RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Synagogue Synagogue, The Great
tisches Gebetbuch, 2 vols., ib. 1870; J. M. Jost, Geschichte des Judentums und seiner Secten, Leipsic, 1857; M. Duschak, Geschichte und Darstellung des jiidischen Cultus, Mannheim, 1866; Sieffert, in Beweis des Glaubens, 1876, pp. 3-11, 225-239; J. Hamburger, Real-Encyklopadie fur Bibel und Talmud, ii. 1142-47, Strelitz, 1883; A. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, i. 430-450, London, 1884; I. Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, pp. 1-34, New York, 1896; Weinberg, in Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums, 1897, pp. 588 sqq., 639 sqq., 673 sqq.; L. Low, in Gesammelte Schriften, iv. 1-71, Szegedin, 1898; J. Elbogen, Geschichte des Achtzehngebets, Breslau, 1903; idem, Studien zur Geschichte des jiidischen Gottesdienstes, Berlin, 1908; L. Stern, Die Vorschriften der Thora, 4th ed., Frankfort, 1904; A. Kistner, Der Kalender der Juden, Carlsruhe, 1905; P. Haupt, " Purim," in JBL, 1906, and Leipsic, 1906; O. Holtzmann, N eutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, 2d ed., Tubingen, 1906; M. Rosenmann, Der Ursprung der Synagoge und ihre allmahliche Entwickelung, Berlin, 1907; W. O. E. Oesterley and G. H. Box, The Religion and Worship of the Synagogue: an Introduction to the Study of Judaism from the New Testament Period, New York, 1908; E. Schiirer, Geschichte, ii. 427-463, Eng. transl., II., ii. 52- 89; Nowack, Archaologie, ii. 83 sqq.; DB, iv. 636-643; EB, iv. 4832-40; JE, xi. 619-640. The subject is discussed in many of the works on the history of the Jews (see under Ahab; and Israel, History of).
On the worship consult : C. G. Bodenschatz, Kirchliche Verfassung der heutgen Juden, part ii., Leipsic, 1748; J. F. Schroder, Satzungen und Gebrauche des talmudischrabbinis^hen Judenthums, Bremen, 1851; L. M. Lewinsohn, Geschichte und System des jiidischen Kalenderwesens, 1856; F. Delitzsch, Physiologie und Musik, pp. 44-57, Leipsic, 1868; M. H. Friedlander, Beitrage zur Geschichte der synagogalen Gebete, Briinn, 1869; Rothschild, Der Synagogalkultus in historisch-kritische Entwickelung, vol. i., Alzey, 1870; A. Schwarz, Der jiidische Kalendar, Breslau, 1872; J. Dessauer, SchliXssel zum Gebetbuche, Budapest, 1878; H. Guedallah, Observations on the Jewish Ritual of the Present Time, London, 1885; J. Singer, Die Tonarten des traditionellen Synagogengesanges, Vienna, 1886; A. H. Lawatsch, Das Synagogenjahr, 2d ed., Reichenberg, 1887; L. Stern, Die Vorschriften der Thora, 3d ed., Frankfort, 1895; J. Winter and A. Wunsche, Die jiidische Litteratur, iii. 477-529, Treves, 1896; J. M. Japhet, Die Accente der heiligen Schrift, pp. 167-184, Frankfort, 1896; E. Breslaur, Sind originate Synagogen- und V olksmelodien bei den Juden . nachweisbar? Leipsic, 1898; L. N. Dembitz, Jewish Services in Synagogue and Home, Philadelphia, 1898 (popular); T. Seharf, Das gottesdienstliche Jahr bei den Juden, Leipsic, 1902; L. Zunz, ut sup.; also the works of Geiger, Duschak, Elbogen, Stern, Kistner, and Oesterley and Box in the preceding paragraph.
SYNAGOGUE, THE GREAT: According to Talmudic and rabbinic tradition, a council established in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, consisting of 120 members, and lasting till the beginning of the Greek period, which was concerned principally with the law and the ordering of life according to that law. Especially to this body were attributed the settling of the Canon of Scripture (q.v., I., 1, § 2), the masoretic marginal notes, the punctuation or pointing of the text, the composition of prayers, and directions respecting prayer and the like. As support for the theory of the existence of this body, the report in Neh. viii.-x. regarding the reading of the law by Ezra was cited, together with the assembly in which the people obligated itself to keep perpetually the law. The number 120 is found there (Neh. x. 128 — comprising eighty-five subscribers to the obligation, with Ezra as the eighty-sixth) and the twenty-six (Neh. viii. 4, ,7), who supported Ezra at the reading of the law, together with eight Levites (Neh. ix. 5-6) who prayed and sang. That from these three chapters no cogent proof for the existence of the Great Synagogue is deducible needs no
proof. The most complete assemblage of passages from Jewish literature bearing on the subject is found in Rau, Buxtorf, and Aurivillius (see bibliography).
All testimonies for the existence and activities (as outlined above) of this body are late. The oldest passages relatively are Pirke Aboth, i. 1-2 [cf. C. Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers, pp. 124- 125, Cambridge, 1877], and Baba Bathra, 15a, in the Babylonian Talmud. In the first passage " the men of the Great Synagogue " appear simply as the mediators of the law (torah) between the prophets on the one side and Antigonus of Socho and his followers on the other. Simon the Just, i.e., probably the high-priest Simon I. at the beginning of the third century before Christ, is designated as belonging to the remnant of the Great Synagogue, so that with him or soon after him the body ceased to exist. Now, since the period between the rebuilding of the Temple and the overthrow of Persian rule in Palestine (516-331) is compressed to thirty-four years, the traditional conception of a body which continued for more than a century has here no firm basis. The passage from Baba Bathra reads: " The men of the Great Synagogue wrote Ezekiel, The Twelve, Daniel, and Esther. Ezra wrote his book and the genealogies in Chronicles up to his time." Of the closing of the canon there is here no mention; the subject dealt with is only the authorship (editing?) of the books which are recognized as the latest. From the nature of the relations existing and from some indications in the Bible (such as the reference to Ezra in Ezra vii. 6 as a ready scribe in the law of Moses) it may be concluded that activities corresponding to those attributed to the Great Synagogue actually were carried on. It is a fact that since the time of Ezra Jewish life was under the domination of the law and was characterized by that very fact. So that while the Great Synagogue can not be established as historical, yet the activities attributed to it were actually in operation through some medium then authoritative, and it is upon these activities that the tradition cited was in fact based.
(H. L. Strack.)
Bibliography: The modern hypothesis regarding the existence of this body depends upon J. Buxtorf's Tiberias, chap, x., Basel, 1665, and Elias Levita's Massoreth ha- Massoreth, ed. Ginsburg, pp. 112 sqq., London, 1867. That the question is now answered in the negative is due principally to H. E. Ryle, Canon of the O. T., Excursus A, pp. 250 sqq., London, 1892, and A. Kuenen, Over de mannen der groote Synagoge, Amsterdam, 1876, Germ, transl., Ueber die Manner der grossen Synagoge, in Gesammelte Abhandlungen, pp. 125-160, Freiburg, 1894. The subject will be found treated in most of the recent larger treatises on the introduction to the O. T. and on the canon — e.g., C. A. Briggs, Study of Holy Scripture, pp. 120-122, 252 sqq., New York, 1899. Consult further: J. E. Rau, Diatribe de synagoga magna, Utrecht, 1727; C. Aurivillius, Dissertationes, ed. J. D. Michaelis, pp. 139- 160, Leipsic, 1790; A. T. Hartmann, Die Verbindung des A. Ts. mit dem Neuen, pp. 120-166, Hamburg, 1831; M. Heidenheim, in TSK, 1553, pp. 93-100; L. Herzfeld, Geschichte des Volkes Jisrael, ii. 22-24, 380-396, iii. 244- 245, 270-271, Nordhausen, 1855-57; J. M. Jost, Geschichte des Judenthums, i. 41-43, 91, 95-97, Leipsic, 1857; J. E. Lowy, Kritisch-talmudisches Lexikon, i. 241—261, Vienna, 1863; J. Derenbourg, Essai sur Vhistoire et la geographie de la Palestine, i. 29^0, Paris, 1867; J. S. Bloch, Studien zur Geschichte der Sammlung der althebraischen Litteratur, pp. 100-132, Breslau, 1876; J. Hamburger, Real-Encyklopadie fiir Bibel und Talmud, ii. 318-323, Strelitz, 1883;
S\naxarium Syncretism