LlTlRATURR. — Of the earlier literature the standard worit is John Spencer's De legibut Heb. rUuatibiu, etc. IGSii. Of the modeni works the most important are the works on Hebrew antiquities by De Wette. Kwald (Eng. tr. 187(1), Nowack (Ilrh- raUche Arcbdolnqie, 1894, lland li. SacralaltfTthiinier, § 73ff.), and Benzinger (//ci. ^rcAtw>io^, 1894, g 52, Die altisrael. Heilifj- thiimer, etc.), and the more general treatises of Wellhauaen {Skizz^n mid Vararbeiten, iu.. JUste arab. Ueulentbunu, 18S7), and. In particular, W. H. Smith's Reliijion o/ Ihe Semitet, 1889 (2lKl ed. 1895). The student should also consult the standard work of Perrot and Chipiez, UisUnre de VArt dana CAntiifuUi. tome iii. J'hHiiciet lv. Judie, etc. (Kng. tr. iiwf. of Art in rkccnicia, i vols. 1888, Bitt. <>f A. in Jvdea etc., 2 vols. 1890). A. K. S. Kknnedy. AL-TASHHETH (m:^!f^H, AV Al-Uschith), Pss 67. 58. 59. 65 (titles). See Psalms.
ALTOGETHER is now only an adv., but was at first an adj., being simply a stronger 'all.' As an adj. it is found in Ps 39* ' Verily every man at his best state is a. vanity ' ; Is 10* ' Are not my
ItT
the
princes a. (RV 'all of them') kinjjs,' and perhaps Nu 16". Of its use as an adv. noticeable examples are Jer 30", where ' I will not leave thee a. un- punished' is given in RV ' I will in no wise leave thee unpunished ' ; Ac 26-'*, where ' Imth almost nnd a.' is in RV ' whether with little or with much ' after the Gr. ; and 1 Co 5'°, wIutc ' not a.' (Gr. oi' irdiTw!) is taken by commentators in two direclly ojiii. ■enses, either ' not wholly,' or ' not at all ' ; RV gives the first in text, the second in marg.
J. Hastings. ALDSH (CiSk). — A station in the journeyings, occurs only Nu 33"- '■'. (See SiNAI.)
ALVAN (nW-— Son of Shobal, a Tlorite (Gn 36==). The name appears in 1 Ch l* as Allan (i;^!'). It is clearly the same a.s Alvah (ii^'y) in Gn 36*", which appears in 1 Ch 1" as Aliah (n;^!;), one of tin; 'dukes' of Edom. Knobcd compares the name with that of a Bedawin clan Almoin, said by Burckhanit
to be dwelling north of the Gulf of Akabah. See Dillm. »n loc. H. Jl. Ryle.
ALWAY, ALWAYS.— Alway (i.e. 'all the way') is originally the accus. of duration, 'all the time'; while always is the genit. of occurrence, 'at ail times.' And although by 1011 this dis- tinction was vanishing, there are some undoubted instances in AV. Cf. Mt 28™ ' Lo, I am with you alway,' with Ro 1* ' I make mention of you always in my prayers.' RV gives alway for always at Ac 24"'«, 2 Th 1» ; and always for alway at Col 4« apparently capriciously, for these changes oblite- rate the distinction noticed above. When the dis- tinction was lost, always drove alway out of use.
J. Hastings.
AMAD (ivoy), Jos 19=« only.— A city of Asher. The site is doubtful ; there are several ruins called 'Amud in this region.
AMADATHUS, Est 12« 16»-". See Hamme- datua.
AMAIN only in 2 Mao W* 'the enemies . . . fled a.' (so RV\ Gr. ch <pvy^v Sipiiriaaii). The mean- ing is ' at once, precipitately.'
AMAL (Scy). — A descendant of Asher, 1 Ch 7" See Genealogy.
AMALEK, AMALEKITES (p^sy, 'p^oy). — A nomadic Arabian tribe, occupying tlie \vide desert region between Sinai on the south and the southern borders of Palestine on the north. This district corresponds to what is now called the wilderness of Et-Tili. The Amalekites are represented as per- petually at feud with the Israelites, though such closely connected tribes as the Kenites and Keniz- zites appear from the first as friendly, and ulti- mately as peaceful settlers in the midst of the pos.sessions of Israel.
References to the Amalekites appear very early in the OT history. In the account of the cam- paigns of Chedorlaomer of Elam and his confeder- ates in Gn 14, ' the countrj" of the Amalekites ' near Kadesh is described as the scene of one of those desolatinp wars. Hengstenberg, followed by Kurtz, maintains that this does not imply that the Amalekites were in existence in the Jays of Abraham, but only that this country, lying be- tween Kadesh and the land of the Amorites, after- wards kno\vn as ' the fields of the Amalekites,' was at that early period overrun and destroyed by Chedorlaomer. Had there been no other hints of the extreme antiquity of the Amalekites, this ex- planation might perhaps be accepted. But we find again in the cliant of Balaam (Nu 24™) that Amaiek is described a.s 'the first of the nations,' which seems almost certainly to mean a primitive people to be reckoned among the very olilest of the nations. Most recent scholars are agreed in assigning to the Amalekites a high antiipiity. This is the conclusion to which such passages as those referred to would naturally lead. The only reascm why an attempt should be made to jiut aiiv other interpretation upon these words is the idea that, in Gn 3(1", the descent of the Amalekites is traced from Amaiek, the grand.son of E.sau, and their origin thus brought down to a later period than that of Abraham. It is exceedingly hazardous to build any argument of this sort on an occasional statement in a genealogical table reproduced from some unknown source, seeing that it is inipo.ssible to determine what the point of view of the original compiler may have been. In many ea.ses such genealogical lists seem intended to set forth simply certain interrelations of tribes, so that, though terms indicating personal and family relationsldps are