* When yahw forms the first element of a proper name, It becomes — through an intermediate y^aw (cf. 133 from "12;)- yehd, y/S (as Jehoram, Joram) ; see Gray, p. 2S1 ff-,'who enunier ates 29 names of this type ; cf- p- 300 (El-yeAo-'enai, * Unto Yah are my eyes ').
t For Rabb. theories oj the orthography In pome of the«« cues of. Geiger, Unchri/t, 274-278.
JAIiATH
JAHZEIAH
539
all proper names, and the supposed traces of the name amon" Semitic nations (other than the Hebrews), who did not use the verb hdwdh, and could not consequently have formed a name from it. The same opinion has been adopted by Hom- mel {AHT 113 f., 115 f., 144, 145, •_'J0), who follows Mr. Pinches * in thinkinj,', in particular, that Yah is identical with Ai OT Va, found in an Arabian name Ai-kalnbu on a contract-tablet of c. B.C. 2300, and in various Assyrian names (as Abu-Ai, Ashur-Ai', Samas-Ai) of 9-8 cent. li.C., and who, in- ferring from these indications the antiquity of the form, concludes that Ynhweh is a later Mosaic moditication of Yah, introduced for the purpose of imparting to it a new significance. Delitzsch's theory was criticized at the time by Philippi : t in view of the fact that Jahweh is the standmg form of the name in the OT, and is attested independ- ently for c. B.C. 850 by Mesha, wliile Jali, as shown above, is exceptional and mostly late, it is exceedingly dilhciilt to think that the latter can be really tlie more original form ; while its occurrence in proper names is sulliciently accounted for by the tendency to abbreviation which would there be natural. The opinions of Pinches and Hommel have not hitherto (so far as the writer is aware) been endorsed by other AssyrioIogists.J
Among the Jewish names occurring on the cuneiform tablets of the Persian period, found recently by the Pennsylvanian Expedition at Nippur, are many of the form Gndnlyama (or ■ydwa), Igdalijdma (or -ydwa), Mattani/dma (or ■i/dica), i.e. Gedaliah, Igdaliah, Mattaniah, etc.§ Mr. Pinches had noted before, from the same age {PSBA, I.e. p. 14f.), Gamarijdvia (or -ica), i.e. Gemariah ; ifatanayuma (or-wa), i.e. Nethaniah ; Shubunuydnia (or -wa), i.e. Shebaniah ; and others. These forms would seem to show that in the Persian age the divine element in such names was pronounced as a dissyllable ; it is strange, therefore, to find them in the books Ezr-Neh (as remarked above) all but uniformly written with ■yah. Perhaps further investigation may explain the discrepancy. S. R. Drivee.
JAHATH (nrj:, perh. for r^prii • he [God] will snatch np '). — 1. A grandson of Judah, 1 Ch 4-. 2. A
freat-grandson of Levi, 1 Ch G-*- **. 3. A sou of himei, 1 Ch 23'". i. One of the ' sons ' of Shelo- moth, 1 Ch24*'. 8. A Merarite Levite in the time of Josiah, 2 Ch 34". See Genealogy.
JAHAZ d-n* Is 15*, Jer 48" ; pans, and n hrale n^n: Nu 21==, Dt 2=" [cf. n^n-:^ Jg ll™] ; in Jos 13'« called .ijn; : in 1 Ch 6™, Jer 48'-» n>n:, RV Jahzah. The LXX renderings are: — Ehaa B Nu 21^; 'ld<r<ra B'AF Nu 21^ B Dt 2«, A Jos 13"*, 'Idcra Jg I1-* where A has IijX, Bdirai- B Jos 13". The variations and omissions in Jos 21*', 1 Ch 6", Is 15', Jer 48"- *♦ are too complicated for reproduction). — A town at which Sihon was defeated by Israel (Nu 21^, Dt 2*-, Jg 11^). According to Tristram and Palmer, it was south of the Amon on a site marked in maps aa Muhniel el-IIaj. But as Jahaz is counted among the cities of Reuben, whose Bouthern boundary was the Arnon, a situation to the north of that river seems required. After the
• See PSBA XT. (1892) pp. 18-18; Trorw. Viet. IruU xxvlll. (18n.'))pp. 11-13.
t St-e Sludia Jliblica. 1. pp. 1-6 ; »nd comp. Or»jr, pp. 149-151.
: Comp. J«8trow In JBLit. lii. (1*>4). P^ l"*'., ami Xritich. /. J«jM/r. X. (180.'>), p. 2*^211.; and Cluy in the Lutheran Church Rrrifxr (U.S.A.), 1895, p. 197. Joalrow'ii arfrunuTiM a^inflt Pinches are forcible, lliouijh liin own theory that tlio ]ia m the Abs^t. names (aa well as tn many lleb. nanu-K> Is an 'afforma- tive restA upon InsuHlcient (grounds. l>clil£5ch and others aiflaln the Aasvr. ia simply s« the suIHx oI Uie first person (Cl.iv, U. pp. l(fr-l»91.
; ililprecht In the PEFSt, Jan. 1898, p. 65 (and Bab. Eiped. \x. 27); Pinches, ib., Apr. 1898, p. ia7(.
crossing of the Amon, messengers were sent to Sihon from the ' wildernes-s of Kedemoth,' Dt 2*, and he ' went out against Israel into the wilderness and came to Jahaz,' Nu 21^. Jahaz is mentioned in connexion with Kedemoth, Jos 13"* 21*". These passages indicate a po.sition for Jahaz in the S. E. portion of Sihon's territory. Eusebius in the Onomtuilicun (204. 94, Lagarde, p. 207) describes Jahaz as existing in his time between Medeba and Dibon (^iTj^oui). This assigns a more central position to Jahaz, and implies that Israel, before encountering the forces of Sihon, disregarding his refusal, had advanced some distance into his land. If for Atj^oDs we read 'Eo-^oDr, as Reland (Pal. tom. 2, p. 825) suggests, the position of Jahaz will be farther north. Jahaz was one of the Levite cities of Reuben belonging to the children of Merari, Jos 13"* 21 '« (see note in RVm), 1 Ch 0". Accord- ing to the Moabite Stone (11. 18-20), the king of Isr.ael dwelt at Jahaz while at w,ar with king Meslia, but was driven out, and the town was taken and added to -Moabite territory. Isaiah (15') and Jeremiah (43'-'-*') refer to it as in the possession of Moab. The site has not yet been identified. See SEP Mem. p. 279 note, and G. A. .Smith, HGHL, p. 559 and note.