When David lay apparently on his death-bed, and a demonstration was made in favor of the succession of the eldest surviving son, Adonijah, whose interests had been compromised by the preference of the young Solo- mon, Joab joined the party of the former. B.C. cir. 1015. It would be unjust to regard this as a defection from David. It was nothing more or less than a dem- onstration in favor of the natural heir, which, if not then made, could not be made at all. Ikit an act which would have been justifiable had tlie preference of Solo- mon been a mere caprice of the old king, became crimi- nal as an act of contumacy to the divine king, the real heatl of tlie government, who had called tlie house of David to the throne, and had the sole right of determin- ing which of its members should reign. We learn from David's last song that his powerlessness over his court- iers was even then present to his mind (2 Sam. xxiii, 6, 7), and now he recalled to Solomon's recollection the two
murders of Abner and Amasa (1 Kings ii, 5, G), with an injunction not to let the aged soldier escape with impu- nity. When the prompt measures taken under the di- rection of tlie king rendered Adonijah's demonstration abortive (1 Kings i, 7), Joab withdrew into private life till some time after tlie death of David, when the fate of Adonijah, and of Abiathar — whose life was only spared in consequence of his sacerdotal character — warned Joab tliat he iiad little mercy to expect from the new king. He tied for refuge to the altar; but when Solomon heard this, he sent Benaiah to put him to death ; and, as he refused to come forth, gave orders that he should be slain even at the altar. Thus died one of the most ac- complished warriors and unscrupulous men that Israel ever produced. His corpse was removed to his domain in the wilderness of Judah, and buried there (1 Kings ii, 5, 28-34). B.C. cir. 1012. He left descendants, but nothing is known of them, unless it may be inferred from the double curse of David (2 Sam. iii, 39) and of Solomon (1 Kings ii, 23) that they seemed to dwindle away, stricken by a succession of visitations — weakness, leprosy, lameness, murder, starvation. His name is by some supposed (in allusion to his part in Adonijah's cor- onation on that spot) to be preserved in the modern ap- pellation of Enrogel — " the well of Job" — corrupted from Joab. — Kitto; Smith.
3. One of the "sons" of Pahath-moab (1 Esdr. viii, 35), whose descendants, together with those of Jeshua, returned from the exile to the number of 2812 or 2818 (Ezra ii, 6 ; Neh. vii, 11), besides 218 males subsequent- Iv under the leadership of one Obadiah (Ezra viii, 9), B.C. ante 536.
Jo'achaz ('I(u«x«^ v. r. 'IwxaK and 'Icx"*""?)) * Grnscized tbrm (1 Esdr. i, 34) of the name of king Jeho iiAz (q. v.).
Jo'achim (IwaKiifi), a Grrecized form of the Heb. name Jehoiakim, and applied in the Apocrypha to
1. The king of Judah, son of Josiah (Bar. i, 3).
2. A priest (o 'leptvcA.V. "high-priest"), said to be son of Hilkiah at the time of tlie burning of Jerusalem by the Babylonians (Bar. i, 7). See Joacisi, 4. As no such pontiff occurs at this time (see High-priest), the person intended may perhaps have been not the suc- cessor, but only a junior son of Hilkiah — if, indeed, the whole narrative be not spurious. See Babucii.
Joachim, abbot of Floris, was born at Celico, in the diocese of Cosenza, about 1130. After a short resi- dence at the court of Koger of Sicily, he journeyed to Jerusalem, and on his return joined the Cistercians, and became abbot of Corace (Curatium), in Calabria. This office he resigned, however, some time after, and found- ed himself a monastery at Floris, near Cosenza. Joa- chim died between 1201 and 1202. He enjoyed great reputation during his life : he was reverenced by many as a prophet, and stood in high consideration with popes and princes, but since his day he has been very vari- ously judged. Praised as a prophet by J. G. SyUanseus, and defended by the Jesuit Papebroch, he was accused of heresy by Bonaventura, and called a pseudo-prophet by Baronius. His partisans claimed that he worked miracles, but it appears better proved that he wrote prophecies, and denounced in the strongest terms the growing corruption of the Komish hierarchy. He en- I deavored to bring about a reformation. His character has perhaps been best delineated by Neander {Ch. Hist. iv, 220), who says of him : " Grief over the corruption of the Church, longing desire for better times, profound Christian feeling, a meditative mind, and a glowing imagination, such are the peculiar characteristics of his spirit and his writings." He complained of the deifica- tion of the Koman Church, opposed the issue of indul- gences, condemned the Crusades as antagonistic to the express purpose of Christ, who had himself predicted only the destruction of Jerusalem, decried the simonious habits of the clergy, and even argued against the be- stowal of temporal power on the pope, fearing that the
JOACHIM
922 JOAN