at INIarion, also laboring as a missionar\' in South Ala- bama Presbytery. In 1853 he settled in Pensacola, Fla., where he remained until 1861-62. \fhen he re- moved to Cahaba, Ala., where he died, Nov. 10, 1867. See Wilson, Presb. Hist. Almanac, 1868, p. 369; David- son, IJist. of Presb. Ch. in Ky. p. 40. (J. L. S.)
Sparsh^na {the airtchich enters into and permeates the human body), in Hindii mythology, is a surname of the wind-god, whose usual name is I'aruna.
Sparta, in Grecian mythology, was a daughter of Eurotas, and wife of L<acediemon. The latter gave his own name to the kingdom over which he reigned, and the name of his wife to its capital city (Pausan. iii, 1, 3; Schol. Eurip. C/fs/. 615).
Spar'ta (S7rapr?j, 1 Mace, xiv, 16; AaKfCaij-unnoi, 2 Mace, v, 9 : A. V. " Lacedemonians"). In the lustory of the Maccabees mention is made of a remarkable cor- respondence between the Jews and the Spartans, which has been the subject of much discussion. The alleged facts are briefly these. When Jonathan endeavored to strengthen his government by foreign alliances (about B.C. 144), he sent to Sparta to renew a friendly inter- course which had been begun at an earlier time between Areus and Onias [see Akkus; ONiAs],on the ground of their common descent from Abraham (1 JIacc. xii, 5- 23). The embassy was favorably received, and after the death of Jonathan "the friendship and league" was renewed with Simon (1 Mace, xiv, 16-23). No results are deduced from this correspondence, which is recorded in the narrative without comment; and imperfect cop- ies of the official documents are given, as in the case of similar negotiations with the Romans. Several ques- tions arise out of these statements as to (1) the people described under the name Spartans, (2) the relationship of the Jews and Spartans, (3) the historic cliaracter of the events, and (4) the persons referred lo under the names Onias and Areus. For the general history of Sparta itself, see Smith, Diet, of Geog. s. v.
1. The whole context of the passage, as well as the independent reference to the connection of the " Lace- dfemonians" and Jews in 2 Mace, v, 9, seem to prove clearly that the reference is to the Spartans, properly so called. Josephus evidently understood the records in this sense, and the other interpretations which have been advanced are merely conjectures to avoid the sup- posed difficulties of the literal interpretation. Thus Michaelis conjectured that the words in the original text were D^TiSO, I^ED (Obad. 20, see Gesen. The- saur. s. v.), which the translators read erroneously as I31SD, D'^UiEO, and thus substituted Sparta for Se- pharad (q. v.). Frankel, again {Monatsschrift, 1853, p. 456), endeavors to show that the name Spartans may have been given to the Jewish settlement at Nisibis. the chief centre of the Armenian dispersion. But against these hypotheses it may be urged conclusively that it is incredible that a Jewish colony should have been so completely separated from the mother state as to need to be reminded of its kindred, and also that the vicissi- tudes of the government of this strange city (1 Mace. xii,20, /SrtffiXff'c; xiv, 20, «p;;^oi'T£C '^■«' 'if I'oXtr) should have corresjionded with those of Sparta itself.
2. The actual relationshi]) of the Jews and Spartans (2 jMacc. v, 9, (rvyy'tvua) is an ethnological error which it is difficult to trace to its origin. It is possible that the Jews regarded the Spartans as the representatives of the Pelasgi, the supposed descendants of Peleg, the son of Eber (Stillingtleet, Origines Sacral, iii, 4, 15; Ewald, Gcsch. iv, 277, note), just as in another place the Pergamenes trace back their friendship with the Jews to a connection in the time of Abraham (Josephus, Ant. xiv, 10, 22); if this were so, they might easily spread their opinion. It is certain, from an indepen- dent [)assage, that a Jewish colony existed at Sparta at an early time (1 INIacc. xv, 23): and the important settlement of the Jews in Cvrene mav have contribu-
SPARTI
912
SPEAR
ted to favor the notion of some intimate connection be- tween the two races. The belief in this relationship apiH'ars to have continued to later times (^Josephus, U'<i;-, i, -tJ, 1), anil, however mistaken, may be paral- leled bv other |Mipular leijends of the Eastern orit,'in of IJreek states. The various hypotheses proposed to sup- port the truth of ihe statement are examined by Werns- dorff (/'e Fiile Lib. Mticc. § 94), but probably no one now would maintain it.
3. The incorrectness of the opinion on which the in- tercourse was based is obviously no objection to the fact of the intercourse itself; and tiie very obscurity of Sjiar- ta at the time makes it extremely unlikely that any for- ger woultl invent such an imident. 15ut it is urged that the letters said to have been exchanged are evi- dently not genuine, since they betray their tictitious or- igin negatively by the absence of characteristic forms of expression, and i>ositively by actual inaccuracies. To this it may be replied that the Spartan letters (1 Maec. xii. '20--2A\ xiv, •.'it-23) are extremely brief, and exist cmlv in a translation of a translation, so that it is unrea- sonable to expect that any Doric peculiarities should have been preserved. The Hellenistic translator of the Hebrew original would naturally remler the text before him without any regard to what miglit have been its original form (xii, '22-lb, ilfn'ivi], ktIii'i] ; xiv, 20, dStX- 6oi). Ou the other hand, the absence of the name of the secoinl king of .Sparta in the first letter (xii, 20) and of both kings in the second (xiv, 20) is probably to be explained by the political circumstances under which the letters were written. The text of the first letter, as given by .losephus (Ant. xii, 4, 10), contains some vari- ations, and a very remarkat)le additional clause at the end. The second letter is apparently only a fragment.