such a manner that chambers for dwelling and
storage were obtained by means of galleries running
round the walls. According to Friedrich the palaces
of the Philistines and of the Moabites conformed to this
type. He will have it that the temple also was built on
this plan (with a wooden framework in the interior), and
he brings together all the other buildings of Solomon,
alike the royal residence and the state buildings, into
one great building-the house of the forest of Lebanon.
The main and characteristic part of this palace complex
he finds-in accordance with this N. Syrian style of
architecture-in the great hall stretching through the
whole enclosure of the house (throne-room and judgnient-
hall) in the centre of the complex, having its roof sup-
ported by many wooden pillars. All other apartments,
the royal residence, the harem, storerooms, and the
like, he regards merely as side-chambers connected
with this hall. That this collection of all the buildings
into a single large build-
ing is not reconcilable
with our present text is
obvious; we read in it
quite clearly of various
separate buildings. On
the other hand, we must
concede the possibility
that the house of the
forest of Lebanon was
erected as one of the
separate buildings of
the citadel in this N.
T
Syrian palace style : the
1ES
use of wooden pillars
was naturally an im-
portation in S. Syria,
which waspoorintiniber.
Next in the description, after the house of the forest
of Lebanon, we read ( I K. 76) of the hall of pillars
,.
The hall of (o.?rnnq +). It measured 50 cubits
by 30, and in front of it was a porch
pillars.
with pillars and a flight of steps
(perron ; or a projecting roof? the meaning of the Heb.
word ~y here used is quite unknown). We may perhaps
suppose that it was intended to serve as a sort of ante-
room, or waiting-room, to the hall of audience which
(see below, 8) is mentioned immediately afterwards in
the description, and on this account we might think of
it as also architecturally connected with the other. The
word a h is also used of the outer court of the temple.
Klostermann. starting from this employment of the hall,
suggests that we should read its Hebrew designation as
n?$; o&--i.e., the hall of those who stood waiting
on the king's service, or who as petitioners in their own
affairs or as appellants to his justice were waiting for an
audience.
Of the judgment-hall ( I K. 7 7 ) , which, as suggested
above, perhaps constituted with the hall of pillars but
*.
The hall one building. we are not told either the
of dimensions or the construction. All we
learn is that its walls were panelled with
cedar up to the roof. The purpose of the hall is
expressed by its very designation (judgment-hall, D$
m h ) ; it was here that the king sat in judgment (see
G OVERNMENT , 19), and here too that he usually
gave audience. The great ivory throne with the
lions, which is described as one of the wonders of
the world ( I K. 1018-20). stood there, whence the
hall was also called the throne-room (ne?? +g;
I K.77).
' Inwards ' from this hall, in an enclosure of their own
3532
 PALACE
(see above, 3 3 ) , were the palace and harem (I K. 78).
Of the palace or ’ residence ’ of Solomon
9, Palace
and
(ne xt9; i v c in,?) we are told that it was
built after the same manner as the judg-
ment-hall,-thus, doubtless, with a hall in the lower
story and panelled with cedar. This palace seems also
to have served as residence for Solomon’s wives; at
least we are not told of a separate house for them, only
the most illustrious of them all-the Egyptian princess
--received a separate dwelling, which was built in the
same manner as the throne-room and Solomon’s palace
(I K. 78). Where it was situated we are not expressly
informed ; but it cannot be doubted that it was in the
immediate vicinity of the palace and perhaps contiguous
with it (so Stade, see Fig. I)-at any rate with the
court of the palace, the ‘ middle ’ court (see above, 3).
With regard to all these buildings what is brought
into special prominence is that they were built of
‘ costly’-Le., great-stones. These
lo’
blocks were on both the inner and the
and sty1e‘ outer side cut with the saw ( I K. 79-11).
whilst elsewhere, as the old Phcenician architectural
remains show, the Phoenicians often built with rough-
faced rustic work ( ~ u s t i c n ) . For the foundation, stones
of from 8 to I O cubits (about 4-5 metres, 13-166 ft.)
in length with proportionate breadth and thickness were
used. In the superstructure smaller blocks, yet still of
considerable size (nv? nhpg n i y PV?:, stones--i.e.,
blocks hewn according to measure ; I K. 7 I,), and cedar
timber were employed. From foundation to cope only
fine large blocks were employed ; this was the case even
with the wall ofthe great enclosure (see above).‘ whilst
elsewhere the Hebrews, little skilled in such construc-
tions, were wont simply to superpose undressed stones
one upon another (cp Benzinger, H A 2 3 1 8 ) . This
employment of large blocks is quite characteristic of
Phoenician architecture. It is a priori in the highest
degree probable that it was applied in the case of
Solomon’s buildings. A Hebrew architecture as such
there never was ; stone-working and the art of erecting
detached houses was at that time something rather
unfamiliar to the Israelites. David and Solomon
alike, therefore, found it necessary to summon Phoe-
nician masons to their aid, and these naturally built in
the style with which they were acqndinted. Of this
Phmnician architecture Renan makes the remark, which
will apply also to the buildings of Solomon : ‘ T h e
fundamental principle of their architecture is the hewn
rock, not as in Greece the pillar. The wall takes the
place of the hewn rock without losing this characteristic
entirely.’ Hence the partiality for building with huge
square blocks ; the greater the blocks the greater the
resemblance to the rocks. That these palaces of David
and Solomon, built of hewn stone, though insignificant
compared with the palaces and temples of Egypt,
Assyria, and Phcenicia, should have struck the Hebrews
in their then stage of culture as in the highest degree
wonderful need not cause us surprise.
For the older literature, see Bahr, Der Salomonisckc Ternbet
m i f Beriicksichf i p n K seines VerhZlfnisses ZUY he6rZischen
Archiffkfur ii6crhau#f, 7849 : see further
11. Literature. Stade, Der Text des Berichtes “her Salornos
Bauten’ : Z A T W 3 ‘29.177 [r883] : the
archgolopies of Jahn, Saalnchiitz. Scholz, Schegg, Hamberg, de
Wette-Rabiger, Keil, dq Visier, Benzinger, Nowack ; the corn-
mentaries of Keil Thenius Klostermann, Benzinger and Kittel
on I K. 5-7: the‘ Dictionhes of Scheukel, Win&, Riehm,
Herzog, and Smith, under the various headings. Also Stade,
GVI1311j: Kittel Gesch. d. He6. 2 1 6 4 8 , KBhler, Lehrb. d.
.
ki6L Gcsck.’ii. 1 ?8iB Th. Friedrich, Tempel u. Palast
Salomos 1887 a i d D i i uorderasiafiscke HoIzfekfonik 1891 ;
Perrot ind Cdpiez, Hidoire de I‘art, v. ; Perrot and dhipiez,
Le Temple deIPjerusaZenr et Za Maison du Bois-Liban, 1889.
1. E . . 66 2 7 f
1 MT, 1 ~ l p~ p 7 n q yields no sense, since the court cannot
in any case have Seen paved with colossal blocks. Delete pnn.
which i, a mere repetition, through oversight, of the yrnb shortly
before, and translate lxp? l p as above : ‘ his auf die Hofmauer
himus.’ See Benzinger, a d loc.
3533
PALESTINE
PALESTRA (TT~~AICT~A 2 )Macc.
, 4 1 4 RV, AV
‘ place of exercise.’ See WRESTLING, and cp HELLEX-
ISM, 8 5.
P A W (h?, 5 5 0 ; cp PALLU and P ELALIAH ;
+ahah [B], +ahax [N],+aha[ [AI, +aAA\q [Ll), b. Uzai, one of the
repairers of the wall (Neh. 3 25).
PALANQUIN (]jcl?.K ; 1$0p[f]iON) Cant. 39 RV.
The Revisers appear ’to suggest as possible a connectio: of
u&iry& with Sanskr. $frayanku.= palanquin. RVw. car
of state’ (AV ‘chariot, mg. ‘bed’). See LITTER, 0 I ;
CANTICLES, $5 TS.
PALENESS (flj7T), Jer. 306. See COLOURS, 11.
PALESTINE
Extent (0 I). Fauna ($50 14c-A).
General geography (I 2). Political geography (98 15-17).
Geology (0, 3). General names ($18)
Physical divisions ($8 4.1). Later divisions (B 19).
Water (I 13). Trade routes (8 20).
Climate (Ir4a). Population (0 21).
Flora (B 14 6). Literature (8 22).
By Palestine’ is to be understood in general the
country seized and mainly occupied by the Hebrew
W e thus exclude the portion of
1. Extent. territory
people.
which they held only for a time,
or only according to an ideal demarcation (cp Nu. 34
[PI) by which the land of the Israelites was made to ex-
tend from the ’ river o f Egypt ’ to Hamath (?) ; we accept,
on the other hand, another ancient tradition which
fixes the extreme borders at Dan (at the foot of Hermon)
in the N. and at Beersheba in the S., thus excluding
the Lebanon district and a portion of the southern
desert. In like manner, though with certain limitations
to be afterwards mentioned, the country E. of Jordan
stretched from the foot of Hermon in the N. to the
neighbourhood of the Arnon. Towards the W. the
natural boundary-purely ideal so far as occupation by
the Israelites was concerned-was the Mediterranean ;
but towards the E. it is difficult to fix on any physical
feature more definite than the beginning of the true
steppe region. That the territory of Israel extended as
far as Salcah (E. of Bosra at the foot of the HaurHn
Mountains) is the statement of an ideal rather than an
historical frontier (Josh. 13 11).
Palestine thus lies between 31’ and 33’ 20’ N. lat.;
its SW. point is situated about 34’ 20’ E. long., some
distance S. of Gaza (GLnzaa), its NW. point about 35’
15’ E. long., at the mouth of the LitXny (el-KHsimiye).
As the country W. of the Jordan stretches E. as far as
35O 35’, it has a breadth in the N. of about 23 m. and
in the S. of about 80 m. Its length may be put down
as 150 m. ; and, according to the English engineers,
whose survey included Reersheba, it has an area of
6040 sq. m. For the country E. of the Jordan no such
precise figures are available. T h e direct distance from
Hermon to Arnon is about 120 m., and the area at the
most may be estimated at 3800 sq. m. The whole
territory of Palestine is thus of very small extent, equal,
in fact. to not more than a sixth of England. The
classical writers ridicule its insignificant size.
Palestine, as thus defined, consists of very dissimilar
districts, and borders on regions of t h e most diverse
2. General character. To the S. lies a mountainous
desert, to the E. the elevated plateau of
geography’ the Syrian steppe, to the N. Lebanon
and Antilibanus. and to the-W. the Mediterranean.
In the general configuration of the country the most
striking feature is that it does not rise uninterruptedly
from the sea-coast to the eastern plateau, but is divided
into two unequal portions by the deep Jordan valley,
which ends in an inland lake (see J ORDAN , D EAD SEA).
Nor does the Jordan, like the Nile in Egypt, flow
through the heart of the country and form its main
artery ; it is the line of separation between regions that
1 On the name see below 5 18, PHILISTINES, 5 I :cp GASm.
HG p. 4 and n. 2.
3534
 PALESTINE
may almost be considered as quite distinct, and that
too (as will afterwards appear) in their ethnographic
and political aspects. This is especially the case in the
southern sections of the country ; for even at the Lake
'of Tiberias the Jordan valley begins to cut so deep that
crossing it from either direction involves a considerable
ascent.
The country W. of Jordan is thus a hilly and moun-
tainous region which, forming as it were a southward
continuation of Lebanon, slopes unsymmetrically E.
and W., and stretches S., partly as a plateau, beyond
the limits of Palestine. The mountain range consists
of a great number of individual ridges and summits,
from which valleys, often rapidly growing deeper, run
E. and W. Towards the Mediterranean the slope is
very gradual, especially in the more southern parts,
where the plain along the coast is also at its broadest.
About three-fourths of the &-Jordan country lies to the
W. of the watershed. Towards the Dead Sea, on the
other hand, the mountains end in steep cliffs ; and, as
the Jordan valley deepens, the country draining towards
it sinks more abruptly, and becomes more and more
inhospitable. The plateaus back from the W. coast-cliffs
of the Dead Sea have been desert from ancient times,
and towards the east they form gullies of appalling
depth. On the farther side of the Jordan the mountains
have quite a different character, rising from the river
gorge almost everywhere as a steep wall (steepest
towards the S.) which forms the edge of the great
upland stretching E. to the Euphrates.
The mountains of Palestine consist in the main of
strata of the chalk formation ; of older precretaceous
3. Geology. rocks can be mentioned only a few isolated
instances of a breccia-like conglomerate,
consisting of fragments of archaean crystalline schists
and older porphyry, and traversed by dykes and veins
of old plutonic rock. These represent the oldest rocks
of Palestine. They are met with only to the SE. of the
Dead Sea (G6r es-Sgfiye) and on the eastern border of
the W. el-'Arabah, w-here they are still covered by sand-
stones and dolomitic limestones of the carboniferous
age. The chalk strata belong to the upper cretaceous
(Cenomanian, Tnronian, and Senonian).
T h e strata include : ( I ) the Nubian sandstone on the E. shore
of the Dead Sea. (2) Limestone, marl, and dolomite, containing
many echinoderms, oysters and ammonites. Fossils ai-e fnnnd
in quantities a t es-Sal; and'Ayiin M i i e to the E. of Jordan, as
also in the region to the W. of Jerusalem (on this last the
so -called m i n i ahmar der-yzsini, and mizzi yehiidi, with
Ammonites Rotomh.ge&). (3) Massive limestones dolomites,
and silicious limestone, with Rndistes and Nerineae ( B e Meleke
or cave rock, and mizzi hela in the city of Jerusalem its&):
(4) Yellowish-white lime'stone (sometimes ringing under the
hammer) with ammonites ( A . quinguenodoms) the kzkiile of
the Mount of Olives used for inscriptions on ;he tombs. (5)
White soft chalk marl; containin lamellibranchs (Ledajerdifa)
gasteropods, and baculites. ( 6 ) &ray to blackish bituminous and
partly phosphatic limestones containing fish remains (asphalt
limestones of Nebi Moss)), alternating with variegated red,
yellow, gray-green, and dazzling white mark, with much gypsum
and dolomite. (7) Flint heds alternating with limestones and
mark in the wilderness of Judaea.
Eocene nummulitic limestone occurs but rarely in
Samaria (Ebal, Gerizim), more frequently in Galilee.
Younger tertiary is entirely absent. The diluvial strata,
on the other hand, are very extensive : partly of marine
origin on the present coasts of Sharon and the Shgphelah
and southwards to beyond Beersheba. partly of lacustrine
origin, deposited by the formerly greatly extended Dead
Sea. which occupied the whole of the lower Jordan
valley as far as to the N. end of the Sea of Tiberias
and deposited beds in the form of terraces. Finally,
mention must be made of the dunes on the coast, and
the deposits left by the rivers.
Volcanic rocks are very extensively met with all
around the sea of Tiberias (Jaul2.n) and the plain of
Jezreel in Galilee, as well as on the plateau to the E.
of the Dead Sea (Jebel Shehiin), and particularly in
Haur2.n and in Trachonitis. C p BASHAN,J 2, and
TRACHONITIS.
3535
PALESTINE
The mountain system W. of Jordan must be broken
up into separate groups, which, it may be remarked,
*. are of political as well as physical sig-
physical: nificance. A first group, consisting of
divisions
the country N. of the plain of Jezreel
upper (see map of Galilee, above, facing col.
1631 J ) , may be subdivided into a large northern
portion with summits reaching a height of 4000 ft.,
and a smaller southern portion not exceeding 2000 ft.
The northern, the Upper Galilee of antiquity, is a
mountainous region with a somewhat intricate system
of valleys, stretching froin the KZsimiye in the N. to a
line drawn from Acre ('AKKa) towards the Lake of
Tiberias. Of the valleys (more than thirty in number)
which trend westwards to the Mediterranean, the WHdi
Hubeishiye, Wadi 'Ezziye, and WZdi el-Karn deserve
to be mentioned. Not far W. of the watershed is a
plateau-like upland draining northwards to the Kcimiye.
The slope to the Jordan is steep. Jebel Jermak, a
forest-clad eminence 3934 ft. above the sea, is the
highest massif: The whole territory is fruitful, and
forms decidedly one of the most beautiful as well as
best-wooded districts of Palestine. See G ALILEE i., 5 4.
The plain along the Mediterranean is on the average
hardly a mile broad ; between cliff and sea there is at
times barely room for a narrow road, and at some places
indeed a passage has had to be cut out in the rock.
South of RBs en-N+ara, on the other hand, this plain
widens considerably ; the portion named after the town
of Acre is, as far as the town itself, about 4 m. broad.
The mountain structure of the southern subsection,
or Lower Galilee, is of a different character-low chains
'' (running east and west in well-marked
Lower lines) enclosing elevated plains. Of these
Gali1ee' plains the most important is that of Bat-
tauf (plain of Zebulun or Asochis), an extremely
fertile (in its eastern parts marshy) depression 9 m.
long and 2 broad, lying 400 to 500 ft. above the sea,
between hills 1700 ft. high. To the SW., about 700
ft. above the sea, is the smaller but equally fertile plain
of Tor'Zn, 5 m. long and I m. broad. Among the
mountains the most conspicuous landmarks are Nebi
Sa'in (1602)near Nazareth, Jebel es-Sih (1838),and
especially, to the E. of this last, Jebel et-Tdr or Tabor
(1843),an isolated wooded cone which rises on all sides
with considerable regularity, and commands the plain
of Esdraelon. Eastwards the country sinks by a suc-
cession of steps : of these the lava-strewn plateau of
Sahl el-Ahma, which lies above the cliffs that look down
on the Lake of Tiberias, but is 300 ft. below the level
of the Mediterranean, deserves mention.
T h e principal valleys of the whole region are : (I) towards the
W. the great basin of Nahr Na'min (Belus of the ancients),
whose main branch is W i d i Khalziin, known in its upper course
as WZdi Sha'ih or WXdi Khashah, and, farther S., the basin of
the WBdi hlelek (Wsdi Rummini), which flows into the Nahr
el-Mukatta' (Kishon) ' and (2) towards the E. the rapid-flowing
Wadi kabadiye, Wadi el-Hamam, and Wadi FejjZs.
There is a certain connection between the plains
already mentioned (those of Battauf. Acre, etc. ) and
6. Jezreel. the great plain which, with an average
height of 250 ft. above the sea, stretches
S . from the mountains of Galilee and separates them
from the spurs of the mountains of Samaria (the central
portion of the cis-Jordan country). This great plain
(see map, opp. col. 1631J),which in ancient times was
known as the plain of Megiddo, and also as the valley
of Jezreel or plain of Esdraelon, and now bears the
name of Merj Ibn 'Amir (pasture-land of the son of
'Amir), is one of the main features of the whole cis-
Jordan region (Josephus called it the Great Plain p a r
exceZZence; cp EPHRAIU i., 5 3). and presents the only
easy passage from the coast districts to the Jordan
valley and the country beyond. The larger portion lies
W. of the watershed, which at el-'Afule is 260 ft. above
the Mediterranean. In the narrower application of the
name, the whole plain forms a large triangle with its
3536
 PALESTINE
southern corner near Jenin and its western near the
mouth of the gorge of the Nahr el-R,lukatta' (for here
the hills of Nazareth shoot out towards Carmel) ; and
connected with it are various small plains partly running
up into the hills. The plain to the S. of Acre, in which
marshes are formed by the Kishon and Na'mkn. and
various other recesses towards N. and E., really belong
to it.
T o the NE. stretches a valley bounded in one direction by
Jehel Nehi Dahy (the Lesser Hermon, a range 15 m. long and
1690 ft. high) and in the other direction hy the hills of Nazareth
and Mount Tabor, where lie I k S l and Debtiriye(see CHISLOTH- westwards, and form a hilly district composed of hori-
TABOR, DABERATH);then to the E. of the watershed lies the
Bire valley, and the well-watered Wzdi Jzliid from Zer'in
(Jezreel) falls away towards the Jordan between the slo es of
Jebel Nebi Dahy and the more southern range of Jehel gnkii'
(cp GILBOA,MOUNT). Finally, towards Jenin in the S. lies the
secondary plain of 'ArrHne.
In ancient times the whole country, with its rich
basaltic loam, was densely peopled and well cultivated.
See GALILEE i., 5 4.
T o the S. of the plain of Jezreel, which still belongs
to the northern part of Palestine, it is much more diffi-
., s. of Jerreel. cult to discover natural divisions (see
mapof the hill-countryof Ephraim,opp.
col. 1311$, and cp EPHRAIM i., 5 3). -In the neighboxr-
hood of the watershed, which here runs almost regularly
in great zigzags, lie several plains of very limited extent.
T h e plain of 'Arrahe (700 to 800 ft. above the sea) connected
SE. with the Merj el-Gharak, which having no outlet becomes
a lake in the rainy season ; the plain of Fendekiimiye ( r m f t . ) ; Jordan ; the WZdi el-Kelt (see ZEBOIM, VALLEY O F ),
and the plain of Riijib, E. of Shechem, connected with the plain
of Makhna (16w to 1800 ft. ; cp MICHMETHAH) to the SW.
The highest mountains too are generally near the watershed.
In the E. lies the south-westward continuation of Gilboa. In
the W., Mount Carmel (highest point 1610 ft., monastery 470)
meets the projection of the hills of Nazareth, and sends its
wooded ridge far to the NW. so as to form the southern boundary
of the Isay of Acre, and render the harbour of H a i h , the town
a t its foot, the best on all the coast of Palestine.
The belt of land along the shore, barely zoo yards
8. Maritime widc, is the northern end of the lowland
plain, which, gradually widening, stretches
plain. S. towards Egypt.
At 'Atblit (9 m. S.) it is already z m. broad, and it continues
much the same for 21 m. to the Nahr ez-Zerkl (named by the
ancients after the crocodile. which is still tb be found in its
marshes), where a small ridge el-Khashm projects from the
highlands. South of Nahr ezZerk8 begins the marvellously
fertile plain of S HARON (q.~.), which, with a breadth of 8 m.
near Czsarea and r i to 1 2 m. near YIfP (Jaffa) stretches 44 m.
farther to the Nahr Riibin, and slopes upwaids towards the
mountains to a height of about 200 ft. above the sea. Its surface
is broken by lesser eminences, and traversed by a few coast
stream5, notably the Nahr el-FZlik.
Between the maritime plains and the mountains proper
lies a multiform system of terraces, with a great number
9. WBdis. of small ridges and valleys. In this the
only divisions are those formed by the
basins of the larger wadis, which, though draining
extensive districts, are here too for the most part dry.
They all have a general E. and W. direction.
First comes the basin of the Nahr el-Mefjir, bounded S. by the
Bayazid range, and dehouching a little to the S. of Caesarea ;
and about 5 niiles farther S. is the mouth of the Iskauderiine
which is distinguished in its upper portion as the Wndi eshi
Sha'ir, running E. a s far up as NZbulus (Shechem), hardly a
mile W. of the watershed. I t is in this neighbourhood that we
find the highest portions of the mountains of Samaria-Jehel
Isllmiye or ERAL (q.~.),3077 ft. high, to the N. of Shechem,
and Jehel et-Tiir or GEKIZIM (q.~.), 2849 ft. high, to the S.
Both are bare and rugged, and consist, like all the loftier
eminences in the district, of hard limestone capped with chalk.
I t was generally possible, however, to carry cultivation u p to
the top of all these mountains, and in ancient times the highlands
of Samaria are said to have been clothed with abundant forest.
From the watershed eastward the important WZdi FZri'a (also
known as Wsdi KarlwH in its lower course) descends to the
Jordan (Cp EPHRAInl i. $ 4).
Returning to the western slope, we find to the S. of Nahr
el-Fzlik the basin of the 'AujZ, which after it leaves the bills is
fed by perennial (partly palustrine) sburces (see ANTIPATKIS, cretaceous formation; only in the E. of the country
MBJARKON), and falls into the sea 5 m. N. of Jaffa. As a t
this place the watershed bends eastward, this extensive basin
stretches proportionally far in that direction ; and, the right side
of the Jordan'valley being also very broad, the mountains of the
eastern slope soon begin to sink rapidly.
On the watershed, not far from JifnZ, lies Tell '&or (3378
ft.; see BAAL-HAZOR), and with this summit of hard gray
3537
PALESTINE
limestone begin the hills of ancient Judah (cp further EPHRAIM
i. f 3J). South of the 'Auj; comes the Nahr Riihin (near
Jkbne) erennial up to the WZdi @rZr (SOREK ?), and reaching,
as Wah! Bet Hanina, as far as the country N. of Jerusalem;
the WZdi el-Werd is one of its tributaries.
Farther S. begins the maritime plain of Philistia,
which stretches 40 m. along the coast, and, though
Philistia. now but partially under cultivation, con-
sists of a light brown loamy soil of extra-
ordinary fertility. I t is crossed by many ridges of hills ;
and to the S. of Ashdod (Esdiid) the highlands advance
zontal strata of limestone, sometimes considered part of
the lowlands (Shephdah), and separated from the more
elevated region in the interior by a ridge more or less
parallel with the line of the watershed.
The basins to the S. of the Riihin are those of WZdi Sul:ereir,
which runs up towards Tell-es- Szfiyeh (see G ATH , MIZPEH)
in one direction and to Bet Jihrin'in another, of Wzdi el-Hesy
and finally of WXdi Ghazza, which forms the proper boundar;
of Palestine towards the S., runs past Beersheba as W l d i es-
Seba', and receives the Wldi el-Khalil (Hebron) from the NE.
The mountainous district immediately N. of Jerusalem
ll. Jerusalem is now known as Jebel A-Kuds, of which
the loftiest point is the summit of the
and south- Nebi Samwil(29qq ft.),
____._ , rising above the
warau.
plateau of El-lib. Near- lerusalem
the watershed iies at a height of about -2600 ft.
Wild deep-sunk valleys descend eastwards to the
WBdi en-NBr (Kidron valley), WBdi ed-Dereje, and
southernmost Wadi SeyZl deserve to be mentioned.
The country sloping to the Dead Sea falls in a triple
succession of terraces-a waterless, treeless waste (in
ancient times known as the desert of Judah), which has
never been brought under cultivation, but in the first
Christian centuries was the chosen abode of monasticism.
To the N. of Hebron, in the neighbourhood of Halhtil,
lie the highest elevations of this part of the central
highlands (up to 3500 ft. ), which may be distinguished
as the mountains of Hebron. Towards Yutfii (JUTTAH)
in the S. is a sudden step down; there begins a
plateau a t a height of about 2600 ft., 500 ft. below
the Hebron watershed. The plateau consists of open
wolds and arable land, the soil being a white soft
chalk; but there are no wells. Southward another
step leads down to the white marl desert of Beersheba,
abounding in caves. In ancient times this southern
district was called the N EGEB ; it extends far to the S.,
but is properly a part of Palestine. The country was
in former times a steppe region without definite
boundaries, and consequently the abode of nomadic
herdsmen. See NEGEB,and map opp. col. 3375f:
The Jordan Valley having been described elsewhere
(see J ORDAN , ARABAH), we may pass to a brief sketch
. .
12,E. of Jordan. of thephysicalcharacter oftheconntry
E. of Jordan (see map of Gilead, opp. -.
col. 1727f., and mapof Moab, opp. col. 31675, and com-
pare G ILEAD , M O A R ). This is a more difficult task for
several reasons : first, no connected series of investiga-
tions and nieasurements has been made ; and, secondly,
as the ideal demarcation of the book of Joshua is a
hardly sufficient basis on which to build, and the
information about the actual state of matters supplied
by other ancient sonrces is insufficient, it is impossible
to determine the limits of the country as far as it was
occupied by the Israelites.
In the opinion of the present u-riter, the plain of
RASHAN( p. v . ) can hardly be assigned to Palestine.
T o the S. of the Yarmiik (Hieromax of the Greeks
and Romans, Hebrew name unknown), which falls into
the Jordan below the Lake of Tiberias, begins the
the basalt of the Hauriin territory stretches farther
south. Ascending from the Yarmiik, we first of all
reach a mountainous district of moderate elevation
(about 2000 ft.) rising towards the S. ; this is Jebel
'Ajltin, which abounds in caves, and, according to
3538
 PALESTINE
recent explorers, is extremely well watered and of great
fertility-the whole surface being covered with pasture
such as not even Galilee can show. Eastwards are
massive ridges as much as 4000 ft. in height-Jebel
Kafkafa and especially Mi'rad-separating this territory
from the waterless desert lying at no great depth below.
The plateau stretches away to the S. of the deep gorge
of the perennial Zerk5 (Jabbok), and reaches a con-
siderable height in Jebel Jil'ad (Gilead in the stricter
sense). The landmark of the region is Jebel &hac
(3590).to the N. of es-,Salt, so called from the traditional
tomb of Hosea (see G ILEAD , 5 4). From the deep-
sunk Jordan valley the mountains rise grandly in
terraces, partly abrupt and rocky ; and, whilst fig trees
and vines flourish down in the lower levels, vdonia
oaks, Laiwus Pinus, cedars, and arbutus grow on the
declivities. Owing to its perennial springs, the interior
terrace of the country, the ancient Mishor, is a splendid
pasture land, famous as such of old ; and abundance of
wood and water renders this whole middle region of
the trans-Jordan country one of the most luxuriant and
beautiful in Palestine. Only a few individual summits,
such as Jebel Neb& (Mount Nebo), are noticeable in
the ridges that descend to the Jordan valley. The
country from the Zerkii southward to the Mejib (Arnon)
is now known as el-Belkii; and beyond that begins
the land of Moab proper, which also consists of a steep
mountain-wall through which deep gorges cut their way
to the plain, and behind this of a plateau poorly watered
but dotted over with ancient ruins (see M OAB , 3-5).
In this district, too, there are a few individual summits.
Here also a mountain-wall separates the plain from
the eastern desert ; and the mountain district continues
farther S. along the Araha (cp EDOM).
Palestine is not exceptionally deficient in water.
Perennial streams, indeed, are scarce, and were so in
13. Water. antiquity ; but, except in certain districts, as
the desert of Judah, the country is not
badly supplied with springs. In keeping with 'the struc-
ture of the rocks, the springs usually break out at the
junction of the hard and the soft strata. Thus abundant
springs of good water occur on the very summit of the
cis-Jordan country, as, for example, near Hebron, at
Niibulus, and in Galilee ; and, though few are found in
the immediate neighbourhood of Jerusalem, more than
forty may be counted within a radius of 15 to 2 0 miles
round the city. There is no water in the low hilly
country behind the coast region; and, though in its
northern portion some fairly large streams take their rise,
the same is true of the coast-region itself. Rising as
they do at the foot of a great mountain range, the most
abundant springs in Palestine are those of the Jordan,
especially those near BBnias and Tell-el-Ktidi. The
mountains of Gilead are rich in excellent water.
A considerable number of hot springs occur through-
out the country, especially in and near the Jordan
valley; they were used in ancient times for curative
purposes, and might still be so used. The water of
the bath of el-Hammeh, about z miles S. of Tiherias.
has a temperature of 137' Fahr., and the spring near
the Zerkii Mdin, formerly known as Callirrhoe. as much
as 142O Fahr. Hot sulphur springs also occur on the
W. coast of the Dead Sea. Many of the springs in
Palestine are slightly brackish.
From the earliest times cisterns ( 6 i ~ Heb.
, 6 8 4 have
naturally played a great part in the country ; they are
found everywhere in great numbers. Generally they
consist of reservoirs of masonry widening out downwards,
with a narrow opening above often covered with heavy
stones. Open reservoirs were also constructed to
collect rain and spring water (see CONDUITS). Many
aqueducts, as well as many now ruined cisterns.
could be restored without much trouble, and would
give a great stimulus to the fertility and cultivation of
the country.
Climatically, Palestine may be considered part of the
3539
PALESTINE
subtropical zone. At the summer solstice the sun stands
Climate IO" south of the zenith ; the shortest
148.
andvegetation. day is thus one of ten hours, the longest
of onlv fourteen. In a few rDoints. as
~~~~---
already remarked, there is a difference between Palestine
-.
and the rest of Syria.
The extensive maritime plain and the valley of
the Jordan give rise to important climatic contrasts.
I. From its vicinity to the sea the maritime plain is
naturally warmer than the highlands. The mean
annual temperature is 70' Fahr., the extremes being
50' and 85'. The harvest ripens two weeks earlier
than among the mountains. Citrons and oranges
flourish ; the palm also grows, though without fruiting ;
melons are largely cultivated ; and pomegranate bushes
are to be seen. Less rain falls than in the mountains.
2. The second climatic zone consists of the highlands
(from 500 to 3000 ft. above the sea), which were the
real home of the Israelites. The average temperature
of Jerusalem, which may be taken as pretty much that
of the upland as a whole, is 62- ; but the extremes are
considerable, as the thermometer may sink several
degrees below the freezing- point, though frost and
snow never'last long. The rainfall of zo inches is
distributed over about fifty days. In this climate the
vine, the f i g , and the olive succeed admirably. Even
in the southernmost districts (of the Negeb), as well as
throughout the whole country, there still are traces of
ancient wine-growing. T h e mountain ridges in this
zone are for the most part hare; hut the slopes and
the valleys are green, and beauty and fertility increase
as we advance northwards.
3. In regard to the climate of the third zone, see
J ORDAN , 8. The barley harvest here ends with the
middle of April. The thermometer rarely sinks below
77O, and it goes as high as 1309
4. The fourth zone, the elevated plateau of the trans-
Jordan region, has an extreme climate. The thermo-
meter may frequently fall during the night below the
freezing-point, and rise next day to 80". The mountains
are often covered with snow in winter. Whilst the
rainfall in the Jordan valley is very slight, the precipita-
tion in the eastern mountains is again considerable;
as in western Palestine, the dewfall is heavy.
From this short survey it appears that Palestine is a
country of strong contrasts. Of course it was the same
in antiquity ; climate, rainfall, fertility, and productive-
ness cannot have seriously changed. Even if we
suppose that there was a somewhat richer clothing of
wood and trees in the central districts of the country,
on the whole the general appearance must have
been much the same as at present. T o the stranger
from the steppes arriving at a favourable season of the
year Palestine may still give the impression of a land
'flowing with milk and honey.'l The number of
cisterns and reservoirs is proof enough that it was not
better supplied with water in ancient times; but, on
the other hand, the many ruins of places which were
still flourishing during the Roman period show that at
one time (more especially in the southern districts,
which now possess but few inhabited localities) cultiva-
tion must have been carried on more extensively and
thoroughly (cp N EGEB , 5 6). In general the country
enjoyed the greatest security, and consequently the
greatest prosperity, under Western rule, which even
protected the country E. of Jordan (at present partly
beyond the control of the Government) from the inroads
of the Bedouins. The Romans also did excellent
service by the construction of roads, portions of which
(as well as Roman milestones and bridges) still remain
in good preservation in many places. Thus it cannot
be denied that the resources of the country were
formerly better developed than at present. Like all
the lands of the nearer East, Palestine suffers from the
1 S 7.
On this phrase see above, col. 2104, n. 3, and NEGEB,
3540
 PALESTINE
decay of the branches of industry which still flourished
there in the Middle Ages. A. S. ($5 1-14 a).
The unique position of Palestine-a narrow strip of
mountainous country connecting the three great con-
14b, Flora. tinental areas of Europe, Asia, and Africa-
and its remarkable variations of surface
and climate within a comparatively small area render it
a fitting home for an exceedingly rich and varied flora.
There are at present known more than 3000 species of
flowering plants, and this number will certainly be in-
creased by future explorations, particularly in Antilibanus
and the southern extension of the eastern range. So
varied is the flora that its relationships are found in no
less than three botanical regions.
i. Meditervanean area. -The narrow strip of coast,
the slopes of Lebanon and Antilibanus. the tableland
of Galilee and the hills of Judza, Gilead, and Moab,
constitute a fairly uniform area, the plants of which are
for the most part identical with or closely related to
those which flourish a t corresponding elevations in Asia
Minor and southern Europe, particularly in Turkey,
Greece, Italy, and Sicily. This may be terr-t.1 the
‘ Mediterranean ‘ area. The relationship of me flora
with that of the maritime countries of the eastern Medi-
terranean is most marked on the coast plains and on the
western slopes of the hills on the seaward side of the
Jordan. In the mountains east of the Jordan and on
the eastern slopes of the western hills the presence of
many wanderers of eastern affinity marks the transition
from the Mediterranean flora to that of our second
region, the Oriental.
I . On the coast plains and the western hills, including the
lower slopes of Lebanon, such well-known European genera as
Clematis, Anemone, Papaver Silene, Hypericum, Rhamnus,
Medicago, Lotus, Lathyrus,’ Scandix, Lonicera, Anchusa,
Linaria, etc., are represented, in most cases by species identical
with those found in Europe. The indigenous trees of the coast
plains are very few ; among them are two British willows, a
Mediterranean alder, and the terebinth, which is probably
only a variety of the Mediterranean Pisfacia Teredinfhus, L.
2. On Lebanon dense forests are no longer to he seen, and on
Antilibanus forest-covered areas are now found only on its
eastern flanks. The most prominent tree is the oak, represented
hy about half a dozen Mediterranean species. Maples, pruni
poplars, the Aleppo ine and the widely cultivated car06
(Cerafonia s i l i p a , L.p are also common. A large number of
herbaceous species are at present known only from these two
ranges, and they all belong to genera which are represented by
other species in southern Europe. On the western slopes of
Lebanon, between 3” and 35” ft., occurs Erica verficilZata,
the only heath found in Palestine.
3. The southern uplands west of the Jordan have few trees
and those that occur do not grow gregariously, the land bein;
now practically destitute of forests. Hardly any plants are
found here which are not also known from the lower and middle
slopes of Lebanon.
4. East of the Jordan, especially on the flanks of the mountains
of Gilead, there are forests of oak, Aleppo pine, and terehinth.
The most characteristic plants on this portion of the eaqtern
range are those which are common on the western slopes of the
hillc of western Palestine. Thus the Bora of the hills of Gilead
and Moab is truly Mediterranean in character although its con-
tinuity with that of western Palestine is abruptly broken hy
the derp gorge of the Dead Sea, and it contains many species
of Oriental affinity mingled with the more numerous western
types.
5. Above 4- ft. on the slopes of Lebanon and Antilibanus
the low-level Mediterranean species gradually disappear and
their place is taken by others which mark the approach to an
Alpine flora. Conspicuousaniong these is the famous cedar of
Lebanon, which, within our area, appears to be confined to the
middle slopes of Lebanon, where it is now found only in a few
small isolated groves. Its apparent absence from Antilibanus
is remarkable, though the comparative dryness of the climate
of this range is perhaps sufficient to account for it. At about
the same elevation are found our singlespecies of rhododendron,
a cotoneaster, several roses, and two species of juniper.
6. Above 7 0 0 3 ft., on Lebanon and Antilibanus, the flora
becomes Alpine in character. Trees and tall shrubs are want-
ing ; such shrubby vegetation as there is consists of isolated
small, frequently prostrate hushes of Cerasus p Y Q S f Y a f a :
Cotoneaster nrmmdaria, and other woody species. Rounded
clumps of AcanthulimonZi6anoficum,a member of the Leadwort
family, form a marked feature on the otherwise almost naked
suinmits. The vast genus Astiagalus is represented here by
many thorny specxs. In moist and sheltered crevices are
hidden several ferns, a family which elsewhere is very feebly
represented in our area. The most notable feature of the
Alpine flora of these ranges is the almost complete absence of
3541
PALESTINE
arctic species such as characterise the Alpine zone in the Alps
of Europe and even in a range so far south as the Himalayas.
The northern genera which do occur are representedby Levantine
species ; one of the very few, perhaps the single, arctic species
being Oxyria digyna, L. The explanation of this remarkable
absence of arctic types, which is found also in the Alpine regions
of the high mountains of tropical Africa, is to be sought in the
geological history of the country.
ii. Oriental area.-Our second botanical area is very
much smaller and less distinctly characterised than the
preceding. The plains of Coele-Syria (separating
Lebanon from Antilibanus), HaurHn, and Damascus,
together with the lower eastern flanks of Antilibanus.
possess a flora which may be described as Oriental.
Although it includes many Mediterranean species and a
few from the Syrian desert, its most marked affinity is
with the plants of Northern Syria, Mesopotamia, and
Persia. The most characteristic genus is Astragalus,
which is represented by about thirty species. Next t o
these, species of Verbascum and Phlomis are most
8bundant. The plants of this area, which includes the
isolated volcanic range of Jebel ed-Drtiz, are very
incompletely known, and in the present state of our
knowledge its exact botanical relationship with the vast
plains and deserts to the east cannot be defined. Many
herbaceous species have thus far been found only in
these plains. Future exploration will doubtless extend
the range of many of these in a n easterly direction.
iii. TropicaZ area.-In the gorge of the Jordan and
Dead Sea there flourishes a tropical flora which has for
the most part African and Arabian affinities, bilt
includes a large number of species from the eastern
deserts, many of which are found as far east as the
deserts of North West India. On descending the steep
declivities of this remarkable cleft, the traveller leaves
the Mediterranean flora behind a t about the true sea-
level.
Among the more remarkable plants which in Palestine are
found only in the gorge are Solanum coaguluns, Forsk.,
whose fruit has been called the “Dead Sea apple ” Bulaniies
A?$&bfzbca, Del., and calQfYQ)iS #rocera, W., all ;If which are
tropical African and Arabian species ; Salvadora jersica, L..
identified, probably incorrectly, with the “ Mustard-tree,”
Zizyjhus Spina-Christi, the ‘ Christ-Thorn ’ and PQ~UZUUS
Bzjltruficu, O h . , which extend from Africd to India. The
genus Astragalus is represented hy over 70 species, only about
three of which are Mediterranean.
On the shores of the Dead Sea there is a typically
tropical halophytic flora, composed largely of species of
Salicornia, Suaeda, and Atriplex. Higher up the valley
the tree flora includes several species of Willow and
Tamarix, which in places form a dense low jungle-
growth. This narrow cleft is, from a botanical point
of view, one of the most remarkable and interesting
features of the country. Isolated from the surrounding
area in the course of geological changes and by
reason of its depression possessing a torrid climate, it
harbours the descendants of a tropical flora which
probably flourished over a very wide area in an earlier
epoch. Its flora is further modified by the saline nature
of the soil of its southern end, due to the absence of a
natural outlet for the waters of the Jordan.
H. H. W.P. (8 14 6).
Of the six regions (based primarily on the distribution
of land-birds) into which the surface of the world has
14c, Fauna, been subdivided by zoogeographers, Pales-
tine belongs to the Palzarctic. It lies not
far from the middle of the southern districts of the
Palaearctic region of Sclater and Wallace, and in the
Mediterranean sub-region. T h e Palzearctic region in-
cludes all Europe, Asia north of the Himalayas, Northern
China, Persia and neighbouring lands as far E. as the
Indns and the extra-tropical parts of N. Africa, Egypt,
and Arabia. Of the sub-regions into which the Palz-
arctic region is divided the Mediterranean is by far the
richest, indeed by some authorities it is considered not
so much a sub-region as a transition region whose fauna
1 Some authorities group this vast expanse of land with the
N. American continent as one region (the Holarctic), thus
reducing the regions to five.
354”
 PALESTINE
is an association of elements derived from the Palzearctic,
the Ethiopian, and the Oriental regions, with each of
which the area is contiguous.
In its broader features, then, the fauna of Palestine is
that of the Mediterranean sub-region, which includes
Spain, the countries S. of the Alps, the Danube, and
the Caucasus. Eastwards this fauna extends over
Persia, Afghanistan, and Beluchistan, southward across
Arabia and Africa, its southern limit being the line of
the Tropic of Cancer. Almost in the centre of this
district, but a trifle to the E., lies Palestine. Since
it is so near the gate which leads from Africa to Asia
one is not surprised to find a considerable intrusion of
Ethiopic forms. Still this is not so considerable as to
alter the dominant Palcearctic facies of the fauna, which
is still less modified by animals from the Oriental region.
As usual the tracts of desert which lie to the E. of
Palestine offer a very effective barrier to the dispersal of
both beast and bird ; and but for this desert we should
doubtless find a greater admixture of Indian forms.
Palestine is characterised by a wide diversity not only
of climate (I 14a), but also of soil. Large areas are
sandy deserts, and much is stony ground ; but there are
also tracts of rich corn-fields and fruitful orchards, and
although there are now no large forests, there probably
were such in the past, and the smaller woods and thickets
are still sufficient to give shelter to many sylvan birds and
beasts. Both in climate and in the nature of the soil
and its products, the country is adapted to a rich and
varied fauna.
According to Canon Tristram, Palestine possesses
some 113species of mammals, amongst which, however,
14d. Mammals. are counted several species no longer
to be found there, but for whose ex-
istence we have, as in the case of the Bos primigznius,
fossil evidence, or, as in the case of FeZis Ira, the
evidence of history. Of these 113, about one half are
characteristic of the Palzarctic region.
The mammals belong to the following classes :Hyracoidea, I . .
Ungulata,several species of which are probably introduced a<
domestic cattle etc. 23; Carniuora, 2 1 ; Znsectiuom, 8 ;
Chziropfera, 17 and k’odentia, 43.
The mammalian faunais obviouslyrich and fairlyvaried
for so small an area, the most striking character perhaps
being the predominance of the Carnivores and Rodents.
One of the Carnivores, Ursus syriacus as was indicated by
Canon Tristram, is not a true specie:. I t is classed hy
Trouessart as a variety of Ursus isdelr’inus, which extends
from the Caucasus to Thibet. Some authorities even regard the
last named species as a mere variety of the European Brown
Bear U. Arcfos. In any case, U.syriacus can no longer be
reckined as a species peculiar to Palestine.
Of the 43 rodents, a number which Canon Tristram thinks
may easily he increased, he counts no less than ten as peculiar
to the district. Some of these have, however, since been shown
to have a wider range ; thus Sciurus sm.acus is now recognised
as a synonym for Sc. persicus which is widely distributed in
Europe and Asia. GerbiZZus t e n b r u s extends to the Euphrates
valley. Dipus hirt9es the rough-footed jerboa, does not,
accordin to Trouessart, ‘live in Palestine, where the fascinating
little jerfoas are represented by D.e&fius D.gerboa, and
D. sagitta. Lepus 3 d e e is recorded from ’Palestine alone ;
but L. synacus, L. sinaificus, Gerbir’Zusfeniurus,Psammomys
myomrus, Acomys russatus, Mus f r e t e x f u r , Elionzys mer’an-
#?-us all extend into neighbouring lands such as Syria and the
Peninsula of Sinai, and some are found even farther afield.
The rodents thus not only are rich in number but
also show a marked proportion of peculiar forms.
This is largely due no doubt to the fact that they form
the dominant desert fauna. For the most part nocturnal
in habit, burrowing in their holes during the day, at
night they emerge and seek as food the succulent bulbs
and tuberous roots of the desert flowers.
The only peculiar Ungulate Gazelln arabica, and the coney
Procawa syriaca also extend through Syria and the Sinaitii
peninsula, and tde latter throughout Arabia, in the southern
parts of which it is represented by a sub-species P. syriaca
jayahan: The 13 other species of Procavia which together
make up the class Hyracoidea are confined to the African
continent and are widely distributed throughout the continent
except along the northern border.
It may further be mentioned that of the 113 mammals
recorded by Tristram 34 are common to the Ethiopian
3543
PALESTINE
region and only 16to the Indian, a further proof of the
efficiency of such a desert as that which stretches out
E. of Palestine as a barrier to the dispersal of animals.
The birds are even more pronouncedly Palzearctic
than the mammals; of the 348 species recorded by
14e. Tristram, 271 are also Palzearctic, 40
Ethiopian (IO of w-hich are also Indian),
7 Indian, 30 are claimed to be peculiar. Thus the
avifauna is remarkably rich for so small a district, and
this is partly due to the wealth of bird life at times of
migration. Palestine has a winter season for many
birds that summer farther north and a summer season
for others that pass their winter in warmer climes.
T h e essentially Palcearctic character of the birds is
perhaps best brought home to us by the statement that
134 species are common to Britain and Palestine.
One of the interesting features of the avifauna is that of the
30 species common tp Palestine and the Ethiopian region alone
18 are found only in the Jordan and Dead Sea basins. In fact
this deep cleft shelters the Ethiopian and Indian forms very
few of which are found outside it, whilst in it, except fo; some
winter migrants hard1 any Palaearctic birds are found.
Thirteen of the 3; classe2by Tristram as new or peculiar birds
have closely allied Pakarctic forms. Eleven, however-and
these are all found in the Dead Sea basin-are allied to Ethiopian
or Indian forms, or to forms common to these two regions. On
the whole the approximation is greater to the African avifauna
than to the Indian ; but this is not so pronouncedly so as in the
case of the Mammalia
Amongst the reptiles and Amphibia we find less
trace of an Ethiopic invasion,
Of the 91 reptiles and Amphibia recorded
14f. Reptiles br Tristram some II are peculiar 49 occur
and Amphibia. a so in the Palrearctic region, ;7 in the
Ethiopian, and only 4 in the Oriental. There
are in Tristram’s list 33 Snakes, 44 Lizards, many of which are
deserticolous in appearance and habits, 7. Chelonians 2 of them
marine, and the single species of Crocodile, C. niZot&, which
is found nowhere out of Africa but in Syria and Palestine,
where judging from travellers’ tales it is much less common
than formerly.
The Amphibia include a newt, the beautiful Triton wittafus,
Bufo airidis E, varzabiZis the green toad ; B. pantherina s.
maun’fanica, the p a n t h e h e toad PeloZmfes synhcus the
Syrian spade-foot toad ; Rana escdlpnla, the edible frog: and
Hyla arborea, the tree frog. Doubtless further search would
be rewarded with other species of Amphibia.
The ichthyological fauna is by far the most char-
acteristic of the five vertebrate groups. Of the 43
14g. Fishes. species, only 8. and these found in the
rivers of the coagt, belong to the ordinary
piscine fauna of the Mediterranean basin. Out of 36
species found in the Jordan system only one is common
to the ordinary Mediterranean fauna.
Two others, Cltromis niloticus and Clarias macracanfhus,
occur in the Nile ; 17 others are found in the lakes and rivers of
Syria and SW. Asia, whilst 16 species of the families Chromide
Cyprinodonfide, and Cy#rznidc are peculiar to the rive;
Jordan and its subsidiary streams and lakes. The discovery
of Chromis (7 species) and Henzichromis, typically genera
of the East African lakes and rivers, in the valley of the Jordan
is one of the most remarkable pieces of evidence of the con-
nection of this gorge with the Ethiopian region.
A good deal of work has been done on the molluscan,
the arachnid, and certain classes of the insect fauna;
14h. Inver- but, as is usually the case, our knowledge
of the Invertebrata lags behind that of the
tebrata* Vertebrata. In many cases the divisions
of the land made in accordance with the distribution of
the various groups of Invertebrata, in no way corresponds
with the areas laid down by Sclater ; and for this reason,
and because in the present state of our knowledge of
the invertebrates of Palestine it would be premature to
generalise, we shall not consider the invertebrate fauna
in this article. A. E. S., 14 C-h.
Evidence of Palestine’s being inhabited at a n early
date is afforded by many megalithic monuments similar
16. Political in character to those so often met with
elsewhere in widely separated quarters
pre-Israehte.
geographY : of the globe. It would be rash to
base upon these too definite conclusions
regarding the primitive population of the country.’
1 In this respect Conder’s Syrian Sfonr Lore (1886), for
example, is much too positive.
3544
 PALESTINE PALESTINE
For thousands of years Palestine was an object of 8. Radi-ne,a northern Libnah
conflict between the vast monarchies of western Asia. (or Lebonah?).
9. Ke-r-ti-nuz(e)-n(!)u,a Kir-
As Egypt, whenever she sought to extend her power, was from jath-Nasib; cp OL22138.
the very position of the country naturally led to make herself
12. Ma-ru-ma,a Dig-not
mistress of the E. coast of the Mediterranean, so, on the other
hand, there were no physical boundaries to prevent the westward Merom-also in RQ.
advance into Palestine of the Asiatic empires. For both Egypt 13. 71-mas-&u, Damascus
and the East indeed the country formed a natural thoroughfare, mixed in here by mistake.1
in time of war for the forces of the contending powers, in time 14. 'A-ti-ra (an Addir) ;cp Sh.
ofpeace for the trading caravans which carried on the interchange 15. Odi-ra, an Abel; cp on sp.
of African and Asiatic merchandise. 16. H a m -t u , Hammath In
I t may, to a certain degree, be accidental that we Naphtali (not the great
Hamath on the Orontes,
have no detailed reports of the Syrian expeditions of c,p As. u. Bur. 256).
the first pharaohs of dynasty 18 (cp EGYPT, 1 53). 18. Sf-mu-nuis, perhaps,z the
From the time of the great conqueror Thutmosis III.,
Sam/runa of Amarna,y or
we find lists of foreign countries or cities very frequently rather Mm2n, 'fat place'?
as mural decorations of the temples. T h e most im- 19. Bi-'a-rtc-tu,a Ueeroth (in
portant referring to Palestine ( A S . u. E u r . 157J) are : Benjamin?).
21. Sa-ru-nu (not the plain
i. The list of Thutmosis 111. in Karnak (T), 118 names, em- but a city of) Sharon; cp
bracing northern and middle Palestine. Socoh (No. 67) is the
southernmost city which wecan determine ; I'(a)-ra-zu(No. 60), Amarna, 260, after Knud-
tzon's reading.
said to have been farthest S., cannot he localised (As. u. Eur. 26. Ku-nB (also St.), Kanah in
IS?., 159).'
11. T h e list of Rameses 11. in Karnak (R), enumerating re-
Asher.
bellious Palestinian cities (chiefly in Middle Palestine) which he 27. 'A-ru-nu(also Sh.), 'E-ru-
na (i.e., 'Elyen), described
had resuhjugated (As. u. Eur. 165 ; copied in llledinet Habu
by Rameses 111.: see Rec. de Trav. 20 114 [18981). Both texts
a s covering the road across 83. k&-ma-'-na
Carmel(.4s. u. Eur. I 58). 84. N(a)-'-ma-w identical.
will soon be republished by the writer in MVAG. 2a. *(E>s-fi-m-tu,Ashtaroth-
iii. Another small list (R2)of such rebel cities in N. Palestine
and north of it, is found on a representation in the Ramesseum Karnaim beyond Jordan.
(As. U. Eur. zm).. . I t is much mutilated. 30. Mu-&-tu, Makeddah (of
iv. The list of cities of Judah and Israel conquered by SoSenk Judza?).
-Shishak (Sh.: As. u. EUY.166); strictly, the only list refer- 3'. Ra-ui-sa,Laish-Dan?
ring to hihlical times. I t seems to 60 hack to sources written in 32. Hu-za-ra,Hazor of Galilee
(St., An.).
Canaanitish (Phccnician) letters, whilst the other official lists all
33. Pa-ba-ra, frequently men- 89. He-y-
show traces of cuneiform originals. tioned (St., An., etc.) (As.
v. Finally, we might mention various small lists of Sety I. U. Eur. 192).
(St.), pertaining more to Phcenicia (eg. As. u. Bur. I ~ I ) and,
vi. The enumerations of cities and dountries in the so-called 34. Ke-n-nu-m-tu,Chinnereth.
36. ('A)-ti-m(e)-m(an Adum- 91. O-ta-ra-'a, quent; cp Sh., St., and 15.
'Travel of a n Egyptian,' in (hieratic) papyrus Anastasi I. (An.) mim 1 cp An. A-da-mi-mi).
(time of Rameses 11.; now generally understood a s satirical and
fictitious in the part in question; As. u. Eur. 772). 37. Ka-su-nu, Kishion.
The rest of our material consists of single occasional references. 38. Sa-na-ma,Shunem (cp 06. Krt-ra-ma-nu ('vine-
For the criticism of these lists the writer must em-
Sh.).
39. Mu-5aa-'-ra, Misheal.
phasise more than ever ( A u. Ezrr. 157) that they
40. 'A-k-sa), Aksaph (on An.,
contain nothing but loose enumerations of names with- cp As. u. Eur. g6 17 and
out any systematic arrangement. All attempts to find above, col. 1310, A. 43:
43- Tu-'a-nu-&,Taanach (Sh.). 101. Ha-ra-hi-ra, elsewhere
in the order of the names larger geographical groups or 43. Y(a)-d-ra-*a-mu, Yihlecm.
even the marches of the Egyptian armies have failed. 44. Ke-n-fu-'(e)-s-na,a Gatb-
T h e popular character of the inscriptions, which were primarily Ashna ; cp Amarna, 257.
mural, decorations, explains this deplorable lack of order and 46. 'A-Aa)-na. Ijon ; cp 95.
precision. (Compare the sharp distinction which the Assyri- 41. ' A - a - k (correct 'A-ka),
ologist has to make between the strictly historical texts and the Accho; cp St.
' Prunkinschriften ' or ' texts of general laudatory phrases.') For 48. Ru-Sa-&ud-S, a 'holy moun-
the mode of transcription, it must he home in mind by the non- tain-top,' ~ 3 - wcp~ R.~ 104.
Egyptologist that the consonants are fairly well rendered (c 49. K(e)-rz'.Ae)-me- nu,
on the principal equations, EGVPT,5 I z a ) as far a s was possih?; K(thus R;)aryamin.
with the Egyptian alphabet which, unfortunately, does not dis- 50. h'a-ra, a Bor.'
tinguish between I and Z, or F and z, but on the other hand 5'. 3a-wz.Ca~(e)-ti-mu (in a ~ o g .Bi-'(e)-m-tu; see above,
keeps carefully asunder 4 and 4. (The weakest point is the text of Amenophis 11.
l-T(a)$u,Joppa- Japho (also
An. and in a novel).
K(e)-n-tu,a Gath (Sh.).
Ru-le-n (hardly Lod).
&ad, hibl. Ono.
'A-pu-&e-n,an Aphikim or
(Aphek ?).
Sa-u-ka (Sh.), Socoh.
Y(a)-+ua,elsewhere U(a>
kam, described as situated
in the plain between Joppe
and the Carmel.
iVZa-k-t2-ra,Migdol (St.,
Sh., etc.), a frequent name.
flu-di-ti, Hadid.
Har, a ' mountain.
Y(a)-Sa+'(e)-ra,now usu-
ally understood ai Joseph-
el, although the S for
Samekh would he un-
usual. Cp Winckler, GI
268 against it (also J O ~ E P H
i. 5 I, ii. $ I).
K(e)-ru-rtc (hardly Gerar).
H(e)-r-,'(e?-ra, 'God's
mountain.
Ra-6a-6 (or d), a Rabhah
f?O.
} evidently
The name Nu'(a)mrin
seems to point to the terri-
tory of Benjamin.
8j. Ma-ra-ma-i(?)m, 'heights.'
86. 'ni, a ' fountain '; iy
87. Ru-hdu Rehoh in Asher,
Sh. ,.An.'
k - v u -y - m, 'double
temple'(cp As.u. Eur. 88).
go. 0-6i-ru, a n Abel. Fre-
Edrei.
92. 0-di-ra;cp 90.
95. 'A-y(a)-na,Ijon.
. yards'?).
97. Ba-f2.g.a(rather yd), Beth-
Yahweh?; cp As. u. Bur.
313..
99. 0-61-ra;cp 15, go. 92.
w'ritten ($u-<e)-n-kri-ru,in
southern Lebanon; cp A S .
u. Err. zoo, 204.
102. I'(u)-'-&(e)d-'d-ra, the
much discussed name
Jacob-el, also in R ; cp As.
Eur. 164 [JACOB, 5 11.
; U. Ka-ei-ra,Gezer.
a 105. Ru-6a-hr, a Rabbah; cp
Sh.
107. 'a-m-ku,a 'valley.'
Tn

rendering of the dentals d,t t ) T h e system of vocalisation, Sa-m-Sa-'(e)-ti-u [Le., to]- IIO. -$i-fi-la-'(e)-ra, a Beth-
however (EGYPT Z.c) is a(ways more or less arbitrary and ma), twogodsShamashand sha-el ; cp As. U . Eur. 193
ambiguous, and,'alti&gh far from being perfectly worthless Edom joined. (Sh., St., An., etc.).
a s hassometimes been maintained, it is to be used only with th; 52. '.A-nu-&)-r-tu, AnZharath i n . Ba-f2-n-f2 (sic.9 Beth-
greatest possible caution. T h e present writer transliterates it, in 1,ssachar. Anath in Naphtaii; Sh.
a s much as possible, in imitation of the cuneiform system(which 53, 54. -p-ra,Ophra (3. correctly gives the 'Ain
we know, exercised a strong influence on the Egyptian ortho! 5 j. Ha-Sa& :cp Amarna Ha- omitted here.
graphy of foreign names) and of the methods of Assyriologists.Q faihu in N. palestine. " 112. Ha-ra-k-tu, Helkath in
Taking the list of Thutmosis 111. (Th.) as basis3 and 56. T2-su-ra-ti. the T u h l t i of Irj, ~ ~ $ - ~ ( e ) - * a(sic.mu !), the
marking the other lists with R (R2), Sh., St. ( i . e . , Sety), Amarna ; N. Palestine. 'fountain of Jokneam in
and An. (ie., pap. Anastasi I.), we have the following . Ne-aedu, not 'the desert
.57. ZPhr,lnn.
- .- -......
cities which allow certain identifications :- place,' 3:2 (so A s . U. Eur. 114. K(e)-b-'u, a 'hill.'
I. Kad-Su5 (An. distinguishes 4. K(!)e-ti-su-nu, the Gada- 184, and often), but 32& 116. Za~-fi(elsewhereZe-f-ti),
Kad-sir on the Orontes Suxa of Amarna, 267, a on mount Carmel: a north-
' pass ' (cp Josh. 19 33 ?). ern Zephath.
from K d - 3 in Galilee). pdlp
Megiddo ('wa-ke-to, etc.): 6. D e . 6 4 u ( A n , , Tu&.&); cp 58. '(e)-Cu-S-/r(e)-n,Sashimi in 117. Be-ra-K-nu; cp Burkuna
+
'

cp An., St., Sh. Amarna. (thus Knudtzon) Amarna

3, g a . t a . y ( t h u s , after Sayee, Amarna and On 60, I'(u)-ra-za,the Yurza 43,164,which seems tohav;
who compared the Ha-zi of ., ${''2f-$t:a''
gr 382:
ofAmama, see above, 5 I j, i. been situated in Issachar.
Amarna, in N. Palestine). thafi,n, An. mentions, of strictly Palestinian places, also : Shechem
(cp As. u. Eur. 394) as Sa-ka-md Ku-(z?r~-ti-'(E)-n-du i.e.
1 French scholars commonly identify Y(a)-ra-za with analleged Kirjath-'Enab (a place NW. of J e k a l e m ; also in St.). 'J.(a)L
modern Yerzd (?),E n e h (7) ; hut the name is doubtful. 'a-ni-nu(=Kirjath Jearim? evidently corrupted) ; Ba-ti(Reth,
2 Consequently, the grave accent indicates not stress but that s;c!)-_Tu-#a-(z')ru ( L e . , Kirjath Sepher, cp As. u. Bur. 174);
a sign can be used with the B or e vowel.
3 The numbers prefixed to the names indicate their position 1 Cp As. u. Eur. 234 for the mention in text? of Rameses 111.
in Thutmosis' list. 2 The 'Ain being ohitted because the ma sign contained a
4 Doubtful names which do not admit of geographical identi- silent 'Ain. Cp the double value of the point of d with Cholem
fication or a reasonable etymology have been omitted. preceding.
5 Mistaken by the scribe for the KadeS on the Orontes and, 3 If .fam&unawere a Simeon, jiy,yd (Winckler), it would be
therefore, placed first. not the tribe hut a city.
3545 3546
 PALESTINE
K i y n a = ( G i n a Amarna) cp As. 78. Eur. 174on the biblical
iquivalent. A ,ki&fi, dentioned between the last two places,
occurs in Sh. a s Zu-d-p-i-m--i.e., Zadpet-El. An Adw-umu
is common to both sources, perhaps Adoraim in J u d a
On the list of Shoshenk, see further S HISHAK.
Gaza (Guzufualso in An.) is mentioned frequently As&uruni-
Ashkelon twice, ShSrahen (S.)in Simeon three times,'I.uz(Rlczu)
once, the important fortress Zarethan on the Jordan (Zu-ru-tu-
nu) twice, also the modern Sannur, and a number of places
which admit no certain identification.
The list of Shishak (Sh.) enumerates of known cities besides
those mentioned before : Hapharaim (Hu.pu-ru-m-&), Gibe'on
Beth-Horou, Kirjatbaim (see As. U. Euv. 166, on the necessar;
emendation of Ku-d(e)-l(e)-nz),Ajalon ( d y - y u - m - n )Beth-
Tappuah (Bi-ti-tri-@,sic!), Pnuel, Azmon (? 'A-&-zu-md), Arad
differentiated as 'great Arad' ('d-m-d-d m-6i-t) and Arad
n(e)-6u-tri,perhaps Jerahmeel (Yu-ru-+u-mu). w. M. M.
On t h e light shed by t h e A m a r n a letters (I SRAEL, 6)
a n d t h e Assyrio-Babylonian documents, see S Y R I A , a n d
on M e ( r ) n e p t a h ' s ' I s r a e l ' inscription, see I SRAEL , § 7.
O n the ethnology of primitive Palestine, s e e C ANAAN ,
a n d o n t h e relatively l a t e a n d artificial details of t h e
g e o g r a p h y of t h e various Israelitish tribes see t h e several
articles.
D o w n to a very late d a t e (the time of the Maccabees)
the Israelites were a l m o s t entirelv s h u t o u t from t -~ h e sea-
To t h i N. of the l a n d of the
lsraelitish nit;:es the m a r i t i m e plain was in
occupahon* the hands of the Phcenicians; see
DOR. E v e n i n t h e N T mention i s made of a district
of T y r e a n d S i d o n t o which w e m u s t not assign t o o
n a r r o w a n extension inland. How matters s t o o d i n the
country E. of Jordan i t is hard to decide. The stretih
f r o m t h e N. of t h e Dead Sea t o t h e Y a r m a k (practically
to the S. e n d of the L a k e of Tiberias) w a s the o n l y
portion securely held b y the tribes of Israel. See G ILEAD ,
BASHAN,M ANASSBH , G A D , REUBEN. MOAB, M ESHA ,
A MMON .
Our information i n regard to t h e divisions of t h e
country d u r i n g t h e regal period is very defective. A t
l,. N. and s. any rate, t h e list of Solomon's twelve
' officers ' in I K. 4 (see B A A N A , BEN-
kingdoms- HUR, B EN- DEKER) is derived f r o m
ancient sources. It i s noticeable i n this document t h a t ,
whilst the boundaries of s o m e of t h e districts appear t o
coincide with the tribal bouudaries (cp T RIBE ), the
political division was not based on the tribal. I n the
a c c o u n t given i n I K.ll mention i s m a d e of only o n e
t r i b e t h a t remained true to David, by which must naturally
be understood the tribe of Judah. The boundary, i n fact,
so f a r as it related t o the tribal territory of Benjamin,
seems to h a v e varied f r o m t i m e to time ; cp B EN J AMIN
(col. 538, beginning). It was to the k i n g d o m of Israel,
with its general superiority i n s t r e n g t h and influence, that
a l l the Israelite districts beyond J o r d a n were attached.
That the northern kingdom consisted of ten trihes(1 K. 12) is a
highly artificial computation. The small extent of the southern
kingdom is evident from a list (if indeed it be trustworthy) given
in 2 Ch. 11of the towns fortified by Rehoboam. As regards the
capitals of the northern kingdom, the royal court was originall
at S HECHEM (NSbulus), from the time of Jeroboam I. a t T i r d
(not yet securely identified ; cp TIKZAH), and from the time of
Omri a t Samaria (Sebastiye) ; the house of Ahab had its seat for
a season at Jezreel (Zer'in).
To describe i n detail the boundaries or divisions o f
Palestine i n l a t e r times is r a t h e r a historical t h a n a
geographical task.
The lists for the post-exilic period (found in the books of Ezra
and Nehemiah), containing a series of new topographical names,
require a very careful examination, owing to the tendency of the
Chronicler to introduce late elements into his literary material.1
That Edomites forced their way into S. Judah, is a known fact
(see EDOM);this part of the country came to be known as
Idumea. I t also appears that there was a ewish population not
only in a portion of the old territory of Judah and Benjamin, but
now to the N. of Bethel.
Before w e proceed to the G r a x o - R o m a n period i t will
be well to consider the n a m e s b y which t h e country i n
general was called at different times.
1 On the difficult question? involved, cp Ed. Meyer, Enf. d.
/u<. (1896), p. 151. See also E ZRA -N EHEMIAH , and special
articles on these ' new names ' in the present work.
3547
PALESTINE
i. Gilead was the centre of the power of the Israelites on the
E. side of Jordan, and the whole country which they possessed
there bore this name. Gilead consequently is
18. opposed to Canaan, the 'Promised Land' (cp
names. col. 1585 n. I). The southern portion ulti.
mately riceived thename of the individual tribe
of Judah, as indeed the northern kingdom was frequently called
afterthemost powerful tribeof E P H R A ~(4.~8. M i. I I ; JOSEPH i.).
ii. The name of the southern kingdom appears in cuneiforiu
inscriptions as mat (ir) Ya-u-du (di) ; and it is said (see A HAB
8 4) that m8t Sir'lai occurs once for the land of Israel, thougd
more frequently it is called m8t a u m r i (Land of Omri). That
even the Assyrians occasionally included Judah under the
designation Palastu or Pilistu (Philistia) has not been absolutely
proved ; but there is nothing improbable about the supposition.
I t cannot be taken for granted, however, that the cis-Jordan
country bore the name of land of the Philistines at a time when
it was the scene of a great development of the Philistian power ;
the name was rather, as so often happens, extended by their
neighbours from Philistia proper to the country beyond and
from the Egyptians it passed to the Greeks. I n the O'T PEkshet
(see P HILISTINES, 5 I ) is still always restricted to the Philistine
coast-plain; the same is the case in Josephus ; and in Herodotus
though the usage is not very explicit, P a b s t i n a appears usuall;
to have no wider application. Gradually, however, the designa-
tion Palzestina Syria, or simply Palaestina, came into vogue, and
was made to include even the country E. of Jordan, and con-
sequently the whole territory between Lebanon and Sinai.
See, further, PHILISTINES, 8 I, etc.
We n o w r e t u r n t o the divisions of Palestine. Already
i n the b o o k of K i n g s ( t h a t is, by t h e t i m e of the exile)
19. Later t h e n a m e S h 6 m h 6 n (S AMARIA ) is applied
divisions. to t h e territory of the northern kingdom,
f o r mention is m a d e of the a cities of
S a m a r i a ' ( 2 K. 1726 23 19; c p the late narrative-passage,
I K. 1332). I n the a p o c r y p h a l books of the OT, Judaea
a n d S a m a r i a (Zapapeins, Zupapir. Zapupera) are op-
posed t o each other ; b u t the limits of the two divisions
at t h e t i m e of Christ, and for centuries previously, can
hardly b e laid down.
Thus in Josephus the Mediterranean coast as far N. as Acre
is assigned to JUDXA (q.u.); towards the S. this country was
bounded by Idumea; in the N. it extended to a b o q E m. to the
S. of NZbulus (Shechem). Whether SAMARIA extended
(9.~8.)
from the Jordan to the sea is uncertain; in the N. it reached
the southern edge of the plain of Esdraelon the frontier town
being 'En Gannim (Jenin). Galilee was orikinally the district
in the neighbourhood of Kedesh, afterwards distinguished as
Upper Galilee. TheJewish population was there largely niixed
with Phoenicians, Syrmns, Greeks, andeven Arabs(see GALILEE).
The whole maritime regign to the N. of Dol was still called
Phoenicia in the time*'drhe Romans, and thus does not strictly
belong to Palestine in our Sense of the word.
A l o n g the coast, as well a s m o r e especially i n the
N. of t h e country, m a n y Greek colonies were established;
how s t r o n g the foreign influence m u s t h a v e been i n
S a m a r i a and Galilee is evident from t h e preservation of
so many Graeco-Roman n a m e s like Neapolis (NBbulus),
Sebaste (Sebasfiye). Tiberias (Tabariye). Elsewhere
too, i n the S. for example, the o l d nomenclature was
altered : Blia w a s substituted for Jerusalem, Azotus
f o r m e d f r o m Ashdod, and so o n ; b u t the o l d n a m e s
were always retained i n t h e m o u t h of the people. The
N. of t h e country and the trans- Jordan region were
m u c h m o r e thoroughly b r o u g h t u n d e r the influence of
t h e Greeks and R o m a n s t h a n t h e south.
The Greek towns in some cases date from the time of
Alexander the Great, and others were founded by the Ptolemies;
hut most of them owe their origin to the Seleucids One district
of the transJordan region retained at that period its old name
in the Greek form of Perzea. Jospphus says that this district
extended from the Jordan to Philadelphia (Rabbath Ammon,
AmmZn) and Gerasa (Jerash), went southward as far as
Machgrus (Mkaur on the ZerkZ Mi'in), and northward as far
a s Pella (Fnhl opposite BeisZn).
Adjoining Peraea. and mainly t o the E. of J o r d a n ,
l a y t h e DECAPOLIS ( q . ~ . ) which , was n o t , however, a
continuous territory, b u t a political g r o u p of cities occu-
pied b y Greek republics distinguished f r o m t h e tetrarchies
with their Jewish'Syrian-Arabic population i n the midst
of which they were scattered.
L i t t l e requires to be said about t h e division of t h e
country i n later R o m a n times.
In the fifth century a threefold partition began to prevail :-
Palaestina Prima (roughly equal to J u d a and Samaria),
Palreqtina Secunda (the countries about the upper Jordan and
the Lake of Gennesaret) and Palzstina Tertia or Salutaris
(Idumea and Moah). 1; the time of the crusades the same
3548
 PALESTINE
names were applied to three divisions (at once political and
ecclesiastical) of the country W. of Jordan,-Palzstina Prima
or Maritima being the coast region a s far as Carmel (with
Czsarea a s its archbishop's see), Palzstina Secunda comprising
the mountains of Judah and Ephraim (with the patriarchal see
of Jerusalem), and Palzstina Tertia corresponding roughly to
Galilee (with its bishop's see a t Nazareth). The country E. of
Jordan was called Arabia, and was in like manner divided into
three parts lying N. and S. of one another.
Palestine is by no means so strikingly a country apart
a s is usually supposed. It lay, as already mentioned,
20. Trade near the great military highway from western
routes. Asia to Egypt and Africa. The traffic by
sea was also formerly of importance; and
even in the Middle Ages something was done for the
protection of the harbours. At no time, however, was
the country in the proper sense of the word rich; it
hardly ever produced more than was necessary for home
consumption. The great trading caravans which passed
through were glad for the most part to avoid the high-
lands, and that region at least was more or less isolated.
The following is a brief survey of the principal routes,
partly as they ran formerly, partly as they are used
still.
From Egypt a road runs by el-'Arish (Rhinocolura) or 'the
RIVERO F E GYPT' (4.v.) by Rafah (Raphia) to GAZA(q
From Gaza another runs by Umm LPkis, formerly identified
with LACHISH ( q . ~ . ) and
, Bet Jibrin (Eleutheropolis) across the
mountains to Jerusalem. Northwards from Gaza the main
route continues along the plain a t some distance from the sea
(which in this part has piled up great sand dunes) to el-Mejdel
(perha s Migdal Gad) near Ashkelon and so on to Ashdcd
(Esdiitf, Azotus). From Ashdod a roid runs by 'Akir (Ekron)
to Kamle, an important town In the medizval Arabian p e r i d ,
and Ludd ( G d , Lydda). From these towns, which are con-
nected with the port of YZG (Japho, Joppa), there run to
Jerusalem three routes, of which the one most used in antiquity
was evidently-the northern one passing by Jimzu (Gimzo) and
the two Bet 'Urs (Beth-horon), not the one now followed-vir.,
by 'Amwas (Nicopolis) and Wadi 'Ali. From Yafa a road
continues along the coast by Arsiif (Apollonia) to the ruins of
Kaisariye (Czsarea), then past Tantiira (ruins of Dor) and
'Athlit (Castellurn Peregrinorurn of the crusaders) and round
the foot of the promontory of Carmel to Haifa and Acre (a
town of great importance from early times). Another route
startin from Lndd runs north, close to the mountains by Anti-
patris ?now Kefr SBbZ or Ras el-'Ain?) and Kakiin and ends a t
Khan Lejjon. The Great Plain offered t'he'ea;iest passage
from the wast inland. el-Lejjiin (a corruption of the Latin
L ~ g i o )was certainly an important point; it is still generally
identified, according to Robinson's suggestion, with the ancient
MECIDDO(P.v.). In the vicinity lie the ruins of Ta'annuk
(Taanach), and farther SW. the great centre of Jenin (see
(EN-CANNIM).From Acre there also runs a road directly
E. over the mountains to KhPn Jubb YOsuf. T h e coast road
from Acre northwards passes through ez-Zib (Akhzih, Ecdippa)
and by the two promontories of R& e n - N i k i r a and.RZs el-.4pya<
(Scala Tyriorum), and so continues to the maritime p l a n of
Tyre.
T o return to the S., from Egypt (Suez, Arsinoe) the desert
was crossed to Ruheibe (Rehoboth), K h a l a e (Elusa), and
Bir-es-Seha' (Beersheba), the route went northward to ed-
DBheriye (see A CHSAH ) and el-Khalil (Hehron). I n IiGe
manner a road from Aila up the Arabah valley crossed the pass
of eg-Sufah (see H ALAK M OUNT ) to Hehron.
On; of the most frequented highways traverses the central
mountain chain northwards, and, though somewhat difficult in
various parts, connects some of the most important places of
central Palestine. Starting from Hebron, it nins past er-RZma
and Halhfil through the WBdi el-BiZr, and leaving Bethlehem
on the right holds on to Jerusalem, where a branch strikes E.
by Khan H a d r i r (probably there was once another route) to
p i c h o . prom Jerusalem northwards it naturally continues
y Sha'fat past er-Rim (Rama) to el-Bire (Beeroth) and then
onwards by 'Ain el-Haramiye (see BAcA, V ALLEY &), Sinjil
and K h i n Lubban through the Mukhna plain to NBhulu;
(Shechem). From this point a route runs down to the Jordan
and es-Salt (Ramoth Gilead?); another passes by TiibBs
(Thebez) noith-eastward in the line of the Jordan valley to Beisan
(Bethshean, Scythopolis). T h e road across the highlands passes
a little to the E.. of Sehastiye (Samaria, Sebaste), running along
the W. side of the Merj-el-Gharak and past Tell Dothan
(Dothan) to Jenin. Thence the road northward to Nazareth
skirts the E. side of the plain of Esdraelon, and from Nazareth
a path strikes to Acre. The caravan route proper passes from
el-'Afile north-eastwards past Jebel e t - Tor (Tabor) to KhZn
et-TujjZr (where several roads cross) and reaches the Lake
of Tiberias near hlejdel (hfagdala). ' I t keeps by the shore
only for a short distance. Having traversed the small plain of
Gennesar, it begins again to climb the mountains where they
approach the lake a t Khan Minye (which, however, for many
reasons, Cannot he Capernaum [but see CAPERNAUM]), and then
it goes on to Khan Jubb Yiisuf, strikes down again into the
3549
PALESTINE
valley of the Jordan and crossing the river a t Jisr BenBt
Ya'kiih holds on acrosi Jebel Hish to Damascus.
The mountain district of Samaria is crossed by a great number
of small roads ; but none of them are true caravan routes or
worth particular mention. An old caravan route once ran
northwards u p the Jordan valley from Jericho to Beisan ; and
from BeisBn an important, now less frequented, road crossing
the river a t the bridge el-Mejimi' struck N E . to Fik, Tseil, and
Nawa in HaurZn, and finally to DamascuT.
In the country E. af Jordan a great highway of traffic ran
from Petra (or really from the Elanitic Gulf) by Kerak (Kir
Moab) to Rabha (Rabbath Moab, Areopolis); in front of Aroer
('AG'ir) it crosses the Mojib (Arnon) and rnns northwards
fhrough the highlands to HesbZn (Heshbon), and thence to
Amman (Rabbath Ammon Philadelphia). A route also led
from Jericho to es-Salt (Ghich could also be reached from
HesbZn) and thence northwards to the Jabbok and Jerash
(GEKASA).then from Jerash one stretched NW. by Tibne
to Mkes (Gadara) and the valley of the Jordan, and another
NE. to the Zumle and HaurZn or more precisely to Bosra
(Bostra), and SO on to Damascus. I t must also he mentioned
that the great pilgrim's track direct from Damascus to Medina
and Mecca skirts the eastern frontier of the country.
A great many roads await more detailed investigation ; what
has been said may suffice to show what lines of communication
there were and still are between the more important places of
Palestine. See T R A D E A N D C OMMERCE .
There are no trustworthy estimates of the number of
inhabitants in the country at any period of its history.
21. Population. Certain districts, such as Galilee, have,
there is no doubt, from early times
been much more populous than certain other districts ;
the desert of Judah and some portions of the country
E. of Jordan must all along h p e been very sparsely
peopled. The figures given in the book of Numbers
indicate that the whole country contained about 14
million souls,-it being assumed that the statistics do
not refer to the time of the wandering in the wilderness,
and that the details may be suspected of being artificially
adjusted. The number 24 to 3 millions may indeed be
taken as a maximum ; the population can hardly ever
have been more than four times its present strength,
which is estimated at 650,000 souls. Thus, in the
most flourishing period, about 250 to 300 inhabitants
would go to the square mile. whilst at present there may
be about 65, a number which is rather above than below
the mark.
The population of Palestine, even at an early date,
was very mingled ; for even at the time of the immigra-
tion the Israelites included foreign elements, and later
they absorbed or were absorbed by the Canaanites.
The Philistines, Moabites, and others in course of time
were merged in the new nationality. From the period
of the exile colonies from the E. settled in the country,
and so powerful did the Aramaean contingent gradually
grow that Aramaean became the popular tongue
(H E BR E W , 7 ; A RAMAIC , 5 zf.). Next were added
Greek and Roman colonies.
T h e Arabic element exerted considerable influence even
before the days of Islam ; with the Mohammedan conquest it
became the dominant power, though it was only by slow degrees
that it obtained numerical superiority. T h e Arab tribe? trans-
lanted to Palestine their old distinctions, especially that
Eetween northern and southern Arabs (Kais and Yemen). T h e
Arab peasantry is still divided into clans : for example, the
districts of the Beni Hasan and Beni MZlik to the W. of
Jerusalem, those of the Beni HBrith Beni Zeid, and Beni
MurrX to the N. and that of 'Beni 'SHlim to the E. Till
recently the relati& of the separate clans of fellshin was one of
mntual hostility, and, unhindered by the Turkish government,
they engaged in sanguinary conflicts.
In manners and i n language (though Arabic is uni-
versally in vogue) the Palestine peasants retain much
that is ancient. It is extravagant, however, to maintain
from the traditions they preserve that primeval Canaanite
elements survive among them. The prevalent type, in
fact, is Syro-Arabic, or in many districts pure Arabic ;
and their superstitious customs are partly remains of
Syrian beliefs, partly modern Arabic reproductions,
under similar external conditions, of ancient supersti-
tions. These remarks are applicable to the saint
worship at present spread through the whole Oriental
world. A. S. ($5 I - 1 4 a . 1 6 - 2 1 ) ; H. H. W. P. ( 5 146) :
A. E. s. (5s 1 4 c - h ) ; W. M . M . (5 1 5 ) .
3550