y stone of this character would mark a Béth-el. Hence such stones came to be called by the Greeks βαίτυλοι or βαιτύλια. In Is 57° we have an interesting reference to the wide pre- valence of this worship of sacred stones, on which drink-offerings were poured and to which meal- offerings were offered. In the wadis, the winter- torrents made these boulders smooth and round. See Cheyne’s note, ad loc., in SBOT.
It was not at every spot that such sacred pillars were erected. There must be a special manifesta- tion of the Divine presence in order to render the worship valid, because the place had thus become invested with special sanctity. Not simply fertile oases with trees and flowing spring coming from the depths of the soil, but also special events, as battles, signal deliverances and visions, were tokens of God’s presence. Thus after the battle of Michmash, Saul ordered a great stone to be rolled
* Comp. RS3, p. 456 ff. (additional Note D).
ἡ On these bétyls as Wondest working stones endowed with magia powers, see Pietschmann, Gesch. der Phénizier, p. 206, eh rmant, Revue de Phistoire des religvons, iii.
PILLAR
(1 S 1483) which served as an altar (ν. 35); Bethel, according to JE, became a consecrated spot through the vision of Jacob, who in consequence set up the stone pillar and poured oil upon it (Gn 2818),
These passages sufficiently illustrate the priml- tive character of the pre-exilian Hebrew mazzeba which formed the indispensable accompaniment of every sanctuary (Hos 34). The early pre-exilian code of legislation preserved in Ex 20” sought to keep intact the stone’s primitive condition. It was to remain unhewn and no iron instrument was to desecrate it, either because the stone itself was sacrosanct like the sacred enclosure in which it stood, or perhaps, as Nowack suggests (Heb. Archéol. ii. p. 17), because the profaning hand οἱ man drove the nwmen out of the stone. If we are to believe the statement of the Mishna tract Middoth (iii. 1), the altar of burnt-offering in Herod’s temple was formed of unhewn stones. Throughout the earlier portion of OT narrative we constantly meet with allusions to the stone pillars of the local sanctuaries, e.g. Shechem (Jos 24°), Ramoth-gilead (Gn 31), Gilgal (Jos: 4°), Mizpeh (18 713), Gibeon (2 S 208), En-rogel (1 K 15). Sometimes the stone gave the name to the spot, as Eben-‘ezer (1S 77%, ef. 4). Here again, as in the case of 1S 14 (already mentioned), the erection of the stone at a particular spot follows the manifesta- tion of Divine power in His people’s signal victory. That the rough stone (mazzéba), as the symbol of Jehovah, differed in no respect from that which was erected to represent Baal, is quite certain. Baal worship and Jehovah worship at the local baméth were inextricably blended in the_pre- Deuteronomice period, as the oracles of Hosea clearly testify (Hos 218 the genuineness of which Wellhausen and Nowack unnecessarily surrender), The mazzebéth of Baal were destroyed in Samaria by the reforming zeal of Jehu (2 K 10% 37),
BRAZEN PILLAR,
Whether there is any reference to the stone: symbol in the designation of Jehovah by the name ‘rock’ in many poetical passages in the OT (Pa
PILLAR
PILLAR, PLAIN OF THE 88]
LEELA Le aT IO TL ae a ee ee, 18°, 1S 23, Dt 32‘", Is 30”), it is not cary fo his own name, and it is called Absalom’s monu- ni
determine. The name for rock here is Ἣν, w also enters into proper names which have their porallels in Assyrian (Schrader, COT ii. p. 326).
he balance of evidence is on the whole against this attractive supposition. In the first place, the occurrence of such names in Hebrew is late (Buch- anan rey observes that they occur only in P and never in JE or Judges*), In the second place, sx is not the term associated with the See) symbol by the Hebrews, but }3x; but 3x is never employed in personal proper names. Probably, therefore, we should regard the use of Ἣν in the personal names and in the. poetical passages as figurative only, Jehovah being regarded as a safe and strong place of refuge (Ps 27° 61°), or as affording shadow from oppressive heat, cf. Is 32% See, further, art.
CK.
In Pheenician cultus we frequently notice the presence of twin pillars. Thus we find twin pillars erected in Solomon’s temple + by Hiram the Tyrian artificer (1 Καὶ 7°), Similar twin pills are exhibited on coins which portray the
ple at Paphos, and also they represented the
TWIN PILLARS IN TEMPLE OF APHRODITE AT PAPHOS,
deity Melkarth at Tyre. The latter are specially
' described by Herodotus (ii. 44), who paid a personal visit of inspection to this famous Tyrian shrine of Hercules (Melkarth). According to Herodotus, this temple was sumptuously wrought and fur- nished. One of the pillars was of refined gold, and the other of emerald (or more probably, as Abicht suggests, of green glass), the latter emitting a bright light at night-time, perhaps for the mariners at sea. To the same eakegory belong the bronze pillars of the temple of Hercules at Gades (773), another Phenician settlement, de- scribed by Strabo.
Respecting Pheenician stones, sometimes called 23, see Pietschmann’s Gesch. der Phénizier, pp. 204-213. Among the varied forms of these Pheeni- cian stele, some of which were worked into a square shape tapering at the top (see illustration below), special mention should be made of the votive stele, erected by individuals as the result of a vow to the deity in order to secure some desired object. Many of them have no inscription. Others a legend which would nearly always be somewhat of the following character: ‘To the Rabbat, the Tanit-P’né-Ba'‘al and the Adon, the Baal-Hammon, as N.N. son of N.N. has vowed, since they have heard his voice; may they bless him.’ It is possible that this may have been the real character of the memorial stone erected by Absalom (25 1818, ‘ Now Absalom in his life time had reared ἃ for himself the mazzébeth which is in the king’s dale; for he said, I have no son to keep my name in remembrance ; and he called the magzébeth after