Chapter XIII: Part 13

It is impossible to determine precisely with what justice tradition has made the name of "Judge Jeffreys" a byword of infamy. The Revolution, which brought about his fall, handed over his reputation at the same time to the mercy of his bitterest enemies. They alone have recorded his actions and appraised his motives and character. Even the adherents of the deposed dynasty had no interest in finding excuse for one who served as a convenient scapegoat for the offences of his master. For at least half a century after his death no apology for Lord Jeffreys would have obtained a hearing; and none was attempted. With the exception therefore of what is to be gathered from the reports of the state trials, all knowledge of his conduct rests on testimony tainted by undisguised hostility. Innumerable scurrilous lampoons vilifying the hated instrument of James's tyranny, but without a pretence of historic value, flooded the country at the Revolution; and these, while they fanned the undiscriminating hatred of contemporaries who remembered the judge's severities, and perpetuated that hatred in tradition, have not been sufficiently discounted even by modern historians like Macaulay and Lord Campbell. The name of Jeffreys has therefore been handed down as that of a coarse, ignorant, dissolute, foul-mouthed, inhuman bully, who prostituted the seat of justice. That there was sufficient ground for the execration in which his memory was long held is not to be gainsaid. But the portrait has nevertheless been blackened overmuch. An occasional significant admission in his favour may be gleaned even from the writings of his enemies. Thus Roger North declares that "in matters indifferent," i.e. where politics were not concerned, Jeffreys became the seat of justice better than any other that author had seen in his place. Sir J. Jekyll, master of the rolls, told Speaker Onslow that Jeffreys "had great parts and made a great chancellor in the business of his court. In mere private matters he was thought an able and upright judge wherever he sat." His keen sense of humour, allied with a spirit of inveterate mockery and an exuberant command of pungent eloquence, led him to rail and storm at prisoners and witnesses in grossly unseemly fashion. But in this he did not greatly surpass most of his contemporaries on the judicial bench, and it was a failing from which even the dignified and virtuous Hale was not altogether exempt. The intemperance of Jeffreys which shocked North, certainly did not exceed that of Saunders; in violence he was rivalled by Scroggs; though accused of political apostasy, he was not a shameless renegade like Williams; and there is no evidence that in pecuniary matters he was personally venal, or that in licentiousness he followed the example set by Charles II. and most of his courtiers. Some of his actions that have incurred the sternest reprobation of posterity were otherwise estimated by the best of his contemporaries. His trial of Algernon Sidney, described by Macaulay and Lord Campbell as one of the most heinous of his iniquities, was warmly commended by Dr William Lloyd, who was soon afterwards to become a popular idol as one of the illustrious seven bishops (see letter from the bishop of St Asaph in H. B. Irving's _Life of Judge Jeffreys_, p. 184). Nor was the habitual illegality of his procedure on the bench so unquestionable as many writers have assumed. Sir James Stephen inclined to the opinion that no actual abuse of law tainted the trials of the Rye House conspirators, or that of Alice Lisle, the most prominent victim of the "bloody assizes." The conduct of the judges in Russell's trial was, he thinks, "moderate and fair in general"; and the trial of Sidney "much resembled that of Russell." The same high authority pronounces that the trial of Lord Delamere in the House of Lords was conducted by Jeffreys "with propriety and dignity." And if Jeffreys judged political offenders with cruel severity, he also crushed some glaring abuses; conspicuous examples of which were the frauds of attorneys who infested Westminster Hall, and the systematic kidnapping practised by the municipal authorities of Bristol. Moreover, if any value is to be attached to the evidence of physiognomy, the traditional estimate of the character of Jeffreys obtains no confirmation from the refinement of his features and expression as depicted in Kneller's portrait in the National Portrait Gallery of London. But even though the popular notion requires to be thus modified in certain respects, it remains incontestable that Jeffreys was probably on the whole the worst example of a period when the administration of justice in England had sunk to the lowest degradation, and the judicial bench had become the too willing tool of an unconstitutional and unscrupulous executive.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The chief contemporary authorities for the life of
Jeffreys are Bishop Burnet's _History of my own Time_ (1724), and see
especially the edition "with notes by the Earls of Dartmouth and
Hardwick Speaker Onslow and Dean Swift" (Oxford Univ. Press, 1833);
Roger North's _Life of the Right Hon. Francis North, Baron of
Guildford_ (1808) and _Autobiography_ (ed. by Augustus Jessopp, 1887);
_Ellis Correspondence, Verney Papers_ (Hist. MSS. Comm.), _Hatton
Correspondence_ (Camden Soc. pub.); the earl of Ailesbury's _Memoirs_;
Evelyn's _Diary_. The only trustworthy information as to the judicial
conduct and capacity of Jeffreys is to be found in the reports of the
_State Trials_, vols. vii.-xii.; and cf. Sir J. F. Stephen's _History
of the Criminal Law of England_ (1883). For details of the "bloody
assizes," see _Harl. MSS._, 4689; George Roberts, _The Life,
Progresses and Rebellion of James Duke of Monmouth_, vol. ii. (1844);
also many pamphlets, lampoons, &c., in the British Museum, as to which
see the article on "Sources of History for Monmouth's Rebellion and
the Bloody Assizes," by A. L. Humphreys, in _Proceedings of the
Somersetshire Archaeological and Natural Hist. Soc._ (1892). Later
accounts are by H. W. Woolrych, _Memoirs of the Life of Judge
Jeffreys_ (1827); Lord Campbell, _The Lives of the Lord Chancellors_
(1845), 1st series, vol. iii.; E. Foss, _The Judges of England_
(1864), vol. vii.; Henry Roscoe, _Lives of Eminent British Lawyers_
(1830); Lord Macaulay, _History of England_ (1848; and many subsequent
editions). Most of these works, and especially those by Macaulay and
Campbell, are uncritical in their hostility to Jeffreys, and are based
for the most part on untrustworthy authorities. The best modern work
on the subject, though unduly favourable to Jeffreys, is H. B.
Irving's _Life of Judge Jeffreys_ (1898), the appendix to which
contains a full bibliography. (R. J. M.)

JEHOIACHIN (Heb. "Yah[weh] establisheth"), in the Bible, son of Jehoiakim and king of Judah (2 Kings xxiv. 8 sqq.; 2 Chron, xxxvi. 9 seq.). He came to the throne at the age of eighteen in the midst of the Chaldean invasion of Judah, and is said to have reigned three months. He was compelled to surrender to Nebuchadrezzar and was carried off to Babylon (597 B.C.). This was the First Captivity, and from it Ezekiel (one of the exiles) dates his prophecies. Eight thousand people of the better class (including artisans, &c.) were removed, the Temple was partially despoiled (see Jer. xxvii. 18-20; xxiii.v. 3 seq.),[1] and Jehoiachin's uncle Mattaniah (son of Josiah) was appointed king. Jehoiachin's fate is outlined in Jer. xxii. 20-30 (cf. xxvii. 20). Nearly forty years later, Nebuchadrezzar II. died (562 B.C.) and Evil-Merodach (Amil-Marduk) his successor released the unfortunate captive and gave him precedence over the other subjugated kings who were kept prisoners in Babylon. With this gleam of hope for the unhappy Judaeans both the book of Kings and the prophecies of Jeremiah conclude (2 Kings xxv. 27-30; Jer. lii. 31-34).

See, further, JEREMIAH (especially chaps. xxiv., xxvii. seq.), and
JEWS, § 17.

FOOTNOTE:

[1] 2 Kings xxiv. 13 seq. gives other numbers and a view of the
disaster which is more suitable for the Second Captivity. (See
ZEDEKIAH.)

JEHOIAKIM (Heb. "Yah[weh] raiseth up"), in the Bible, son of Josiah (q.v.) and king of Judah (2 Kings xxiii. 34-xxiv. 6). On the defeat of Josiah at Megiddo his younger brother Jehoahaz (or Shallum) was chosen by the Judaeans, but the Egyptian conquerer Necho summoned him to his headquarters at Riblah (south of Hamath on the Orontes) and removed him to Egypt, appointing in his stead Eliakim, whose name ("El [God] raiseth up") was changed to its better-known synonym, Jehoiakim. For a time Jehoiakim remained under the protection of Necho and paid heavy tribute; but with the rise of the new Chaldean Empire under Nebuchadrezzar II., and the overthrow of Egypt at the battle of Carchemish (605 B.C.) a vital change occurred. After three years of allegiance the king revolted. Invasions followed by Chaldeans, Syrians, Moabites and Ammonites, perhaps the advance troops despatched by the Babylonian king; the power of Egypt was broken and the whole land came into the hands of Nebuchadrezzar. It was at the close of Jehoiakim's reign, apparently just before his death, that the enemy appeared at the gates of Jerusalem, and although he himself "slept with his fathers" his young son was destined to see the first captivity of the land of Judah (597 B.C.). (See JEHOIACHIN.)

Which "three years" (2 Kings xxiv. 1) are intended is disputed; it is
uncertain whether Judah suffered in 605 B.C. (Berossus in Jos. _c.
Ap._ i. 19) or was left unharmed (Jos. _Ant._ x. 6. 1); perhaps
Nebuchadrezzar made his first inroad against Judah in 602 B.C. because
of its intrigue with Egypt (H. Winckler, _Keilinschrift. u. d. alte
Test._, pp. 107 seq.), and the three years of allegiance extends to
599. The chronicler's tradition (2 Chron. xxxvi. 5-8) speaks of
Jehoiakim's captivity, apparently confusing him with Jehoiachin. The
Septuagint, however, still preserves there the record of his peaceful
death, in agreement with the earlier source in 2 Kings, but against
the prophecy of Jeremiah (xxii. 18 seq., xxxvi. 30), which is accepted
by Jos. _Ant._ x. 6. 3. The different traditions can scarcely be
reconciled. Nothing certain is known of the marauding bands sent
against Jehoiakim; for Syrians (_Aram_) one would expect Edomites
(_Edom_), but see Jer. xxxv. 11; some recensions of the Septuagint
even include the "Samaritans"! (For further references to this reign
see especially JEREMIAH; see also JEWS: _History_, § 17.)
(S. A. C.)

JEHOL ("hot stream"), or CH'ENG-TE-FU, a city of China, formerly the seat of the emperor's summer palace, near 118° E. and 41° N., about 140 m. N.E. of Peking, with which it is connected by an excellent road. Pop. (estimate), 10,000. It is a flourishing town, and consists of one great street, about 2 m. long, with smaller streets radiating in all directions. The people are well-to-do and there are some fine shops. The palace, called Pi-shu-shan-chuang, or "mountain lodge for avoiding heat," was built in 1703 on the plan of the palace of Yuen-ming-yuen near Peking. A substantial brick wall 6 m. in circuit encloses several well-wooded heights and extensive gardens, rockeries, pavilions, temples, &c. Jehol was visited by Lord Macartney on his celebrated mission to the emperor K'ienlung in 1793; and it was to Jehol that the emperor Hienfeng retired when the allied armies of England and France occupied Peking in 1860. In the vicinity of Jehol are numerous Lama monasteries and temples, the most remarkable being Potala-su, built on the model of the palace of the grand lama of Tibet at Potala.

JEHORAM, or JORAM (Heb. "Yah[weh] is high"), the name of two Biblical characters.

1. The son of Ahab, and king of Israel in succession to his brother Ahaziah.[1] He maintained close relations with Judah, whose king came to his assistance against Moab which had revolted after Ahab's death (2 Kings i. 1; iii.). The king in question is said to have been Jehoshaphat; but, according to Lucian's recension, it was Ahaziah, whilst i. 17 would show that it was Jehoram's namesake (see 2). The result of the campaign appears to have been a defeat for Israel (see on the incidents EDOM, ELISHA, MOAB). The prophetical party were throughout hostile to Jehoram (with his reform iii. 2 contrast x. 27), and the singular account of the war of Benhadad king of Syria against the king of Israel (vi. 24-vii.) shows the feeling against the reigning dynasty. But whether the incidents in which Elisha and the unnamed king of Israel appear originally belonged to the time of Jehoram is very doubtful, and in view of the part which Elisha took in securing the accession of Jehu, it has been urged with much force that they belong to the dynasty of the latter, when the high position of the prophet would be perfectly natural.[2] The briefest account is given of Jehoram's alliance with Ahaziah (son of 2 below) against Hazael of Syria, at Ramoth-Gilead (2 Kings viii. 25-29), and the incident--with the wounding of the Israelite king in or about the critical year 842 B.C.--finds a noteworthy parallel in the time of Jehoshaphat and Ahab (1 Kings xxii. 29-36) at the period of the equally momentous events in 854 (see AHAB). See further JEHU.

2. The son of Jehoshaphat and king of Judah. He married Athaliah the daughter of Ahab, and thus was brother-in-law of 1. above, and contemporary with him (2 Kings i. 17). In his days Edom revolted, and this with the mention of Libnah's revolt (2 Kings viii. 20 sqq.) suggests some common action on the part of Philistines and Edomites. The chronicler's account of his life (2 Chron. xxi-xxii. 1) presupposes this, but adds many remarkable details: he began his reign by massacring his brethren (cf. Jehu son of Jehoshaphat, and his bloodshed, 2 Kings ix. seq.); for his wickedness he received a communication from Elijah foretelling his death from disease (cf. Elijah and Ahaziah of Israel, 2 Kings i.); in a great invasion of Philistines and Arabian tribes he lost all his possessions and family, and only Jehoahaz (i.e. Ahaziah) was saved.[3] His son Ahaziah reigned only for a year (cf. his namesake of Israel); he is condemned for his Israelite sympathies, and met his end in the general butchery which attended the accession of Jehu (2 Kings viii. 25 sqq.; 2 Chron. xxii. 3 seq., 7; with 2 Kings ix. 27 seq., note the variant tradition in 2 Chron. xxii. 8 seq., and the details which the LXX. (Lucian) appends to 2 Kings x.). (S. A. C.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] 2 Kings i. 17 seq.; see Lucian's reading (cf. Vulg. and Pesh.).
Apart from the allusion 1 Kings xxii. 49 (see 2 Chron. xx. 35), and
the narrative in 2 Kings i. (see ELIJAH), nothing is known of this
Ahaziah. Notwithstanding his very brief reign (1 Kings xxii. 51; 2
Kings iii. 1), the compiler passes the usual hostile judgment (1
Kings xxii. 52 seq.); see KINGS (BOOKS). The chronology in 1 Kings
xxii. 51 is difficult; if Lucian's text (twenty-fourth year of
Jehoshaphat) is correct, Jehoram 1 and 2 must have come to their
respective thrones at almost the same time.

[2] In vii. 6 the hostility of Hittites and Mizraim (q.v.) points to
a period _after_ 842 B.C. (See JEWS, § 10 seq.)

[3] These details are scarcely the invention of the chronicler; see
CHRONICLES, and EXPOSITOR, Aug. 1906, p. 191.

JEHOSHAPHAT (Heb. "Yahweh judges"), in the Bible, son of Asa, and king of Judah, in the 9th century B.C. During his period close relations subsisted between Israel and Judah; the two royal houses were connected by marriage (see ATHALIAH; JEHORAM, 2), and undertook joint enterprise in war and commerce. Jehoshaphat aided Ahab in the battle against Benhadad at Ramoth-Gilead in which Ahab was slain (1 Kings xxii.; 2 Chron. xviii.; cf. the parallel incident in 2 Kings viii. 25-29), and trading journeys to Ophir were undertaken by his fleet in conjunction no doubt with Ahab as well as with his son Ahaziah (2 Chron. xx. 35 sqq.; 1 Kings xxii. 47 sqq.). The chronicler's account of his war against Moab, Ammon and Edomite tribes (2 Chron. xx.), must rest ultimately upon a tradition which is presupposed in the earlier source (1 Kings xxii. 47), and the disaster to the ships at Ezion-Geber at the head of the Gulf of Akaba preceded, if it was not the introduction to, the great revolt in the days of Jehoshaphat's son Jehoram, where, again, the details in 2 Chron. xxi. must rely in the first instance upon an old source. Apart from what is said of Jehoshaphat's legislative measures (2 Chron. xix. 4 sqq.; cf. the meaning of his name above), an account is preserved of his alliance with Jehoram of Israel against Moab (2 Kings iii.), on which see JEHORAM; MOAB. The "valley of Jehoshaphat" (Joel iii. 12) has been identified by tradition (as old as Eusebius) with the valley between Jerusalem and the mount of Olives. (S. A. C.)

JEHOVAH (YAHWEH[1]), in the Bible, the God of Israel. "Jehovah" is a modern mispronunciation of the Hebrew name, resulting from combining the consonants of that name, _Jhvh_, with the vowels of the word _adonay_, "Lord," which the Jews substituted for the proper name in reading the scriptures. In such cases of substitution the vowels of the word which is to be read are written in the Hebrew text with the consonants of the word which is not to be read. The consonants of the word to be substituted are ordinarily written in the margin; but inasmuch as Adonay was regularly read instead of the ineffable name Jhvh, it was deemed unnecessary to note the fact at every occurrence. When Christian scholars began to study the Old Testament in Hebrew, if they were ignorant of this general rule or regarded the substitution as a piece of Jewish superstition, reading what actually stood in the text, they would inevitably pronounce the name Jehovah. It is an unprofitable inquiry who first made this blunder; probably many fell into it independently. The statement still commonly repeated that it originated with Petrus Galatinus (1518) is erroneous; Jehova occurs in manuscripts at least as early as the 14th century.

The form Jehovah was used in the 16th century by many authors, both Catholic and Protestant, and in the 17th was zealously defended by Fuller, Gataker, Leusden and others, against the criticisms of such scholars as Drusius, Cappellus and the elder Buxtorf. It appeared in the English Bible in Tyndale's translation of the Pentateuch (1530), and is found in all English Protestant versions of the 16th century except that of Coverdale (1535). In the Authorized Version of 1611 it occurs in Exod. vi. 3; Ps. lxxxiii. 18; Isa. xii. 2; xxvi. 4, beside the compound names Jehovah-jireh, Jehovah-nissi, Jehovah-shalom; elsewhere, in accordance with the usage of the ancient versions, Jhvh is represented by Lord (distinguished by capitals from the title "Lord," Heb. _adonay_). In the Revised Version of 1885 Jehovah is retained in the places in which it stood in the A. V., and is introduced also in Exod. vi. 2, 6, 7, 8; Ps. lxviii. 20; Isa. xlix. 14; Jer. xvi. 21; Hab. iii. 19. The American committee which cooperated in the revision desired to employ the name Jehovah wherever Jhvh occurs in the original, and editions embodying their preferences are printed accordingly.

Several centuries before the Christian era the name Jhvh had ceased to be commonly used by the Jews. Some of the later writers in the Old Testament employ the appellative Elohim, God, prevailingly or exclusively; a collection of Psalms (Ps. xlii.-lxxxiii.) was revised by an editor who changed the Jhvh of the authors into Elohim (see e.g. xlv. 7; xlviii. 10; l. 7; li. 14); observe also the frequency of "the Most High," "the God of Heaven," "King of Heaven," in Daniel, and of "Heaven" in First Maccabees. The oldest Greek versions (Septuagint), from the third century B.C., consistently use [Greek: Kyrios], "Lord," where the Hebrew has Jhvh, corresponding to the substitution of Adonay for Jhvh in reading the original; in books written in Greek in this period (e.g. Wisdom, 2 and 3 Maccabees), as in the New Testament, [Greek: Kyrios] takes the place of the name of God. Josephus, who as a priest knew the pronunciation of the name, declares that religion forbids him to divulge it; Philo calls it ineffable, and says that it is lawful for those only whose ears and tongues are purified by wisdom to hear and utter it in a holy place (that is, for priests in the Temple); and in another passage, commenting on Lev. xxiv. 15 seq.: "If anyone, I do not say should blaspheme against the Lord of men and gods, but should even dare to utter his name unseasonably, let him expect the penalty of death."[2]

Various motives may have concurred to bring about the suppression of the name. An instinctive feeling that a proper name for God implicitly recognizes the existence of other gods may have had some influence; reverence and the fear lest the holy name should be profaned among the heathen were potent reasons; but probably the most cogent motive was the desire to prevent the abuse of the name in magic. If so, the secrecy had the opposite effect; the name of the god of the Jews was one of the great names in magic, heathen as well as Jewish, and miraculous efficacy was attributed to the mere utterance of it.

In the liturgy of the Temple the name was pronounced in the priestly benediction (Num. vi. 27) after the regular daily sacrifice (in the synagogues a substitute--probably Adonay--was employed);[3] on the Day of Atonement the High Priest uttered the name ten times in his prayers and benediction. In the last generations before the fall of Jerusalem, however, it was pronounced in a low tone so that the sounds were lost in the chant of the priests.[4]

After the destruction of the Temple (A.D. 70) the liturgical use of the name ceased, but the tradition was perpetuated in the schools of the rabbis.[5] It was certainly known in Babylonia in the latter part of the 4th century,[6] and not improbably much later. Nor was the knowledge confined to these pious circles; the name continued to be employed by healers, exorcists and magicians, and has been preserved in many places in magical papyri. The vehemence with which the utterance of the name is denounced in the Mishna--"He who pronounces the Name with its own letters has no part in the world to come!"[7]--suggests that this misuse of the name was not uncommon among Jews.

The Samaritans, who otherwise shared the scruples of the Jews about the utterance of the name, seem to have used it in judicial oaths to the scandal of the rabbis.[8]

The early Christian scholars, who inquired what was the true name of the God of the Old Testament, had therefore no great difficulty in getting the information they sought. Clement of Alexandria (d. c. 212) says that it was pronounced [Greek: Iaoue].[9] Epiphanius (d. 404), who was born in Palestine and spent a considerable part of his life there, gives [Greek: Iabe] (one cod. [Greek: Iaue]).[10] Theodoret (d. c. 457),[11] born in Antioch, writes that the Samaritans pronounced the name [Greek: Iabe] (in another passage, [Greek: Iabai]), the Jews [Greek: Aia].[12] The latter is probably not Jhvh but _Ehyeh_ (Exod. iii. 14), which the Jews counted among the names of God; there is no reason whatever to imagine that the Samaritans pronounced the name Jhvh differently from the Jews. This direct testimony is supplemented by that of the magical texts, in which [Greek: Iabe zebyth] (Jahveh Sebaoth), as well as [Greek: Iaba], occurs frequently.[13] In an Ethiopic list of magical names of Jesus, purporting to have been taught by him to his disciples, _Yawe_ is found.[14] Finally, there is evidence from more than one source that the modern Samaritan priests pronounce the name _Yahweh_ or _Yahwa_.[15]

There is no reason to impugn the soundness of this substantially consentient testimony to the pronunciation Yahweh or Jahveh, coming as it does through several independent channels. It is confirmed by grammatical considerations. The name Jhvh enters into the composition of many proper names of persons in the Old Testament, either as the initial element, in the form Jeho- or Jo- (as in Jehoram, Joram), or as the final element, in the form _-jahu_ or _-jah_ (as in Adonijahu, Adonijah). These various forms are perfectly regular if the divine name was Yahweh, and, taken altogether, they cannot be explained on any other hypothesis. Recent scholars, accordingly, with but few exceptions, are agreed that the ancient pronunciation of the name was Yahweh (the first h sounded at the end of the syllable).

Genebrardus seems to have been the first to suggest the pronunciation _Iahué_,[16] but it was not until the 19th century that it became generally accepted.

Jahveh or Yahweh is apparently an example of a common type of Hebrew proper names which have the form of the 3rd pers. sing, of the verb. e.g. Jabneh (name of a city), Jabin, Jamlek, Jiptah (Jephthah), &c. Most of these really are verbs, the suppressed or implicit subject being _'el_, "_numen_, god," or the name of a god; cf. Jabneh and Jabne-el, Jiptah and Jiptah-el.

The ancient explanations of the name proceed from Exod. iii. 14, 15, where "Yahweh[17] hath sent me" in v. 15 corresponds to "Ehyeh hath sent me" in v. 14, thus seeming to connect the name Yahweh with the Hebrew verb _hayah_, "to become, to be." The Palestinian interpreters found in this the promise that God would be with his people (cf. v. 12) in future oppressions as he was in the present distress, or the assertion of his eternity, or eternal constancy; the Alexandrian translation [Greek: 'Egô eimi ho ôn ... 'Ho ôn apestalken me pros hymas], understands it in the more metaphysical sense of God's absolute being. Both interpretations, "He (who) is (always the same)," and "He (who) is (absolutely, the truly existent)," import into the name all that they profess to find in it; the one, the religious faith in God's unchanging fidelity to his people, the other, a philosophical conception of absolute being which is foreign both to the meaning of the Hebrew verb and to the force of the tense employed. Modern scholars have sometimes found in the name the expression of the aseity[18] of God; sometimes of his reality, in contrast to the imaginary gods of the heathen. Another explanation, which appears first in Jewish authors of the middle ages and has found wide acceptance in recent times, derives the name from the causative of the verb; He (who) causes things to be, gives them being; or calls events into existence, brings them to pass; with many individual modifications of interpretation--creator, life-giver, fulfiller of promises. A serious objection to this theory in every form is that the verb _hayah_, "to be," has no causative stem in Hebrew; to express the ideas which these scholars find in the name Yahweh the language employs altogether different verbs.

This assumption that Yahweh is derived from the verb "to be," as seems to be implied in Exod. iii. 14 seq., is not, however, free from difficulty. "To be" in the Hebrew of the Old Testament is not _hawah_, as the derivation would require, but _hayah_; and we are thus driven to the further assumption that _hawah_ belongs to an earlier stage of the language, or to some older speech of the forefathers of the Israelites. This hypothesis is not intrinsically improbable--and in Aramaic, a language closely related to Hebrew, "to be" actually is _hawa_--but it should be noted that in adopting it we admit that, using the name Hebrew in the historical sense, Yahweh is not a Hebrew name. And, inasmuch as nowhere in the Old Testament, outside of Exod. iii., is there the slightest indication that the Israelites connected the name of their God with the idea of "being" in any sense, it may fairly be questioned whether, if the author of Exod. iii. 14 seq., intended to give an etymological interpretation of the name Yahweh,[19] his etymology is any better than many other paronomastic explanations of proper names in the Old Testament, or than, say, the connexion of the name [Greek: Apollôn] with [Greek: apolouôn], [Greek: apolyôn] in Plato's _Cratylus_, or the popular derivation from [Greek: apollymi].

A root _hawah_ is represented in Hebrew by the nouns _howah_ (Ezek., Isa. xlvii. 11) and _hawwah_ (Ps., Prov., Job) "disaster, calamity, ruin."[20] The primary meaning is probably "sink down, fall," in which sense--common in Arabic--the verb appears in Job xxxvii. 6 (of snow falling to earth). A Catholic commentator of the 16th century, Hieronymus ab Oleastro, seems to have been the first to connect the name "Jehova" with _howah_ interpreting it _contritio, sive pernicies_ (destruction of the Egyptians and Canaanites); Daumer, adopting the same etymology, took it in a more general sense: Yahweh, as well as Shaddai, meant "Destroyer," and fitly expressed the nature of the terrible god whom he identified with Moloch.

The derivation of Yahweh from _hawah_ is formally unimpeachable, and is adopted by many recent scholars, who proceed, however, from the primary sense of the root rather than from the specific meaning of the nouns. The name is accordingly interpreted, He (who) falls (baetyl, [Greek: baitylos], meteorite); or causes (rain or lightning) to fall (storm god); or casts down (his foes, by his thunderbolts). It is obvious that if the derivation be correct, the significance of the name, which in itself denotes only "He falls" or "He fells," must be learned, if at all, from early Israelitish conceptions of the nature of Yahweh rather than from etymology.

A more fundamental question is whether the name Yahweh originated among the Israelites or was adopted by them from some other people and speech.[21] The biblical author of the history of the sacred institutions (P) expressly declares that the name Yahweh was unknown to the patriarchs (Exod. vi. 3), and the much older Israelite historian (E) records the first revelation of the name to Moses (Exod. iii. 13-15), apparently following a tradition according to which the Israelites had not been worshippers of Yahweh before the time of Moses, or, as he conceived it, had not worshipped the god of their fathers under that name. The revelation of the name to Moses was made at a mountain sacred to Yahweh (the mountain of God) far to the south of Palestine, in a region where the forefathers of the Israelites had never roamed, and in the territory of other tribes; and long after the settlement in Canaan this region continued to be regarded as the abode of Yahweh (Judg. v. 4; Deut. xxxiii. 2 sqq.; 1 Kings xix. 8 sqq. &c.). Moses is closely connected with the tribes in the vicinity of the holy mountain; according to one account, he married a daughter of the priest of Midian (Exod. ii. 16 sqq.; iii. 1); to this mountain he led the Israelites after their deliverance from Egypt; there his father-in-law met him, and extolling Yahweh as "greater than all the gods," offered (in his capacity as priest of the place?) sacrifices, at which the chief men of the Israelites were his guests; there the religion of Yahweh was revealed through Moses, and the Israelites pledged themselves to serve God according to its prescriptions. It appears, therefore, that in the tradition followed by the Israelite historian the tribes within whose pasture lands the mountain of God stood were worshippers of Yahweh before the time of Moses; and the surmise that the name Yahweh belongs to their speech, rather than to that of Israel, has considerable probability. One of these tribes was Midian, in whose land the mountain of God lay. The Kenites also, with whom another tradition connects Moses, seem to have been worshippers of Yahweh. It is probable that Yahweh was at one time worshipped by various tribes south of Palestine, and that several places in that wide territory (Horeb, Sinai, Kadesh, &c.) were sacred to him; the oldest and most famous of these, the mountain of God, seems to have lain in Arabia, east of the Red Sea. From some of these peoples and at one of these holy places, a group of Israelite tribes adopted the religion of Yahweh, the God who, by the hand of Moses, had delivered them from Egypt.[22]

The tribes of this region probably belonged to some branch of the great Arab stock, and the name Yahweh has, accordingly, been connected with the Arabic _hawa_, "the void" (between heaven and earth), "the atmosphere," or with the verb _hawa_, cognate with Heb. _hawah_, "sink, glide down" (through space); _hawwa_ "blow" (wind). "He rides through the air, He blows" (Wellhausen), would be a fit name for a god of wind and storm. There is, however, no certain evidence that the Israelites in historical times had any consciousness of the primitive significance of the name.

The attempts to connect the name Yahweh with that of an Indo-European deity (Jehovah-Jove, &c.), or to derive it from Egyptian or Chinese, may be passed over. But one theory which has had considerable currency requires notice, namely, that Yahweh, or Yahu, Yaho,[23] is the name of a god worshipped throughout the whole, or a great part, of the area occupied by the Western Semites. In its earlier form this opinion rested chiefly on certain misinterpreted testimonies in Greek authors about a god [Greek: Iaô], and was conclusively refuted by Baudissin; recent adherents of the theory build more largely on the occurrence in various parts of this territory of proper names of persons and places which they explain as compounds of Yahu or Yah.[24] The explanation is in most cases simply an assumption of the point at issue; some of the names have been misread; others are undoubtedly the names of Jews. There remain, however, some cases in which it is highly probable that names of non-Israelites are really compounded with Yahweh. The most conspicuous of these is the king of Hamath who in the inscriptions of Sargon (722-705 B.C.) is called Yaubi'di and Ilubi'di (compare Jehoiakim-Eliakim). Azriyau of Jaudi, also, in inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser (745-728 B.C.), who was formerly supposed to be Azariah (Uzziah) of Judah, is probably a king of the country in northern Syria known to us from the Zenjirli inscriptions as Ja'di.

Friedrich Delitzsch brought into notice three tablets, of the age of the first dynasty of Babylon, in which he read the names of _Ya-a'-ve-ilu_, _Ya-ve-ilu_, and _Ya-u-um-ilu_ ("Yahweh is God"), and which he regarded as conclusive proof that Yahweh was known in Babylonia before 2000 B.C.; he was a god of the Semitic invaders in the second wave of migration, who were, according to Winckler and Delitzsch, of North Semitic stock (Canaanites, in the linguistic sense).[25] We should thus have in the tablets evidence of the worship of Yahweh among the Western Semites at a time long before the rise of Israel. The reading of the names is, however, extremely uncertain, not to say improbable, and the far-reaching inferences drawn from them carry no conviction. In a tablet attributed to the 14th century B.C. which Sellin found in the course of his excavations at Tell Ta'annuk (the Taanach of the O.T.) a name occurs which may be read Ahi-Yawi (equivalent to Hebrew Ahijah);[26] if the reading be correct, this would show that Yahweh was worshipped in Central Palestine before the Israelite conquest. The reading is, however, only one of several possibilities. The fact that the full form Yahweh appears, whereas in Hebrew proper names only the shorter Yahu and Yah occur, weighs somewhat against the interpretation, as it does against Delitzsch's reading of his tablets.

It would not be at all surprising if, in the great movements of populations and shifting of ascendancy which lie beyond our historical horizon, the worship of Yahweh should have been established in regions remote from those which it occupied in historical times; but nothing which we now know warrants the opinion that his worship was ever general among the Western Semites.

Many attempts have been made to trace the West Semitic Yahu back to Babylonia. Thus Delitzsch formerly derived the name from an Akkadian god, I or Ia; or from the Semitic nominative ending, Yau;[27] but this deity has since disappeared from the pantheon of Assyriologists. The combination of Yah with Ea, one of the great Babylonian gods, seems to have a peculiar fascination for amateurs, by whom it is periodically "discovered." Scholars are now agreed that, so far as Yahu or Yah occurs in Babylonian texts, it is as the name of a foreign god.

Assuming that Yahweh was primitively a nature god, scholars in the 19th century discussed the question over what sphere of nature he originally presided. According to some he was the god of consuming fire; others saw in him the bright sky, or the heaven; still others recognized in him a storm god, a theory with which the derivation of the name from Heb. _hawah_ or Arab. _hawa_ well accords. The association of Yahweh with storm and fire is frequent in the Old Testament; the thunder is the voice of Yahweh, the lightning his arrows, the rainbow his bow. The revelation at Sinai is amid the awe-inspiring phenomena of tempest. Yahweh leads Israel through the desert in a pillar of cloud and fire; he kindles Elijah's altar by lightning, and translates the prophet in a chariot of fire. See also Judg. v. 4 seq.; Deut. xxxiii. 1; Ps. xviii. 7-15; Hab. iii. 3-6. The cherub upon which he rides when he flies on the wings of the wind (Ps. xviii. 10) is not improbably an ancient mythological personification of the storm cloud, the genius of tempest (cf. Ps. civ. 3). In Ezekiel the throne of Yahweh is borne up on Cherubim, the noise of whose wings is like thunder. Though we may recognize in this poetical imagery the survival of ancient and, if we please, mythical notions, we should err if we inferred that Yahweh was originally a departmental god, presiding specifically over meteorological phenomena, and that this conception of him persisted among the Israelites till very late times. Rather, as the god--or the chief god--of a region and a people, the most sublime and impressive phenomena, the control of the mightiest forces of nature are attributed to him. As the God of Israel Yahweh becomes its leader and champion in war; he is a warrior, mighty in battle; but he is not a god of war in the specific sense.

In the inquiry concerning the nature of Yahweh the name Yahweh Sebaoth (E.V., The LORD of Hosts) has had an important place. The hosts have by some been interpreted of the armies of Israel (see 1 Sam. xvii. 45, and note the association of the name in the Books of Samuel, where it first appears, with the ark, or with war); by others, of the heavenly hosts, the stars conceived as living beings, later, perhaps, the angels as the court of Yahweh and the instruments of his will in nature and history (Ps. lxxxix.); or of the forces of the world in general which do his bidding, cf. the common Greek renderings, [Greek: Kyrios tôn dynameôn] and [Greek: K. pantokratôr], (Universal Ruler). It is likely that the name was differently understood in different periods and circles; but in the prophets the hosts are clearly superhuman powers. In many passages the name seems to be only a more solemn substitute for the simple Yahweh, and as such it has probably often been inserted by scribes. Finally, Sebaoth came to be treated as a proper name (cf. Ps. lxxx. 5, 8, 20), and as such is very common in magical texts.

LITERATURE.--Reland, _Decas exercitationum philologicarum de vera
pronuntiatione nominis Jehova_, 1707; Reinke,
"Philologisch-historische Abhandlung über den Gottesnamen Jehova," in
_Beiträge zur Erklärung des Alten Testaments_, III. (1855); Baudissin,
"Der Ursprung des Gottesnamens [Greek: Iaô]," in _Studien zur
semitischen Religionsgeschichte_, I. (1876), 179-254; Driver, "Recent
Theories on the Origin and Nature of the Tetragrammaton," in _Studia
Biblica_, I. (1885), 1-20; Deissmann, "Griechische Transkriptionen des
Tetragrammaton," in _Bibelstudien_ (1895), 1-20; Blau, _Das
altjüdische Zauberwesen_, 1898. See also HEBREW RELIGION.
(G. F. Mo.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] This form, _Yahweh_, as the correct one, is generally used in the
separate articles throughout this work.

[2] See Josephus, Ant. ii. 12, 4; Philo, _Vita Mosis_, iii. 11 (ii.
§114, ed. Cohn and Wendland); ib. iii. 27 (ii. §206). The Palestinian
authorities more correctly interpreted Lev. xxiv. 15 seq., not of the
mere utterance of the name, but of the use of the name of God in
blaspheming God.

[3] _Siphrê_, Num. §§ 39, 43; _M. Sotah_, iii. 7; _Sotah_, 38_a_. The
tradition that the utterance of the name in the daily benedictions
ceased with the death of Simeon the Just, two centuries or more
before the Christian era, perhaps arose from a misunderstanding of
_Menahoth_, 109_b_; in any case it cannot stand against the testimony
of older and more authoritative texts.

[4] _Yoma_, 39b; _Jer. Yoma_, iii. 7; _Kiddushin_, 71_a_.

[5] R. Johanan (second half of the 3rd century), _Kiddushin_, 71a.

[6] Kiddushin, l.c. = _Pesahim_, 50a.

[7] _M. Sanhedrin_, x. 1; Abba Saul, end of 2nd century.

[8] _Jer. Sanhedrin_, x. 1; R. Mana, 4th century.

[9] _Strom._ v. 6. Variants: [Greek: Ia oue, Ia ouai]; cod. L.
[Greek: Iaou].

[10] _Panarion_, Haer. 40, 5; cf. Lagarde, _Psalter juxta Hebraeos_,
154.

[11] _Quaest._ 15 in Exod.; _Fab. haeret. compend._ v. 3, _sub fin_.

[12] [Greek: Aïa] occurs also in the great magical papyrus of Paris,
1. 3020 (Wessely, _Denkschrift. Wien. Akad._, Phil. Hist. Kl., XXXVI.
p. 120), and in the Leiden Papyrus, xvii. 31.

[13] See Deissmann, _Bibelstudien_, 13 sqq.

[14] See Driver, _Studia Biblica_, I. 20.

[15] See Montgomery, _Journal of Biblical Literature_, xxv.
(1906),49-51.

[16] _Chronographia_, Paris, 1567 (ed. Paris, 1600, p. 79 seq.).

[17] This transcription will be used henceforth.

[18] _A-se-itas_, a scholastic Latin expression for the quality of
existing by oneself.

[19] The critical difficulties of these verses need not be discussed
here. See W. R. Arnold, "The Divine Name in Exodus iii. 14," _Journal
of Biblical Literature_, XXIV. (1905), 107-165.

[20] Cf. also _hawwah_, "desire," Mic. vii. 3; Prov. x. 3.

[21] See HEBREW RELIGION.

[22] The divergent Judaean tradition, according to which the
forefathers had worshipped Yahweh from time immemorial, may indicate
that Judah and the kindred clans had in fact been worshippers of
Yahweh before the time of Moses.

[23] The form _Yahu_, or _Yaho_, occurs not only in composition, but
by itself; see _Aramaic Papyri discovered at Assuan_, B 4, 6, 11; E
14; J 6. This is doubtless the original of [Greek: Iaô], frequently
found in Greek authors and in magical texts as the name of the God of
the Jews.

[24] See a collection and critical estimate of this evidence by
Zimmern, _Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament_, 465 sqq.

[25] _Babel und Bibel_, 1902. The enormous, and for the most part
ephemeral, literature provoked by Delitzsch's lecture cannot be cited
here.

[26] _Denkschriften d. Wien. Akad._, L. iv. p. 115 seq. (1904).

[27] _Wo lag das Paradies?_ (1881), pp. 158-166.

JEHU, son of Jehoshaphat and grandson of Nimshi, in the Bible, a general of Ahab and Jehoram, and, later, king of Israel. Ahaziah son of Jehoram of Judah and Jehoram brother of Ahaziah of Israel had taken joint action against the Aramaeans of Damascus who were attacking Ramoth-Gilead under Hazael. Jehoram had returned wounded to his palace at Jezreel, whither Ahaziah had come down to visit him. Jehu, meanwhile, remained at the seat of war, and the prophet Elisha sent a messenger to anoint him king. The general at once acknowledged the call, "drove furiously" to Jezreel, and, having slain both kings, proceeded to exterminate the whole of the royal family (2 Kings ix., x.). A similar fate befell the royal princes of Judah (see ATHALIAH), and thus, for a time at least, the new king must have had complete control over the two kingdoms (cf. 2 Chron. xxii. 9). Israelite historians viewed these events as a great religious revolution inspired by Elijah and initiated by Elisha, as the overthrow of the worship of Baal, and as a retribution for the cruel murder of Naboth the Jezreelite (see JEZEBEL). A vivid description is given of the destruction of the prophets of Baal at the temple in Samaria (2 Kings x. 27; contrast iii. 2). While Jehu was supported by the Rechabites in his reforming zeal, a similar revolt against Baalism in Judah is ascribed to the priest Jehoiada (see JOASH). In the tragedies of the period it seems clear that Elisha's interest in both Jehu and the Syrian Hazael (2 Kings viii. 7 sqq.) had some political significance, and in opposition to the "Deuteronomic" the commendation in 2 Kings x. 28 sqq., Hosea's denunciation (i. 4) indicates the judgment which was passed upon Jehu's bloodshed in other circles.

In the course of an expedition against Hazael in 842 Shalmaneser II. of Assyria received tribute of silver and gold from Ya-u-a son of Omri,[1] Tyre and Sidon; another attack followed in 839. For some years after this Assyria was unable to interfere, and war broke out between Damascus and Israel. The Israelite story, which may perhaps be supplemented from Judaean sources (see JOASH), records a great loss of territory on the east of the Jordan (2 Kings x. 32 seq.). Under Jehu's successor Jehoahaz there was continual war with Hazael and his son Benhadad, but relief was obtained by his grandson Joash, and the land recovered complete independence under Jeroboam.

Jehu is also the name of a prophet of the time of Baasha and
Jehoshaphat (1 Kings xvi.; 2 Chron. xix., xx.). (S. A. C.)

FOOTNOTE:

[1] I.e. either descendant of, or from the same district as, Omri
(see Hogg, _Ency. Bib._ col. 2291). The Assyrian king's sculpture,
depicting the embassy and its gifts, is the so-called "black obelisk"
now in the British Museum (Nimroud Central Gallery, No. 98; _Guide to
Bab. and Ass. Antiq._, 1900, p. 24 seq., pl. ii.).

JEKYLL, SIR JOSEPH (1663-1738), English lawyer and master of the rolls, son of John Jekyll, was born in London, and after studying at the Middle Temple was called to the bar in 1687. He rapidly rose to be chief justice of Chester (1697), serjeant-at-law and king's serjeant (1700), and a knight. In 1717 he was made master of the rolls. A Whig in politics, he sat in parliament for various constituencies from 1697 to the end of his life, and took an active part there in debating constitutional questions with much learning, though, according to Lord Hervey (_Mem._ 1, 474), with little "approbation." He was censured by the House of Commons for accepting a brief for the defence of Lord Halifax in a prosecution ordered by the house. He was one of the managers of the impeachment of the Jacobite earl of Wintoun in 1715, and of Harley (Lord Oxford) in 1717. In later years he supported Walpole. He became very unpopular in 1736 for his introduction of the "gin act," taxing the retailing of spirituous liquors, and his house had to be protected from the mob. Pope has an illusion to "Jekyll or some odd Whig, Who never changed his principle or wig" (_Epilogue to the Satires_). Jekyll was also responsible for the Mortmain Act of 1736, which was not superseded till 1888. He died without issue in 1738.

His great-nephew JOSEPH JEKYLL (d. 1837) was a lawyer, politician and wit, who excited a good deal of contemporary satire, and who wrote some _jeux d'esprit_ which were well-known in his time. His _Letters of the late Ignatius Sancho, an African_, was published in 1782. In 1894 his correspondence was edited, with a memoir, by the Hon. Algernon Bourke.

JELLACHICH, JOSEF, COUNT (1801-1859), Croatian statesman, was born on the 16th of October 1801 at Pétervárad. He entered the Austrian army (1819), fought against the Bosnians in 1845, was made ban of Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia in 1848 on the petition of the Croatians, and was simultaneously raised to the rank of lieutenant-general by the emperor. As ban, Jellachich's policy was directed to preserving the Slav kingdoms for the Habsburg monarchy by identifying himself with the nationalist opposition to Magyar ascendancy, while at the same time discouraging the extreme "Illyrism" advocated by Lodovik Gáj (1809-1872). Though his separatist measures at first brought him into disfavour at the imperial court, their true objective was soon recognized, and, with the triumph of the more violent elements of the Hungarian revolution, he was hailed as the most conspicuous champion of the unity of the empire, and was able to bring about that union of the imperial army with the southern Slavs by which the revolution in Vienna and Budapest was overthrown (see AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: _History_). He began the war of independence in September 1848 by crossing the Drave at the head of 40,000 Croats. After the bloody battle of Buda he concluded a three days' truce with the Hungarians to enable him to assist Prince Windischgrätz to reduce Vienna, and subsequently fought against the Magyars at Schwechát. During the winter campaign of 1848-49 he commanded, under Windischgrätz, the Austrian right wing, capturing Magyar-Ovar and Raab, and defeating the Magyars at Mór. After the recapture of Buda he was made commander-in-chief of the southern army. At first he gained some successes against Bem (q.v.), but on the 14th of July 1849 was routed by the Hungarians at Hegyes and driven behind the Danube. He took no part in the remainder of the war, but returned to Agram to administer Croatia. In 1853 he was appointed commander-in-chief of the army sent against Montenegro, and in 1855 was created a count. He died on the 20th of May 1859. His _Gedichte_ were published at Vienna in 1851.

See the anonymous _The Croatian Revolution_ of the Year 1848 (Croat.),
Agram, 1898. (R. N. B.)

JELLINEK, ADOLF (1821-1893), Jewish preacher and scholar, was born in Moravia. After filling clerical posts in Leipzig, he became _Prediger_ (preacher) in Vienna in 1856. He was associated with the promoters of the New Learning within Judaism, and wrote on the history of the Kabbala. His bibliographies (each bearing the Hebrew title _Qontres_) were useful compilations. But his most important work lay in three other directions. (1) _Midrashic._ Jellinek published in the six parts of his _Beth ha-Midrasch_ (1853-1878) a large number of smaller _Midrashi_, ancient and medieval homilies and folk-lore records, which have been of much service in the recent revival of interest in Jewish apocalyptic literature. A translation of these collections of Jellinek into German was undertaken by A. Wuensche, under the general title _Aus Israels Lehrhalle_. (2) _Psychological._ Before the study of ethnic psychology had become a science, Jellinek devoted attention to the subject. There is much keen analysis and original investigation in his two essays _Der jüdische Stamm_ (1869) and _Der jüdische Stamm in nicht-jüdischen Sprüch-wörtern_ (1881-1882). It is to Jellinek that we owe the oft-repeated comparison of the Jewish temperament to that of women in its quickness of perception, versatility and sensibility. (3) _Homiletic._ Jellinek was probably the greatest synagogue orator of the 19th century. He published some 200 sermons, in most of which are displayed unobtrusive learning, fresh application of old sayings, and a high conception of Judaism and its claims. Jellinek was a powerful apologist and an accomplished homilist, at once profound and ingenious.

His son, GEORGE JELLINEK, was appointed professor of international law at Heidelberg in 1891. Another son, MAX HERMANN JELLINEK, was made assistant professor of philology at Vienna in 1892.

A brother of Adolf, HERMANN JELLINEK (b. 1823), was executed at the age of 26 on account of his association with the Hungarian national movement of 1848. One of Hermann Jellinek's best-known works was _Uriel Acosta_. Another brother, MORITZ JELLINEK (1823-1883), was an accomplished economist, and contributed to the Academy of Sciences essays on the price of cereals and on the statistical organization of the country. He founded the Budapest tramway company (1864) and was also president of the corn exchange.

See _Jewish Encyclopedia_, vii. 92-94. For a character sketch of Adolf
Jellinek see S. Singer, _Lectures and Addresses_ (1908), pp. 88-93;
Kohut, _Berühmte israelitische Männer und Frauen_. (I. A.)

JEMAPPES, a town in the province of Hainaut, Belgium, near Mons, famous as the scene of the battle at which Dumouriez, at the head of the French Revolutionary Army, defeated the Austrian army (which was greatly outnumbered) under the duke of Saxe-Teschen and Clerfayt on the 6th of November 1792 (see FRENCH REVOLUTIONARY WARS).