PELIAS PENNY

PELIAS (nshlac [B], naihalac [A]), AV I Esd. of Seville, who died 636 A.D. ('instrumenta scribz. 934=Ezra 1035, BEDEIAH. calamus et penna . . . sed calamus arhoris est, penna avis, cujus acumen dividitur in duo'). That, however, ; OPNEON, KAT&- PELICAN (nvz ~EAEKAN. does not prove that the quill pen was not in use earlier. PAKTHC, XAMAIA~WN [or KO~A~?--transposition ; see A bronze pen. nibkd like a modern steel pen, found Zeph.]; unocrotaZus, but in Ps. prllrc-anus). One of at Ponipeii. is now preserved in the Museum at Pu'aples. the unclean birds. Lev. 11 18 Dt. 14 17. The relerence On the 'pen of the writer' (Judg. 5 14, 19D B?v RV 'marshal's in Is. 31 11, however, seems due to thoughtlessness, staff') see ScniBE, 5. at least if &i',ith means the ' pelican.' for this bird (like the bittern) loves marshy ground. whereas Edoni (to PENALTY (Pr. 1919 RV). See TRIBUTE, 7 ; cp the fate of which Is. 34 is devoted) was to become FINE. parched. On the other hand, the ' pelican' is well PENCIL (l@,iPred; 6 incomplete and corrupt ; Is. placed in the ruins of Nineveh (Zeph. 214), for there 4413t RV), the instrument with which the wood-carver are many reedy marshes near the Tigris. In Ps. 1026. made his first rough sketch of the image he \vas to pro- again, the reference to the pelican (if nNiJ means this duce. Kirnhi and others think of a red-coloured thread bird) indicates a conventionalised zoology ; for though (hence AV's 'line') ; RV"'S records the sense 'red it may he true that the term iIin in Ps. ' wilder- (EV ochre ' ; RV gives ' pencil ' (cp Aq. ?rapaypurgis-i.e., ness') does not convey the meaning 'desert,' it of stilus) ; Vg. rumina-Le., ' plane.' All plausible mean- is certainly applied to relatively dry districts where the ings, if justifiable. pelican would not be at home. The rendering ' pelican,' however. seems to be corrupt : the root would mean 'to however, is by no means free from doubt. 119, weave together.' We should expect (see PEN). Haupt, It has been suggested by the supposed etymology of nNp, D?? kZ'Augustus, sonofthedeified Augustus'). On thereverse the inscription IVNTI F(L.X) >iAx(imus)complete.; the titles of Tiberius marshy lands, was the true ancient representative of whilbt the seated figure, with her rirht hand resting on a sceptre: the modern pen. The use of such reed pens can be her left holding a flower, is the Empress Livia. traced to a remote antiquity among the civilised nations This then is the kind of coin in which the tribute was of the East2 To make and mend them, a penknife paid. A standard silver coin of the same normal weight (lo:? lp: Jer. 3623t) or 'scribes' razor' (see REARU) (60 grs. troy) would at the present time be equivalent Was required. A reed pen is probably intended in Ps. to 81d. The legal value of the denarius, however, is 452 (oy, K~XU~OS,cnZamus) and in Jer. 88 (DV ; uxoivos; better estimated by its relation to the aureus. That coin weighed normally grs. troy, and the denarius sfvZz~s). and in 3 Jn. 13 (KdXapos). The earliest specific 126.3 allusion to the quill pen is in the Ecvmofogies of lsidore 1 Rateson-Wrirht (WasZsraelewer in E&t 1 231) connects 1 yOa&% was also used for a fine brush (#enkillus, pencil) Peninnah with Jephunneh, Elkanah heing a son of Jeroham. used in drawing. 2 The standard weight of the Rritish shilling is 87.27272 2 Hollow joints of bamboo were similarly employed. grains, that of the sixpence 43.63636. 3645 3646 PENNY PENNY was therefore legally equivalent to & of the same amount denomination from the larger, seem to owe their small of gold, which, at the present rate of'L3 : 17 : 10% for size and low weight to carelessness on the part of the the ounce troy, works out at g.83d. The best idea of moneyers, or to long circulation. On the other hand, the actual purchasing poaer of the denarius is gained the following consideration will show that chalkous and from its employment as a fair day's wage for the agri- lepton are probably the same, and that the apparent cultural labourer (Mt. 2O2-14), from the payment of two discrepancy is due to different systems of valuation. denarii by the good Samaritan, and from the fact that In addition to the system (A), in which the drachm the Roman legionary's pay in those times was 225 was equivalent to 12 assaria-asses, there was in 4. Chalkous Judrea, at least during the second century, and lepton. another system (B). According to it (see Kennedy, 429) the drachm was divided into 6 obols (mR'dth) and 24 assaria (issRrim). To the same system presumably belonged the lepton- p€r&!ah. which would bear the same relation to the assarion of system B as the chalkous-kodrantes did to the assarion of the system A. is much in the view by of There probability advocated Ken; Denarius Tiberius. nedy that we have in this double system a case of 'tariff and 'current' values. System A represents the values adopted denarii a year, or + denarius a day. Hence it is clear for accounting, B those according to which coin5 panbed in that the American KV translation 'shilling,' if not ordinary transactions. The three systems with which we have entirely satisfactory, is nearer the mark than the English to reckon may thus be stated in tabular form, where in each column r is placed opposite the unit in terms of which the other ' penny.' denominations in that column are calculated. Farthing is the rendering adopted for two Greek __ words. the Ko6odvrns.' Kudranfes (sbv Puyarov Ko6odvrnv. Provincial. ' thi last farthing,' Mi.-526 ; hekb $60 Denomination. zpz 2* 'Farthing'' 8 Purtv KO~U~V~S.' two mites. which System A.! System B. make a farthing,' Mk. l242)'and ;he duudptov, ursariun i (6Lo uzpouOia duuapiou awheirar, two sparrows sold I- I- I for a farthing,' Mt. 1029, cp Lk. 126). Both names are Denarius Apaxpi? dradme [il I of Latin origin, assdrius being a by-form of as, and pad- Festertius a runs representing the fourth part of the as in the Roman opokir, obolos If1 B divisional system. Assarion must be the name of a pro- fa .. vincial coin which corresponds in some way to the Roman PASomiprov, assarion [fa] h Quadrans dx as. In the Hellenistic system the unit was the silver XahKOCr-he7&", [E$] dE drachm (for ordinary purposes ranking as equivalent to I chalkous-lcjton the denarius, but by the Romans for official purposes I I. tariffed at 2 denarius or 12 asses). This drachm con- On system A, the assarion, as ,IE of the denarius estimated at tained 6 dpoXol or 48 XaXKoi. Now the evidence of 9.83d.. is to be rated at ad., and the KO~~LVWS,kodrantes kah- KO& chalkous) at <\d. On system B the assarion would he worth the coins of Chios (see Imhoof-Blumer, Griechische &d.: and the ~ahroSc-hrrrrd.v,chalkous -lepton jhd. It is probably Miinzeen, 660) shows that, in that island at least, the the lower values that we must assign to the words (IUUL~PLOY obol was equivalent to z assaria, and the drachm to (assarion) and Am& (lepton) wherever they are used in the N'r, since there is nothing to show that they are not used in a 12 assaria. Since assarion thus corresponds to as, it popular sense. follows that the XakKo6s, chalkous (or + of the obol of If it is desirable not to use the actual Greek names, 2 assaria) corresponds to the quadrans (or f as). Kud- practiral purposes are best served by the use of ' penny' rantes may therefore be regarded as an alternative name for assarion, 'farthing' for kodrantes, and 'mite' for for this chaikuus, used especially where it was desirable lepton. to be understood by non-Hellenistic readers. Hence its The identification of these minor denominations with occurrence in the explanatory clause in Mk. 1242 ; its extant pieces is hampered by two facts; very few use by Mt. 526, where Lk. 1259 has hem6v (see § z), has ancient coins bear their names ; and bronze and copper, been explained by Mt.'s familiarity with the Roman being token currency, were not issued according to system of accounting. As regards the quadrans itself, accurate weight-standards. Size, in fact, rather than the Roman coin of that name ceased to he issued early weight, seems to have been the distinctive mark of in the first century B.C., and was revived for a short denomination. Among Jewish coins we have pieces of period under the Empire (from Nero to Trajan). There Herod I. which bear the letter X (Madden, p. III), and is no good evidence of its existence in the Roman currency of Agrippa 11. with the inscription XAAKOTZ (zb. p. during the time with which we are immediately con- 146 ; the same legend occurs on other small coins issued cerned, nor is there any probability that a provincial perhaps from Antioch). The coin of Herod is probably coin was at any time known in common speech by the name of kodrantes. The bearing of this point on the text need not be discussed here. The word Xenrbv, Zeptun, already mentioned, is fittingly translated mite (Mk. 1242 Lk212 and 1259). As to 3. 'lMite., this coin there is much evidence confirming the equation of two lepta to one kodrantes given in the first passage, although most of that evidence Coin issued (by Pontius Pilate) in 29-30 A.D. seems to be derived from the same source. In Hebrew literature, however, we find the smallest Jewish coin, like the latter, the XahKO%-h€7rTbV,chalkous-&fun. Of plyzitah, equated with Q Roman ar. We need not coins actually issued during the time of Christ, the small hesitate to identify lepton and pJrzifah. From this, pieces of the Procurators (from &to of an inch in since we have identified chalkons and quadrans, it diameter, and weighing from 40 to 23 grs. troy), may would seem to follow that the lepton was half the be regarded as of the same denomination, since they chalkons. Nevertheless, numismatists haye serious most nearly approach the two coins of Herod I. and difficulty in finding, among the small coins of Judza, Agrippa 11. As an instance, we give the accompanying coin, which was separate denominations for chalkous and lepton. The issued in the 16th year(L1S) of the Emperor Tiherius (TIB€PIOY minute pieces of the HasmonEan and Idumaean rulers, KAICAPOC), and therefore by Pontius Pilate 111 the year 29-30 which it has been proposed to regard as a different A.D. The types are a sacrificial ladle (simpulum) and three ears 3647 3648 PENTECOST PENTECOST of corn hound together; on the reverse is the name of Julia The old law contains no further detailed enactment of (Livia), mother of the Emperor-IOYAIA KAICAPOC. any kind regarding this feast. the manner of its celebra- The assaria may have been coins like the larger tion, the sacrifices to be offered, or the like. Indeed, pieces of Herod I. (Madden, 107; two specimens in the this is no case where definite offerings and legally fixed Assaria. British hluseum weigh 107.9 and 97 grs. dues are to be rendered ; it is a question of voluntary respectively). More probably, however, presentation of first-fruits, as it still stands enacted in these were pieces of threeXaXKoi, chaikoi (Madden, 108), Ut. (1610) : ‘Thou shalt keep the feast of weeks unto and the commonest assaria were coins of the Syrian Yahwe thy God with a tribute of a freewill offering of Antioch. In addition to its coins with Greek inscriptions thine hand which thou shalt give according as Yahwe meant chiefly for local use, this mint issued a series with thy God hath blessed thee. ’ Latin inscriptions, and with the letters S. C. (Le.,Senatus The meaning of the gifts and of the feast as a whole consuZtu). These coins, resembling the issues of the is easily recognised when we hear in Hosea (94), that in Roman mint, were meant for more than local circulation. exile the people shall have nought to eat but mourners’ Under Augustus and Tiberius we find two denomina- bread, since none of it shall have come up into the house tions ; the larger weigh from over 300 to 225 grs., and of Yah\v&. By this gift made to God, a gift which in turn measure I$ to I& inch ; the smaller, from 150 to 114 is consumed by men in the joyous sacrificial meal, the grs.. measure I to $o inch. The two denominations whole is made holy (see TAXATION). That at the same are generally supposed to be the sestertius and the as. In time the gift has the character of a thank-offering is also the smaller, therefore, we probably see the assnriun Of manifest. The next step is easy : such an offering came the NT. to be regarded as a tribute of homage in which the deity is recognised as the ‘lord,’ the Baal of the land, and the bestower of the g fts of the soil. At how early a date this last conception ci me to be the leading and normative one we do not know. It finds explicit expression first in the passage of Dt. already quoted, w-here the offering to be offered at the feast is determined by the wealth of the offerer, in other words by the produce of his fields. The law of Dt., as already seen, adds nothing to the ancient custom ; all that it does is to lay greater stress .Lsuion of the year 3, A.IL 2. In D. on the character of the offering as a divine tribute which may be rightly claimed by the The assarion here illustrated was struck in the year 37 A.D. On the obverse, it hears a laureate head of the emperor with the deity as due to him out of that which he has bestowed titles TI(berius) CAESAR AVG(ustus) TK(ihuniciQ) POT(es- on his human vassal. This appears also in the precept tate) XXXIII ; on the reverse the letters S ‘ C within a wreath. of Dt. (see below). In spite of the general Lifernture.--See especially F. W. Madden, Coins of theJews 261 f: (1881); A. R. S. Kennedy’s art. ‘Money’ in Hastings’ DB 3 tendency of Dt. to assign a historical origin to the (1900), 4178 G. F. H. feasts, we do not find in it in the present case any such definite reference to the Exodus as is found in that of PENTATEUCH. See HEXATECCH. the passover (see PASSOVER, § 6). Even here it is only in PENTECOST. In J and E (Ex. 34 18-26, cp 23 IO- a quite general u-ay that reference is made to the exodus 17) the feast of weeks is the second of the three festivals when in Dt. 26 I there is prescribed a sort of confession to be celebrated by the attendance of all to he made at the bringing of the first-fruits ( =tithes; see ’* In and E’ males at the sanctuary. The expres- TAXATIONS), in which amongst other things the offering sions in the two forms of the law are not quite the same. of the produce of the land is represented as a thanks- Ex. 34 22 runs ‘thou shalt observe the feast of weeks giving for the bestowal of the land. After the offering (niyxj m),[the feast] of the first-fruits of the wheat-harvest IT of the first-fruits at the autumn festival (see TABER- (O’P)? 1’57 ’173$)’ ; Ex. 23 16, on the other hand, has ‘the feast NACLES, FEAST OF) had come to be so regarded, only of harvest; the first-fruits of thy labours which thou sowest in a very short step was needed in order to bring the the field (?’gyp ’7753 l’:?? JC).’ offering of the first-fruits at the harvest festival into Substantially, both come to the same thing : Ex. 3422 connection with the same thought. is merely expressed more precisely. It is not the feast More important, however, than the points just of corn-harvest as a whole that is spoken of, but the mentioned are the changes which, though not indeed festival at its conclusion, the wheat-harvest being the last intended and enjoined by Dt., inevitably arose in the to be reaped. case of this feast as a consequence of the concentra- ‘The time of celebration is thus clearly and distinctly tion of the worship at a central sanctuary ; the fixing fixed for the end of harvest. ’The first-fruits of the new of a definite day in the calendar, and the transformation harvest (pm$121) are now presented-more precisely, of the celebration from being a popular festival to being the first-fruits of the wheat-harvest, for the first-fruits of an act of public worship. On these points see, further, the barley-harvest are presented at the beginning of FEASTS, IO. harvest, at the feast of unleavened bread. A more The third stage in the development of the three feasts exact, yet equally relative determination of the date is marked by H in Lev. 2315-21. Here again we find seems to lie in the plainly ancient name Sribii’dth ; at and the date of the feast of weeks still left 3. In least it is so taken in Dt. 169, where the feast of weeks Elek. vague, just as it is in Dt. On the other is brought into a close time connection with the feast at in hand, the amount and kind of the festal the beginning of harvest. The duration of the corn- offering is more precisely determined in the law of H harvest (it is only the corn-harvest that is to be taken than before. It is no longer left to the discretion of into account) is computed at seven weeks-an estimate the individual to bring as he chooses according to the which still answers fairly well to the climatic conditions yield of his land-this tribute of first-fruits has already of Pxlestine. These seven weeks of the harvest are the become a fixed tithe to be paid at the sanctuary (see great annual season of gladness, the weeks of joy, the TAXATION)-but it is now laid upon the entire comniun- weeks ~a7’&ox$v. The ‘joy of harvest ’ is proverbial ity’ to bring a definite first-fruit offering ; two first-fruit among the ancient Hebrews (cp Is. 93[2]) ; the period loaves (n’ymc E.)) of new meal, of two tenths of an opens and closes with the two feasts we have named. 1 ‘Out of your dwellings’ (nJrniI@lDp) in Lev. 23 17 does not 1 The question of the literary relationship of the two passages mean, as has been supposed (so Graf and others), ‘out of each is discussed elsewhere (PASSOVER,8 I : cp EXODUS ii., Sg 3,,4), several house,’ so that every householder or owner of land would but may he disregarded here, the answer to it having no bearing have had the duty of bringing this offering ; it means ‘out of on the hi5tory of the development of the Pentecost feast. your land ’- Le., of home-grown flour (see Dillm. ad Zuc.). lli 3649 3650 PENTECOST PENTECOST ephah, baked with leaven. With the loaves is performed feast as shown in the various stages of the written the ceremony of waving, whence the loaves are called 6. Probable legislation. Unfortunately, in the case ‘wave loaves.‘ They were to be leavened, for they of the feast of Pentecost we are not in a were to be taken from what was in common daily use. origin. position to show from the historical books In this we may safely conjecture a survival from ancient at what period- it began to be celebrated, or what part custom : at the beginning of harvest in the feast of it played in the religious life of the Israelites, although unleavened bread the grain was offered raw, or roasted, many passages allude in quite general terms to various or in the form of quickly-baked unleavened cakes (see feasts. It is not till the period of later Judaism is PASSOVER) ; at the end of the harvest what was offered reached that we are expressly informed of its regular was fully prepared bread. It must not be taken as celebration. The narrative in Acts shows a multitude an argument against the antiquity of this religious of worshippers from foreign parts as attending the custom tbat it is not mentioned in D or JE; JE has festival in Jerusalem (Acts2; cp Jos. BY ii. 31, Ant. no ritual prescriptions at all as to the bringing of these xiv. 134 xvii. 152). The silence of the older literature of offerings, and D has them only in the case of the course proves nothing against the observance of the passover, not in that of the harvest festival or of the feast in earlier times as attested by Josephus. As autumn (ingathering) festival with its peculiar customs. bearing on the question of the antiquity of the festival, For the Pentecost offering H (Lev. 23 19) further orders however, the following circumstance is not without two yearling lambs’ as a sacrifice of peace offerings. interest. So far as the great spring festival at the be- The bread and the flesh, after having been presented to ginning of harvest is concerned, we hear that even the Yahwk, fall to the lot of the priests. pre-Mosaic period knew something of the kind (see PASS- In the programme of Ezekiel, singularly enough, OVER) ; of the autumn feast we are told that even the the Pentecostal offering finds no mention; in 4521, Canaanites had observed a closely allied festival and it has been introduced by a later hand and is absent this festival had already become almost fully naturalised from 6. in Israel at the time of the division of the monarchy, The omission is perhaps connected with the fact that as we see from I K. 1232 (see TABERNACLES. FEAST OF). Ezekiel divides the entire ecclesiastical year iuto two portions. Pentecost, on the other hand, is not only relegated to a with two parallel series of feasts; thus no suitable place is kit for Pentecost. In any case, however, this proves that Ezekiel very subordinate part in P and passed over in complete does not regard the feast of Pentecost as of particular interest ; silence by Ezekiel, but is also left unmentioned as and from this we can infer further that in his time it was the existing in the older time. It would be too much to least important of the great yearly festivals. infer from this single circumstance that the feast was of In P (Nu. 2826f. ) Pentecost still continues to be a late origin ; and even from the difference of name in J purely harvest feast. In agreement with the name ‘ feast of the first-fruits ’ is the specific ritual and E (see above, 5 I) it is by no means safe to conclude that it did not arise till after the revolt of the ten tribes 4* In prescription, the bringing of a meal offering of new meal. To this characteristic Pentecostal offering (so Steuernagel on Dt. 161). Even on the assumption that belonged to the northern kingdom and J to the P adds, besides the stated daily offering, an accumu- E southern (though this is by no means certain), all that lated series of animal sacrifices, just as in the case of could with certainty be inferred, would be diversity the passover : two young bullocks, one ram, seven he- a of local designation, which there may very well have lambs of the first year as a burnt offering, besides a been, even in the case of an ancient feast. meal offering of three tenth-parts mingled with oil for There are other considerations, however, which, taken each bullock, two tenth-parts for the ram and one tenth- in conjunction with what has been already adduced, part for each lamb. Lastly, there is a sin-offering, suggest the secondary character of pentecost. Under consisting pf one he-goat. The fixing of a definite date FEASTS (4.v.) the general thesis has already been is in the case of Pentecost the natural consequence of propounded that all three feasts of harvest and in- the passover being fixed for 15th-zrst Nisan. In P gathering were of Canaanite origin. This applies to also \ye observe that a less value is attached to this Pentecost in particular, in so far as it at least presupposes feast than to the others: it is held only for one day, settlement in the country, and if it is of equal antiquity whilst the passover and tabernacle feasts are spread over with the feast of the ingathering it will in all probability a longer time. This valuation is also reflected in the fact that no significance as commemorating any event have had its origin also in the Canaanite worship. If, however, we closely scrutinise the significance of the in the redemptive history of the nation is assigned to feast we shall find that, coming between passover and the festival. tabernacles, it is, strictly, a superfluity. this Later Judaism made up for what was lacking in the For reason Ezekiel is able quietly to set it aside. If the 5. later law in this respect, and gave the feast In purpose of the feast is to consecrate the harvest by Judaism. the historical interpretation which it had offering the first-fruits to God, that has already been hitherto lacked. done at the passover feast, and very fittingly, at the It was assumed, in accordance with Ex. 19 I, where the giving of the law is dated on the third month after the Exodus, that the begiuning of harvest. If the chief stress is to be romulgation of the law on Sinai was on the sixth or seventh of laid on its character as a harvest thanksgiving, then &wan, the day of the feast of Pentecost (Piskk. 68 6 ; cp /ubi(. again it seems somewhat superfluous alongside of the 11 61 17 141 151 where God‘s covenants with Moses, Noah Abraham, are made at new moon, or, as the case may he, on th; great feast of the ingathering which was held at the sixteenth day of the third month). It is certain, however, that close of the entire year’s husbandry ; there was no real this metamorphosis of the feast of the corn harvest into the occasion for a special feast of thanksgiving or consecra- feast of the law-giving was late, probably not earlier than the destruction of the temple when the system of sacrifices and tion for each separate kind of produce. Strict symmetry offerings came to an end. Even in Josephus and Philo we is somewhat broken if a feast is held at the begin- still find no trace of it. In Josephus (Ant. iii. 106, $ 252) the ning and at the end of the corn harvest whilst there feast is called Asartha (atrap& = Heb. il,fp, Aram. ml?$ ; so is only one to celebrate the ingathering of the fruits of also in the Talmud (PZs&k. 42 d and often). This expression vineyard and orchard. Thus arises the conjecture that will be intended to characterise the feast either as the ‘con- perhaps the opening and closing feasts connected with clusion * of the great feast of unleavened bread, or as the closing harvest festival. In the more precise dating of the feast the the corn harvest were not, originally, essentially distinct second day of the feast of unleavened bread was taken as the feasts celebrated invariably and everywhere as separate ; starting point for which the fifty days were reckoned and the that it was one and the same feast celebrated at ‘sabbath’ of Lev. 23 15 was taken to mean the first day of that feast. different times, according to the nature of the case, We have dealt so Far with the development of the in different parts of the country. The difference between the times at which harvest begins is in 1 In vv. 18 I various other offerings are also enjoined as in Nu. 28 z7$ Tiese, however, do not belong to the original text. Palestine very considerable ; between the climate of the See Dillm. ad roc. Jordan valley and that of Jerusalem and the colder 36.51 3652 PENUEL PEREZ-UZZAH districts of the ’hill country’ it amounts to some three prophecy; but, even if we accept the text as it stands, there or four weeks. The beginning of the harvest at are reasons against it, as well as against rival theories. Jerusalem and the close of the harvest in the Jordan Cp BETH-PEOR ; Driver, Dt. 62, Buhl, Pal. 123. Well- valley approximately coincide. In this way it becomes hausen (CU I 13) and Ed. Meyer (ZAT 1129) assume the easy to see how, out of a single harvest festival, when identity of a Peor ’ and ‘ Pisgah.’ which may be practic- celebrated at such different times, there should ulti- ally right, hut raises a serious critical problem. Recog- mately have arisen, as the separate districts of the nising this, B. W. Bacon (Trip. Tyad. 229) supposes country were brought into closer relations and religious ‘ the Peor ‘ in Nu., I.c., to have been substituted by R,, customs tended more and more to be assimilated, a for ‘ the Pisgah ’ (cp Nu. 21 20). The problem of ‘ Peor.’ double feast, or to speak more accurately, a double however, cannot be treated alone ; the set of names to celebration of the same festival idea. The connection which it belongs needs critical examination. ‘ Peor,’ of the passover with the feast of unleavened bread-a wherever it occurs, may be corrupt. See NEBO, § 2. connection whereby the latter was thrust into the back- 2. A late abbreviation of BAAL-PEOR (q.v.), Nu. 25 18 3116 ground by the passover feast-could not but favour the Josh. 22 17 (cp Dillm.). rise of an independent harvest festival. 3. See PAU. 4. A Judahite town, mentioned only by @BAL in Josh. 1.5592 See the relative sections in the Archologies of Saalschfitr, a wp) and by Eusehius (OS 300, 4 boyup), identified with the De Wette, Ewald Keil De Visser, Ben- (+mo .Kk. Fashar, SW. from Bethlehem on the way to Hebron. ?. Literature. zinger Nowack ; drelli’s’art. ‘ Pfingsten ’ in a PRE(i!, vol. xi.; also the literature cited T. K. C. under FEASTS and PASSOVER. I. B. PERAZIM, MOUNT (D’u!!77 ; for 6 see BAAL- PERAZIM), Is. 2821t, commonly identified with Baal- PENUEL or PENIEL (!JK.lJB, !J&’J? [Gen. 3230[31] perazim. 31 [p]]; Egypticised as Penu’aru [ WMM, As. u. BUY. In Crit. Ri6., however, Cheyne reads for P’z OW?, 1681; @ANO~H~CBKALI, but in Gen. EIAOC TOY 13, l’p, esoy). ‘(against) the city of liars,’ [I O’llS Pp. (On YV see Cheyne, I. A place mentioned in connection with Jacob’s Ps.?), on Ps.1746.) wrestling with a divine being (Gen. 32 31 [p],cp 33 IO), PERESH (@B; B om. @~psc[AL] ; Pharer) a and with the story of Gideon (Judg. 88J, 17) ; fortified, Machirite name; I Ch. 716t. Peresh has a brother it is said, by Jeroboam (I K. 1225). In Phcenicia the called Sheresh, and yet the text continues ‘ his sons were name 8EoO ?rpbuwaov was given to a promontory near Ulam and Rekem.’ Sheresh’ is possibly corrupt Tripolis (Straho. xvi. 2 ), perhaps because in profile ‘ a 155 variant of Peresh‘ (Che.). ANASSEH it suggested a huge face. The god referred to in ‘ Cp M , § 9, ii. Penuel, ‘face of God,‘ would be the God, originally PEREZ (EB, apparently ‘ a breach,’ but see below ; hostile to the Jacoh-tribe, who was worshipped at the +apse), sonofJudahbyTamar(Gen. 3829[J],4612[P]. sanctuary of the city (?) of Penuel. Where was this city Ruth 4 12 18, where AV PHAREZ ; Mt. 13AV PHARES). situated? From the story in Genesis, as it stands, no In Neh. 114 (uepes [B], cp Peresh and Sheresh in last sure conclusion can be reached, since it is uncertain (I) article) the ‘children of Perez,’ are the Perez clan, on which side of the JABBOK(y.~.) J’s narrative means called in Num. 2620 [PI the PHARZITE, RV Perexite us to place Penuel. and (2) whether originally the story (*rlBn [gentilic], 6 @apru[r] [L]). Probably a place- of Jacob at Penuel may not have been quite unconnected name as well as a clan-name; see 2 S. 520, where, with the crossing of the Jabbok (or Yarmuk?). Conder ‘ perazim ’ in BAAL-PERAZIM is popularly explained by thinks of the summit of the Jebel Oshd in S. Gilead; ‘ perez-maim ’ (an outburst of water). In 2 S. 5 23J. Merrill (Enrt .f the fordun, 370) of the Tuld ed-Qahab it has been maintained elsewhere (see MULBERRY), we ( ‘ Hills of Gold ’), between which the Jabbok forces its should probably restore a place-name Perez-jerahme’elim way into the Jordan. It was at any rate on a hill (see below), and the same place-name meets us in (Judg. 88), and it was near Succoth (if the received 2 S. 68 as PEREZ-UZZAH. The special mention of ‘ the reading is correct), as both the Gideon-story and the house of Perez’ in Ruth412 and the appending of the Jacob-story agree. If the present writer’s view of the true ‘ generations of Perez ’ in Ruth4 18-22 (cp RUTH, BOOK form of the name now read ‘Succoth‘ be accepted, Penuel OF) are completely accounted for by the theory that there will be the Hebrew name of the ‘tower,’ or castle, of is an older story underlying the narrative of Ruth, in Salhad (thetrue reading, not only for JEGAR-SAHADUTHA which certain members of a Jerahmeelite family were in Gen. 3147, but also for ‘Succoth’ in Gen. 3317a, made to take a journey to Mi+r (not Moab). Zarephath Judg. 8 58). See SUCCOTH,and cp WRESTLING. of Mi+r was a natural refuge for a Jerahmeelite family. The reference to ‘ Penuel’ in I K. 1225 is due to corruption of Bethlehem (a corruption of Beth-jerahmeel?) had the text. i~ijgshould probably be SN~V*>I, ‘the Israelites.’ a 2. Penuel appears twice as a personal name : (a)in the gene- Jerahmeelite or Calebite connection (I Ch. 2 1924 so$ ), alogy of Judah, I Ch. 44, cp ZI. 18 JERED; (6) in that of and the post-exilic genealogical theoristsregarded Hezron BENJAMIN (5 9, ii. 6)in I Ch. Sz5 (5~’j~[Kt.] ; 9eAtqA [B]). b. Perez as the father of Jerahmeel and Caleb (I Ch. 29). T. K. C. See Rum. PEOPLE (PP),Gen. 116. See GENTILES. As to the origin of the name : the origins suggested in Gen. 3829 and z S. 520, to which we may add 2 S.67 (on the theory PEOR (YiVPiJ, the Peor,’ as if ’ the cleft ’ : or, if the that the Zarephathites and not the Philistines were the captors of the ark) are popular fancies. ‘Perez ’ we may reasonably name is correct, cp IlK?, PARAN; @orwp’). conjecture, is a mutilation and corruptioi of Zarephath, just as I. A mountain ‘that looketh toward Jeshimon ’ (AV), TAMAR (4.v.) is perhaps a corruption of Jerahme’elith. It is or ’ that looketh down upon the desert’ (RV), NE very significant that in Neh.114 Shephatiah, who in Ezra88 is ie., closely related to Michael-i.e., Jerahmeel (see MICHAEL, IO)- of the Dead Sea (Nu. 2326); cp ‘Baal (of) Peor.’ It appears as son of MAHALALEEL[q u.) which is another popular was on ‘the top of the Peor’ that Balaam is said to or literary distortion of Jerahmeel, and that Mahalaleel is called have delivered his third oracle, and though a Mt. Peor a son of Perez. ‘ Perez Jerahmeelim’ is therefore fully justified. Cp SHEPHATIAH,9. is mentioned nowhere else, it is conceivable that a T. K. C. mountain not far from Beth-peor might have borne this PEREZ-UZZAH (2 S. 68, or Perez-uzza I Ch. 13 XI ; name ; Eusebius (23379 ; 300 z) at any rate asserts this. AIAKO~H[BKAL] OZA [or azza]), as if ‘Breach of It is, however, as Bennett (Hastings, DB. 3743~)truly Uzzah.’ The name of the place where Uzzah (y.~.)died, says, ‘ not certainly identified.’ Conder’s eloquent on the way from Kirjath-jearim to the ‘ city of David.’ description of the prospect from his ’ cliff of Peor ‘-i.e., Probably, however, the name was rather different in the the narrow spur which runs out to Minyeh. overlooking ancient story on which 2 S. 6 1-13 is based. The name the Dead Sea (Heth and 1210nb(~J,146J)-may indeed which seems to be required is SHrefath (nais), out of make one wish to adopt his view of the scene of Balaam’s which Pere? ( yis) may easily have arisen ; Uzzah ’ has perhaps come from ‘azzah (~IP),which was appended to 1 There is mention of a +oywp in Tohit 12 IN]. 3653 3654 PERFUME PERGAMOS Sarefath, as raddah ( great ’) was appended to Sidon Cestrus, 60 stades, or 79 m., from its mouth, the river (Josh. 118 1928). ‘ Perez-uzzah’ thus became ’ Strong being navigable as far as the town. As a matter of fact, (city) Zarephath.’ See ZAREPHATH. the ruins of Perga at Murtunu, about 12 m. NE. of Winckler’s view (GZ 2 199) may be compared ; see also H. P. Adalia (Attalia), are about 5 m. W. of the AR-Su Smiths Commentary. T. K. C. (Cestrus), but about the distance inland indicated by PERFUME (ni?i. YW; MYPON MYPBYIKON, Strabo (hence Ptol. v. 5 7 reckons Perga among the in- land towns-po6yeror). The acropolis of the city was MYPE~IKON,unguenturn, Ex. 302535j’; or iYn27, one of the heights on the fringe of the plateau between hk&hC?% TOYC MAKpAN ATTO COY [BKAQ], TA the Cestrus and the Catarrhactes : the town, in Strabo’s MYPBYIA [Symm. in QmE. ; so Aq. CYNeECEIC, coy time, and in the time of Paul, lay on the plain to the Theodot. MypBYOyC], pigmenta tuu, Is. 57 9 5). The art of manipulating and compounding odori- south of the hill. ferous substances for the gratification of the sense of On the hill itself stood the great temple of Artemis(Strab0 667. psrr~pou rbrrou Tb nir ncpyaurs ‘~prip‘sar iaphv)’: si; smell, is (needless to say) very ancient and very widely fragmentary granite columns on a platform to the SE. of the diffused, especially in the East, still the principal hill have been considered to belong to the Artemisinm. hut source of supply. For their supply of odoriferous this opinion is rejected on grounds of style by Peter&, in Lanckoronski (Stiidte Partzjh. materials the ancients, like ourselves, were dependent 136). mainly on the vegetable kingdom -most frequently The greatness of the city was closely connected with the odoriferous gum-resins or balsams which exude the worship of Artemis (cp coins). Though called naturally or from wounds in the trunks of various trees Artemis by the Greeks, this deity w& similar to the and shrubs, but sometimes the wood, bark, or leaves Artemis of Ephesus (see DIANA), and the same as the themselves, rarely the flowers or seeds. There is no Cybele of northern and eastern Phrygia. On coins she evidence of the Israelites having been acquainted with is sometimes Vanassa Preiia (written in the Pamphylian the use in perfumery of the animal products which else- alphabet), ‘ the Pergrean Queen ’ (according to inter- where have played so great a part, such as Ambergris, pretation given by Ramsay in 1. Hell. Stud., 1880, Castor, Civet, Musk ; perhaps the onlyanimal substance p. 246, now commonly accepted), sometimes Artemis so employed by them was ONYCHA (g-.~.). of Perga (’ApdprSos IIepyalas: see coin figured by See AI.OES,ALMUG, B ALM, BALSAM, BDELLIUM, CALAMUS, Conybeare and Howson, 1194). The type is either CANE, CASSIA CINNAMON,F RANKINCENSE, GALBANUM that of the Greek huntress Artemis,’ with sphinx or LADANUM, M~RHS AFFRON, SPICE, SPIKENARD, STACTE) stag by her side, and armed with the bow, or a native STORAX.The list :upplies important evidence as to the geoi graphical extent and limits of Hebrew trade and commerce (see type representing the cultus-image, a stone column TRADE AND COMMERCE). bearing a rude resemblance to a human figure (see

, As for the modes of preparation ; some of the most PAPHOS,5 2). It is to this same deity that the name important modern methods-such as those of distillation, Let0 belongs (cp inscr. published by Rams. in Bull. de infusion, tincture, enfleurage-were wholly unknown. Corr. HeZl., 1883,p. 263 ; kpPa 6th plov Be& h~so3r The method of treatment with boiling oil or heated fat res IIepyalwv r6Xewr ; and see Rams. Cities and Bish. so as to produce a precious oil or ointment was, however, PhYygiu, 19.5).An annual festival was held in her familiar ; the process is apparently alluded to in Job It is clear from this that Perga 4131 k3]: The pestle and mortar (Prov.2722), too, would be a centre of native feeling, in opposition to the were indispensable for the preparation of the ‘ powder Hellenic city of Attaleia, a later foundation. Hence of the merchant’ [‘perfumer,’ see 61 Cant.36. the preaching of Paul and Barnabas made apparently Perfumes may be applied either as fumigations or as no impression during their short stay ; and the town unguents. On the former compare INCENSE.^ On the was not sufficiently important to call for long-continued latter compare OIL, ANOINTING, PERFUME BOXES. 4ffort (contrast the case of Ephesns). For the probable On the religious symbolism of perfume and its use in route of Paul northwards, see PISIDIA. divine service and in exorcisms see INCENSE, MAGIC, Perga and SIDE (q.v.) seem to have been rivals in dignity and and SACRIFICE,^ and on its place in social and festive both on their coins claim the title metropolis, and in ecclesiaktical %dministration(hut apparently not in civil) Pamphylia was life compare DRESS, 5 4. and MEALS, 5 11. 9ivided between the two cities Perga bein the metropolis of PERFUME BOXES, AV ‘tablets’ (de$? ’@, :he western part ; when this dihsion of thefishoprics between :he two metropolitans was made, is not known. During the ddttt hannt$heJ, Vg. ocfctoriola), Is. 3zoj.. A bag of Byzantine period, Perga gradually fell into decay, and Attaleia myrrh was sometimes suspended from the neck (Cant. :ook its place as the seat of the metro olitan and the chief city 113). But there is no other passage in which w?~,ncphef if Pamphylia. (For the history of Zhristian organisation in Pamphylia, see Ramsay, Hisf. Geogr. of AMqqfi,and papers can be proved to mean ‘ perfume ’ ; the supposed refer- ~yGelzer inJPTxii.). W. J. W. ence to # scented words ’ in Prov. 279 (eiF>-nsJ) is ex- PERWMOS (€IC lT€prAMON, Rev. 111 ; BN tremely doubtful. Hence Haupt (on Is. 320 in.SBOT, IIepy&po Rev. 212, thus leaving the nom. uncertain. AV Heb.) would connect this wm with Ass. puJ&u, a to pm~un;ds=$IIipYapor [Lat. Pergumus]. found in Paus. v. 13 3 anoint oneself’ (cp nupfuftu, Del. HWB, 551). !Y IIcpy&prt, urrlp aorapoi, Kakou ; id. vii. 16 I, viii. 49: :tcyand in other authors. RV Pcrgamum=rb IIipyapov [Lat. ‘ Boxes of unguents ’ may perhaps be meant. W. R. Pergamuml, the usual form in inscriptions and authors [so Smith thought that ‘ some kind of amulet ’ was intended. ilways in Strabo and Polybiusl). PERFUMERS. RV’s substitute for AV’s APOTHE- A Mysian city, about 15 m. from the sea, command- CARIES (g...). ng the valley of the Caicus (Bakir Chai),from which By one of the curiosities of textual corruption the ‘Jerah- 1. Hietory. river it was distant about 4 m. to the N. meelites’ (who stepped into fresh prominence after the exile) This district was the richest land in Mysia have become in the text of Neh. 38 O‘p??,.. ‘the perfumers’; by IStrabo, 624). The earliest settlement occupied the a similar corruption in v. 32. they have become +i?,‘the :onical hill, 1000 feet high, which rises between the merchants ’ (Che.). Cp SPICE MERCHANTS. jelinus on the W. and the Cetins on the E., both flowing iouthwards into the Caicus. The later Hellenic and PERGA (nEprH, Acts 1313f., 1425; PERGA).~ Perga lay, according to Strabo (667), on the river Roman city spread over the ground at the foot of the ?ill, south-westwards beyond the Selinus. The modern 1 The n!bp of Ex. 3035, ‘perfume’ in AV, is in RV rightly :own of Bergumu covers part of the site of the lower translated I NCENSE. So also Ecclus. 491 ; RV ‘ incense pre- .own. The hill was the Acropolis of the later city. pared by the work of the apothecary,’ Heb. ‘salted, the work, The town was of little importance until after the etc. ’ nmnvyn n5nm nmmop. 2’SeC Tobit 83 Ecclk 3848 and reff. in RaZ. Sem. 453, and 1 Sometimes this type shows the variation of a long tunic, in on the ?ll2!N (cpFRANKINCENSE)SeCINCENSE, $4(I),SACRIFICE. ,lace of the ordinary short tunic appropriate to the huntress 3 But Pcrge in Plin. HN5 26, Pergn, Pomp. Mela, 1x4. roddess. 3655 3656 PERGAMOS PERGAMOS death of Alexander the Great. On its strong hill King city of the province, is to be gathered indirectly from Lysiniachus deposited 9000 talents of his treasure, and 2, Reference the fact that, as early as 29 B.C., the city this was appropriated by its guardian, Philetzxus of in Rev. 73. possessed a temple dedicated to Rome and Tion in Pontus to found the independent kingdom of Augustus by the Provincial Synod (Korvbv the Attalids (Strabo, 623 3). With the support of 'Aulas) as its place of meeting (Tac. Ann. 437). Seleucus, the King of Syria, Philetaxus consolidated Ephesus was not then recognised as a leading city. his power (284-263 B.c.) and bequeathed it to his Pergamos thus gained the honour of the Neokorate nephew Eumenes I. (263-241 B.c.). The glory of before either Smyrna (temple erected to Tiberius, 26 Pergamos began with the reign of Attalus I., another A. D., Tac. Ann. 4 56) or Ephesus ' (temple to Claudius, nephew of Philetaerus (241-197B.c.). The prestige of 41-54 A.D. possibly). The second Neokorate (and the Pergamene kings was gained by their championship second temple of the Emperors) in the case of Perganios of Hellenic civilisation against the Gauls or Galatians, dates from the reign of Trajan ; in the case of Ephesus who for long terrorised western Asia (see GALATIA, § I). only after 127 A.D., in the reign of Hadrian (see NEO- After defeating the Gauls near the sources of the Caicus COROS). The discussion of this point is necessary as (cp Paus. i. SZ), Attalus took the title of king. His upon a correct appreciation of the position of the city success inspired Pergamene art.' Other victories added depends the interpretation of the striking phrase of Rev. to the dominions of Attalus a large part of western Asia 213, ' thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is' (so Minor, as far as Pamphylia (Pol. 1841) ; and he enlarged AV ; better, RV 'where Satan's throne is,' liaou 6 Opbvor his capital so that it became the fairest city in the East. TOG Za~avi?). Then the Seleucid power increased, and the Pergamene Various interpretations have been proposed. kingdom was reduced to its original narrow limits ; but (a) In view of the special prominence at Pergamos having sided with Rome in the struggle with the Seleucid of the worship of four of the greatest deities2 of the monarchy Attalus gradually reconquered his lost posses- pagan religion-Zeus, Athena, Dionysus, and Asclepius sions, and by the peace of 189 B.C. received from Rome --some have referred the phrase thereto. Zeus Soter all within the Taurus. Under his son, Eumenes 11. (the Saviour), Athena Nicephorus (Bringer of Victory) (197-159B.C.), Pergamos reached the zenith of her were honoured as having given victory over the Galatai. splendour. He carried on the artistic and scientific Athena's greatest temple as Warden of the City (Polias) schemes of his father. He it was who built the great occupied nearly the highest point of the Acropolis. Altar of Zeus, and beautified the temple and grove of This view must be rejected on the ground that Pergamos Athelia Nicephorus below the Acropolis (cp Strabo, 624, in no wise stood in the position of champion of pagan Po!. 161). He also enlarged the library founded by ritual against Christianity. Moreover, in Asia Minor Attalus, which rivalled ultimately that of Alexandria, and the most formidable rival of the new religion was not contained 200,ooo books (Strabo, 609). Attalus II., his the religion of Greece, but the development of that brother (159-138B .C. ), founded Attalia and PHIL.4- primitive Oriental nature-worship which presented itself DELPHIA (g.~.). Attalus HI., the last king (138-133 with overpowering might in the cult of the so-called B.c. ), who inherited little of the capacity of his ancestors, Aphrodite of Paphos and Diana of Ephesus. left a will * stipulating that Pergamos and other cities If any city and worship merited the figure in the Apocalypse should be free, whilst the of his kingdom was be- it Was Ephesus with her goddess Diana ; more especially d perhaps already at the time of the composition of the Apocalypse queathed to the Romans, One Aristonicus, who there had occurred a pagan revival at Ephesus (this revival took claimed to have the blood of the Attalids in his veins, place as early as 104 A.D. See Hicks, Znscr. ofBrit. dlus. made an abortive attempt to seize the kingdom. 3 67.87, and cp Rams. Ck. in Ronz. Enzp. 143). Pergamos continued to be the capital of the Roman (a) More -s~ecifically,some haye Seen in the phrase a province3 (from 129 B.c.), even as it had beell the reference to the great Altar of Zeus on the terrace below capital of the Attalid monarchy-a position which had the temple of Athena Polias. its justification in history, and was recognised for at The sacrificial altar proper consisted like that at Olympia of least the next two hundred years, There is, however, the ashes of the sacrifices (Paus.v. 1318) hut rose in this Lase from the centre of a platform about 90 ieet square and 20 feet nowhere any express statement to this effe~t.~ high, with a flight of steps cut into it on the western side. This The three cities, Smyrna, Pergamos, and Ephesus were in substructure has been recovered, together with the famous frieze fact rivals for the honour of being capital of the Province (each of the Gigantomachia which ran round it. This frieze is ' a called itself ~pP;q'Arias), and in this struggle Pergamos had theatrical work of tremendous energy' (Holm Gk. Hist., ET nothing hut her history to set against the steadily growingcom- 4 468) : in it the whole Hellenic pantheon apdeared in conflic; mercial supremacy of her rivals ; and in the end the rivals won. with the Giants, many of the latter being represented with a Ephesus, lying on the main route of eastern trade, asserted her human body ending in serpents' coils (see Mitchell, Hist. ofGk. snDerioritv over both Smvrna and Pereamos.6 Probablv the Sculbture, 571 fi). p&ctical -fact of the supremacy of Eihesus was recoinised Artists' -skill combined with the natural grandeur of popularly long before it became the official view, and the change came about gradually and without any official imperial enact- its position to make the great altar a fit emblem of the ment. The order ofenumeration in Rev. 1T I, Ephesus, Smyrna, kingdom of Satan as the smoke of the sacrifice rose into Pergamos, etc., is true to the facts of the time, and the two the air from the huge platform 800 feet above the city. commercial cities stand at the head of the list. Still, we must be on our guard against our modern feeling That for the first two ceituries of the Roman occnpa- for what is picturesque or grand. Would a dweller in tion of Asia Pergamos was in the official view the chief the great cities of Asia, among the treasures of an art which lived only through its connection with religion, 1 Plin. "3484 ; Paus. i. 25 2. See Harrison, MyU. and Mon. ofdnc. Athens, 474f:; Gardner, Hist. of Gk. Scu@ture, feel that the altar at Pergamos was something apart and 4528 typical ? 2 Suspicion has sometimes been cast upon the genuineness of (c) A third view is that the reference is to the worship the will ; hut an inscription has vindicated the honour of Rome of Asclepins. whose temple was, as usual, the centre of a (see Frankel, Znschrifen won Perg. i., no. 249). 3 Phrygia Magna had been separated from the rest of the medical school, with the right of asylum (Tac. Ann. Pergamos realm ; it was given to Mithridates of Pontus until 363 ; Paus. ii. 268). Under the empire this cult was IZO B.c., when he died. It wac not definitely attached to the fashionable (cp coins), and Asclepios ultimately became Province of Asia until Sulla's time, 84 B.C. 4 For the expression of Pliny, HA75 30, Zonge clarissinttcnt the representative deity of the city. The snake was his Asire, is simply on a level with that of Straho, 623, ;m+av+ special attribute (cp art. ' Asklepios ' in Roscher's Lex. u&s, both primarily referring to the place of the city in history and art. Straho's remark, Z.C., +X.L 6.' nva $yrpoviav ~pbrmas 1 The temple dedicated to Augustus some time before 5 B.C. ~6rroucrolirovp rb IGp apw, shows how little we have to do was not one that entitled the city to he called Neocoros, because with any definite officialy-fixed status. (I) it was a dedication by the city merely, not by the Kodv, 6 The long struggle for supremacy has continued and (2) it stood in the precinct of Artemis, not independently. Cp Ephesus has had to yield the palm to Smyrna, which is ndw the Hicks, Inscr. of Brit. Mus., no. 522. greatest city in Asia Minor (see Murray, Handbook to AM, 7of:, Cp the oracle in Frankel, InscLr. wn Pcrg. 2 239, of date and cp SMVRNA). about 167 A.D., where all four are mentioned. 3657 3558 PERIDA PERSEUS der Myth. 16158, and Pauly-Wiss. Realenc. 2 1642 8; rnann and Kautzsch’) to favour the theory that the Farnell, Cults of the Greek States), and the snake was 2. Earlier perizzites were survivors of the pre-Canaan- the Christians the symbol of evil (cp Rev. 129 202 to theory. itish population of W. Palestine, which, 2 Cor. 11 3). His special title was ‘ Saviour ’ (Zwmjp, or after the Canaanitish invasion, could main- Zw.r+p T& lixwv), which would have very different tain itself only in the open country. But to infer from a,sociations for the Christian. In spite of these striking Gen. 1015, where the Perizzites are not mentioned, that features, the reference in Rev. can hardly be to this they were pre-Canaanitish, is difficult in the face of worship. Gen. 137 3430 (see, however, Kautzsch). J no doubt Laodiceia also had an Asklepieion and SMYRNA (pu.). The believed that the Perizzites (if that be really the name) word b’p6voc also undoubtedly refer; to the Acropolis hill: hut the temple of Asclepius lay in the plain, at some little distance were a separate people, contemporary with the Canaan- from the town (Pol. 32 27, cp Paus. v. 13 3). ites. As to the reference to the ‘Perizzites and the (d)The reference is to the primacy of the city as a Rephaim’ in Josh. 17 15,it gives no support to Dillmann‘s centre of the worship of the emperors ; it was the earliest theory, man and m~aiilbeing most probably alternative and the chief centre of that worship, which was the out- readings (cp REPHAIM). ward expression of loyalty to the imperial system. Since vng, Dt. 35 I S618 (cp VILLAGE), means the ‘Refusal to comply with the established and official inhabitants of unwalled villages, it is plausible to deny worship of the emperors ’ became the ‘ regular test and any distinction between *!:B and v??, and to touchstone of persecution’ (Rams. Church in the Rom. tizE suppose that the term ‘ Perizzite ’ is really a Em?. 250 f: ), for the imperial cultus was part of the clan-name equivalent to vn? (so Moore, machinery of government, and such refusal constituted Yudges, But there are still stronger grounds forthink- treason. The whole history of early Christianity is the 17). ing that via is really an early corruption of ’112, GIRZITE. story of the passage from legality to absolute proscrip- @ may he quoted for the theory that ‘ Perizzite is the name tion. If Rev. 213 was written after the accession of of a clan, for in Dt. and IS. it has +eppsROMAN EMPIRE.] The thought of official persecution [VI, in accus.). The city where, according to 2 Macc. has suggested the words of v. 12, ‘he that hath the 9 zj., Antiochus Epiphanes attempted to plunder a sharp two-edged sword,’ selected from the description temple (or temples, iepouuXe?v); he was put to flight in Rev. 112fi (cp v. 16). The actuality of the message by the people of the country, and broke up his camp to Pergamos as compared with the colourlessness of with disgrace (shortly before his death). See ELYMAIS, most of the other messages (especially of that to Ephesus) where it is pointed out that the name Elymais in the probablythrows somelightupon the placeof composition. 11 passage, I Macc. 61, is probably corrupt. From For the history of the Pergamene kingdom see Holm, Gk. 2 Macc. 113 it appears that a temple of Nanaea was Hist., ET, 427gJ, 4643, with references there. Good account meant. Now NANBA (q.v.) was an ancient Elamite of history and recent discoveries by Ussing, Pergarnos (1899). The results of the German excavations are as yet only partially goddess. It would be not unnatural that out of the published. W. J. W. statement ‘Persepolis is a city renowned for wealth’ (II~pu.hoXlsAni dXis b8ofos ~Xohy)should arise PERIDA (+epelAa [BK]), Neh. 7 57 = Ezra 2 55 the corrupt reading, ‘Elym(a)is in Persia is a city PERUDA (q.v.). renowned for wealth’ (Pdv eXup(a)is2 H. E. nX.). But PERIZZITES, RV PERIZZITE(Vl3D; 01 @epezalot that there was a temple of Nanrea near the ruins of Per- [or -ZSOI] [BKADEFL] ; in Ezra 91 +epeceet [B]. sepolis in 164-163 B.C. is not probable. For Persepolis -pezl [A]), one of the pre-Israelitish populations of was not in Elymais ; it was the capital of Persia proper, Palestine (Gen. 1520 Ex. 3 8 17. etc. ; see AMORITES) ; and had long since been shorn of its splendour by also PHERESITES~(in I Esd. 869 ; RV -EZITES, so EV Alexander the Great, who gave up the city to be plun- 2 Esd. 121 and AV Judith 56). The name, however, dered, and caused the royal palaces (those can hardly reqnires renewed investigation, the prevalent theory have been temples-only fire-altars) to be set on fire. being open to serious objection. It is, therefore, not as having any direct connection with We begin by collecting the biblical notices. Accord- biblical history (like Susa), but simply as the original ing to Judg. 14 f: the a Perizzites’ were overcome by home of the Achaemenian dynasty, and as the seat of 1. References. Judah and Simeon ; but Josh. 1715 (as the sepulchres of its kings, that Persepolis with its still the text now stands; @BA omits the magnificent ruins interests us. two names) mentions ‘ the Perizzites and the Rephaim ’ See Noldeke, art. ‘ Persepolis,’ EBP) . Stolze PersejoZis 2 vols. Bed. 1882 (an account of the Lxpeditibn of F. C: as occupying a wild un-cleared region (ip),perhaps N. Andrea;, with introd. on the inscriptions by Noldeke); Flandin of Shechem, which was to be taken frbm them and et Coste, Perse ancienne, and Voyage en Perse (1851.52); cleared by the bne Joseph. According to Josh. 113 Dienlafoy, L’art antique de Za Perse (1881); Curzon, Persia they dwelt in the hill-country’ (like the Amorites, etc.). (r892), 2 248.8 T. K, c. In Gen. 137 3430 (J) the Canaanites and the Perizzites PERSEUS (mq~ceyc).‘ king of Chittim’ (see are mentioned together ; also in 2 Esd. 121 (ferezei), KITTIM, end), is alluded to in I Macc. 85. The with the addition of the Philistines. In Gen. 1016 f: reference is to the battle of Pydna (168 B.c.),~in which (R) the Philistines are not mentioned at all (but cp v. 1 Riehm HWBP) 1211. 14), and the Perizzites too are conspicuous by their 2 eaohrc bould he confounded with rhvp[aIic (~pvh\[alrc)under absence. the influence of the tradition that Naniea’s was the temple re- Some of these data have been thought (e.g.,by Dill- ferred to. 3 Near modem Azam on the coast-road on the west shore of 1 I Esd. 869 agrees with Ezra 9 I (glossed, see Guthe, SBOT). the gulf of Salonica. 3659 3660 PERSIA PERSIA Perseus was defeated and the Macedonian kingdom Persia (Payxi)is mentioned repeatedly as one province brought to an end (cp MACEDONIA). of the empire (Behistun, 11434 27, etc. ). In the first in- His conqueror was L. A3milius Paullus. At SAMOTHRACEscription of Persepolis (Spiegel, 468,Weissbach, 34f: ) [q.u.j Perseus surrendered to the victor, and was taken as a Darius speaks of ' this land Persia ' more particularly, captibe to Rome, but allowed to pass the remainder of his days as a state-prisoner at Alba on Lake Fucinus. This was the end as is natural. In accord with these facts is the assump- of the empire of Alexander which had lasted for 144 years. For tion by the Greek kings of a title similar to that of the the character and aims of Perseus, see Mommsen, Rom. Hisf earlier Babylonian kings ; so Antiochus Soter (280-260 J. ET 2 287s Z93f: W. W. B. c.) in his cuneiform inscr. 1I J? (Schr. KB 3 z 136, PERSIA trans]. by Peiser) :-I Antiochus, the great king, the mighty king, the king of hosts, king of Babylon, king Name ($ I). Religion and culture ($8 7-9). of the countries, princely son of Seleucus the Biblical references ($ 2). Chronology ($ IO). . . . Land and people (0 3). History ($0 11-20). Macedonian (MuRKndunai) king, king of Babylon. ' Languageand literature (85 4-6). Bibliography (0 21). It seems probable that the Chronicler's frequent use Under the name Persia Media also is included, of the name D?? is intended to distinguish the empire Persia and Media, when known to the Hebrews, having that began with Cyrus from the Macedonian power that 1. Name. been closely united. overthrew and assumed it. F. B. Media in Hebrew is '?E : ethnic, 3lb a Mede. Some scholars identify the Persians with the ParQuaS Persia is bll ; ~EPCWN[BKAL ; both Theod. and or BarSuaS of the Assyrian inscriptions ; but this is very LB in Dan.], hut in Dan. 11 2 6 mpu& [BAQ, 871, in 2 Ch. doubtful as, even in the time of the Sargonids, they still 3620 p$ov [BAL] (so, in the reverse way, IIrpuw for ?inin lived much more to the N. than the Persians did during Is. 21 2) ; adj. Persian, ?D??, Neh. 12 zz ; N:QyS [Kt.], ?iN,plS the Median rule. ParSuaS seems rather to be an Assyrian [Kr.] in Dan. 6 28 [29l (Aram.); +OB IIrpuov [BRAL] ; five times form of ParthavaS, the Parthians. called IIapsuaior by plur. in EV Persians. In the inscriptions of the Achaemenids, the Greeks. 0. Persian Pdrsu uta &?&fa, Semitic version Pursu (gentilic Pursa), andMadcii(du-u-u)[Nabirn. Cyl. Pursii], Sus. or Elam. In Gen. 102 MADAI [p.v.] is named among the sons version Pur& and Mutu (gentilic Pur&). of __lapheth. following- Gomer and rMalgog---i.e.,- _-- the ' Persia' and ' Persians ' are the designations of the 2. Biblical Gimirrhi and the Lydians-and preced- kingdom and dynasty (respectively) of Cyrus and his references. ing Javan-Le., the Ionians and others. successors after the commencement of the Greek period Persia is not mentioned, hut is certainlyre- garded by the author belonging to Media. z K-176 (on D?: in Ezek. 27 IO see PARAS). as and 1811 relate how the king of Assyria, after having The passages both Hebrew and Aramaic are 2 Ch. conquered Samaria, transferred the captives from the 3620~2f.=Ezra11f.837 43572461471 99Neh.1222, kingdom of Israel to ' the towns of Media.' In Is. 131; besides Dan. (11 z) and Esth. (5I IO), which are later than the Chronicler. The only one of the passages in Ezra- the Medes who do not care for silver nor desire gold Neh. that appears on the surface to be free from the are called upon by Yabw&to fight the Babylonians. Cp Chronicler's redaction is Ezra 99, and even if this Is. 21 2, where Elam is added to Media. ' The kings of passage be really from Ezra's hand, the presumption Media' are mentioned among others in Jer. 2525 and II as enemies of Babylon. In Ezra z decree of from the usage as exhibited is strong against the 51 6 a Cyriis is found at Ahmetha (Ecbatana) in the country authenticity of the word ; of course, if the conten- D?? of Media. tion of C. C. Torrey (see EZRA, 5 I, n. 2) be right, The references in the OT to the Persians, either singly and the Chronicler's hand is the only one to he recognised or joined to the Medes, are rather many, hut only in in Ezra, the case is still clearer. Even in Dan. 9 I, where the later historical books and in Daniel and Esther. Ilarius is said to have been made king over the kingdom It is very improbable that they are meant in Ezek. of the Kasdim, he is called not ' the Persian,' hut ' son 27 IO 38 5. where they are said to serve in foreign armies of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes.' with LIJD and Put or with Cush (cp PARAS). Perhaps With these phenomena agrees the usage of Babylonian ~~19should he read instead of ~15. contract tablets from Cyrus to Artaxerxes, where the Kings of Persia are mentioned in Ezra99; Cyrus in nCh. king's name appears as a Cyrus (Cambyses, Darius, 3622/: EzraliJ8 37 435; Darius in 424 Neh.1222; Ar. etc.), king of Babylon, king of the countries,' or simply taxerxes in Ezra 7 I ; all three in 6 14. Cyrus the Persian also in Dan. 6zg [z81 10 I, andpassim. For Darius the Mede in Dan. 6 'king of the countries' (see KB 4, 1896, p. 258 8, and jupassirn, see DARIUS.The prince or angel of the Persians Peiser's trans]. ). is mentioned in Dan. 101320. By 'the kings of Medes and No doubt Cyrus is called 'king of Persia' (Pursu) in the Persians,' Dan. 820 is meant the whole Medo-Persian empire. Chronicles of Nabonidus 2 1. 15, hut also king of Anhn (an Belshazzar's empirelis given to the Medes and Persians, Dan. Elamitic province ; on the' relation between these see Tiele, 528. The immutable laws of the Medes and Persians are BAG 469), Id. i6: 1. I, Cyrus Cylinder, 1. 12; but these both referred :o in Dan. 69 13 16 [8 IZ 151 (cp Esth. 119) ; their army, represent him prior to the capture of Babylon. Th: Cyrus seven princes, princesses in Esth. 1314 18, and the chronicles of Cylinder ZZ. 20.22, gives his formal title thereafter : CyrFs, their kings in 102. king of hosts, great king, mighty king, king of Babylon (lit. In the NT the Persians and Persia never occur, only, Tintinki), king of &mer and Akkad (entire Babylonia), king of the four quarters (of the world), son of Cambyses, the great in Acts 29, M$or with the Parthians and Elamites. king, king of (the city) AnSan, grandson of SiSpiS (=Old Pers., The Medes and Persians mentioned in the Bible in- CiSpiS, Gk. Tei'spes), the great king, king of [the city] AnSan, habited in historical times only a part of IrHn or ErHn, etc. (For all these see KB 3 25IZO~., and especially Hagen 3. Land and the land of the Aryans, which extended in Delitnch and Haupt, Beitr. 2 2058) Even in the Old Persian inscriptions, where we find people. W. to E. from the Zagros range to the Darius naming himself ' king in Persia' (Pirsaiy), this Hindu Kush and the Indos, and N. to S. title does not appear alone. from the Caspian Sea and the Turanian steppes to the Thus, Behistun, 1 I, 'I,, Darius, the great king, the king of Erythrazan Sea or Persian Gulf. The western countries kings, king in Persia,. king of the provinces, and the much Persia. Media proper, and Little Media (Atropatene) are more common expression ' I, Dirius, !he great king, king of separated from the eastern provinces, of which Bactria, kings, king of the countries of many tribes, king of this great Margiana (Merv), and Sogdiana (Sughda) are the best parth far and wide' (Inscr. Alvend, IC. IT 8)or more briefly the great king, king of kings, king of the& many regions known, by an immense barren desert, running from N. (Inscr. Persepolis, 2, ZZ. I X), and the like, in connection with to S. and ending only where the coastland, in a corre- which he sometimes cails himself ' a Persian' (as Inscr. Nakch- sponding degree inhabitable, of the Persian Sea begins. i-Rustam, 1, I. 13); these more general titles are those exclu- sively found in the (Persian) inscriptions of Xerxes and his It is only along the SE. shore of the Caspian Sea that successors Artaxerxes I. Artax. Mnemon, and Artax. Ochus the land of the Hyrcanians unites the eastern and western (see for tdese Spiegel, AkK,esp. 2, 42, 46, 48, 50,. 52, 58, 60, parts of Iran. 62 64 66 68-transl. on opp. pp. ; especially Weisshach and As a whole. Irgn, lacking large rivers and extended Bang,'AhK 12, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, 44, 46-transl. on OPP. PP.). valleys, and for the most part mountainous and cold, is 3661 3662 PERSIA PERSIA not particularly fertile. There are several exceptions, expressing the same sound in the Babylonian or Susian however, such as Persia itself, and especially the north- writing, or looks like a modification of it. If they had eastern provinces, Bactria and Sogdiana, where the intended only to simplify the older syllabaries, they would climate is mild and the soil rich. It is remarkable that at least have retained the simple vowel signs of the just those two important satrapies did not rise against t- F* Babylonians ; but for a, i, and u they write 777, 7 7, Darius, whilst rebellion everywhere prevailed. In general ... . . it may be said, that IrHn was a country well fitted to Therefore, foster an industrious, proud, manly, and warlike race, and to be for some centuries the centre of a mighty empire. it is clear that they made independent combinations of It is quite certain that the founders of this empire, the wedges. It is hardly conceivable, however, that they the Medo-Persians, were not the original inhabitants of would have taken such trouble, only for the purpose of the country. They belonged to the Aryan stock. When incising a few inscriptions, as the cuneiform, being only the Assyrians, as they often did, directed their expeditions destined to be carved in stone or on clay tablets, could to Media, and even built there some strong places to not be used for what had to he written on other material. maintain their supremacy, the kings they fought did not They wrote royal annals, official documents, letters, and bear Aryan names, which become more frequent only in communications from the king to the Iranian satraps in the time of the Sargonids. Aryan tribes, coming from their own language, and even the Aramaic or Greek the NW. or the N., and spreading first in the eastern despatches sent to the satraps and other governors of part of the land, seem to have conquered the western Western Asia and Egypt were translations of Persian regions little by little, and to have settled there in small originals. Now, for this purpose they apparently used, independent kingdoms, before the Median monarchy was not the old Pahlavi, which appears first on the coins of established. If there is any truth in what BErBssos tells the Arsacids, and, as its name indicates, is of Parthian about a Median dynasty reigning over Babylon in the origin, but one of the Aramaean alphabets of Babylonia remotest times, this dynasty has nothing in common or Assyria, adapted to their own idiom, and it is on such with the Aryan Medes, but probably was of the same an already existing alphabet that the Old Persian cunei- origin as the Kassites, Elamites, and other eastern form appears to be based. At any rate, in adopting this neighbours of Babylonia. simple and practical method of writing instead of the A complete ethnology and glossology of the Iranian clumsy system of their new subjects, the Persians peoples would be out of place here, as our scope is showed great originality and a sound sense of the 4. Language. limited to the two nations with whom character of their language. the Hebrews came into contact. The Weissbach (in ZDMG 48664) tries to prove that the Persian Old Persian language we know from the inscriptions of cuneiform was invented not earlier than under Darius Hystaspis. the Achaxnenidsand from the proper names and sundry But if the inscription of Cyrus, found at Murghxh, refers to words recorded by the ancients. It is closely allied to Cyrus the Great, which is most probable not to Cyrus the Younger, the brother of Artaxerxes I., as Geissbach holds, the the Avestan language (the two dialects of which seem to Persian cuneiform must have been in use at least in Cambyses' have been spoken in the eastern and northern parts of time. Other arguments against Weissbach are urged by Ed. the empire), and more remotely to the Vedic and Sanskrit Meyer, GA 3 49. languages. About the language of the Medes we know We do not know whether there ever was a written very little. Judging from the Median names that we literature, Droperlvso-called, in this Medo-Persian idiom. .I know, and from the fact that Darius used the same 6. Literature. if there was, it is now irretrievably lost. Aryan language for the great Behistun inscription in That is not very probable. Though Media as he did for those he had incised in Persia, we no longer barbarians, the subjecis bf the Median and may assume that the Old Median language differed only Persian kings were a simple, hard-working people, and dialectically from the Old Persian. Still, the inscriptions even the higher classes were given to riding and shoot- of the younger Achanenids show that the Old Persian ing more than to the cultivation of fine arts and letters. was then already in decline, and perhaps supplanted The great kings themselves were totally absorbed by by a younger dialect or by the widespread Aramaic. the founding, organising, and maintaining of a large Some scholars call the second of the three languages empire, and by constant warfare against rebels and used in the Achremeniau inscriptions Median. If so, foreign nations. it would not be the language of the rulers, who were National songs, epic and lyric, they certainly had; certainly Aryans, but the idiom of the conquered race, but these may have been transmitted orally from one who may have constituted the majority of the population. generation to another. According to Pliny (HN301). In all probability the second language is better called the Greek author Hermippus compiled his description Susian or Neo-Susian, as the idiom of the province of the Persian religion from two millions of original where the Persian kings had their principal residence verses, and a well-known Persian tradition mentions could hardly be wanting in their inscriptions. two official copies of the holy scriptures of the Zoro- The system of writing used for the Persian text of the astrians, preserved by the Achzemenian kings, one of Achremenian inscriptions is one of those commonly called which was burnt by Alexander, whilst the other was sent 5. System cuneiform. It has been taken for granted by him to Greece, to be studied and translated. There that it was taken by the Persians either is some truth in both statements, however exaggerated Of writing' from the Babylonian or Assyrian, or as they may be. But the religious documents of the some think, from the Susian, cuneiform. An accurate Iranians were certainly composed in the language of comparative study of the three systems, however, shows the Avesta, even if they were not the same as the clearly that this is not the case. The Susians reduced the books, of which the Avesta known to us contains only many hundreds of Babylonian signs to some hundred the scanty remains, and this religious literature may and twelve, but retained the syllabic character of the have been the only one extant at the Medo-Persian writing, the same signs for the same or cognate sounds, time. and the use of determinative signs with the same signi- The inscriptions of Darius Hystaspis and his suc- fication. Not so the Persians. All they took from their cessors prove that they were worshippers of Aura- ,. ,. aeligion. mazda, ' the great God, who created predecessors was the wedge in three shapes- 7, -, this earth, who created this heaven, who and <. They rejected all determinatives, only created happiness for man,' and to whom they owed their royal dignity as 'one king, one monarch over separating the words by a sloping wedge \, and, many.' It was this God who intrusted Darius with instead of a syllabary, they composed a real alphabet of sovereign power over the land when it was full of thirty-six signs, none of which corresponds to the sign lying rebels, and who helped him to smite them and to 3663 3664 PERSIA PERSIA smother all revolt. Darius admonishes his subjects Darius and Xerxes, though avowed Mazdayasnans, did ‘to obey the commands of this God, and to walk in quite the same. the straight path unhesitatingly.’ Now a God thus Still, if the Zoroastrian religion was that of the kings described has ceased to be a nature-god; he is the and of the ruling race and the upper classes in Persia supreme being of an ethical religion. It is true that and Media-in a Susian inscription Auramazda is called the ilchaemenids, as well as Darius, continued to wor- the god of the Aryans (unnup arryandm)-it cannot be ship their old clan-gods (hadd daguibir vithibii) ; but denied, and even the Avesta admits, that the worship eveti in the Avesta Mazda, the all-wise Lord, is sur- of the old gods subsisted among the nomadic tribes and rounded by a staff of minor heavenly powers, Ames’a- in various of the more remote parts of IrLn. Mazda- spCfitas and Yazatas, partly personifications of his own ism was never the generally accepted faith of all the attributes, partly old Iranian gods, too popular to be Iranians. Not before the SLsLnids was it the only neglected, and therefore assimilated with some modifi- tolerated religion of the State, and even under the cations by the new creed. There is no essential differ- Achaemenids it may have been divided into different ence between the theology, the demonology, and the sects. (For a description of the Zarathustrian religion, moral doctrines of the inscriptions and those of the see ZOROASTRIANISM. ) Avesta. The Persians may not have followed all the Like the religion of the Hebrews, the national religion precepts of the holy scriptures as perhaps only the of the Aryans of IrLn, with its tendency to monotheism, Magi did; biit even the Avesta states that they were its vague personification of ethical not observed everywhere among the Iranians, even in *. Art and ideas, and powers of nature, its sober countries belonging to Mazda. The Auramazda of the in- and generally prosaic character, was scriptions is no other than the Ahura Mazdaof the Avesta. not fitted to create orhevelop a-national art. Its cult And if the Persians were Mazda-worshippers, as the required no large and splendid temples, but only some younger Achzmenids certainly were, they were also small and simple places of worship and altars in the Zarathustrians, for there is no other Mazdaism than the open air. The only image of the deity we know of is Zarathustrian. All suppositions to the contrary must the human figure in the winged circle, which is fre- be rejected as unhistorical. It has been said that the quently seen hovering about the king’s head, and religion of the Persians, as described by Herodotus and is commonly thought to represent Auramazda or his other Greek writers, differs too much from the religion fravaii, but may as well be meant for thefrazuii of taught in the Avesta to be considered as identical with the king himself. Even this is borrowed from the it. But there are manifest errors in Herodotus’ Assyrians, who themselves had imitated it from the description, and it must be taken into consideration Egyptians. The statues of the goddess AnLhita. which, that the Greek historian only states what he had heard as BErGssos (frg. 16) tells us, were erected by Arta- about the real religion of the Persian people, whilst the xerxes Mnemon at Babylon, Susa, and Ekbatana. and Avesta contains the ideals of the priests. The same to which a passage of her Yasht seems to allude, were argument might be used to maintain that the Bible was doubtless of foreign origin, as (it is all bnt certain) unknown to or at least not acknowledged as the Word was the new cult and even the goddess herself, in spite of God by not a few Christian rulers and nations. of her pure lranian name. Nevertheless, it cannot be Moreover, the Avesta was certainly not composed in said that Persian architecture and sculpture have been Persia, nor even in Media proper, and the religious borrowed or even imitated from their western neighbours, observances may have differed in the various provinces, for they have indeed a character of its own. It is called according to the divergent local traditions that could eclectic by high authorities, and in a certain sense it is. not be disavowed even after the new faith was accepted. But it is not entirely deficient in originality. The able So the same gods are called bagas in Persia and Media, artists who planned and adorned the admirable palaces yazatas in the country where the Avestan language was of Persepolis and Susa were mostly inspired by Assyro- spoken. And though the name for priests in the Avestn Babylonian models, and they assimilated also not a few is only atharvans and the name map? is wholly un- Egyptian motives ; but, perhaps under the influence of known to it in that sense, it is the only name for priest what they had learned from Greek art in Asia Minor, in use as well in Persia as in Media, where the Magi they created a new style of building and sculpture formed a kind of tribe. which, by its elegance and taste, its boldness and Whilst it is evident that the younger Achaemenids finish, surpasses all oriental art in antiquity. It has were Mazdayasnnns we are not certain whether the been suggested that only Greeks, either captives or same may be said of their predecessors of the older adventurers, could have done this, and that no Persians, branch and of the Median kings. Those scholars who tillers of the soil and warriors as they were, could ever think that Zarathus’tra was a contemporary of Darius’ have produced works of art of such excellence. This father Hystaspes (ViStLspa) cannot but regard them as may be true in a measure. Whilst they may have had the first confessors of the reformed religion, and others, Greeks as technical advisers, and even as craftsmen of a though rejecting the premiss, equally hold that the higher class. it is improbable that a Greek would have Zoroastrian faith did not spread in Media and Persia conceived a plan of building so far different from his till Darius I. ascended the throne, perhaps even later. own standard of beauty, that, notwithstanding all its According to both, Cyrus. Cambyses, and the kings of merits and charm, it must have seemed to him only Media were polytheists, da&vayasnans as the Avesta adapted to the taste of barbarians. At any rate, calls them. Others again, and among them such Persian art is an artificial growth; it is a hot-house historians as Noldeke and Ed. Meyer, think it most plant. It WRS invented only by the king’s command, probable that, at least from Phraortes (Fravarti5)- and lived only by the king’s grace; therefore it did which even means ‘ confessor ‘-downwards, all the not develop. In two centuries it was not improved, but rulers of Media and Persia were Mazda-worshippers. gradually declined. With the Achzmenids it rose, and The writer of this article is of the same opinion, on with them it disappears. grounds developed elsewhere (see 21, below) more What is true of Persian art and architecture may also amply than is here possible. If Cyrus, on his Baby- be said to a certain extent of their civilisation in general. lonian cylinder, calls himself a worshipper of Marduk, 9. Civilisation, The Medes led the way. and the as Cambyses appears on Egyptian monuments as an Persians. for a long time their vassals. Y adorer of the gods of Memphis and Sais, it was only followed, not only imitating the Median equipment, ‘the priests’ diplomacy’ to which the kings did not but adopting also the organisation Cyaxares had given object for political reasons. It has been truly said to the army and (we may be sure) much more that was that trained historians (historisch geschdten, Noldeke) new to them before, and that was borrowed by the could not be led astray by such royal decrees. Besides, Medes from the older nations they had conquered. 3665 3666 PERSIA PERSIA Not that the Medo-Persians, before they came into DeYoces, the son of Phraortes, who fixed his residence contact with a more refined culture, had been an un- in Ecbatana and held a regular court. civilised nation. As Aryans proud of their Aryan The name Deioces appears in Sargon’s Annals as Dayaukku descent, feeling their superiority to the aborigines whom a Saknu or governor of Man, who with KusP th; they brought under their rule, they were a young, 11. =Story : Urartian platted against Ullusun, the king of healthy, vigorous people, chivalrous and valiant, Deioces. Man and vassal of the Assyrians but was led captive by Sargon with his whol; family and generous even to their enemies, though severe and even brought to Hamate (Hamath in Syria?). It is clear that this cruel to rebels and traitors. Their manners, while Mannrean con5pirator, who was deported by the Assyrian king, still unspoiled by opulence and luxury, were simple, cannot he the king who founded the Median empire. except that they freely indulged in spirituous liquors. Elsewhere a Bit-Dayaukku is mentioned in south- They hated nothing more than lying, and their given western Media, near Ellip. This Dayaukku, after word was held sacred even where others proved false. whose house the Assyrians called his country, as e.g., But, Herodotus tells us, they were prone to imitate as they called Israel Bit-Humri and southern Chaldea or strangers and to adopt foreign customs. The Medes Sealand Bit-Yakin, must have been the head of a inherited, with the empire of the Assyrians, their ancient princely or royal house of some importance, unless civilisation. The Persians, after the conquest of Sua, Duhyauka (as the Iranian form would be) were only a found themselves in the capital of a still more ancient general title. corresponding to the Avesta dahvyumu. monarchy, known for its love of splendour and rich and meaning ‘ the lord of the land ’ (der Landesherr), attire, and could hardly escape its influence. Then as the present author suggested in his Bu6. -Ass. Gesch. came the invasion nf Babylonia, of Lydia and the 263, n. 3. Glorified by popular tradition, this Dahyauka Greek cities of Asia Minor, of Egypt. This led to the (he may have been the head of a dynasty or the chosen awakening of slumbering powers, but also, and perhaps +~y~pLsvof the Median tribes) grew into the founder of an in a greater degree, to moral degeneration. In marry- empire, the Deiokes of Herodotus. The real founder of ing their nearest relations the Achaemenids of the the monarchy, however, can have been only Phraortes, younger branch followed the example of the Egyptians. though a series of leading chieftains presiding over a for if the next-of-kin marriage (bva2fvaddta),mentioned confederation of tribes may have preceded him for even in the Avesta, was in its origin an Iranian institution, it much longer time than the fifty-three years assigned was certainly restricted to the second degree of kinship, a to Deiokes by Herodotus. However inviting it might and only meant to keep the Aryan blood pure. From be to regard the list of Median kings before Astyages, the Greeks the Persians learnt other sexual aberrations ; given by Ctesias, as comprising the names of such and their court, where the heads of the first families leading chieftains, the idea must be rejected, as the were expected to appear regularly, and where even the whole list is apparently a product of Ctesias’ fancy, young nobles were educated, soon became depraved by invented only to contradict Herodotus. the bad consequences of harem life, by the arrogance Phraortes (FyuvartiS, cp the Avesta fravarlta, con- of the eunuchs, and by the intrigues of foreign favourites fessor.’ which is onlv etvmolocicallv connected with and ambitious politicians. fruvaSi, guardian spirit ’) is said to For the chronology of the Median empire we are ‘ la’Phraortesy have first subjugated Persia and after- dependent entirely on Herodotus and Ctesias, though 647-626. wards.I little bv little. nearlv the whole Chronology. some synchronisms with Assyrian ~~, of Asia. At last, however, the Assyrian poGer, though history may help us in a few cases. already on its decline, proved too strong for him. An Ctesias is not to be trusted ; his list of Median kings expedition against a king of whom Berossos calls and the more than three centuries assigned by him as AS:,,, Saracos, was unsuccessful, and Phraortes himself suc- the total duration of their reigns, are equally fantastic. cumbed. We may accept these statements as historical, The computation of Herodotus is better, but also though admitting that there is some exaggeration in partly artificial. The reigns of 40, and 35 years he 22, what is told of Phraortes’ conquests, and though we assigns to Phraortes, Cyaxares, and Astyages may be cannot explain why Sardanapalus (ASur-bHni-pal) is nearly correct ; but the 53 years for Dei’oces serve only called Saracus. For it is this king only who can be to fill up the round number of The date of 647 150. meant. The subjugation of Persia most probably falls B. c. for the beginning of Phraortes’ reign corresponds in the reign of Teispes (Cispi:)-who is the first Persian with the date of the subjection of Babylon by ASur- ruler, called by Cyrus the Great ‘ King of AnSan ’-or a bani-pal, and the troubled state of the Assyrian empire short time earlier. Elam, to which AnSan certainly during the gigantic struggle against a mighty confedera- belonged, had just been annihilated by ASur-bEni-pal, tion was indeed very favourable to the founding of some and was bereft of all its old splendour and power ; it central power among the chieftains of Media Though therefore fell an easy prey to a young and valiant nation victorious over its rebellious vassals and afterwards over like the Persians, who, though unable to resist the Elam, its hereditaryfoe, Assyria seems to have exhausted its own powers in those wars and to have rapidly Median conqueror, may have striven to extend their declined during ASur-bani-pal’s last years. Under the power, as a compensation for the loss of their independ- Sargonids who preceded him, Media appears still to ence. They found an opportunity to do so in the have bern divided into small principalities. It cannot year 625 B.c., when at the same time Media was defeated by Assyria and lost its king, ASur-bani-pal have been a monarchy before 647 ; but this may be the date of its foundation. died, and Babylon under Nabopolassar threw off the For the chronology of the Persian empire we have yoke of ASSur, so that none of the three neighbouring the Canon of Ptolemy, which is certainly to be trusted, powers could prevent the Persians from penetrating into the Babylonian contract tablets dated under the reigns the very heart of Elam. It is understood that a large of the Persian kings, and the synchronisms of Greek part of Elan1 may have remained independent for many years afterwards. history. See CHRONOLOGY 4 25 Table iii. Best edition of Ptolemy’s J.er.4935-38, where the fall of Elam is rophesied and Canon in Wachsmu;h: Ek.in das Stud. d. alt. Gesch., 305f: which the redactor ascribes to Jeremiah as eeing spokk by Cp also Ed. Meyer, Forschungen P. alt. Gesch. ii., ch. 6, him about 597 B.c., cannot refer to this first invasion of the Chron. Forschungen, 436fi Persians at least if the date is accurate. Twelve years later We now give a short survey of the history of the Ezekiel i32q) speaks of Elam as having already descended into Sheol. [On these passages see PROPHET.] Is.226, re- Median and Persian empires. garded by some scholars (PraSek. and others) as belonging According to Herodotus the Median tribes, living in to this time, is much older and dates from the time of Sen- a kind of anarchy and constantly quarrelling, but nacherih and Hezekiah. Forty years later Cyrus the Great wishing to stop these everlasting raids and robberics, was master of the whole country. and to unite against the common foe, chose a king Phraortes’ son and successor Cyaxares (Uuakiriutara) 3667 3668 PERSIA PERSIA saw :it once why his father, though victorious in his The Lydian frontier, however, was destined to be the 13. Cyaxares, struggle with the rude and semi- limit of the Median conquests. After five years of barbarous tribes of Iran, was over- fighting the war was still undecided, and both parties 624-686. come by the veteran-warriors of such a seem to have been rather tired of it. At least, when, military state as Assyria. His army was, in fact, deficient on 28th May 585, a great battle, probably near the in training and organisation. Wishing to avenge his Halys, was interrupted by a total eclipse of the sun- father, Cyaxares set himself to work, divided his troops the same that Thales the Milesian is said to have pre- into lancers, archers, and horsemen, and fortified his dicted-they accepted it as a divine warning and ceased capital Ecbatana (Hagmatana, ‘ the place of gathering ’). all hostilities. Syennesis of Cilicia, probably chosen Then, feeling stronger, he renewed his attack, defeated by Lydia. and Nebuchadrezzar, erroneously called the Assyrians in a pitched battle, and invested Nineveh. Labynetus by Herodotus, chosen by Media, acted as Soon, however, he had to raise the siege. A wild arbiters, and peace was concluded by their mediation. horde of those northern nomads, included by the Greeks Astyages, who seems in the meantime to have ascended under the common name of Scythians and called by the throne, since Phraortes is said to have died in the the Persians Saka, had invaded Media, and Cyaxares year of the battle, married the daughter of Alyattes, the had to hurry home. king of Lydia. Whether this invasion was connected with that other Astyages (Is’tuvegu in the Nab. Cyr. Annals, cp more terrible irruption of Scythians by which western Ctesias’ Astvicras) is called hv the Greeks (Herod.. I- Asia was devastated, is not certain. The Scythians &ch. Pers. 76if. ) a son of Phraortes; with whom Cyaxares had to deal probably came from 14‘ *styage’’ Since, however, he is.called by the Baby- the NE. of the Caspian Sea, and, though of the same 684-660’ lonians kine of the Ummanmanda- Y kin as the Iranians, were savage or at least barbarous which, whatever it may mean, cannot have indicated the nomads. They did not reign in Media, for Cyaxares Medes, but rather (probably) the Scythians, as Cyrus is was neither dethroned nor banished by them. They said to have slain the numerous Ummanmanda with his seem, however, to have domineered over the peaceful few troops-since moreover the rebels, who, in the reign householders, and as a kind of Janissaries or Mamelukes of Darius, rose in Media and Sagartia do not call them- to have even held the court in check. It is said that selves sons of Astyages, but pretend to belong to the the king got rid of them by killing their chiefs at a family of Cyaxares, Winckler (Unters. z. a&. Gesch. banquet, after having made them drunk. It is an old 124f.) suggests, that Astyages was neither the son and very common folk-tale, and is only the popular nor the lawful successor of Phraortes, but revived the substitute for the historical fact that such a gang of Scythian supremacy in Media. It cannot be denied that barbarians, rendered careless by an easy victory, and this hypothesis is very alluring. To the arguments of enervated by indulging too freely in all the unwonted Winckler may he added, that Cyrus himself, in his luxuries of civilised life, could not but be overpowered cylinder, glories in having defeated the Guti, the at last by the shrewd policy and the superior tactics nomads of Mesopotamia, and the widespread Umman- of a real king. It seems that Cyaxares did not manda. the nomads of Iran, so that he himself seems chase the Saka, but that they submitted to him and to have regarded his conquest of Media as the liberation joined his army. In a few years this result was of that country from the yoke of a usurper. The man obtained. The whole drama was played between the who delivered the greater part of the army of Astyages first and second expeditions to Assyria. The second into the hands of Cyrus, Harpagus, belonged to the ended in the fall of Nineveh (607 or 606 B.c.). the royal family. Finally, the name of Astyages has no first, preceded by the military reform, cannot have Iranian sound, and is altogether unlike those of his happened much earlier than 620 B. c., 625 or 624 being predecessors. Be this as it may, Astyages’ reign seems the year of the accession of Cyaxares. If Herodotus is not to have been a glorious one. The only thing we right in stating that the Scythians ruled Asia for twenty- know of it is, that he encroached on the dominions of eight years, this cannot refer to Media, where they did Babylonia, then weakened by internal troubles and by not even rule. the government of a mere antiquary, and placed a Cyaxares now felt able to renew his attack on garrison in Harran, which the Chaldean kings regarded Assyria, which, though no more than a shadow of as belonging to their empire. As soon, however, as the what it was before, still hindered the Medes in extending Persians under Cyrns revolted, the Ummanmanda from their empire to the NW. This time he was successful all parts of the empire were ordered home to reinforce and destroyed Nineveh about 607-606 B.C. For it the army. Astyages may at the outset have defeated was to Cyaxares, not to Astyages, as Berossos and the Persians, and even have chased them as far as those who depend on him have it, that the fall Pasargadze ; we could believe it, if it were not Ctesias of the old imperial city was due. It is difficult to who told it. It is certain, however, that Astyages’ own decide whether Nabopolassar and his Babylonians troops gave him up to the enemy, and that the man who joined the Medes as allies against the common foe. betrayed him was Harpagus, whom Cyrus afterwards Both Ctesias and Berossos tell us so, and even without rewarded by bestowing on him an all but royal dignity their testimony we should expect it. Allies they were, in Asia Minor. In this the Babylonian account and and the prince royal of Babylon was married to Herodotus agree : they are mutually complementary. Cyaxares’ daughter. The rising power of the Chaldeans The history of the Median empire, very little of was not to be neglected, and on the other side it was which unfortunately is known, is interesting as the their interest to take an active part in the proceedings 16. significance first attempt of an Aryan or Indo- against a dynasty which, though paralysed, always European people to found a great claimed the suzerainty over Babylonia. If Herodotus Ofe...... , and conquering monarchy. But it does not mention the Chaldeans, he may have followed Wll‘pIO. was not much more than an attempt. a one-sided Medo-Persian tradition. Lastly, it may be In itself, the Median empire had no such great import- doubted whether Media would have left the Chaldeans ance. Compared with the Assyrian empire which in undistiirbed possession of all the southern and south- preceded, or with the Persian which followed it, it seems western provinces of the Assyrian monarchy, which rather insignificant. It did not supplant the Assyrians, Nabopolassar’s great son not only maintained, hut for this had been done already by the Chaldeans. extended, if they had remained inactive in this final All it could do, and this only after having failed at first struggle for the hegemony of Western Asia. At any and with the aid of the king of Babylon, was, to give rate, Media played the principal part, and it would the death-blow to the dying capital of the old empire, now direct its victorious arms against Armenia, Cappa- and to appropriate a part of the booty It was un- docia, and the rich and mighty kingdom of the Lydians. able to conquer Lydia and felt ob1 ged to respect the 3669 3670 PERSIA PERSIA still mighty dynasty of Nabopolassar. Still, what it to the acme of his power, and made it easy for him to achieved was by no means contemptible. It liberated extend it to the shores of the Mediterranean S. of Asia Iran from the Semitic suzerainty; it united the ever Minor. There is no record of any serious resistance on quarrelling tribes under a central power ; it laid the the part of the nations subject to Babylon ; and certainly foundations of a higher civilisation, and so paved the the Phoenician cities, though so often rebellious against way for that Persian empire, which in a short time Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia, seem to have borne the equalled, if it did not outrival, the once supreme light yoke of the Persians without reluctance. monarchies of Babylon and Assyria. On Cyrus’s relations to the Hebrews see CYRUS, With the title king of ‘Adan and Parsfi,’ Cyrus, a 55 3-6. descendant of Achsemenes (HnkhdmnniS),ascended the Next to nothing is known about Cyrus’s doings after 16. Cyrus. throne of the empire. This does not mean the fall of Babylon in 538. It appears that he did not that a new monarchy, the Persian, sup- make it his residence, but installed his son Cambyses as planted the Median, but rather that there was a change viceroy, preferring to live at Susa, and especially perhaps of dynasty, by which the Median was developed into a at his own Persian capital Pasargadz, which he had Medo-Persian empire, differingfrom theformeronlyin this, built and adorned out of the plunder of Ecbatana. that the Persian branch, hitherto subject, was henceforth Probably he was for most of the time engaged in uppermost. The Greeks make scarcely any difference one or another military expedition. He died on the between Medes and Persians, and the latter ever re- battlefield about 529, nobody knows where, and. the garded the Medes as their nearest kin, and, provided varions sources mention different names for the remote they respected the Persian supremacy, treated them and barbarous tribe which at last defeated and killed with marked distinction, and entrusted them with high him. Whether his tomb at Pasargidse (Murghdb)was offices and honours. only a mausoleum erected by his son to his memory, Cyrus (0.Pers. KZ‘ruSin the nominative, Bab. Kurd) or whether it really contained his last remains, it is was certainly of royal descent. difficult to say. When Herodotus makes him the son of a private Persian Cyrns was neither the bloodthirsty tyrant he is represented noble married to the daughter of Astyages, and Ctesias the in some stories current among the Greeks nor the ideal ruler of son of a common herdsman, they only repeat two different Xenophon’s Cyro$edia. It may be eve; doubted whether he traditions of a popular story, such as Orientals especially-and was a great ruler, as he seems not to have done much for the not only they-like to tell about the origin of great monarchs organisation of his colossal empire. But that he broke with the and conquerors, who, from an obscure and modest position, bated Assyro-Babylonian system, respected every nationality, unexpectedly rose to large power and world-wide renown. (See allowed every people to retain its own religion, laws, customs, CVRUS,I I , to which must be added, that Darius calls Hakh2- language in its own home, proves him to have been a man of manis thefather of Cyrus’s great- grandfather Cispis, who is large views and, as such, a real statesman, highminded and therefore not merely his descendant ; he always distinguishes generous an Aryan of the Aryans. At any rate he was a hetweenputru, ‘son,’ and tuumbyu, ‘ of the family, descendant great coAmander, and, if we may believe Herodatus, also a of.’) good tactician, one of those military geniuses who are born, not made. After having taken Ecbatana, the first care of Cyrus Cambyses (KuGbujiya, or perhaps better Kubujiya), should have been to secure his supremacy over the the son of Cyrus and Kassandana (also of Achzemenian Iranian provinces of the Median dominion. Before he l?.Cambyses. descent), followed his father as ruler of the could bring this to an end, however, he was compelled to empire, and devoted the first four years wait for a more convenient season, since Crcesus, the king of his reign to the preparation of an expedition against of the Lydians, had invaded Cappadocia and devastated Egypt, which, as long as it was independent, threatened certain cities which, by the treaty between Alyattes and his south-western frontier. Polycrates of Samos, the kings Astyages, belonged to the Medes. Cyrus hurried to of Cyprus, and the Phenician cities were his allies, and the frontier, and a battle was fought in the district of with their help he gathered a large fleet, commanded by Pteria, near Sinope, which, according to Herodotus, the Halicarnassian Phanes, who, till then in Egyptian remained undecided. Crcesus, however, seeing that service, had gone over to him. Before he left Persia, the Persian army exceeded his own in number. thought Cambyses secretly killed his own brother Bardiya, called it wiser to retreat, and to wait till the auxiliary troops Smerdis by the Greeks, who therefore, according to an of his allies, on which he reckoned, should have arrived. ingenious remark of Noldeke, cannot have been the But he made the mistake of disdaining his enemy, and governor of the eastern provinces of IrBn, as Ctesias disbanded his army, feeling sure that Cyrus would not pretends. Then he put himself at the head of his venture to march upon Sardis. This proved a fatal army, entered Egypt, defeated the Egyptian army near error. The Persian army advanced with great speed, Pelusium, and was soon the lord of the whole country. invested the capital, and took it within a fortnight. The Egyptian priests represented him to Herodotus as Crcesus was taken prisoner, but not put to death by a brutal and cruel tyrant, an epileptic, unable to com- the conqueror, who treated him kindly, and even mand his passions, as rude to his own wife and kin as assigned him a city for his living. to others, a scoffer, who laughed at the images of Ptah The well-known narrative of Herodotus and Xanthns ahont in Memphis, burned the mummy of Amasis, and with the pyre on which Crcesus was to be burned with some of his subjects, but from which he was released by Cyrus’s curiosity impious hand killed the sacred Apis. On the contrary, and the favour of the gods, cannot be regarded as history. genuine Egyptian monuments depict him as a pious Ctesias, though not partial to Cyrus, knows nothing of it, but worshipper of those same gods, and a high priest of Sais ascribes the liberation of Crcesus to another miracle. praises him as the protector of his cult. The official repre- Cyrus being now master of Lydia, returned to his sentation on one side, popular gossip, inspired by national country, where much had still to be done before the hate, on the other,-neither the one nor the other is whole of IrZn had submitted to his rule. The conquest to be trusted. But we may be sure that Cambyses’ of the Ionian cities, which had refused to accept his action in Egypt was unwise and impolitic, and that he suzerainty instead of that of the Lydians, and the sub- could not control his violent passions. Certain it is, jugation of the valorous Lydians, he left to his generals, that even at home he was not popular. His snccessor principally to Harpagns. Even the government of Darius states that as soon as the king had left his Lydia, where there was a single and last revolt, was safe country a rebellious spirit showed itself in all the in their hands. provinces, Persia and Media not excepted. At last a It was only (seven or eight years after the fall of Mag& called Gaumata (Gometes, Justin), who knew Sardis) in 539 that Cyrus could venture to grapple with of the mmder of Bardiya, and indeed may have per- the power which even Cyaxares had not dared to petrated it himself, put forth a claim to be the real assail-Babylon. The overthrow of this monarchy Smerdis, and was speedily acknowledged as such by and the capture of the imperial city is related elsewhere the whole empire. Those who doubted kept silent, (see DARIUS, z ; BABYLONIA, 5 69). It brought Cyrus for they knew that their life was in danger, the Magian 367 I 3672 PERSIA PERSIA having killed every one to whom the secret was known. most interesting parts of ancient oriental history, hut do 'That he really reigned is proved by Babylonian contract not fall within the scope of the present work. Perhaps tables dated from the first year of Barziya. In the the Greeks, if they had been less divided by internal dis- meantime Cambyses was hurrying home, though not yet sensions and bad not had so many traitors in their ranks, aware of all that had happened ; but when the terrible disappointed in their ambition and greedy for money, news reached him in Syria, he killed himself. might have succeeded in wresting from the Persians Upon this a member of a side-branch of the at least the supremacy of Asia Minor. What we gather Achanenids, named Darius (DdmayuvauC), son of from classic writers as to the affairs of the Persian court Hystaspes ( ViStdspu), aided by six other re- is a sad history of alternate weakness and cruelty, cor- '*' Darius' presentatives of the highest Persian nobility, ruption, murders, intrigues, and broken faith. The succeeded in murdering the false Smerdis, and ascended vainglorious and at the same time cowardly Xerxes was the throne (522). (Cp Da~rus.) Darius states in his succeeded by Artaxerxes (AmtukhSuthru)I., of the Long inscription at Behistun, that he restored the temples the Hand, under whose reign Nehemiah his cupbearer and Mage had destroyed and set right everything else that the Ezra the scribe were allowed to go to Jerusalem to help usurper had altered ; though it is not clear what kind of their fellow-countrymen in their miserable state (cp religious and social reforms ' Smerdis ' had introduced. ARTAXERXES). He was not a bad. but a very weak This, however, was only a first step. An arduous task man, governed by courtiers and women. awaited the young king. A spirit of rebellion was fer- We may $ass over the short reign of Xerxes II., who menting through the whole empire. ' There was much was murdered like his namesake. His successor was lying in the land.' In nearly every province, except those Darius II., surnamed Nothus, who left of western Asia, a pretender rose, and had to be put down. II.20. Nothus Darius and the supreme power in the hands of his The history of these struggles and of the pacification of his successor'8~cruel and troublesome sister and con- the empire cannot be narrated here in detail. Nor can sort Panisatis. Perhaus if she had we follow Darius in his useless and unsuccessful ex- succeeded, after her husgand's death, in putting the pedition against the Scythians, his crushing of the sceptre in the hands of her beloved son, the ambitious Ionian revolt, and his war with Greece ; all this rather but energetic and able Cyrus, the fate of the empire belongs to the history of Greece than to that of Persia. might have been different. But Artaxerxes II., surnamed Darius was not so great a general as Cyrus, but he was Mnemon, ascended the throne, and during the long a greater king. He defined the rights and duties of the reign (404-3j8) of this mild and friendly but lazy Satraps (Khfuthrupdvan,imidnx), the governors of the monarch the power of Persia rapidly declined. It was provinces, who were allowed a large autonomy, but he who suffered the foreign semi-idolatrous cult of the were controlled by the 'eye of the king,' the first goddess called AnBhita by the Iranians to be introduced counsellor of the realm or other high officials, and, even in Media and Persia. Under his son and suc- though themselves commanders of an army corps, were cessor Ochns ( VuhuRa),who as king adopted the name held in check by the garrisons of the fortresses, im- Artaxerxes III., the monarchy seemed to revive. Cruel, mediately under the king's command. To keep the harsh, mmdrrous, indifferent as to the means which he reins of government in the hands of the central power, selected to realise his plans, he was intensely hated. Darius constructed a net of highways and instituted a By his energy he smothered every revolt, humiliated regular system of posts. He substituted a new and the Egyptians (whom he deeply offended by ridiculing better coinage for that of the Lydians, which was more and persecuting their religion), the Phoenicians, and primitive; did his best to promote navigation and probablyalso the Jews (cp ISAIAH ii., $5 9, 11, ZI), and commerce-for example, by digging a canal between really restored for the time the Persian supremacy. Just, the Nile and the Red Sea. Instead of the compulsory however, when the Macedonian power was rising, and presents which had in the olden time been extorted with it the greatest danger that ever threatened the from the population, he assigned taxes for each province. empire, Artaxerxes was murdered by Bagoas, an The Persian nobles sneered at this and called the king Egyptian eunuch, the same who pacified Judza in 348, a chaffer (K~T~XOS); it seemed to them undignified, and (when Johanan the high priest had killed his just as the medimal knights would have thought it ; but brother Jesus) entered the temple to the great offence the people and certainly the state profited by it. Darius of the pious (JOs. Ant. xi. 71,5 297 ; cp ISRAEL, 5 66). did not enlarge the empire of Cyrus ; but he maintained Bagoas placed on the throne Arses ; but when the king it under great difficulties, and made it into an organised tried to get rid of his patron, Bagoas poisoned him. state. He could not indeed undo the mischief wrought Bagoas then gave the crown to a great-grandson of in Egypt by Cambyses ; his wise policy and accumulated Darius II., Darius surnamed Codomannus, the worst favours could not withhold it from revolting; but choice he could well have made. Only a Cyrus, perhaps if he had lived he would have recovered perhaps not even a Darius Hystaspis, might have possession of it. The character of Darius stands very held his own against the terrible onslaught and the high; even the Greeks, whose national feelings he tactics of such a general as Alexander the Great, and so severely hurt, spoke of him with respect. And it was saved the empire. Here, however, was a king no better no vain boast when he claimed to have been neither a thanxerxes, valiant perhaps inordinaryfights, but quickly liar nor a despot, but to have ruled according to the law. confused in great emergencies, and in no wise equal to Unhappily, the son who succeeded Darius on the the gigantic task imposed on his weak shoulders. His throne was in all points his inferior-Xerxes (KhSuydrJd), tragic fate cannot make us blind to his great faults ; but 19. Xerxes. who reigned from 48 5-464. He is the king at the same time we cannot but feel disgusted at the called AhaSwei-oS in the book of Esther (cp burning of Persepolis by the conqueror. The flames AHASUERUS). With him the decline of the monarchy which devoured the graceful buildings of the imperial began, and it was only the solid foundation Darius I. city were to announce to the world that the lance of the Rad given it that held it together for so long a time. Persian, which formerly reached so far, now lay broken Of Persian history after Darius we know nothing for evef. except from foreign, and especially Greek, sources. The best surveys of Medo-Persian history down to the time of Some of his successors record in their inscriptions the Alexander are those of Th. Noldeke (art. 'Persia,' Pt. i. in EBP) buildings they erected, either for their own use or in [reprinted with emendations and ad- 21. Bibliography. ditions in Aufiufze SNY pers. Gesch. 1% honour of the gods, and Xerxes, like his father, gives 18841) and F. Justi (' Geschichte Iraq a list of the nations he ruled; but upon the events in GY. d. +an. PhiZoZogie, 2 3-4 1900) ; c his ' Gesch. d. alt. of their reign they are silent. Their struggles with the Persiens' in Oncken's AG 1 I 4. F. Spiegef Eran. AltrrNrrmzs- Greeks, who more than once withstood them bravely, and Run& 2, Rk.5, pp. 236-632,Masp. 3, and above all E. Meyer's GA 1-3, 1884-1991 (cp Entsteh. and Forschungen s. dt. Gesch. 2 whom they never were able to subjugate, belong to the 437-511 IChronologyl), should also he consulted. Interesting 3673 3674 PERSIS PESTILENCE monographs are (among others) :-V. Floigl Cyma und Herodot Deuteronomy. The threat which is dramatically attached (1881). J.V. PraIek, Media u. a!. Hays As Kyaxares, 18p; to the non-observance of the Deuteronomic law is that Forschungen z. Gesch. a!. Alterfh. 1. Kambyses u. $. Ueber- lieferung ’ Leipz. 1897,3, ‘Z. Chronologie d. Kyros ‘ Z. der Yahwk will bring upon Israel ’ all the diseases of Egypt BehiHtunkchrift,’ 1, Leipz. 1900, ‘ Die ersten Jahre dareios des which thou wast (not ‘ art ’) afraid of’ (Dt. 2860). Hystaspiden,’ u.s.w., in Beifricgc z. a&. Gesch., ed. by C. F. It may be partly owing to the consequences of plagues Lehmann, i., 1~6.50. Th. A. Lincke’s endeavour to re. habilitate Cambyses in Zur Losung der Kam6ysesfiqe (1891) that we have so little historical evidence as to particular is ingenious but not convincing. outbreaksof pestilence in ancient Palestine. The 0. Pers. cuneiform inscriptions first deciphered by Sir references.3. OT The references to plagues in Ex. 114 H. Rawliuson, Lassen, and Benfey havebeen satisfactorily edited l2~9f. (the Tenth Plague), Nu. 1133 by Fr. Spiegel, APK, 1881P) ; more recently by Weissbach and Bang (1893). Cp Weissbach, Die Achamenideninschnhriften (sickness following the quails), 25 18 26 I (plague through zweifer Art (~Sgo), and Bezold and Haupt, Die Ach. inschr. Baal-peor), belong to a cycle of highly legendary didactic BahyZon. text (1882). narratives (see PLAGUES rrEN1). The story of the boils For the bibliography of Zoroastrianism, see ZOROASTRIANISM, and Tiele, Gesch. v. d. Godsdimst in de Oudhcid, 2, rgor. in I S. 5 9-12 is also legendary: The hondur of the ark F. B., 5 I ; C. P. T., 2-21. of God had to be rescued ; the offenders against the sanctity of Yahw&are naturally punished by pestilence, PERSIS (rrfpcic [Ti. WH]), probably a deaconess, and possibly would have been represented as so punished, commended for her labours in the Christian cause even had they dwelt in the N. of Palestine, and not in (Roni. 1612). a part which was closely connected with Egypt by the PERUDA (K~YIQ ‘ separated ’ ; @aAoypa ,[L]). avenues of commerce.2 The passage describing the The h’ne Pernda a group of ‘Solomon’s servants (see punishment of David’s numbering of the people (2 S. 24) special article) in ;he great post-exilic list (see EZRA ii., 5 9); is also a didactic narrative ; but we cannot deny that a Ezra 2 55 (RVmg. PEKIDA; $&owpa [BA]) = Neh. 7 57 (N??B ; pestilence may have coincided chronologically with the EV PERIDA; $rpda [BH], +ap. [A])=I Esd. 5 33 (AV PHARIRA, unpopular act of the king. A more authentic witness RV PHARIDA,RVmg. PERUDA ; +apIeli6a [BA]). to a pestilence is the retrospective statement of Amos PESTILENCE. The different biblical terms for (410). referring to N. Israel. Lastly, we have the pestilence having been considered elsewhere (see DIS- famous reference to a pestilence by which Sennacherib’s Frequency. EASES), we are able to confine our- army suffered greatly in z K. 1935 (=Is. 3i36)-a selves here to historical and exegetical reference which, in the light of literary and historical details. The frequency of pestilences in ancient Pales- criticism, is most probably altogether legendary. tine is strikingly shown by the words of Gad, ‘ David’s It may be well to pause for a little on the Sennacherib seer,’ to his king, ‘ Shall seven years of famine come to passage, because of the new tradition which has sprung thee in thy land ? or wilt thou flee three months before of up among critics, to the effect that the thy foes? or shall there be three days‘ pestilence in thy *.Sennacherib’s main fact of 2 K. has received inde- land?’ (z S. 2413). There is no doubt a gradation in pendent confirmation from an Egyptian the calamities specified. To be three months at the pestilenre. source. Herodotus, indeed, says (2141) mercy of a victorious foe, burning and spoiling in all that when Sennacherib, ‘king of the Arabians and directions, was worse than even seven years of famine ; Assyrians,’ invaded Egypt and besieged Pelusium in the and even three days’ pestilence of the most acute sort days of king Sethos, field-mice gnawed the quivers and would be enough to destroy or to weaken a large part shield-handles of the invaders, who fled precipitately. of the population of a city. The less severe calamity As Skinner puts the common theory- would also be more frequent than those which were more ‘ Since the mouse was among the Eytians a symbol of pes- destructive. The fact remains, however, that famine, tilence we may infer that the basis o truth in the legend was a deadly epidemic in the Assyrian camp ; and this is the form desolation from war, and pestilence, were three well- of calamity which is naturally suggested by the terms of the known terrors, and this is confirmed by I K. 837, Ezek. biblical narrative. The scene of the disaster is not indicated in 51217,Am. 410, in which these threecalamitiesare again the OT record and there is no obstacle to the supposition that given as parallel misfortunes. it took place, as in the Egyptian legend, in the plague-haunted marshes of Pelusium’ (/sa. i.-zxxix., p. 275). The last of these passages (Am. 410) is historical@ To this view there are several strong objections. very suggestive. EV renders ‘ I have sent among you the The mouse was not symbol of pestilence; it is pestilence after the manner of Egypt ’ (72;: (I) a unwise to attempt to prove this by such a late authority 2. o;?:n) ; G. A. Smith, ‘by way of Egypt.’ as Horapollo (l50), and such an obscure and corrupt ’ A pestilence ’ would be better. It is a pestilence of a narrative as that in I S. 6 (see EMERODS)., The story bad type that is meant, just as in Is. 10266 the ‘rod of the field-mice is merely a mythological way of saying lifted up in the manner of Egypt ’ is a a divine judicial that Horus. to whom the mouse was sacred, repelled act such as Egypt experienced.’ The NE. corner of the foes of Egypt in an unaccountable way.3 (2)The the Nile delta was justly regarded in antiquity as the theory takes no account of the composite character of home of the plague. G. A. Smith has well described the Hebrew story. Two narratives of Sennacherib’s the conditions which favoured the outbreak of plague in dealings with Hezekiah have been welded together. that district. According to the one (Is. 361-379), a report which Sen- ‘The eastern mouth of the Nile then entered the sea at nacherib heard, whilestill at Lachish.‘caused himtomove Pelnsium, and supplied a great stretch of mingled salt and fresh water under a high temperature [always accompanied by fevers, camp, and depart on his return to Nineveh ( ‘ Isa.’ SBOT as round the Gulf of Mexico]. To the W. there is the swampy [Eng.], p. 49). According totheother (Is. 37gc-213336), Delta; and on the Asiatic side sandbills with only brackish wells. Along the coast there appear to have been always a 1 The text bas suffered in transmission (see EMERODS). number of lagoons, separated from the sea by low bars of sand, 2 G.A.Sm. (HG 158J) supports the historicity of the narrative and used as salt-pans. In Greek and Roman times the largest by the considerations that Pbilistia was closely connected with of these was known as the Serbonian Bog or Marsh. . . . In Egypt and that armies are specially liable to infection. The Justinian’s time, the “Bog” was surrounded by communities of Philisdnes, he thinks, were struck ‘while they were in camp salt-makers and fish-curers ; filthy villages of underfed and against Israel.’ If so, the tradition in I S. 5 seems to he not imbecile people, who always had disease among them. The quite accurate (see vu. 6, 9, IO). extremes of temperature are excessive.’ 1 3 Use was made of the essay of A. Lang on Apollo and the In such a country plague must always have been Mouse in Custom and Myth by the present writer m his Introd. io fsniah, 333. More recently, Meinhold has, with German ready to break out, and the infection must often have elaborateness, worked on the same lines (Die jes.-endhZungen, been brought by trading caravans to Palestine. This Yes. 36-39 33-42). He is not perfectly clear on the narrative of illustrates, not only Am. 4 IO, but also a passage mistrans- I S. 5 A, but inclines to follow Klostermann. In the article lated both in AV and in RV, owing to the influence of EMEIZODS,the investigation of the textual problems has been carried further. Wellhausen’s treatment of the text of I S. 5 6 the traditional prejudice of the Mosaic authorship of leaves much to be desired. 4 2 K. 19 8 (Is. 378) has been recast by the editor. See Is&’ 1 HG 157. Cp Book oflsaiah, 1361. SBOT(Eng.), Lc. 3675 3676 PESTLE PETER, THE EPISTLES OF on the night after Isaiah had prophesied Sennacheribs elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, failure to enter Jerusalem, a destroying angel went out tialatia, Capadocia, Asia, and Bithynia' The hypo- and slew 185,000 warriors in the Assyrian camp. Both 1, First Peter: thesis that the letter was written by narratives are very late, but the former (rumour), being its Simon Peter naturally carries with it the less didactic, is to be preferred to the latter (pestilence). presumption that the persons addressed For the origin of the story of the pestilence,* see were Jewish Christians, and the expression sojourners HEZEKIAH, § 2. of the dispersion ' (?rapenr&jpoLors Graonopiis, 1I ) lends it The prism-inscription of Sennacherib may also be some support. But ' sojourners ' (cp 2r1 ; Heb. 11 13) is quoted against the historicity of the pestilence narrative. probably employed figuratively of Christians in general If Hezekiah troubled himself to send a special messenger as earthly pilgrinis or strangers, and Weiss stands with tribute to Nineveh, it is by no means likely that almost alone in supporting the opinion that the writer Sennacherib had been compelled to return by a calamity had in mind as his readers communities composed chiefly which almost destroyed his army, and would doubtless of Jewish Christians. Apart from the fact that the be regarded by Hezekiah as a special act of God. On the provinces referred to were the field of the Pauline other hand, the contemporary history of Assyria confirms mission, and the improbability that there were separate the accuracy of the ' rumour ' narrative. In the follow- Jewish-Christian churches there, the epistle contains un- ing year Sennacherib had as much as he could do in mistakable indications that it was addressed to gentile counteracting the restless Chaldzan princes, and we can believers, to whom alone are applicable the references well believe that the rumour which caused him to move to former practices and errors (11418 29f. 43f.). The camp from Lachish was really concerned with the readers are represented as persons who had not seen machinations of these opponents. The assassination Jesus, who had been ' redeemed ' from a former ' vain of Sennacherib in the first narrative, too, is undoubtedly manner of life' and ' called out of darkness,' and who historical. Not knowing of it, the second narrator was as strangers and foreigners had a ' time of sojourn ' to obliged to represent the pestilence as a just punishment accomplish in the world, whilst their true fatherland was of the enemy of YahwB. heaven. Many writers have held that the sickness of Hezekiah, The epistle has been variously interpreted as to its referred to in z K. 20 (Is. 38). was the plague.- ; and object. On the ground of lrzq and 512, it has been 6. some, following Hitzig, have supposed 2. object. maintained that the author, whether Peter sickness of that it was a case of the same plague or another, wished to establish in the Henekiah. as the Assyrian army is said to have churches of Asia Minor. which had been founded by suffered from, which 'had got among the people Paul, the authority of this apostle, so far as it could be of the country, as sickness in the train of an army confirmed by the approval of the great 'pillar' of the usually does.' This view is at first sight plausible. Jewish Christian community, and to show the essential The compiler of the ' second (the pestilence) narrative ' agreement of the two. This view has been to some certainly held it (cp ' Isa.' SBOT),and it is confirmed extent supported by a few scholars who believe that by Is. 386, which implies that Jerusalem is in great Peter was the author of the epistle. To the older danger from the Assyrians. This, however, is, if recent Tiibingen school the writing had no other object than criticism may be followed, an error. The embassy of to mediate between the Pauline and Petrine factions in Merodach Baladan must have preceded the Assyrian the early church. Schwegler accordingly says of the invasion. It cannot have had any smaller motive than epistle that ' it is an apology for Paulinism written by a the wish to organise a general resistance to Assyria (see follower of Paul for the adherents of Peter-an apology MERODACK-BALADAN).~ which was effected simply that an exposition of the It is, however, by no means necessary to accept the Pauline doctrine might be put into the mouth of Peter' compiler's errangernent of his material, any more than (Nachap. ZeitalLeter, 22). A testimony from Peter to we always accept the arrangement of material in a the orthodoxy of Paul was regarded from this point of gospel. The idea of the writer of a K. 1935 is that the view as a very effective means of reconciling the Assyrians who were attacked by the plague died sud- adherents of the two great teachers. If, however, such denly. The boil (f@fn) of Hezekiah seems to have lasted were the object of the writer, it is to say the least sur- some little time, and need not have been a plague-boil. prising that he did not make it more apparent and con- There are various boil-diseases, sometimes called after spicuous. The passages referred to are too vague to the respective cities where they are prevalent. That of admit of any such special application, and nothing Hezekiah may, for instance, have been a malignant seems to be farther from the writer's thought in general carbuncle, for which (not less than for a plague-boil) a than the Pauline and Petrine controversy, which he poultice of figs would be an appropriate remedy. stands far above and beyond. In 5 12, the 'grace of Dr. Lauder Brunton" has been led to view the disease God ' (~LiprvTOG OeoG) does not necessarily refer to the as ' tonsilitis' from the similarity of some of the symptoms Pauline 'gospel,' hut may be explained by 113 (the words described in the Song of Hezekiah (Is. 3810-20) with cis .4r urijrc, ' wherein ye stand,' are with doubtful pro- those of some cases of quinsy. Unfortunately, the prietyrendered in RV 'stand ye fast therein'). Without connection of the Song with an event in the life of a distinctive dogmatic purpose, the writer addresses him- Hezekiah is plainly a scribe's fiction, and the psalm, as self zealously to the comfort, admonition, and encourage- we may call it, should be grouped with other national ment of his readers, who are assumed to be in need psalms of thanksgiving for deliverance. We should of such an exhortation on account of the persecutions hardly think of discussing the symptoms of disease im- which they are suffering for the sake of their Christian plied in Ps. 6 30 and 88. T. K. C. profession (31216 4412f: 58-10). These persecutions are represented as proceeding from gentiles, and the PESTLE ($!g), Prov. 27 22. See MORTAR. writer's chief object is, as Lechler remarks, to im- press upon his readers the indissoluble connection and PETER. See SIMON PETER. succession of suffering and glory in the life of the believer as in that of Christ himself (111 221 318). PETER, THE EPISTLES I Peter.-The so- OF. Naturally related to this purpose is the prominence called first General Epistle of Peter is addressed to ' the given to hope both expressly and indirectly (13 21 3 15 1 Gesenius has already explained this. It should be observed 413 510). that in Is. 3736 the words 'that night' (see 2 K. 1935) are If, however, the epistle shows distinctively neither a omitted. dogmatic nor a ' mediating' purpose, it is not without a Cp Che. Intr. Is 221 227. Marti Jesaia 265. 3 Sir Risdon Bennett,' iVl.b., Thk Disea&s of the BzW, traces of the influence of Paul's theological ideas, and 144. may properly be classified with the deutero-Pauline litera- 30?7 3678 PETER, THE EPISTLES OF ture of the NT, which represents a weakened Paulinism, shadowings of the ideas of the Fourth Gospel and the 3. Deutero- and may be regarded as denoting the transi- epistles ascribed to John are indeed not wanting, Pauline tion from the thought of the great apostle although there is no indication of the author's ac- to that of the Fourth Gospel. Faith is made quaintance with these writings. Cp 123 with I Jn. 39; prominent, as 'unto,' and ' the end of' 122 with I Jn.33; 52, Jn.10162116; 318, I Jn.37; ' salvation ' (159) ; but its distinctively Pauline contrast 119,Jn. 129. These considerations render the Petrine with works is not expressed. The doctrine of atonement authorship of I Peter very improbable. It is very as set forth by Paul underlies the writer's apprehension unlikely, besides, that Peter should have written at all to of the death of Jesus, which he regards as ' fore-ordained the Pauline gentile churches in ilsia Minor. But if he from the foundation of the world' ; but it is weakened in wrote this epistle to them after the death of Paul, as is the direction of an ' ethical ' significance (12 224 3 18 4 I). generally assumed by the advocates of the traditional The idea of substitution is scarcely expressed, and the view, it is surprising that he should not have mentioned blood of Christ is conceived as having a purifying to them their revered teacher. Apart from the address efficacy. He suffered that he might ' bring us to God.' there is nothing in the internal character of the epistle Accordingly, the Pauline doctrine of justification does to indicate its Petrine authorship. An independent not find distinctive expression, and the apostle's ter- type of doctrine which can with propriety be called minology (6tKatoW3at, 6rKatouivq) is avoided. Petrine is wanting. The writer's Christology is only partially disclosed by a few There is no trace of the questions mooted in the intimations which show its general similarity to that of the apostolic age. Whilst the writer shows some contact deutero-Pauline Epistles to the Hebrews and the Ephesians - with the Gospel-literature, there is '(3 zz 4 IT ; cp Eph. 120 Heb. 18 21). The legend of the descent 6. Not of of Christ to the underworld (3 rg) appears to be a development apostolic age. no indication of the fresh and vivid of Eph. 48-10. In thevague eschatology the prominent Pauline recollections of an eye-witness of the features do not appear ; hut the idea of partaking of Christ's sufferings and rejoicings 'at the revelation of his glory' (4 13) is life of Jesus, and the conspicuous- ideas of Jesus' probablya reminiscence of Rom. S 17, 'we spffer with [him] that preaching, the kingdom of God, eternal life, the Son of we may also be glorified with [him]' (uvprrauxopev i'va uvv- Man, repentance. and the Son of God, find no expres- 6ocauBGpev). sion. The author's conception of faith is unknown to The literary relations of the epistle to the NT literature the synoptics. The goal is not the synoptic 'eternal are many and unmistakable, though the question of life ' (&h aldvtos), but the Pauline ' glory ' (86,fa). 'The dependence is in some cases indeterminable. That the sympathetic student of Paulinism by whom this epistle author was familiar with several of the epistles of Paul, to Gentile churches was written cannot have been Peter, and adopted to some extent their ideas and terminology the apostle of the circumcision (Gal. 27), who 'stood is generally conceded. condemned ' before Paul at Antioch for ' dissimulation ' Weiss's contention that Paul borrowed from I Peter has few if (Gal. 2113) as to the vital question of the primitive any supporters, and has been characterised as 'the most desperate step taken by modern apologetics. The parallels Christian economy. The argument for an apostolical with Romans both in thought and phraseology leave no room authorship based on 13821 and 221-23 is groundless for doubt of dependence on that epistle. Especially is this true in view of analogous expressions in Hebrews. It is of Rom. 12 1-13 14 : cp 114with Rom. 12 z (ovumparl{edar not elsewhere in NT); 4 IO^ with Roni. 12 3.8 (after the apprbpri. altogether improbable that the fisherman Peter who, ation of an idea from Rom. 12 13) ; 48 122 with Rom. 129 ; 3 g according to Papias, required an interpreter should have with Rorn. 12 17 ; 2 13f: with Rom. 13 I ; 2 19 with Rom. 13 5 command of a Greek style of the character of this writing. (6th uuvsQqurv) ; 2 I and 4 I 3 (reminiscences of Rom. 13 IZ~); ' 12) 15413 with Rom.817J; 224 with Kom. Bzere; 33s with ' I am writing by Silvanus (A& ZiXouavoO Pypaqa: 5 Rom. 2 1629 (KPVVT&, KPV~T~S,Iv KPVTTG); 26 with Rom. 933 indicates Silvanus not as a translator or an amanuensis, (citation from OT with Paul's deviations from the Septuagint). much less as the author' 92-96 A.D. (v. Soden), but Several accords with other epistles of Paul indicate the writer's probably as the bearer of the letter (see Acts 23). familiarity with Pauline ideas and forms of expression: cp 13, The reference to Silvanus and to Mark (51zf.) doubt- z Cor. 13; 2 2, I Cor. 3 2. 248 I Cor. 3 16f. 2 II Gal. 5 17 * 216, Gal. 513; 224, Gal.'313; 86, Gal. 426:'37, ;Cor. 735: less belongs to the fiction of the authorship (1I ). 39, I Thess. 5 15 : 4 3, Gal. 5 21 ; 5 14, I Cor. 16 20. The writer The historical conditions and circumstances implied employs a considerable number of terms 'specifically Pauline ' among which may he mentioned LTOK&AU$LS,;AmBepL, &arm;, in the epistle indicate, moreover, a time far beyond the probable duration of Peter's life. &6&, K~Ac~v,Khqpovopia, rarap.ri<~rv,mprj, ypiupara, ovvri- The 8~~5,Iv xp~uri. The plan and grammatica structure of the ,. Ramsay (Church in Roman Empire, epistle also are 'Pauline. 284) calls attention to the fact that I Peter contains, in proportion to its length, a large the history of the spread of Christianity imperatively number of words not used elsewhere in the NT. The demands for I Peter a later date than 64 A.D.,' the date 4. Other writer's acquaintance with Mt., Lk., and generally assumed by the defenders of the Petrine author- literary Acts is probable from 2 12 3 14 16 4 133 (cp ship. These maintain that the persecutions implied in relations. Mt. 510-1216) ; 56 (cp Mt. 231z), 1103(Lk. the passages previously referred to belong to the time of lO24), 113 (Lk. 1235), 112 (Acts 22), 117 Nero. But the references to the trials to which the (Acts 103435). The accords with Hebrews do not neces- persons addressed are exposed do not well fit this period. sarily show a literary relation of the two epistles. Those The persecution is of wide extent,. 'accomplished in the with Ephesians have beeninvestigated in greatdetail with- brethren who are in the world' (5 g), whilst that under Nero was out a conclusion on which scholars can agree. Perhaps the limited. It was not until later that the Christians were suh- jected to a judicial inquiry such as is implied in 315, and that most that one is warranted in saying is contained in von they were put on trial for their name (& Xprwrrav6r. 416: cp Soden's remark that so many related expressions, CHRISTIAN, $ 6). In the Neronian persecution they suffered thoughts, and interests indicate that both writers breathed for a special offence charged by the emperor in order to remove from himself the suspicion of having set fire to the city adolendo the same atmosphere, and that possibly the writer of minon' Nero suddedit reos etc. Tac. Ann. 154r), whilst in one of the epistles knew the work of the other. On I Peter the Christians of Asia Minor are admonished not to relation of James see JAMES [GENERAL EPISTLE]. subject themselves to punishment as ' evil-doers,' but to glorify The dependence of the epistle upon the letters of Paul, God in this name if they sufferas Christians. and its Pauline tone, style, and doctrinal basis, indicate a There is really nothing in I Peter which, fairly 6. Not Petrine. writer who had made himself familiar considered, applies to the Neronian period. As to the with that apostle's works, and was in precise later time, however, to which the writing should sympathy with his thought. The absence of the mystical be assigned one can hardly he very positive, Holtz- profundity of Paul and the softening of some of the mann, Hilgenfeld, and Pfleiderer, following Schwegler harder lines of his teaching as well as several striking accords with Hebrews, show the writer to have been in 1 [Cp Zahn, Einf. 210 $3R' B. W. Bacon (Introd., I~M, contact with the later Paulinism which marks the p. I j7), who says all dings donsidered, I Peter may still re- present to us the idoptive work of Peter, writing " by Silvanus" transition to the Johannine theology. Distinct fore- from Rome to the churches of Paul in Asia.'] 3679 3680 PETER, THE EPISTLES OF and Baur, are quite certain that it could not have been (Canon, p. 263n. ). Itis not nientioned in the Muratorian written earlier than the timeof Trajan (about 112 A.D.); Canon. and it must be conceded that the state of affairs regarding z Peter.-z Peter, like the epistle ascribed to Jude, is the Christians at that time, as set forth in Pliny’s letter vaguely addressed to Christians in general-‘ to those to the emperor, accords with certain indications in 9. Second Peter that have obtained the like precious I Peter. Ramsay, (op. cit. 288), whilst admitting the -its object. faith with us ’ (1r)-aalid there is force of Holtzmann’s argument so far as it bears against nothing in the contents to indicate the date 64 A.D., decides very positively in favour of 75- that Jewish or Gentile believers were especially intended. 80 A.D. (cp PONTUS, 2), thus doubtless excluding the Yet in 3 I the writer inconsistently assumes that the First Petrine authorship. His reason for this judgment is that Epistle was addressed to the same readers, and tells there were conditions similar to those described in them (116315) that they had received instruction from I Peter earlier than the time of Trajan, that is, in the him (ostensibly Peter) and letters from Paul ! z Peter last quarter of the first century. Hut since they also was plainly written partly for the same purpose as fit the later date, they furnish no ground for excluding was Jude-to warn the Christians of the time against it in favour of tho earlier. The data supplied in the certain persons whose false teaching and loose living epistle and in known and precisely determinable historical were a menace to the church. This note is struck in circumstances do not warrant us in placing its com- 116 (ucuo@tuphots pLdBots), in 2 I ($€U808I6dUKahOl, position more definitely than in the last quarter of the aipkts drrwhelas), in 22 (TGSduehyaiars), and is em- first, or the first quarter of the second, century. The phasised, apparentlyin imitation of Jude, in 210-22. The vague greeting (5 13) has given rise to uncertainty as to warning is resumed in 3 14-18. The readers are put on the place from which the epistle was written. The words their guard against ‘mockers . . . walking after their ’ the elect (one) in Babylon ‘ (3 ev BaPijXGvi UUEK- own lusts,’ as in Jude 18, with the additional indication 1em.j) have been interpreted as referring (a) to Peter’s that their mocking is at the delay of the ‘ coming ’ (aap- wife, (P)to the church in Babylon, and (7)to the church in ovuia) of Christ. These ‘ mockers ’ forget the Deluge, Rome. The view (a),though defended by hlayerhoff and are unmindful of the judginent of ‘ fire ’ reserved and Neander, has deservedly found little other support for ‘the heavens that now are and the earth ’ (357). (see Zahn, Einl 215f., $38). and the view p is without In this connection appears another purpose of the writing probability even on the presumption of the Petrine upon which some think the chief emphasis to have been placed: authorship, since there is no historical evidence of a that is, to assure the readers of the certainty of the Parousia in opposition to the scoffers who, it appears (34), were talking 01 residence of Peter in Babylon. The later date of the its non-arrival or indefinite postponement. The delay the epistle renders it very probable that Babylon is em- writer assures them, is due to the Lord’s long-suffering, in brder ployed figuratively for Rome, according to Rev. 148 16 19 that ‘all should come to repentance’ (39) before ‘the day of judgment and destruction of men ’ (37). l821021. ungodly 175 Peculiar to the author is the eschatological catastrophe [I &urr& the note of unity. The second chapter of z Peter however has to Zarephath.’ The earlier form of Nu. 22 5 was, ‘ So he sent a Janus-face, inasmuch as the first half of it deals kith the $ing messengers to Ril‘am hen Keor (or rather Achhor) to Zarephath, teachers of the future, and the second with the errors of the which is by the river, to the land of the h’ne Jerahmeel ’ (i~y present. It is, therefore, as compared with Jude, secondary. comes from iinp, which is not nnfrequently a corruption of On the other hand there are passages in the other parts of SN,~~T.).C. Niebuhr’s bold conjecture(Gesc/i. 1295). ‘ Pathros’ 2 Peter which eithe; are (2 3 cp Jude 17x)or apart from pre- for ‘ Pethor,’ at any rate implies a just dishelief in Pethor. . conceived theory may posiihly be original Ls compared with See Che. ‘The Land of Musri,’ etc., OLZ,May 1899. passages in Jude: On the whole, the second Epistle of Peter, T. K. C. without this interpolation, is to he regarded as authentic. It should he added that Bertholdt (E+ [18r9!, pp. 31578:) PETHUEL (b’K9n0, ‘God‘s simple one’ ?-cp Ps. had already declared 2 Pet. 2 to he an interpolation dependent 197 [8] ; Merx-and Nowack prefer 6’s BaeoyHA [see on Jude, that Ullmann (Kn’t. Unfers. des z Pet. [I~zI])would JOEL, 5 I]), father of the prophet Joel (Joel 1I ). only allow chap. 1 T to be the work of Peter, and that Gess (Das ajost. Zeupniss von C~Y.Pevson, 2 z [18791 pp. 412&) regarded An examination of the occurrences of the name JOEL (9.v.) 1 zd(arc n~mz-33n(yrvicxovrcs)asan int‘erpolation. Weisen- suggests that it was a favourite S. Israelitish name and it may hach, too (7Z%, Nov. 26, 1898, col. 364&), agrees with Kiihl even he held that there is a group of similar narks, such as Eliel Elijah Elihu and Eliah, and also Joel, which arose out that 2~Pct.2 r-3 2 is an interpolation dependent on Jude.] of cdrruptioAs of Jirahmeel. It is noteworthy, as indicating PETHAHIAH (”l’l[n?, 5 27 ; ‘ YahwB opens [the one stage in the process of development, that one of the Joels womb],’ but adapted perhaps from an ethnic name also appears under the name IGAL(5.~1,); see 2 S. 2336; his such as ’DlBn, ‘aTappuhite‘ [Che.]). father’s name was Nathan (an expansion of the Jerahmeelite name Ethan). Kuenen (OndCB),5 69, n. 14, p. 3c4) has already I. Eponym of one of the twenty-four priestly courses; I Ch. suggested that ‘Joel’ may he an assumed name; and that the 24 16 (+FTalQ [B], +r%rra [AI, +&a [L]). writer of the prophecy (who in 211 31 [34] alludes to Mal.45 2. A Levite, temp. Ezra ; Ezra 10 23 (+asam [Bl, +aam [NI, !3231), may cnll himself Joel (=Elijah) to indicate that he is f%fia[sl [AL]), Neh. (BNA om.; +fmnas [L])=I Esd.923 the teacher for righteousness’ (Joel 2 23 ?), the true Elijah 95 announced in Mal. 4 5 [3 231. Now it is far from improhahle $ATHEUS (WQ%QKW [E], +aO. [AI, +r%srap [Ll). 3. h. Meshe~ahel,of the Zerahite branch of the tribe of Judah, that Elijah was a Jerahmeelite-‘ of Zarephath.jerahmee1’ (see was ‘at the king’s hand in all matters concerning the people,’ by THrsBE)-and that not only Elijah and Joel [see above] hut which expression we are most probably to understand that he also Bethuel (see LABAN)or Pethuel is a worn-down form of acted as commissary of the Persian king at Jerusalem in the Jerahmeel. The impulie to prophesy was perhaps specially ROPHECY $ 7. T. I<. absence of Nehemiah (Neh. 11 24, mz%ara[B], +a%.[AL], ra%rra strong among Jerahmeelites. Cp P , c. W*], +a%. [N-l). PETRA (Y!D), Is. 16 I AVmg., EV SELA. PETHOR (Tin! ; @&mypa[BFL]), a place ‘ by the PEULTHAI, RV Peullethai like d?D, a river,’ where, according to the present text of Nu. 225 (*n$L(?,.. (Baeoypa [A]), Balaam dwelt. In Dt. 234[5] (BBAL distortion of ’“lf, Zarephathite, Y and y, 1and 5 being con- om.) it is called ‘ Pethor of Aram-naharaim,’ a phrase founded ; LQ+OOUA~~%C[Bl, +ohha%&[AI, +eMa%r [Ll), one of the sons cf OEED-EDOM(q..,.), I Ch. 26 st, in a context full of dis- which seems to imply an identification of PEth6r with a torted ethnic and gentilic names. T. K. c. place called Pitru (see inscr. of Shalmaneser II., RPM 440, KB i. 133162j?:, and cp Schr. KGF Zzoj?, and, PHAATH MOB (@a&@MUAB [A]), I Esd. 511= Ezra 26, PAHATH-MOAB. for Egyptian notices, &PI2) 538 632; WMM, As. u. Bur. 98 267). This important city lay on the W. of PRACARETH (@aKap& [BA]), I Esd. 534=Ezra the Euphrates, or, more precisely, at the point where 257, POCHERETH-HAZZEBAIM. that river is joined by the Sagur (mod. SEjzir), therefore PHAEZELDAEUS (@AHZEAAAIOY [B]), I Esd. 538 a few miles S. of Carchemish. The district containing RVmZ.=Ezra 261, BARZILLAI. it belonged to the Aramzeans, who had been expelled by Tiglath-Pileser l., but had won Pitru back from a later PHAISUR (@alcoyp [B]), I Esd. 9zz=Ezra 1022, Assyrian king. Shalmaneser 11. adds that he himself PASHUR,3. recovered the place, and settled it anew with Assyrian PHALDAIUS, RV Phaldeus ( @AA(A)AAIOC [BA]), colonists. In modern times this identification was first I Esd. 944=Neh. 84, PEDAIAH, 5. made by E. Hincks; it has been adopted by Sayce, Schrader, and Frd. Delitzsch. PHALEAS (@aA~loy[BA]), I Esd. 529=Ezra 244, PADON. See especially Sayce, ‘The Site of Pethor,’ Acad. Sept. 16, 1876, p. 291 ; Schr. KGF 2208; Del. Par. 269. PHALEK (@AAEK [Ti. WH]), Lk. 335 AV, RV That Pethor rightly stands in Dt. 23 5 [4] cannot be PELEG (4.v.). doubted, and it nust have been read very early in Nu. 225, for on this passage Dt. 235[4] is based. Neverthe- PHALIAS (@A),IAC [B]), I Esd. 948 RV=Neh. 87, less the earliest form of the story of Balaam cannot have PELAIAH, 2. traced his origin to a place called Pethor. For no such PHBLLU (&), Gen. 469 AV, RV PALLU (4.v.). place as Pethor existed in the Euphrates region. PPth6r would be in Assyrian Pitgru. while Pitru would be in PHALTI (*p$e),I S. 2544 AV, RV PALTI(g.~.). Hebrew Pether (Path&-). Kor is it even certain that PHALTIEL (hyph), s. 3 15 AV, RV PALTIEL. the true text of Dt. 23 5 placed Pethor in the far north ; n?i;t3, in the phrase n’iqj nix (.Aram-naharaini), may PHANUEL (@ANOYHA [Ti. WH] ; cp PENUEL),of perhaps be a corruption of Sscm,, a frequent gloss on the tribe of Asher. father of Anna the prophetess (Lk. nix. If so, ’ Pethor of Jerahnieel ’ refers to some place 236). See ANNA. on the N. Arabian border. PHARACIM, Pharakim (@APAKEM [B], @A~A- The Euphrates is iiot the only stream called jar excelZenre RV KEIM [A]. om. L), a post-exilic family of Nethinini 123, ‘the river’; there is another-that near which Rehohoth (I Esd. 531)unmentioned in Ezraand Nehemiah. ‘Sons lay the city of the Aramite king Shad (see SAUL, 2). It was in lhort the river of Misrim miscalled traditionally ‘the river of of Pharakim’ perhaps represents an original 0.?7S;r ,I? Egypt’ (see EGYPT,R~R’oF). This is the WHdy el-‘AriS, the -the guild who had the care of the temple-hangings; border.stream of the N. Arahian land of Musri or Muyn (see cp 0315 in Phcen. i. no. 86 A 5 IO. See SETHmIhf. MIZKAIM).To obtain a clear and consistent geography the CfS ‘river’ beside which was the home of Ralaam, must hr the river S. A. C. by which Kehoboth lay. This is confirmed by the fact (as we PHARAOH (3‘pB; @A~AU; Phamo). the name may fairly regard it) that Mi?rim (i.f., Muhri) occurs twice in a corrupted form in the list of Edomite (or perhaps, rather, Aramite given to all Egyptian kings in the Bible. Evidently -i.e., Jerahmee1ite)kingsin Gen. 363r-?g(see RELA, DISHAHAH, 1. History like our expressions ‘the Tsar,’ ‘ the Mogul,’ nIE-ZAHAB). No such place-name as Pethor, however, is known of name. etc., it must have been a native word for to have existed 5. of Palestine. The name sug-pests a connec- tion with in,, ‘to interpret (a dream),’ and is improhahle; ‘king,’ or one of the chief titles of the indeed, in Nu. 225 Pesh. renders, not ‘to Pethor,’ but ‘an Egyptian rulers. The omission of the article shows its 3685 3686 PHARAOH PHARPAR stereotyped use among the Hebrews. Later, the con- some 430 years before the Exodus. The usual theory nection : Pharaoh, king of Egypt (Ex. 611,etc.), shows with regard to the Exodus (see below, 3) would bring a tendency of the word Pharaoh to become a proper us down to about 1700 B.C. That would correspond name, as which it seems to stand in the NT, etc. with the period of the Hyksos dynasty, perhaps more Josephus (Ant. viii. 6 2, 5 155) correctly states that accurately with the reign of its first kings. The Pharaoh meant ' king ' in Egyptian. tradition of Apophis (EGYPT, 5 Sz).-whether it rest on We are now certain that the word is derived from a correct calculation or on Josephus' confusion of the expression for ' king ' used by the later Egyptians. Hyksos and Israelites-is remarkable, but would bring The Coptic form is (B)ppO, Lower Egyptian OypO, with us to the end of the Hyksos-time, which does not seem the article n(€)ppo, Cpoypo. So already, Jablonski to furnish a smooth calculation. All this depends, (Opusc. 1376). The group of signs corresponding to this in the however, on the Exodus-chronology. latest writings of the pagan Egyptians can he traced hack 3. The Pharaoh of the oppression and his successor through its representatives in demotic and hieratic to the early form Pev-'o1 (originally, '0,' frnal Aleph having fallen away) (cp Ex. 223 419) would according to Ex. 111 be un- 'the great house, the palace. This hieroglyphic group was doubtedly Rameses 11. and his son, Me(r)neptah. first cumpared with the Hebrew word by de Rouge (cp Ebers, This theory has now, however, been finally upset by Ai.,?. Biichev Mosis, 264). It is remarkable that the Greek the discovery of the Israel-stele which proves that in tradition in Horapollo still knew that OIKOSplyas= ' king.' Merneptahs fifth year Israel was in Asia. See EGYPT, The expression occurs already in the texts of the E)s 58-60, on this conflict. It may be mentioned that pyramid-period from dynasty four onwards (later, e.g., the mummy of the alleged Pharaoh of the Exodus in the famous inscription of 'Una,' Z. 8) in titles like (Merneptah) has recently been fonnd in Thebes and is 'only friend of the Great House.' ' Great House ' is a now in the museum of Cairo. A theory of Bunsen, paraphrase for ' king ' due to reverence, exactly like the placing the Exodus in the troubled time of Amenophis modern expressions ' the holy see ' for ' pope,' ' the IV. and his immediate successors (1400 B.C. and later ; ' ' Porte or the Sublime Porte,' etc. In the early period EGYPT, 5 56), might be supported by Josephus's referred to, it was not yet possible to use ' great house' extract from ManEtho; but its four or five kings are as perfectly synonymous with ' king.' Expressions in such inextricable confusion that nothing can be like ' to follow the Great-House on his chariot' (Pap. proved by the passage. For the rest, there is much Orbiney, 175 ; dyn. 19), in w-hich the etymology begins that militates against such theories. [Cp MOSES.] to be forgotten, do not occur in the time of the Old or 4. The Pharaoh contemporary with Solomon, father- the Middle Empire. It is only in the vernacular style in-law of the Israelite king ( I K. 9 1624 11 I. etc.), and of the New Empire that the title can be used in the also of his adversary Hadad (1118),-if one and the loose way quoted above ; it becomes the usual word same person are meant,-would be one of the last kings for ' king,' superseding the earlier expressions like &nf of the twenty-first Tanitic dynasty, or Shoshenk I., the '( ' His Majesty ') and sin, only at a much later date. founder of dynasty twenty-two (EGYPT, 5 63). It is, Consequently the Hebrews can have received it only however, again very doubtful whether originally the after 1000 n.c. reference was really to some Egyptian ruler(s) and not of In confirmation this, we see from the Amarna letters that z b). the title was unknown in Asia about 1400 B.C. The absence of rather to MuSrites (see HADAD,MIZRAIM, E) the word in the Assyrian texts (the alleged Piv's,king of Egypt, 5. In I K. 1425, it is very remarkable that Shishak belon-s rather, a5 Winckler has shown, to the Arabian country -Shoshenk 1.-is called not Pharaoh, but simply king of Mz$) is, however, no cogent argument. No Semitic lang-uage except Hebrew adopted the word ; the Koranic form Fir'aun Egypt. Griffith (in his most valuable article 'Pharaoh' Shows the influence of Syrian Christianity. in Hastings' BD) draws the conclusion that the verse The rendering in Hebrew orthography is remarkably containing the expression belongs to a source earlier good and archaic. The strange vocalisation is sup- than the Pentateuchal sources, which employ regularly ported by @ and, therefore, must not be abandoned the expression Pharaoh. [But cp Cn't. Bib., where it too 1ightly;s perhaps it represents an archaic pro- is held that there is a confusion between Cushi, king of hunciation. Misrim, and Shishak, king of Misraini.] Other Egyptian etymologies which have been suggested 6. On Pharaoh-Necho see NECHO, and (7) on cannot he upheld. p-lZe' 'the sun' (Kosellini, Wilkinson, etc.), Pharaoh Hophra see HOPHRA. The latter is meant by for example, never was the common desigiiation of the king, and the Pharaoh of Ezek. 29 32. [Cp, however, PROPHECY, would, in Hebrew letters, give only mg. Lepage Renouf, and Cril. Bib.] W. M. M. PSBA 15421, prpposed a Hebrew derivation from the root ym, ('to be noble') with little probability. PHARATHON (qapa8wN [ANC.aV]), I Macc. 950 We proceed to an enumeration of the various RV, AV Pharathoni. See PIRATRON. Pharaohs mentioned in the OT. PHARES (Cp~p~c[Ti. WH]), Mt. 13 Lk. 333 AV, 2. OT I. Abraham's Pharaoh (Gen. 1215 f.) RV PEREZ (4.a. ). Pharaohs. has, on the basis of a computation of the lives of the patriarchs, been placed in PHAREZ. I. (719). Gen. 3829 AV, RV PEREZ. dynasty 12. If the latest chronology is to be followed, 2. (+per [BL]), I Esd. 8 30 AV= Ezra 8 3, PAROSH. we ought rather to go back to dynasty 11. As, how- PHARIDA (Cpap[s]~Aa[BA]), I Esd. 533 RV, AV ever, this Pharaoh seems to be only a misunderstood Pharira=Ezra 255, PERUDA(4.v.). prince of southern Palestine (cp the parallel Gen. 26 and PHARISEES. See SCRIBES AND PHARISEES. see MIZRAIM.5 z b), all discussions are idle. 2. Joseph's Pharaoh lived, according to Ex. 1240, PHAROSH (EhB),Ezra 83 AV, RV PAROSH(4.v.). The later Egyptians omitted the PHARPAR (757%; ~CpapCpa[Bl, CpapCpa [Bamg.bl. i_l popular etymology taking it for the article, which ~pap~papa~41, ~pap~pap [LI ; ~hay?hay[vg.~), one of be as ?as felt to ungrammatical as long the expres- the 'streams (nnnj) of Damascus, 2 K. The sion was used for ' zrie king '-i.e. of Egypt. 512. 2 In this period it is frequently written playfully identification of the Pharpar can hardly be doubtful, 'the great,(double)house,' which does not alter the O0 though it has not been so unanimously agreed upon as pronunciation. In Greek times, even a feminine t-[pler-'0, Copt. that of its fellow-stream, the ABANA or AMANA [q.v.]. TEPP0 ' the queen ' can be formed. Those who insist on interpreting ' Damascus' in the 3 The only analogy would he p€~&w'rich man.' This que3tion of Naaman to mean the city of that name have stands, however, for reme-lo, and the short vowel has been coloured to a by the 'Ain. Per, 'house,' on the other hand, has to identify the Pharpar with the Nahr Taura,' which is in all caFes been shortened down to P (cp PimEsErH, PITHOM) one of the principal streams into which the Nahr BaradB and does not seem ever to have had two syllables. The question remains open. The king Pheron of Herodotus may he one of 1 So Rev. W. Wright of Damascus Leisure Hour, 1874, p. that historian's many misunderstandings, and may simply have 284 (cp Erpos. Oct. 1896, p. 295x), &id long ago Benjamin of meant 'king.' Tudela. This'identification is supported by the Arahic version. 3687 3688 PHARZITES PHENICE is divided, and contributes largely to the fertility of fives in 334 n.c. (Strabo, 666s ; cp Spratt and Forbes, Traziels, 119aJ). In Roman times the commerce of Pha5elis had the ' meadow-land ' (eZ--merj)of Damascus. It may of derenerated into piracy, with the result that the town lost its course be permitted to assume that there was a time independence in 77-75 n.c.1 when the Nahr Taura flowed through Damascus, The place is now called Tekir-avz; it shows con- not merely, as it does now, a little to the N., for the siderable remains of its harbours, and of a theatre. site of the city of Henhadad cannot have been exactly stadium, and temple. The temple of Athens at Phaselis coincident with that of the Damascus of today.' But claimed to possess the spear of Acnilles (Paus. iii. 38). how unnecessary it is to put this limitation on the See further description in Beaufort, Ikirramania, 56f: meailing of ' Damascus,' will be seen by comparing W. J. Wr. 2S.85f: rCh.185J Is.78Am.13(?), where Damascus PHASIRON, THE SONS OF, an unknown Arabian is used as the name of the leading Aramaean state. In tribe whom Jonathan the Maccabee smote (I Macc. the question of Naaman, it is not Damascus the city 966 @ACIpWN [A]. @AC€IPWN [HI, @AplCW,N [VI), but Damascus the country that forms the natural if ' sons of Pharison ' (so V) IS not due to a misunder- antithesis to Israel. As soon as these facts are grasped, standing of n.?.?? 'I?, ' members of a robber-band ' ; cp it becomes natural to identify the Pharpar with the Nuhr Dan. llr4. T. K. C. el-d'waj (' the crooked '),z which is the only independent stream of importance in the required district besides the PHASSARON, RV Phassurus (@ACCOYPOY [AI). Barads. This river has two principal sources. I Esd. 5 25 = Ezra238, PASHHUR(RV), 3. One source is near the village of 'Ami, on the E. side of [Ti. Rom. I RV Hermon, the other, in a wild glen, 2 m. ahove the village of PHEBE (@OIBH WH]). 16 AV, Reit Jenn, known to travellers on their way from RiiniPs to PHCEBE(q.v. ). Damascus. The two streams, called the Nahr 'Ami and the Nahr lepniini, unite at Sa'sa' and form the A'wajwhich flows PHENICE. I. (@OINIKH [Ti. WH]), Acts11 19. from t 15 point onwards in a general direction NW. by N. ; it etc. AV RV PHCENCIA(pa). IS no ' brawling brook ' (W. Wright) but a copious stream, from 2.' (OO~YL(,or cPoivr( [Ti. WH]), Acts 27 12, AV, RV PHCENIX. which according to Porter, ancient canals carry the water to The corn-ship from Alexandria in w-hich Paul was placeslin the neighbourhood of Damascus. It dies out at last in a marsh a little to the S. of that in which the BaradC dis- being conveyed to Italy (Acts 276) was so long weather- appears. bound at Fair Havens on the S. coast of Crete that the The name Pharpar has been thought to survive in voyage could not be accomplished that year (v.9), and it that of the Nahr (WHdy) Barbar, which also rises on became necessary to select a harbour in which to winter the E:. side of Hermon, but farther to the N., and flows (v. n). The centurion, who in a ship of the imperial S. of Damascus.J Burton indeed declares, 'There is corn-fleet ranked as senior officer (Ramsay, Sf. Pauf absolutely no Wadv Barbar. . . . But there is a Jebel the Traveller, 323 f.),took the advice of the captain Barbar which may be seen from Damascus ' ( UnexpZored and the sailing-master (EV wrongly 'the master and Syria, 7 ~rg,n. 8). This, however, does not really touch the owner' for Kvpepv4Tqs and vahAqpos of v. II), and the identification of names. T. K. C. resolved to run westwards if possible to port Phcenix (in which attempt, however, they failed). PHARZITES (+?!?Dg),Nu. 2620 AV. RV PEREZITES. To this course Paul himself was opposed, on what grounds See PEREZ. we are not told ;2 nor again is his precise position in the ship made clear. PHASEAH Neh. 751 AV, RV PASEAH (p.~.). (nee), The expression in v. 12 (01 nkiovrc, 'the more part advised ') must not be taken to imply a general consultation of the entire PHASELIS (@ACH~IC[W], BACIAEIAAN [AJ4 ship's company (Weisa, A$osfe/g., L.c.). Nor can we accept I Macc. 1523), a Dorian colony on the confines of Lycia the vape statement that Paul was 'a person of rank whose and Pamphylia, standing on a small peninsula, the first convenience was to some extent consulted, and whose experi- land sighted on the voyage from Cilicia to Rhodes ence as a traveller was known to he great' (so Ramsay, oj. cit.), as helping to explain how a prisorkz should have taken part in (Livy. 3723). ' over the sea of Cilicia and Pamphylia' a council of experts. The liberty accorded to Paul at Sidon (Acts2i5). It wasnotoriginallyLycian (cpStrabo,66;); (u. 3) obviously stands in a quite different category. Pan1 had but later it was incorporated, and finally became a absolutelyno experience of the central or western Mediterranean ; and captains and sailing-masters were scarcely likely to ask member of the Lycian League (cp coins, and CIG 4324, the opinion of amateur sailors. We must he on our guard 4332 : so Kalinka in Kiepert's Festschrift, 1898. p. against the falsity of the pers ective of the writer of Acts, who 167J ), and marked the eastern limit of Lycian extension. of course looks at all from tfe point of view of his hero, and depicts Paul everywhere as the central figure. It may be The town possessed no fewer than three harbours, and doubted whether anything more ought to be extracted from the was a great place of maritime trade (Strabo, 666 ; Thuc. narrative of events at Fair Havens than the fact of a general 269. T~YXXOOV T& ~XK~~WVT&V dsb @au?jXiGos, and objection urgd by Paul with characteristic vigour and direct- id. 888 ; Pol. 309). A testimony to its far-reaching ness against the proposal when it hecaine known to the ship's company. Is it poasihle that Paul's desire to remain at Fair commerce is the fact that, before the middle of the Havens had its origin in a prospect of missionary work? The sixth century B.c., it shared in the Hellenion, or important town of Gortyna was only a few miles from this point sanctuary and ' emporium ' of the Greeks at Naucratis of the coast (Strabo 478. See GORTYNA). in Egypt (Herod. 2178)~ Hence Phaselis had a Jewish It is clear from a general consideration of the cir- colony in 139 B.C. (I Macc. 1523). cumstances (see FAIR HAVENS) that Phoenix must be The importance of Phaselis lay not solely in commerce. sought to the westward of the great gulf of Messara. Above it rose the Solyma mountains (Takhfali Dagh), which left vnly a narrow passage by the sea-the pas of &It. Klimax which begins at Cape Matala. about 6 m. W. of Fair --which was often overflowed by the waves when the wind was Havens. It was during the run across this gulf that E. : here Alexander and his army barely escaped with their the squall broke which drove the ship off her course _~ (v.IS), and ultimately caused her to drift upon the coaSt 1 Cp Sayce, F'atrinvchal Palestine, p. 24. of Malta (v. 27). '2 So Niildeke, Robinson, and especially Porter (Five years in Damaxus, 1294; 'The Rivers of Damascus,'fourn. ojsacred Phoenix is mentioned by Strabo as a coast settlement Lit., July and Oct., 1853). Burton doubtfully identifies with on what he calls the 'isthmus' of Crete-Le., the the stream of 'Ain Fiirh (Unexplorea Syria, 1115). But this narrow part of the island between Mount Ida and the stream joins the Baradz. mountains of the broad western end (475, KaTorKfav 3 [thas been surmised that anciently the stream joined that now called the AVa/ivA'zegaj and was populirly confounded with it and Dr. Thoinson (LA3430) states that one of the existin; 1 Cic. Vrw. iv. 1021,Phnselis illa, quam cejit P. Semilitls. smaller tributaries of the Sdirrini(the name of the Nahr A':+' nmfuerat urbs antea Cilicum el @redonum: Lycii illam, in the first part of its course) comes down the Wridy Barbar. GrrPci homines, incoiebanf . . . asciuerunt sibi illud ojjidulrr 4 4&rqArs, authors ; Oaoqhk, inscrr. ; OaqA(s)rsiru, coins. $ivafe@rimorommercio, deide rfiamsociefate. 6 It struck coins with a varietyof types in the sixth and 2 Acts 27 IO merely gives his summing up of the consequences early part of the fifth century n.c., ceasinr: on the rise of the foreboded by him if the present anchorage was abandoned: Athenian empire (about 466 B.c.). Cp Hill, Brif. Mus. Cat. 'voyage' (rbv rrAoGv) refers of course only to the proposed run ofCreek Coins, [LJcia]. to port Phcenix, not to the entire voyage. 3689 3690 PHENICE PHILADELPHIA . , . rpbs ri vorly ‘BolviKa rbv iiapr.!wv).l Phcenix -in the direction of ‘south-west and north-west.’ (Similarly is commonly identified with the modern village and what we read in Farrar [St. Paul, 71r] is surely not to be justified by appeals to the natural phraeology of 2). 27; cp harbour of Luutrd some miles to the SW., a position Page, Z.C.)~ in conformity both with the notice in Strabo and with It mnst be remembered that neither Paul nor the that of Ptolemy (iii. 173). writer of Acts ever saw the harbour. Ptolemy locates in this part of Crete a harbour Phcenicfis Liferature.--Chiefly J. Smith’s Voyage and Shihreck of (~CVCKO~Shrpiu) a r6hrq). In the and town Phmnix (+oivrp Si. PaulN, 1880. Bursian, Geogr. 21. Gnich., with authorities Synecdenzus of Hierocles (14 ed. Parth) Pbcenix appears under the form Phoenice, as a hisdqxic, along with a place Lradena therein mentioned. W.J. W. --both in the neighhourhood of the island of Clauda (+OLV~KT~ PHERESITES (@~~EZAIOI[BAL]), I Esd. 869 AV, $70~’ApGfva, I.iuoc KAaiSor). Aradena is further mentioned by Steph. Byz., under the name Araden, as a Cretan town which (RV Pherezites) = Ezra 9 I, PERIZZITE. was also called from its position Anopolis, ‘Upper City’ (‘ApaSju r6hrr Kpqqc. 6 82 ’AVWHOALSA+T~L 6r2 rb Bvar dw). Both PHICHOL (he; @IKOA [AD], @ixoA [DEL]), the name Araden or Aradena and the name Anopolis survive general of Abimelech, king of Gerar (Gen. 212232 [RV unchanged-Ampolis or Ana#olis being that of a group of Phicol]; 2626). The name, like MICHAL(q.~.), is villages on the plateau N. of Loutr6, W. of which, about a mile probably corrupted from Abihail, but ultimately. inland from the harbour, is the village of Aradhena. Both at $;ye, Aradhena and at Loutr6 are found ancient remains (those at like Abimelech, from Jerahmeel. the latter place Roman) ; but the chief ancient Greek site is on The absurd rendering ‘ mouth of all ’ (cp Gen. 41 40) is as old a hill on the southern edge of the plateau. Here was the ancient as the Midrash (Bey. rahha, on Gen.21 22). Whiston, the Araden to which was transferred the name of the harbour translator of Josephus, connects Phicol with MOA^, the name Phcenjx (Loutr6).z of the native village of Joseph, the famous tax-collector under Loutr6 is described as ‘the only secure harbour in Ptolemy Energetes Uos. Ant. xii. 4 2) ; so also Fiirst. An all winds on the coast Crete ’ (cp Smith, cit., Arabic etymology (@hzla. 8, ‘to give attention to’) has also S. of up. been ventured. Delltzsch (Par. 270) compares the Hittite 261), and Captain Spratt writes that it is ‘ the only bay name Pisiri ; but we require a Semitic name like Abimelech. to the westward of Fair Havens in which a vessel of T. K. C. any size could find any shelter during the winter months’ PHILADELPHIA (@IAAAEA@I&, Rev. 111 37[WH], (quoted by Smith, op. cit., 92, where similar testimony @IAAAEA+E~&, most minuscnles, inscrr. and classical by others is collected). That imperial ships were some- authors), a Pergamene foundation, as is times to be found there is proved by an inscription 1. evident from its situation on the gentle from Loutr6 (dating from the reign of Trajan) given in slopes at the base of the steeper hills (Mt. Tmolus) full by Smith, op. cit., 269J commanding the site, a position dictated, not by It is all but impossible, however, to make the identi- military, but by commercial considerations (Ranisay, fication which thus appears so conclusive agree with Hist. Geogr. uf AiW 86, Cities and Bish. of Phryp‘u. the description of the harbour in Acts 27 12. 2353 n. ; cp Holm, GR. Hist. ET 4477). It was built There it is described as hrpdva 6sKpiq @Adrotma rani hl@a B.C.), X& KQT~xipov (AV ‘ and lieth toward the south west and north- by Attalus 11. Philadelphus (159.138 who also west’; RV ‘looking north-east and south-east,’ RVmg. Gk. founded Attaleia in Pamphylia (see ATTALIA). The ‘down the south-west 7uid and down the north-west wid’). town lay on the southern side of the valley of the I. If we adopt the rendering of AV, the identification of SPhcenix with port Loutr6 must he gurrendered ; that harbour Cogamns (or Cogamis : Ramsay, Cities and Bish. of faces E.-i.e., is open to winds ranging from NE. to SE. We Phryg. lrg6 n.), a tributary of the Hermus, near the must then identify with the harbour W. of the promontory of road uniting the Hermns and Maeander valleys. It :Lout16 (ending in Cape Muros) called Phineka Bay in the stood, therefore, on the confines of Lydia and Phrygia, Admiralty Chart.3 Soundings ringing from three and a half fathoms to one would make it as good an anchorage as Lout16 on the south-western edge of the volcanic region called yt. If the objection to wintering at Fair Havens was that it Katakekauniene, or ‘ Burnt Region ’ : it was, however, ies open to the E. (Acts 27 IZ), the same ohjection would appl properly a Mysian town (Strabo, 628) separated from to port Loutr6.4 The evidence of navigators acquainted wit{ the coast (cp Smith, 2.c.) is against the actual existence of a the bulk of the Mysians by the aforesaid ‘ Burnt Region,’ sheltered anchoraze on the W. of the oeninsula. and the charts which itself also was variously claimed as Lydian, do not decide the point. Mysian, or Phrygian, from the interlacing of the bounds 2. If we adopt the rendering of RV (‘looking NE. and SE.’) of the three peoples in this district. The volcanic we must interpret ~ardhi@a and rard xipov as ‘looking down the direction of’ the winds named. nature of its soil was the cause alternately of the pros- This translation is supported by reference to Herod. 4 110, perity and the misfortunes of Philadelphia. ‘they were borne along by wind and wave ’ (i+ipovro K~T;ripa Philadelphia’s staple export was wine : its coins show the hmd Kai dvspov), to which objection is made on the ground that of Dionysos, the type being doubly appropriate, as Dionysos there the usage is of a ship in motion (the objections urged by Kathegemon was a great deity at Pergamos (cp the coins of Page, Acts ofthe Apostles, note in loc., that ‘a harbour does Dionysopolis, also founded by Attalus II., Ramsayl ofi. cit. not mme and must look rani A$3a whether hi+ is blowing or 1 126). Some part of its prosperity was doubtless derived from not,’and that ‘if hi+ and ~iporrepresent, not points of the its hot springs (cp Joan. Lyd. 75, 349, where the hot springs of compass but winds in motion then raT2 XiBa rdL KaT& ~Gpovin- Hierapolis and LAODKEA[T.v.] are also mentioned), which .valves the assertion that twb winds are blowing at the same are still much used. probahly connected in some degree with time,’ are surely in the highest degree sophistical). The ex- these was the celebiity of the city for its festivals and temples, pression of Arrian (Per. Eux. 3, P+vw ve+dAj &ravaur&a &$p- the number of which gained it the title of ‘miniature Athens.’ ,+n rar’ etpov) is not clear (see Smith, op. cit., 89, note, for Frequent destructive earthquakes, however, threw heavy burdens discussion). Josephus, speaking of the places between Joppa on its finances (Strabo, 579 628). The status of the town is and Dora, says that they were all Sduoppa 6r2 725 KG& hipa evidenced by the fact that tde Koinon of Asia, which, according rpou@oA& (Ant. xv. 96). Thucydides describes a steady N. to some unknown rule of rotation, held its festival in the chief wind as rad @opdav ~CI~&C (6 104). cities of the Province (eg., Ephesus, Smyrna, Sardis, Pergamos, In spite of the examples quoted, however, the phrase in Acts Laodiceia), met also at Philadelphia (CIG 1068, 3428). For is obscure: it seems due to a confusion of ideas. Ju?t as. in some time the town even changed its name to Neocaesareia, .English ‘to look down the wind ’ means to look in the direction and struck coins under that name during the reigns of Tiberius, in which it is blowing 50 in Greek ; nevertheless, @X&O usqd Caligula, and Claudius (Ramsay, oj. cit. 1201). The change of a harbour would na&ally imply ‘facing,’ ‘turned towards. was made in recognition of the aid rendered by Tiherius on the 3. The explanation of Conybeare and Howson (Llfe and E#. occasion of the great earthquake of 17 A.D. (Tac. Ann. 2 47). ofst. Paul,2 400) is that ‘ sailors speak of everything from their own point of view, and that such a harbour [as that of Lout161 . In later Byzantine times, Philadelphia was a large does “look”-from the water towards the land which encloses it and warlike city (Georg. Acropol. 111, peyiur~Kat aohvoiv8pwlros), and was a bulwark of civilisation in 1 Lampa(Lappa, coins and inscrr.) was at a site in the in- this quarter, until, in 1379 or 1390, the united forces of terior now called Polis. the Byzantine Emperor Manuel 11. and the Osmanli , 3 There is wme evidence that the name Phcenix still survives Sultan Bayezid I. compelled its surrender to the Turks. in the locality (cp J. Smith, Voyagp and .S/ii#wreck of St. PauZ(4) 258); it probably bears reference to the existence in early diys of a Phcenisian trading-post at this point. 1 Ramsay (St. Paul the Traveller, 326) suggests that ‘the 8 (Pub. 1861, from survey hy Mr. Millard in 1859; large sailors described the entrance as one in which inward-hound corrections, July 1864.) ships looked towards NW. and SW., and that in transmission 4 This ohjection would he met, however, by what we read in from mouth to mouth the wrong, impression was given that Smith, 261, 269. the harbour looked NW. and SW. 3691 3692