Wildebocr, while accepting this theory^^ combines with it the Idea of a festival of the dead
(AU-Souls'-Day), as suggested by Lagarde above, and applied bySchwally (Leien nach dem Tode, 42 rt.). Hence the fcastings and fastings and sending of gifts- repasts and offerings for the dead being a usual accompaniment of such commemorations in Persia and elsewhere ; hence, too, the absence of the name of God from a story intended for such semiheathenish rites, as its introduction in such a connexion would have given offence to the religious authorities and pre- vented its admission to the synagogue.
A different version of the same theory is given by Br. Meissner (ZD.MU, 1896). He traces back the Jewish festival through its Persian medium to the festivities referred to by Berosus under the name of !.««.«, which he identifle8(on doubtful etimoloRical ipxiunds) with the Bab. Zagmuk, as popularly understood and abser\'c<l. In the celebration of this festival, which was of so merry a character that Istar, the goildcss of love, naturally acquired a more prominent place in it than Marduk, it was usual for a slave, arrayed In royal apparel, to rule over the nobles for five days, and something like a reversal of the onlinary social relations took place. Meissner supiMses the Jews to have become acquainted with It In Susa, and to have appreciated it »0 much in their state of Bubleclion as to per- petuate it In a form that was specially fitted to glorify their own nation.
In thu Kxpotitor, Aug. 1898, Mr. 0. H. W. Johns calls atten- tion to the fact, as brought out by Peiser in the Keilimchr\fllicht Bilddil. vol. iv. p. 107, that the As«yr. word ptiru means 'term of olllce,' ' turn,' and holds I'urim to be dcrivol from Puru, which is free from the ineffaceahlc guttural in ;/riArw, as the common designation of the New Year's fca«t on its nfruiar sklc (In connexion with the accession of olllclals), as <liBtingul8hed tmni Its sacrcd names and associations, with which the Jews •ould have no sympathy. According to a conleotora of U. J. da Ooeje't, favoured by
Kuerien, the storv of Esther is derived from the same Perslao tradition as the "tale of Tlie Thnuyand and On< A>j//its, which has a similar heroine in Scheherazade.
The word Pur has sometimes been supiiosed to belong to the same root as Pers. p&re and Lat. ^«ri, Ijut Hal6vy traces it to a lost Aram, word .Ti?s, from root its = to break in pieces, after the analogy of other Semitic tongues, in which the idea of 'lot' is closely related to that of fraction, or partition, with which he connects the distribution of gifts at the feast. Another suggestion is that it may have denoted some object (cf. urn, dice, cards) used, in casting lots,— such as Dieulafoy (Itev. dcs Et. Juives, 1888) claims to have dis- covered in the excavations of the Memnonium at Susa, in the shape of a tjuadrangular nrism, bearing ditl'ercnt numbers on its four faces, which he thinks may have been used for casting lots, the name cur (like Sanskrit »t<r 'fulness,' Pers. pur ' fiiU,' Lat. ptenus, Fr. plcin) having reference to its solid form. But Jensen (quoted by Wildeboer as above) derives the word from Assyr. puru or buru=stone, used in a metaphorical sense analogous to that of S-iia and \j/ri(poi.
In subsequent times the Feast of Ptirim has often been the means of sustaining the faith of Jewish communities when in imminent danger of destruc- tion at the hands of their enemies, of which we are reminded by the Cairene Purim (Furin al-Miz- rayim) and the Purim-Vincent, designed to com- memorate the deliverance of the Jews in Cairo and Frankfort in 1524 and 1616.
It may be added that the distinction between ' Great f urim ' and ' Little Purim,' referring to the two celebrations that used to take place in leap- year, in Adar and Ve-Adar respectively, cannot be traced to an earlier period than the 2nd cent. A. D.
Literature. —Besides the authorities cited above, sec the literature referred to in art. Esther, and, further, Derenbourg, IIM de la Pal. 442 ff. ; W. E. Smith, OTJC^, 184 n.
J. A. M'Clymokt. PURITY.— This word, in subst. form, is not found in AV or RV of OT, and occurs only twice in NT, 1 Ti 4" 5= (a-yvda), the RV adding, however, a third instance when it accepts (with N B) icoi Tfji ayplrrrrros at 2 Co 11'. The form 'pureness' occurs once in NT, 2 Co 6" {ayv&rrii), and three times in OT, Job 22**, Is 1=», Pr -22" (Heb. being bor in the two former passages, and lahor in the last, and the LXX reproduction being nearest to exactness in the 6<rlas xf"/"" of Proverbs). In all these instances the use of 'purity' is ethical. This ethical use is one of the functions of all the Heb. and Gr. words constituting the family of purity, though it would be an error to say that any one of these words is never u.sed ceremonially; even idrar (primarily = ' separate') is ceremonial in at least one passage. Is 52". And, of course, there is the literal use also, as, for instance, to describe gold when free from alloy (Ex 25" ct al., (cllwr, naBapU; cf. Rev 21"). But the Eng. translators have preferred 'purity' and its family for the ethicaj region (though they have never so used ' purilication,'and i.„..., ...^f *...atr^..t.>.1 *r^,u-ifTr*i nnff hn.vp nrpferrnd