Such, at least, is St. Matthew's report. St. Mark and St. Luke represent them as merely promisinfj mone\% the amount un- specified. It iiii;.'lit lie supposed that St. Matthew's account is
is^imilated to Zee l\^'- " (cf. Mt 27'- ") ; but (1) Mt 273-= proves Ihat the money had been paid, at all events before the trial of lesus by the Sanhedrin. ('-) i literal sense, 'weiifhed,' need 1
• It seems hardlv necessarv to refer to the theory popularized by De Quincey {Works, vi. 21(1.). which has since his time found favour with not a few. This ingenious theory seeks to explain the conduct of Judas by attributing the betrayal not
■ spite, but to an honest, if mistaken, deter-
the hand' of .lesus and compel Him to a'ssert 'iiit\- and hasten the eslalilishuient of His
lilf I'-
ll born '). For a full discussion of
■ art- JCDAS ISCARIOT. I
■1: 'If anyone kills a slave, good or
unhistorical embellish-
Mier.o uu....>,.u .,,,.. ,....,.....,.. Cf. /'ivFSf, Apr. 1896.
n 15-^ ■ 'To this day it is usual in' Jerus-alem to examine and test'carefullv all coiiis received. Thus a Mudjidie (silver) is ex- amined not'onlv bv the eye, but also by noticing its ring on th_e stone pavement', and English sterling gold is carefully weighed, and returned when defaced."
It remained that Judas should perform his part of the bargain, but he encountered a difficulty ■which he had hardly anticipated. Jesus was aware of his design, and, anxious to eat the Passover -with His disciples ere He suffered (Lk 2-W), He took pains to checkmate it. The next day was the Preparation, and, when His disciples asked where He would eat the Supper, He gave them a mysterious direction. 'Away into tlie city, He said to Peter and John, ' and there shall meet you a man can-ying a pitcher of water: follow him.' Some friend in Jerusalem had engaged to provide a room in his house, and Jesus had arranged this stratagem with him, in order that Judas might not know the place and bring in the rulers in the course of the Supper* (Mt 26"-'9=Mk U>-'« = Lk 22'-i3).
That evening, as they reclined at table, Jesus, desirous of being alone with His faithful followers, made the startling announcement : ' One of you shall betray me,' and, amid the coiisteriiation which ensued, secretly gave Judas his dismissal. The traitor left the room, and, hastening to the high priests, summoned them to action. See ArkesT.
LrrER.\TrRE.-Hastings' DB, art. ' Judas Iscariot • ; Fairbairn, Stvdies in the Life 0/ Christ, p. 258 ff.; Stalker, Tnal and Death ofJestis Christ, p. llOff.; Hanna, Our Lord's ii/f on £(irtt (cd. 1SS21, pp. 453-467; Bruce, Training of the Twelve^ p. 362ff.; Ex-posTlor, 3rd ser. [1889], p. 1665.; D. Smith, The Days of Bu Flesh, p. 436fl. DAVID SMITH.
BETROTHAL.— Betrothal among the Jews in the time of Jesus, like so many other social in- stitutions, was in process of transition. Jewish marriage customs were in origin the same as those of other Semitic peoples, but Jewish ci\-ilization was far removed from its primitive stages. Un- fortunately there is little positive information con- cerning tlie ceremony of betrothal in NT times proper. The Talmud'ic seder on marriage includes two tractates, Kcthuboth and Kiddushtn, dealing largely with the preliminaries of marriage, the latter especially 'ivith betrothal, but it is con- siderably later than the NT period. Accordingly, one cannot be sure that the elaborate laws therein set forth obtained in the time of Jesus. Yet it is possible by the study of betrothal customs in Hebrew and in Talmudic times to form a highly probable hypothesis as to such customs in the time of Jesus. .
1. The OT betrothal ceremony perpetuated in a conventional fashion the recollection of the time when a woman was purchased from her family. This appears in the Heb. word i?-!x (Dt 20', Hos lO'-""). Yet it would be a mistake to regard the use of this word as anything more than a conventional survival. In the days of the codes and the pro- phets the time -was long past when a man's wife was strictly his property. At the same time it is clear that when a -woman was designated ("ly; Ex 21'- ») by the head of her family as the future wife of another man, there was paid over by the prospec- tive bridegroom a certain sum of meney (or service, as in the case of Jacob), and a contract which was inviolable was then entered into (Gn 34"=, Ex 22"). Until the time of the marriage proper the bride-to-be remained in her own family. It was
* Euth. Zig. on Mt 26'9 : Jrw fti pukHk n, olxitt, 'Uiiit: ixipxur, Tfil nU hi^iiiXtv! xtii inxyiyf loiTov,- airi !r/i» tou
BETROTHAL
BILL
201
not permissible to betroth liev to any otlier man except by action amounting to divorce, and any violation of the rights established by the betrothal was as serious as if the two persons had been actually married (Dt 2i-'--*). In the OT period it is not possible to say with precision just how soon the betrothal was followed by the wedding. In later times, in the case of a virgin it was after the lapse of a year, and at least thirty days in the case of a widow ; but it is impossible to establish more than a possibility of these periods in OT times. So, too, it is impossible to describe with any great precision the betrothal ceremony, but it certainly included the payment of some sum (mohar ; in addition to above references, see 1 S 18^), and the making of a betrothal contract (either viva vnrc, Ezk'lG", or in writing) by the prospective bridegioom. We know nothing of any formal ceremony or of the use of a ring (unless [unlikely] it may be in Gn 24^"). The money pay- ment belonged originally to the family of the woman, but gradusQly came to belong in part or wholly to the Avoman herself. The woman might bring wealth to her husband, as in the case of Eachel and Leah, but this was not obligatory in the Hebrew jieriod, and cannot be said to belong to betrothal as such. The first advances might come from the family of either party. There is no clear evidence that the young woman had any right of appeal from the clioice of her family. The bridegroom himself very probably did not conduct the negotiations, but the matter was in the hands of a third party, as his parents, or some trusted servant or friend.