en, with Nehemiah ninety -eight, while the remaining twenty-two are the deputations of tlie cities. We may thus obtain the 120 members of the Great Synagogue mentioned by the unanimous voice of tradition. It will also be seen from the above that these 120 members represented five classes, viz. : 1. The chiefs of the pr-ifst- ly divisions {Z.^ r.-'Z. "^'^Xn); 2. The chiefs of the Le- vitical families (D^^nptl "^ w'X"i) ; 3. The heads of the Israelite families (DSTI ^fXl); A. Representatives of cities, or the elders (D'^DpT ; irpeffjivTspoi) ; 5. The doc- tors of the laic (3"'i'^3"3 C^ISIQ; ypo/(/.(arET(,'), from all grades. This number, however, if thus made ufi, was most probably restricted to the time of Nehemiah, as there can be no doubt that the assemblies which were afterwards held consisted of a smaller number, since, at the time when the Great S3'nagogue is held to have passed over into the Great Sanhedrim, the repre- sentatives consisted of seventy, which became the fixed rule for the Sanhedrim (q. v.).
IV. The Work of the Great Synagogue. — At its first organization under Nehemiah, if the above be its true origin, the representatives bound themselves by a most solemn oath (n""ia"ir-'l n>N2) to carry out the fol- lowing six decisions, which were deemed most essential for the stability of the newly reconstructed State: 1. Not to intermarry with heathens; 2. To keep the Sab- bath holy ; 3. To observe the sabbatical year ; 4. Ev- ery one to pay annually a third of a shekel to the Temple; 5. To supply wood for the altar; 6. Regularly to pay the priestly dues (Neh. x, 28-39). The founda- tion for the reorganization and reconstruction of the State and the Temple-service being thus laid at the first meeting of this synod, the obtaining of the necessary materials for the successful rearing-up of the super- structure and the completion of the edifice demanded that the synod should occasionalh' reassemble to devise and adopt such measures as should secure the accom- plishment of the plan and the permanent maintenance of the sanctuary. To this end the members of the Great Synagogue are believed to have collected the ca- nonical Scriptures. This was called forth by the effects of the first decision, which involved the expulsion of jNIanasseh, son of the high-priest Joiada, by Nehemiah and the synod for refusing compliance with that deci- sion^— i.e. to be separated from his heathen wife, the daughter of Sanballat (xiii, 23-29). In consequence of this his father-in-law, Sanballat, obtained permission to build an o])position temple on Mount Gerizim, in which Manasseh became high-priest, and whither he was followed by many of the Jews who sympathized with him. This proceeding, however, compelled them to deny the prophets, because their repeated declara- tions about the sanctitj' of Jerusalem did not favor the erection of a temple out of the ancient metropolis. To erect a wall of partition between the Jews and these apostates, and to show to the people ^vhich of the an- cient prophetical books were sacred, the Sopherim and the men of the Great Synagogue compiled the canon of the prophets. As the early prophets and the great prophets — i. e. Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel — like the Pentateuch, were already regarded as sacred, it only remained for the Great Synagogue to complete the pro- phetical canon by inserting into it the twelve minor prophets, which this synod accordingly did, as may be seen from Baba Bathra, 15; Aboth di Rabbi Xathan, e. i; 2 Mace, xii, 13. Although some of these authori- ties are no longer clear about the books inserted into the canon, yet they all testify to the fact that the members of the Great Synagogue were engaged in col- lecting the canonical books of the prophets. The Ha- giographa were not as yet made up, as is evident from the fact that the younger Sirach did not even know the expression n^3ir.3. but used the general term ra I'iWa to denote them {Preface to Ecclus.), and that in Alex-
SYNALLAXIS
84
SYNCELLUS
andria additions were made to the book of Esther, and other books were inserted in what we now call the Ha- giofjrapha, as well as from the circumstance that the canonicity of some of the Ilaijiosjraplia continued to be a point of ditTerenee between tlie schools of 8hammai and Ilillel, wliich could not have been the case if the canon of the llanioffraiiha had been definitely made up. They also compiled the ritual for private and public worship [see 8YNAGO(iUE]; and, finally, they intro- duced schools for the study of the divine law (HS'I fT^a), and defined the precepts of Holy Writ. The whole of this is inilicated in the epitome of the three grand max- ims transmitted to us in the lai'oiiic style of the Jlishna: "The prophets transmitted tlie divine law to the men of the Great Synagogue, who propounded the three maxims — be cautious in judging, get manj' disciples, and make a hedge about the law" {Abofh, i, 1). The other work of the men of the (ireek synagogue which has come down to us in the name of the Sopheriin is given in the article Sciube.
Y. Literature. — Wassermann, in Jost's Israelitische Annulen (Frankfort -on- the -Main, 1840), ii, 163 sq. ; Sachs, in FranUel's Zeitschrift jTir die religiosen Inte- ressen des Judenthums (Berlin, 1845), ii,301 sq. ; Kroch- mal, More Neboche Ha-Seman (Leopoli, 1851), p. 52 sq., 102 sq., 166 sq. ; Herzfeld, G(schichte des Volkes Israel (Nordhausen, 1855-57), i, 22 sq., 380 sq. ; ii, 53, 244 sq., 264 sq. ; Jost, Gesckickte des Judenthums, i, 35 sq., 95 sq., 270 sq. ; how, Ben Chanunja (Szegedin, 1858), i, 102 sq., 193 sq., 292 sq., 338 sq. ; and especially the elaborate essay of Griitz, in Frankel's MonutsschriJ't filr Geschichte U7id Wissenschaft des Judenthums (Leipsic, 1857), vi, 31 sq.,61 sq. ; also Fiirst, Geic/M/e*' A'uwcwiS, p. 22, note. See Canon.