* See Bacher in JQR iv. 406 ff.
{+See Weiss, Dor Dor W’Dorshow, i. p. 54; Kuenen in his essay, ‘Uber die Manner der grossen Synagoge’ (occupying pp. 125-160 of the Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Biblischen Wissenschagt von A. Kuenen, Freiburg and Leipzig, 1894), con- tests the existence of such an assembly (cf. also art. Syyagogun (Tuxu GREAT] in vol, iv., and the Literature cited at the end of that article); whilst D. Hoffmann (Magazin fiir die Wissen- schaft des Judentums, x. 45ff.) and 8. Krauss (JQR x. 347 ff.) try to refute his argument. On the whole, the present writer is inclined to admit that there is an element of truth in this tradition regarding the Great Assembly. The Judaism which emerges suddenly after this nebulous period is essentially a product of the Synagogue. It is hard to see how it could ever have thriven under the care of the historical priests or the cosmopolitan Sépher of the moderns; and such a Synagogue would most naturally have developed under the auspices of an authority which acted in conformity with the spirit of the ordinances, decrees, and teachings attributed by the Rabbis to the men of the Great Assembly.
‘Abéth i. 1), but also many ordinances and decrees, the most important of which are those bearing upon the arrangement and the completion of the Canon of the OT, the reading of the Law on certain days of the week, the fixing of the daily prayers (probably in six benedictions now embodied in the so-called Eighteen Benedictions, vy 735¥), and the introduction of the saying of grace after meals. The custom of pouring libations of water at the Feast of Tabernacles, and going in procession round the altar with branches of willow trees, de- clared by. some Rabbis to have been introduced by the prophets, as well as the so-called ‘ Laws unto Moses from Mount Sinai’ (amounting to the number of forty-three, more than a third of which refer to the preparation of the phylacteries), may also have dated from those sopheric times, remote- ness of assigned date pointing, as a rule, to the pre-Maccabzean period.*
ii. The Zégdth (ria; Gr. fvyédv), ‘ Pairs,’ a name given to the leading teachers that flourished between the Maccabzean and the Herodian period (c. 150-30). Five such ‘ Pairs’ are recorded in the Rab. litera- ture, extending over 5 generations, and succeeding each other in the following order: 1. Jose b. Joezer of Zereda and Jose b. Johanan of Jerusalem ; 2. Joshua b. Perahya and Nittai of Arbela; 3. Jehuda b. Tabbai and Shim‘on b. Shetah; 4. Shemaya and ’Abtalyon ; 5. Hillel and Shammai.+ According to tradition each ‘ Pair’ represents the: heads of the Sanhedrin of their age, the one whose name occurs first in the list serving in the capacity of Nas? (xvi), ‘Prince or President’ of the Sanhe- drin, the other in that of ’Ab Béth Din (j7 m3 ay), ‘Father of the House of Judgment,’ or ‘ Vice- President.’ This tradition is contested by many modern scholars as incompatible with the state- ments of Josephus and of the New Testament, according to which the high priest for the time being was ex officio the president of the Sanhedrin. But, whatever their particular function and title were, the existence of the ‘Pairs’ as the heads of a religious corporation to which the large bulk of the nation belonged, and which thus formed an important factor in the development of the Oral Law, cannot well be doubted.t To them are attributed not only various Haggadic sayings (M. ’Abéth i. 4-15), but also Halakhic statements as well as certain ordinances and decrees. It was under the first ‘Pair’ (also called "Eshkéléth nidiayiy [? identical with the Gr. cyod#], a title that disappears with them) that, according to the testimony of the Rabbis, the first difference of opinion regarding the performance of certain religious practices occurred between the sages. The Hdlakhéth attributed to Jose b. Joezer, the first named of this ‘ Pair,’ as well as the ordinances and decrees ascribed to him and to his colleague of the first ‘ Pair,’ were apparently composed in his age, the language of the Halakhéth (Aramaic [M.
*See Weiss, ib. p. 66. The high priest Simon the Just (probably Simon 1., ¢. 300 B.c.) is supposed to have belonged to this Remnant, but the saying recorded in his name is really sopheric in its character : ‘On three things the world is stayed : on the Torah, and on the Worship, and on the bestowal of Kind- nesses’ (M. ’Abdthi. 2). Of his successor (2nd in the sopheric line), whose name Antigonos of Sokho shows already a marked Hellenistic influence, only the following saying is known: ‘Be not as slaves that minister to the lord with a view to receive reward, but be as slaves that minister to the master without a view to receive reward’ (M. *Abdéth i. 3). This saying, which has a certain Stoic savour about it, is supposed to have given rise to two heretical sects.
+ See C. Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers2, p. 14, note 9, for the chronology.
{ For Literature on this point, see Schiirer, GJV ii. p. 188 ff. Of special importance are Kuenen, J.c. pp. 49-81; Hoffmann, Die Prisidentur im Synedrium Mag. v. 1878, pp. 94-99; and Jelski, Die innere Hinrichtung des grossen Synedrion, etc. Wellhausen’s Die Pharisder und Saddueder must be taken with see coun: as his command of the Rabbinic sources is im- perfect.