The terminus ad quem is suggested by the famous letter of the pseudo-Aristeas, who repre- sents himself as having been instructed by Eleazar, the then high priest at Jerusalem, in the institu- tions of Moses. The latter, says Eleazar, in addition to ‘the token of remembrance on our garments (see FRINGES) and the texts (τὰ λόγια) on doors and gates, commanded us expressly to bind the sign on the hands also’ (καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν χειρῶν τὸ σημεῖον mep7ip0ac—Hody, ‘ Aristez Historia,’ in De Bibliorum Textibus, p. xviii; Kautzsch, Pseud- epigraphen, ‘Der Brief ἃ. Aristeas,’ ν. 159), an un- mistakable reference to the hand-phylactery, but to that only.t Unfortunately the date of Aristeas is still sub judice. For various reasons we decline to accept the early date, c. 200 B.c., advocated by Schiirer (HJP τι. iii. 310), and incline to a date early in the Ist cent. B.c. (cf. Wendland in Kautzsch, op. cit.). We thus obtain a period of one hundred and fifty years (B.C. 250-100), to which the intro- duction of the phylacteries may confidently be ascribed. Now it is more than a coincidence that this is the period which witnessed the growth of that more strict and literal observance of the requirements of the Torah, which is associated with the rise to power and influence of the sect of the HASIDZANS (wh. see) and of their successors, the Pharisees. The latter, we know, acquired great influence under John Hyrcanus (B.C. 135-105),
*Toy in the International Critical Comm. says c. 250 8.6. (‘ Proverbs,’ Introd. xxx); so, too, Wildeboer in Marti’s Hand- comm,
t For this term and the variant σάλευτον (of which Philo gives an ingenious explanation, Opp. ii. 358), as also for the render- ings of the later Greek versions, see Field, Origenis Hexapla, at Ex 1316 and Dt 68.
} Have we here an indication that the head-phylactery was of later introduction than the hand-phylactery? The female diviners of Ezekiel’s day were in the habit of binding amulets (n)nd3, EV ‘pillows,’ but understood in the former sense by Ephraem Syrus, and the anonymous ‘ Hebrew’ who rendered the word by φυλακτήρια, see ap. Field’s Hexapla, in loc.) on their wrists, a practice which Hitzig regarded as the precursor of the phylacteries (see the comm. on Ezk 1318#-, and art. KERCHIEF). The late W. R. Smith seems to have shared this view (Jour. of Philology, xiii. 286).
PHYLACTERIES, FRONTLETS
imposing upon the people their views regarding sacrifice, prayer, and worship generally (Jos. Ant. XVIII. i. 3), and it may well be that among the observances which the Pharisees then introduced (see ἐδ. XIII. xvi. 2), and which were successively abrogated by Hyrcanus and reintroduced by Alexandra (B.C. 78), the practice of ‘laying the téphillin’ had a place. Our conclusion, then, is that the introduction of the phylacteries may with certainty be assigned to the period between B.C. 250 and 100, and conjecturally to the generation embraced by the reigns of Simon the Hasmonzan and his son John Hyrcanus, viz. B.C. 140-105.
iv. THE PHYLACTERIES IN THE EARLY CEN- TURIES A.D.—By the NT writers, as by Josephus (Ant. Iv. viii. 3) and .by their contemporaries
enerally, the phylacteries, like the use of the
héma‘ (yoy) in the cay prayers (Schiirer, HJP Il. ii. 77, 84f.),—for both practices doubtless had their rise in the same period and in the same circles,—were regarded as dating from the days of Moses. The practice was, of course, regarded as having scriptural authority, but even the details of the construction of the phylacteries were ascribed to a special revelation to Moses (techni- cally ‘yop ayo> azdz, for which see Hamburger, Fealencycl. 2nd Suppl. p. 162 ff.). The following details, gleaned from the Mishna,—which may be taken as authoritative for the century ending A.D. 135, although in its present form of somewhat later date,—may be given as illustrating the prac- tice of orthodox Jewish circles in NT times, and as showing, when compared with the details already given in § i., how little change has been introduced since the lst cent. A.D. In the Mishna, then, we find the same terms applied to the phy- lacteries as at the present day, ¢éphilla shel ré’sh and ¢. shel ydadh (for the latter also, more correctly, yy oy "Ἢ ‘téphilla of the arm,’—Mikw. x. 3, 4). The interial was the same (Kel. xxiii. 1); the shape square, not round (Megil. iv. 8). The head- phylactery, sometimes spoken of as the phylactery par excellence (Kel. xviii. 8, etc.),was already divided into four compartments (Kel. id.), but not more (Sanhed. xi. 3), each with its parchment slip (Shabb. viii. 3; ef. Justin Martyr, the first Christian writer outside the NT to refer to the phylacteries by name, Dial. c. Tryphone, 46, ed. Otto}, ii. 148, φυλακτήριον ἐν ὑμέσι λεπτοτάτοις γεγραμμένων χαρακ- τήρων τινῶν) containing in all probability the same passages as in modern times. Thus the third of the passages in question (Dt 6**) is expressly described as ‘ the smallest section (Ajop 7¥78) in the téphillin, which is, Hear, O Israel’ (Sanhed. viii.3).* The writing had to be in the square Hebrew char- acter (πη οὶ, lit. Assyrian, t.e. Syrian or Aramzan). Women, slaves, and minors (07) were exempt from the obligation of wearing the phylacteries (Berakoth, iii. 3), also all males in the presence of their dead (ἐδ. iii. 1), and on Sabbaths and festi- vals, the latter as greater ‘signs’ rendering super- fluous the observance of the lesser sign of the phylacteries. When not in use the phylacteries were kept in a case (ΡῈ, θήκη, Shabb. vi. 2). From various indications it may be inferred that they were worn during the whole day, the justification for which was found in a mistaken interpretation of Ex 13% There the Hebrews are enjoined to keep the feast of Unleavened Cakes rpm: opin, i.e. not from day to day, every day, but—as the phrase elsewhere signifies and as the context requires— from year to year (so correctly Onkelos; also Aquila ἀπὸ χρόνου els χρόνον). The Jews, however, referring the command to the phylacteries (v.°),