SARID (ili? ; B 'E(Te!i(Kyu\i, ZeSSovK ; A ZapBlS, Za/iS ; Sarid). — A border town of Zebulun, situated to the west of Chisloth-tabor (IksAl, Jos 19">- '=). Eusebius and Jerome (Onum. s. -apld, Sarith) do not identify it. Conder, following the reading ZleSSovK, and that of the ancient Syriac version, 'Asdod,' reads 'Sadid,' and identifies it with 2'ell Sliadud, an artificial mound with fine sprinfjs, on the north side of the great plain of Esdraelon, and about 5 miles to the westward of Iks&l {PEF Mem. ii. 43, 70). C. W. WlLSON.
SAROTHIE (B ■ZapuBel, A Sopuffii?), 1 Es S".— His sons are named among the sons of Solomon's ser- vants who returned with Zerubbabel. There is DO corresponding name in the lists of Elzia and Nehcmiab.
SARSECHIM (D-:rij; ; BAX 'Sa^ovaaxip, Q NajSou- capax, Q"" ~apaaxel,ii ; Vulg. Sarsacldm). — One of the princes of the king of Babylon who wius present at tlie taking of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar in tlie nth year of Zedekiah, Jer 3'J [Gr. 46],^. Ho seems to have borne the title of Rais-SARIS, 'chief of the heads or princes.' There is much doubt as to the original form of the name, and its meaning is, therefore, likewise obscure. Schrader (COT ii. p. 110) merely remarks that the first part of the name is quite clear (v='king'), and queries the reading. In all probability, testimony to its in- correctness is to be found in the fact that the vocalization is practically the same as that of the Hebrew form of Sennacherib (Sanherlb, Sarsechim ; cf. Nimrod, Nisroch, etc.). If the first element, snr, be regarded as certain, the original form may have been Sar-iskun, ' he (the god) has made a king,' that is, provided a successor to the throne. In this ea.se the original form of the name would have been ir?"'7,* which would go back to a time when no vowels whatever were written.t In the present state of our knowledge, however, all identifications of this name must be regarded as tentative and unsatisfactory, presenting, as they do, several ditfieulties, and oeing unsupjiorted by the monuments. The Greek fonns beginning with No/3oi> are probably due to the name Samgar- neho, which precedes. If, however, they have any authority — and sometimes the Greek forms are the more correct (cf. NiSROCH) — that of Q Noj3ou- aapdx would be the best for comparison, as it resembles very closely the Nahti-Sar-dhS-S^u, ' Nebo is his brothers' king,' of the inscriptions (Strass- niaier, In.irhriftcn run Nahurhodonosor, 172, 23; J 2lli, 12.1; and elsewhere). See also artt. Nkroal- Sharezer and Samqak-neuo. T. G. Pincues.
• [OyiV would also be likely.
t Ah the Gn-ek form Saraois shows, the name of Sin-iarra- iikun (' .sin ha» made a kinjf '), the lost king of As-nyria, could Ijo pn>nouiice<l without the name of the deity, and would then he the same as the Har-iskun here sufff]^e8ted, at the same time lurniHhiriK an ohjenlion, for any one hearing snch a name would prohablv have heeii regarded o--* ctainiing the throne.
I A'aMlardli/ltu, son of Dikia, and father of NahtL-mvitlilf- um, fifth witness to a contract dated in the 27th year of Neliurh»<iner.7jir.
S Sal'it-iaT-dhi'-hi, son of A'inunnda, son of Iddina-Fap- «i*(i/. thini witness to a contr»ot (Utcd In tba 80U> yo»r of Nsbucliadnezzar.
sata:^
407
SATAN (Heb. \9v, Arab, ^'iaj^, Syr. U^CD
Greek o-oroi-as [but in 2 Co 12^ Xariv, x**» A" D** EKLP etc.— yet the evidence is doubtful, and the reading Zaravd (genit.) is preferred by Lachm. Tisch.s and \VH on the authority of N* A* BD* FG Copt. It. Vulg. Orig. Iren. Tert. On the other hand, the reading SaTdi/ was preferred by Meyer, though there is no analogy to it in the NT, and in the LXX only in 1 K 11" 23^*, and Aq. on Job 1^]. More frequently (especially in the Gospels) the Heb. proper name is simplj' rendered by o 5id;3oXos, ' the accuser ' or ' calumniator.' In Kev 12'" o /cari)- yup is the equivalent used). — The name and con- ception of Satan belong to the post-exilian age of Hebrew development. Probably Zee 3' is the earliest instance of its appearance in our Canonical literature. On the other hand, the roots of the conception can without difficulty be traced in the writings of pre-exilian and exilian times.
i. Prk-exilian Period.— (1) The Serpent, who tempts Eve and lures man to his doom, is a demon in animal shape, analogous to the Arabic jinn which frequently resided in serpents. See art. Demon and also Magic (vol. iii. p. 208, footnote J).
(2) The Babylonian Ti&mat, the dragon-monster of the great abyss, with whom Marduk, god of light, contended (see art. Cosmogony), corresponds to the Hebrew Leviathan or Rahab in exilian and post-exilian literature (cf. also Am 1)^), with whom Jehovah entered into conflict and whom He de- stroyed. See artt. Rahab and Sea Monster.
(3) The individual subject might be possessed by an ' evil spirit '(IS 16", cf. Jg 9^), which drives him to commit acts of violence in opposition to the Divine will. In 1 S 16" this 'evil spirit' is placed in opposition to the Spirit of the Lord which departed from Saul upon its advent. This evil spirit, which ' distressed ' (ni'3) the king, is also spoken of as ' from Jehovah.' Wellhansen draws attention to the curious distinction that, whereas •"■ nn is the good spirit, '"■ t\hq nn (or c-S.x * nn) is a bad spirit. The former expression connotes a closer community of mind and purpose between the Deity and His emi.ssary. Kor tlie present, however, it is sufficient to take note that evil, whether it be misfortune or sin, is referred to a Divine causality in accordance ^vith the intense feeling of dependence on God which characterized the ancient Hebrew, 1 S P 18'" 19'-' 26'-', 2 S 24', 1 K 22^', Jg 9^, Is 6'« 63", I's 51" (Max Lohr). In the interestinjj parallel Jj^ 9^ the evil spirit shows itself as a spirit of discord between Abiinelech ami the Shechemites, just as it exhibited itself in Saul's outbreaks of violent jealousy against David. It is thus somewhat analogous in character to the Homeric 'Att;, daughter of Zeus. Cf. art. Maqic in vol. iii. p. 208*.