Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

AMOS

black) hair, and blue eyes (Tomkins, Jrl. of the Anthropological Institute, xviii. 3, p. 224). They thus resembled the Libyans (the Berbers of today), and belonged to the white race. The same type, with profiles resembling those of the Amorites on the Egyp. monuments, is still met with in Pal., especially in the extreme south. The tall stature of the Amorites impressed the Israelites (Nu 1328. 88, Dt 210. 11 92, if the Anakim are to be regarded as Amorites). Amorites from time to time settled in Egypt, and became naturalised subjects of the Pharaoh. Thus, in the reign of Tahutmes III., the sword-bearer of the king and his brother, a priest, were sons of an Amorite' and his wife Karuna.

[ocr errors]

In the age of the Tel el-Amarna correspondence, the Egyp. governor of the land of the Amorites' was Abd-Asherah (written Abd-Asirti and AbdAsratu), who, with his son Ezer (Aziru), made successful war against Rib-hadad, the governor of Phoenicia, eventually driving him from his cities of Zemar and Gebal. Aziru seems to have been assisted by the forces of Babylon and Aram-naharaim (Mitanni). In some of his despatches to the Pharaoh he describes the Hittites as advancing southward, and as having captured Tunip and other Egyp. towns in northern Syria. The kingdoms of Og and (probably) Sihon did not as yet exist, the field of Bashan' (Ziri-Basana) being under the Egyp. governor Artama-Samas. One of the letters is from the king to the governor of the city of the Amorites,' and orders certain Amorite rebels to be sent in chains to the Pharaoh, whose names are Sarru, Tuya, Lêya, Yisyari (or Pisyari), the sonin-law of Manya, Dâsartî, Palûma, and Nimmakhê. About a century and a half later, Merenptah, the son and successor of Ramses II., built a town in the land of the Amorites (Anast. iii. Rev. 5), and one of the chief officials at his court was Ben-Mazana, the son of Yupa'a or Yau 'the great,' from Ziri-Basana. But we do not know whether Bashan was at the time under Amorite rule.

[blocks in formation]

The same order is observed in our editions of the Heb. Bible, but in the LXX Amos follows Hosea. The same is the case in the Syriac Lives of the Prophets. Greg. Naz. says— Μίαν μὲν εἰσὶν ἐς γραφὴν οἱ δώδεκα

'Ωσηε, κ ̓ ἀμώς, καὶ μιχαίας ὁ τρίτος.

The name has been very variously explained. Jerome, in his preface to Joel, understands it as meaning one who bears a load, but in the preface to Amos he makes it equivalent to the people that is torn asunder. Eusebius gives the alternatives strong, faithful, tearing the people asunder. A Rabbinical tradition asserts that the prophet was called Amos because he was heavy (Heb. 'amus) of tongue,' and represents the Lord as saying, I sent Amos, and they called him stammerer.' The Rabbis ascribed the same physical infirmity to Moses, Isaiah, and Jeremiah. Gesenius (Thes. 1044) was disposed to seek an Egyp. etymology, comparing such familiar Egyp. forms, as Amosis, Amasis. But the most probable view is that which traces it to the verb amas (=to bear), and looks on it as meaning burden-bearer or burdened. The attempt at explanation is carried too far when it is suggested that the name was imposed by the child's parents because of the heavy load of poverty which he was doomed to carry.

[blocks in formation]

the OT.* It is almost certain that he was a Judæan by birth: Am 11 is not absolutely decisive, but taken in conjunction with 712 seems to prove that he was a citizen of the southern kingdom. The attempts which have been made to prove his northern origin from the spelling of certain words (410 511 68. 10 88) must be pronounced failures. He owned a small flock of a peculiar breed of sheep, ugly and short-footed, but valuable for their excellent wool [cf. 2 K 34, the only other passage where the word noked (Am 11) occurs]. These he pastured in the neighbourhood of Tekoa, in the wilderness of Judah. (See TEKOA.) Part of his livelihood was derived from the lightlyesteemed fruit of a few sycomore trees (714). own account of himself (714. 15) gives us the impression that, though poor, he was independent, and able, when occasion demanded, to leave his flock for a while. This is more probable than the supposition that he brought his sheep with him from Tekoa to Bethel. It is extremely likely that his father had followed the same occupation, for in the East avocations are hereditary. The omission of the father's name in the superscription of the prophecy would seem to indicate that he did not belong to a distinguished family (contrast Is 11, Jer 11, Ezk 18, Hos 11, Joel 11 etc.). A worthless Jewish tradition makes the wise woman of Tekoa (2 S 14) to have been his grandmother.

His

In his day it was still common for those who appeared as prophets to come forth from circles where the practices and influences cherished were of such a nature as to prepare men for this high office. But he was doing his ordinary work when the impulse came which brought him to Bethel, the ecclesiastical capital of the N. kingdom, there to denounce the sins of Israel. God called him, without any intermediary (715; cf Gal 11), and the call came with a constraining force which left no choice but to follow (38). External events, no doubt, had their influence. It is impossible to read the book without feeling how deeply A. had been impressed by the westward movement of the Assyr. colossus, and we may reasonably believe that the campaigns prosecuted in this direction by Salmanassar III. (783-773 B.C.), or by Assurdanil (773755 B.C.), had excited his alarm. The note of time 11, 'two years before the earthquake,' does not afford much help in dating his mission. Zec 145 assigns this earthquake to the reign of Uzziah of Judah; and Jerome, on Am 11, makes bold to identify it with the one which Josephus (Ant. IX. X. 4) asserts to have occurred as a punishment of Uzziah's sacrilege: quando iram Domini non solum pœna ejus, qui sacrilegus fuit, sed et terræ motus ostendit, quem Hebræi tunc accidisse commemorant.' Am 11 fixes the prophet's activity in the period when Jeroboam II. of Israel was contemporaneous with

Uzziah.

[ocr errors]

This period extended from 775 to 750 B.C. The tone of the prophecy leaves little doubt that, when it was delivered, the bulk of Jeroboam's

* Our English Bibles, agreeing in this with the majority of modern VSS, mention a second Amos. This is in St. Luke's account of the genealogy of Joseph, the putative father of our Lord, Lk 325. There is, however, some uncertainty as to whether the correct form is not Amoz. The Gr. 'Aus is not decisive, since it is used in the LXX indifferently for ps (Is 11) and Dipy (Am 11), precisely as Jerome has Amos in both cases. The Peshitta also fails to help us. Whereas it transliterates the prophet's name mass and that of Isaiah's father at Lk 825 it combines the two forms Delitzsch and Salkinson, in their Heb. New Testaments, decide in favour of Amoz, both giving 18. The question is not important. In any case we know nothing concerning the person named, and it is not possible to do more than state the negative conclusion that he cannot have been either the prophet of Tekoa or the father of Isaiah, seeing he is removed from Joseph by an interval of only seven generations.

ܘܨ

splendid achievements had already been wrought. The ministry of Amos should therefore be dated about 760 B.C. An attempt has recently been made, on the ground of internal evidence, to bring it down a quarter of a century, and date it about 734. This, however, would require us to set aside Am 710-17, a section which bears every mark of verisimilitude. Bethel was the principal scene of his preaching, perhaps the only one. When he had delivered several addresses there, Amaziah, the chief priest of the royal sanctuary, sent a message to the king, who does not seem to have been present, accusing the preacher of treason, and at the same time ordered the latter to quit the realm. Evidently there was some reason to fear that the oppressed poor might be stirred up to revolt against their lords and masters. The threats of coming judgment would disturb many hearers. The denunciation of cruelty and injustice would awake many echoes. Yet the priest's language evinces all the contempt which a highly-placed official feels towards an interfering nobody, a fellow who, as he thinks, gains a precarious livelihood by prophesying. Jeroboam does not seem to have paid much heed. In the Bab. Talm. Pesachim, fol. 876, it is said: 'How is it proved that Jeroboam did not receive the accusation brought against Amos? . The king answered [in reply to Amaziah], God forbid that that righteous man should have said this; and if he hath said it, what can I do to him? The Shechinah hath said it to him.' The conversation is fictitious; but Amos doubtless withdrew unmolested, after disclaiming any official and permanent standing as a prophet, predicting Amaziah's utter destruction because of his impious hindrance of the divine word (714-17), and completing the delivery of his own message to Israel (8. 9). On reaching home he doubtless put into writing the substance of his speeches, and the roll thus written is the earliest book of prophecy that has come down to us.

[ocr errors]

Concerning his subsequent fortunes we are entirely in the dark. A late Christian tradition, originating probably in the 6th century of our era, affirms that Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, struck him frequently, and treacherously abused him, and finally Amaziah's son killed him, striking him on the forehead with a club, because he had rebuked him for the apostasy of worship ping the two golden calves. The prophet survived long enough to reach his own land [another version adds, at the end of two days'], and was buried with his fathers. It is much more likely that he reached Tekoa in peace, resumed his shepherd life, and eventually was gathered to his fathers. Jerome and Eusebius affirm that his sepulchre was still shown at Tekoa in their days. When Maundrell was in the neighbourhood in 1737 he was told that the tomb was in the village on the mountain. The Roman Church places Amos amongst the martyrs, and commemorates him on the 31st March, the Gr. Church on the 15th June. Amongst the Jews his freedom of speech gave offence even after his death, for the Koh. Rab. blames Amos, Jeremiah, and Ecclesiastes for their fault-finding, and states that this is the reason why the superscriptions to their books run, 'The words of Amos,' etc., and not, 'The words of God.' II. THE PROPHECY.

1. The Authenticity of the writing which bears his name has never been seriously questioned. As to its integrity there is good ground for thinking that the following passages are later additions: 11.2 24.5413 58.962 95.8-15. Emendations of the Massoretic text have been suggested for the undermentioned passages, and most of them merit careful consideration: 111.18 218 35. 9. 11. 12. 14 41. 2.3 56. 9. 11. 12.

16. 26 62. 8. 10. 12 71. 2. 4. 14. 17 86 96. 10. 11.

[ocr errors]

2. The Contents may be summarised thus:-Chs. 1 and 2: THE INTRODUCTION, which touches on the sins, first of the neighbouring nations and then of Israel, and announces their imminent punishment. Chs. 3-6: THE FIRST MAIN DIVISION OF THE Book; 3-43 A Minatory Discourse, addressed chiefly to the ruling classes; 44-13 A Continuation of the same Speech, now directed to the people in general, detailing the judgments by which God had sought to bring them back to Himself, and sharply pointing out that a more decisive stroke was at hand; 5: A Second Address, in which are contained lamentations, reproofs, exhortations to true religion as opposed to false, threats of ruin and captivity; 6: A Woe upon the Luxurious, the Self-Confident, and the Proud. Chs. 7-9: THE SECOND MAIN DIVISION OF THE BOOK; 71-9 Three Visions; 10-17 The Narrative of the Expulsion of Amos; 81-2 A Fourth Vision, the rest of the chapter being occupied with denunciations of the extortionate traders, the selfindulgent rich, the superstitious pilgrims; 9: The Concluding Vision: The Inevitable Punishment of Wrong-doers: The Messianic Future.

3. The distinguishing characteristics of this prophet's Theology are quite unmistakable :— (1) His Idea of God.-Amos was an uncompromising monotheist. There is not a verse in his writings that admits the existence of other deities. But his conviction of the divine unity was not the result of philosophic thought and argument. It was an immediate certainty springing out of his deep sense of J's righteousness, nearness, greatness. So near and so mighty did He seem that there was no room for other gods, and hence there is no discussion of their claims. J" is allpowerful in Heaven and Sheol, on Carmel and in the depths of the sea, in Caphtor and Kir, and Edom and Tyre. His might is shown in the control of human history (chs. 1 and 2, passim; 521 614 97), and esp. in His guidance of the fortunes of Israel. Every movement of the national life, spiritual and external, has been under His hand (29-11). In all the affairs of men there is no such thing as chance; it is His purposes that are constantly being wrought out calamity, as well as prosperity, comes from Him (33-8). This implies His dominion over Nature, the completeness of which comes out in such sections as 46-10, where every natural calamity and scourge, dearth, drought, mildew, locust, pestilence, is traced to the direct exercise of His will. It scarcely need be added that the personality of God was clear to the prophet's mind. Hence it is that he does not shrink from anthropomorphism: J" steps forth against the house of Jeroboam like an armed warrior (79); in pity for His people He changes His purposes (73 etc.).

-

(2) The relation between J" and Israel. In common with all his countrymen, Amos believed that J" was in a peculiar sense their God, and they His people. But they regarded the bond as a natural and indissoluble one, like that which was conceived to exist between other nations and their deities, so that, provided they paid His dues in the form of sacrifices, He was bound in honour, and for His own sake, to protect and bless them. The prophet, on the contrary, insisted that the relation was a moral one, not merely dissoluble, but certain to be dissolved if they fell below His standard of moral requirements. It is in the insistence on this, and in the statement of these moral requirements, that the splendid originality of Amos is most clearly evinced. Ceremonial wor ship has no intrinsic value (521-23): the only genuine service of God consists in justice and righteousness (524); when immorality and oppression are practised by His worshippers, God shrinks from contact with them as from a defilement: inhumanity and

D

unbrotherliness, nay even the failure to respect the sentiments of others (13-24), are hateful to Him when heathens are guilty of them, and much more so when Israel is (32). As to the illegitimate methods of worshipping the Lord, he has but little to say; 34 44 814 show the scorn with which he regarded them. But it is the spirit, not the method, which finds in him so stern an antagonist. His main contention is that ritual, as a substitute for the social virtues, is an abomination. True religion consists in doing good and abstaining from harm. As in the Epistle of St. James, ethical considerations are paramount. Righteousness is the keynote of the prophecy. The word Love does not occur. This bent was due primarily to his apprehension of the divine character. God, to him, was the God of Righteousness rather than of Love. Not, of course, that the sense of the Divine Love is absent; ch. 71-6 is a picture of the placableness which yields to the prophet's intercession, even at the moment when the stroke of punishment is, falling. But in this particular Amos stands far below Hosea. The circumstances of the time helped to fix his view. Jeroboam's victories had brought wealth and power to the upper classes, but had left the poor worse off than of old. The basest advantage was taken of this; the wicked meanness of the powerful provoked Amos to contempt (26). Without being what is now called a socialist-for, indeed, he was in no respect a theorist he felt deeply the rottenness of the social state; the dignity of man was being trampled on; the prevalent luxury was founded on oppression, and was sapping the life of those who practised it. He attacks this luxury unsparingly (64-6); even the custom of reclining at meals, recently introduced from the farther East, is twice rebuked (312 64). The peasant, as well as the prophet, may be felt

here.

This is a picture which would have commended itself to the men who heard Amos, as his genuine predictions did not. One point there is in common: everything is human and earthly, there is no trace of expectation of a future life.

In so early a writer as Amos it is surprising to meet with so few signs of sympathy with the modes of thought and expression which were afterwards abandoned by the higher religion of the OT. At 717 he appears to share in the common idea that other lands are unclean to an Israelite. At 93 he adopts the widespread myth of a dangerous serpent inhabiting the sea, the creature, perhaps, which the dwellers on the Mediterranean coast-lands conceived of as swallowing, each evening, the setting sun. At 58 (a disputed passage) there is probably a mythical idea involved in the mention of the constellation of 'The Fool.' (See art. ORION.) At 610 (another disputed passage) the superstitious dread of pronouncing the divine name amidst inauspicious surroundings is referred to without reproof.

His

4. There was a time when Jerome's verdict on the Style of Amos, imperitus sermone, sed non scientia, was generally acquiesced in. Now, however, it is seen that the Christian Father was prejudiced by his Jewish teacher, and that the prophet was as little deficient in style as in knowledge. In point of fact, he is very little inferior to the best OT writers. His language is clear and vigorous; his sentences are well rounded. imagery, mainly drawn, as was to be expected, from rural life (threshing-sledges, waggon, harvests, grasshoppers, cattle, birds, lions, fishing), is vivid and telling. He knows how to use the refrain (4), and the poetic lament (52); he is skilful in working up to a climax. Two or three solecisms in spelling may well be set down to transcribers. An Eastern shepherd is not necessarily uncultivated, though his culture be not derived from books. This shepherd's outlook was a wide one (1. 2. 97); his apprehension of the meaning of events uncommonly clear; his knowledge born of reflection and the touch of the Divine Spirit.

(3) The Coming Judgment.-The Book of Amos is the earliest writing in which the term 'The Day of J"' is used. Most probably it was current on the people's lips. They imagined that when the Lord arose in judgment it would be, not only for the establishment of His rule over the whole The boldness of his style was an expression of world, but also to their great benefit; all their the boldness of the man and his thoughts. It sufferings would come to a perpetual end; dominion required no small courage for a Judæan to enter as large as David's would be restored to Israel. Israelite territory for the express purpose of interAmos saw that this 'Day' threatened to be one offering in the religious and social life of the nation, judgment on Israel itself (518-20), and its coming appeared so inevitable that he speaks of it as already present. Unlike his predecessors, he looks on the result as totally destructive of the commonwealth (214-16 312-15 42. 3. 12 527 6 passim, 78 91-4.7). Repentance would have averted this (4), but the opportunity has passed. The great world-power which will serve as God's instrument is doubtless Assyria, but the prophet stops short of the mention of its name (527614). Perhaps he was aware of the weakness under which the Eastern colossus then laboured, but believed that it would stand firmly on its feet again.

(4) The Messianic picture in 98-15-One of the weightiest reasons for regarding this as a later addition is its incongruousness with the Visions of Judginent which have preceded. It shows us the land entirely purged of the sinners, the rich officials who had abused their power. The Davidic kingdom is restored, no stress, however, being laid on the person or character of the prince at its head. The ancient bounds of the empire are re-established, foreigners, especially the hated Edomites, being reduced anew to subjection. The Israelite exiles have been brought home, and have rebuilt the waste cities. Agriculture and vine-growing flourish to a miraculous degree on a soil of immensely increased fertility. Israel has reached an earthly paradise, and will never be dispossessed.

denouncing everything as corrupt, threatening swift and utter ruin. Nor is that all. No speaker ever ran counter to the most cherished convictions of his auditors more daringly than the prophet who told them that the destinies of other nations are as really guided by God as those of His chosen people; 97 is almost a contradiction of 3. His courage was derived from his conviction of the reality and dignity of his mission. When the Lord God hath spoken, the man who hears Him cannot but prophesy. And whoever else may fail to hear, the prophet does not; he is of the Privy Council (37.8, cf. Gn 1817). That is the starting-point of Hebrew prophecy.

LITERATURE.-Calvin, Prælect. in Duod. Proph. Min. 1610; J. Gerhardi, Adn. Posth. in Proph. Amos et Jon. 1676; J. C. Harenberg, Amos Proph. Exposit. 1763; L. J. Uhland, Annot. ad loc. quæd. Am. 1779; J. S. Vater, Amos ühers. u. erklärt, 1810; Juynboll, Disputatio de Amoso, 1828; Ewald, Die Proph. des Alten Bundes, 1840; Henderson, Minor Prophets, 845, 1858; Baur, Der Proph. Amos, 1847; Gandell in The Speaker's Commentary, 1876; Hitzig-Steiner, Die Zwölf Kl. Proph. 1881; W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel2, 1896; Hoffmann, 'Versuche zu Amos,' in ZATW, 1883; Gunning, De Godspraken van Amos, 1885; Davidson, Expositor, Mar. and Sept. 1887; Keil, Die Kl. Proph. 1888; Orelli, Die Zwölf Kl. Proph. 1888 (tr. by Banks); Bachmann, Præparationen zu den Kl. Pr. Heft 3, 1890; Farrar, The Minor Prophets; Wellhausen, Die Kl. Proph. 1892; Reuss, Die Propheten, Bd. ii. of A.T. 1892; Michelet, Amos oversat. 1893; Bilieb, Die wichtigsten Sätze der na t Kritik von Standp, der p. Am. u. H. aus betrachtet, 1893; Guthe in Kautzsch's A.T. 1894; Cornill, Der Isr. Prophet

1895; G. A. Smith, The Bk. of the Twelve Prophets, 1896; Driver

[ocr errors]

Joel and Amos, 1897; last but not least, well deserving to be
translated into Eng., Valeton, Amos en Hosea, 1894.
J. TAYLOR.
AMOZ (i), father of the prophet Isaiah (2 K
192, Is l1, etc.), to be carefully distinguished from
Amos (Diby) the prophet. See AMOS (p. 85° n.)

the arc.

(Nu 327), and again in the Chronicler's account
of the organisation of the Levites in the time of
David (1 Ch 2623).
W. C. ALLEN.

AMRAPHEL (S), mentioned as 'king of Shinar' (Gn 14'). Schrader, who suggested that the name was a corruption for Amraphi' ('0798), AMPHIPOLIS ('Aμplwoλis). — Amphipolis, men- was the first to identify this king with Khammurabi, tioned in Ac 17 as a stage in St. Paul's mission- the 6th king in the 1st Dynasty of Babylon. The journey from Philippi to Thessalonica, was a city of cuneiform inscriptions inform us that Khammurabi Macedonia. It was situated on the eastern bank was king of Babylon and N. Babylonia; that he reof the river Strymon, about 3 miles from the belled against the supremacy of Elam; that he oversea, closer to which lay its seaport Eion. The threw his rival Eri-aku, king of Larsa; and, after conriver, on leaving Lake Cercinitis, winds in a semi- quering Sumer and Accad, was the first to make a circle round the base of a terraced hill, on which united kingdom of Babylonia. He reigned 55 years. the town was built, protected by the river on three Winckler gives the date of his reign as 2264-2210: sides, and by a wall along the landward chord of Sayce (Patr. Pal. p. 12) gives 2320 as the date of It was, as Thucydides (iv. 102) says, his uniting Babylonia. But the chron. is uncerconspicuous (repipavhs) toward sea and land; and tain. The name is given by Hommel as Chammuthis is probably the import of its name, 'the all-rapaltu (Gesch. d. Morgenlandes, p. 58), and it has around (visible) city' (Classen, in loc., who suggests sometimes been transcribed as Chammu-ragas. the parallel of Umbstadt in Upper Hesse). Its Mr. Pinches considers Amraphel to be a Sem. importance, already marked by its earlier name name=Amar-apla= Amar-pal ('I see a son'), or 'Nine Ways' ('Evvéa dôol), made its possession keenly Amra-apla= Amrapal (see a son'). contested, alike on military and mercantile grounds. It is clear that the identification is not free from The Athenians founded a colony under Hagnon in difficulty, so far as the Biblical account is conB.C. 437, which presented a history of chequered cerned. (1) The date of Khammurabi, according fortunes and varied interest, in its surrender to to the reckoning of Winckler and Sayce, etc., is Brasidas, the fight under its walls between Brasidas 400 years earlier than the cent. to which Gn 14 is and Cleon in which both fell, its refusal to submit generally ascribed. (2) A. is described as 'king of again to the mother-city, its repeated attempts to Shinar'; and Shinar has generally been identified assert its independence, till it passed into the pos- with Shumer, the S. part of Babylonia. Khamsession of the Macedonians under Perdiccas and murabi, while subject to the suzerainty of Elam, Philip, and eventually into that of the Romans. was king of Babylon and N. Babylonia, but not of By these A. was constituted a free city, and made Shumer or S. Babylonia. This difficulty has been met the capital of the first of the four districts into by the assumption that Shinar is to be understood which, in B.C. 167, they divided the province (Liv. to denote in Gn all Chaldæa, of which Babylon was xlv. 18. 29). The Via Egnatia passed through it. the capital. No great exactitude in geog. terms It was called in the Middle Ages Popolia (Tafel, can be expected. Shinar (Sangar), in the inscripThessal. p. 498 f.), and is now represented by a tions, seems to be situated in Mesopotamia. Possibly village called Neochori, in Turkish Jenikoei (see Heb. tradition confused the Shinar of Mesopotamia plan in Leake, N.G. ii. 191). Zoilus, the carping with the Shumer of S. Babylonia. critic of Homer, was a native, and wrote a history of it in three books (Suidas, s.v.).

It seems best at present to suspend_judgment upon this much disputed identification. The results of Assyriological research in illustration of Gn 14 are still much disputed.

WILLIAM P. DICKSON. AMPLIATUS ('Aμπλâтos, RV correctly with ABF G, Vulg. Boh. Orig., for TR 'Ãμπλiâs, DELP, AV Amplias, the abbrev. form).-A Chris-ylons, tian greeted by St. Paul (Ro 168) as the 'beloved in the Lord.' It is a very common Roman slave name. (Lightfoot, Philippians, p. 172; CIL vi. 4899, 5154, etc.)

It

Some further interest attaches to the name. occurs in one of the earliest chambers of the Catacomb of St. Domitilla, inscribed in large, bold letters over a cell belonging to the end of the 1st or beginning of the 2nd cent. A later inscription in the same chamber also contains the same name. The simplicity of the earliest inscription suggests a slave, and the prominence assigned to the name suggests that it belonged to some prominent member of the early Roman Church, perhaps a member of the household of Domitilla.

LITERATURE.-De Rossi, Bull. Arch. Chrit. Ser. III. vol. vi.

Jos. (Ant. 1. ix.) transcribes the name as 'Aμapaalthough the LXX has 'Aμappaλ. H. E. RYLE. AMULETS ( Is 320, AV ear-rings). — 1. Origin. The connexion with laḥash, to mutter as a snake-charmer (Ps 585), points to something that has had whispered or chanted over it words of power and protection. Cf. Heb. hartom, magician, and its connexion with heret, the graving-pen of the learned writer, and the Arab. 'talisman' similarly associated with the tailasan or long robe of the sacred dervish. The same idea of power through secret lore and sanctity is exemplified at the present day in Jerus., where crucifixes, pictures of the Virgin, and rosaries are laid on the pavement at the door of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre so as to give them this holy value in the market.

(1881) pp. 57-74; Athenæum, March 4, 1884, p. 289; Sanday and something that faith may clasp as a prophylactic

Headlam, Romans, p. 424.

[ocr errors]

A. C. HEADLAM.

AMRAM. (opy the people is exalted '). 1. A Levite, son of Kohath and grandson of Levi (Nu 317-19, 1 Ch 62. 3. 18). He married Jochebed his father's sister, by whom he begat Aaron and Moses (Ex 618-20) and Miriam (Nu 2659, 1 Ch 63). 2. A son of Bani who had contracted a marriage with a strange woman' in the time of Ezra (Ezr 1034).

Amramites, The (77). — A branch of the Kohathite family of the tribe of Levi. The name occurs in the account of the census taken by Moses

2. Meaning. The central meaning of the a. is against known and unknown dangers. It assumes a connexion between holiness and healing, between piety and prosperity, the first being appreciated for the sake of the second. It is a testimony to the sense of sin, for it is only that which is wanting in holiness that requires to be covered or protected. Hence the Arab. proverb says, 'The eye of the sun needs no veil.' Its light is pure, and therefore no protection is required.

The a. unites the protector and the protected; what lays a duty on divine power lays on human weakness a corresponding devotion. Fulness of consecration makes fulness of claim. Hence to

·

the Oriental mind familiar with this amulet faith, the words seem very natural, Be strong in the Lord, and in the power of His might.' 'Perfect love casteth out fear.' 'I can do all things in Him that strengtheneth me.' Thus the a. has a true word of power, for it teaches, 'When I am devoted, I am endued.' By a similar vehicle the apostle reaches the experience which says, 'When I am weak, then am I strong.'

3. Classification. This corresponds with the dangers and the points of contact. There is an a. for the heart (illust. 1) worn almost universally in the East. It is a locket suspended over the breast, and consists sometimes of a small metal case of

And

With this may be classed the neck-amulet. See CRESCENT. Similarly, there were as for the nose and mouth for the dangers by inhalation; for the ear and the temptations of hearing; for the eye and what meets its vision (illust. 3, 7, 8). so the veil for the head and face, and the sheet enveloping the whole figure of the Oriental woman, now the formalities of modesty, were doubtless once full of superstitious meaning. See VEIL. Amulet articles among the Jews are chiefly the fringes of large and small tallith: the mezuza; the paper with Ps 121 and certain Abracadabra formulæ, which the Rabbi puts in the room where there is an infant less than eight days old; and the

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small]

1. The Shield of David,' or 'Solomon's Seal,' a favourite a. among the Jews. 2. Extract from Jewish Birth-A., which gives, under Ps 121, the names of the Patriarchs and their wives, with a formula at each side forbidding the approach of Lilith or any witch. 3. Breast-a. (taubeh). 4. Eye-a., seen in the brass thimble-like ornament on the nose of the Egyptian woman. 5, 6. Cactus, and black or red hand-as. 7, 8. As for nose and ears, worn by Bedawin women, along with necklace, bracelets, and armlet.

gold or silver, but more freq. of a heart-shaped sheath of cloth qrnamented with a design in gold thread. This may contain for the Moslem a few words from the Koran, called a hejab, covering, protection; and if for a Christian, a picture of the Virgin and Child, called a taubeh, penitence.'

phylacteries of the brow and arm. See PHYLACTERY. Amulets are also used for the protection, not only of animals such as camels and horses, but even for newly-built houses, such protection usually taking the form of a roughly-drawn human hand in black or red, or of a cactus plant or aloe hung

« AnteriorContinua »