« PreviousContinue »
Greek representative of Persian majesty, reigned over a less extended district than the last Darius. Not only were Egypt and Cyprus severed from the Eastern empire, but Palestine and Colosyria also fell to their ruler, placing Jerusalem for nearly a century beneath an Egyptian monarch. On this subject, see further under ANTIOCHUS.
2. ALEXANDER, surnamed BALAS, from his mother Bala, a personage who figures in the history of the Maccabees and in Josephus. His extraction is doubtful; but he professed to be the natural son of Antiochus Epiphanes, and in that capacity, out of opposition to Demetrius Soter, he was recognised as king of Syria by the king of Egypt, by the Romans, and eventually by Jonathan Maccabæus, on the part of the Jews (1 Macc. x. 18). Demetrius was not long after slain in battle, and Balas obtained possession of the kingdom. He then sought to strengthen himself by a marriage with the king of Egypt's daughter. Prosperity ruined Alexander; his voluptuousness, debauchery, and misgovernment rendered his reign odious, and encouraged Demetrius Nicator, the eldest son of the late Demetrius Soter, to appear in arms, and claim his father's crown. Alexander took the field against him; but the defection of his father-in-law Ptolemy proved fatal to his cause; he was defeated in a pitched battle, and fled with 500 cavalry to Abæ in Arabia, and sought refuge with the emir Zabdiel. This Arabian murdered his confiding guest in the fifth year of his reign over Syria, and sent his head to Ptolemy, who himself died the same year, B.C. 145. Balas left a young son, who was eventually made king of Syria by Tryphon, under the name of Antiochus Theos.
3. ALEXANDER JANNEUS, the first prince of the Maccabean dynasty who assumed the name of king [MACCABEES].
4. ALEXANDER, son of Herod the Great and Mariamne [HERODIAN FAMILY].
5. ALEXANDER, a Jew of Ephesus, known only from the part he took in the uproar about Diana, which was raised there by the preaching of Paul. As the inhabitants confounded the Jews and Jewish Christians, the former put forward Alexander to speak on their behalf, but he was unable in the tumult to obtain a hearing (Acts xix. 33).
6. ALEXANDER, a coppersmith or brazier (mentioned in 1 Tim. i. 20; 2 Tim. iv. 14), who with Hymenæus and others broached certain heresies touching the resurrection, for which they were excommunicated by St. Paul. These per
sons, and especially Alexander, appear to have maligned the faith they had forsaken, as well as the character of the apostle.
ALEXANDRIA (Acts vi. 9; xviii. 24; xxvii. 6), the chief maritime city and long the metropolis of Lower Egypt. It is situated on the Mediterranean, twelve miles west of the Canopic mouth of the Nile, in 31° 13' N. lat. and 25° 53'! E. long. It owes its origin to the comprehensive policy of Alexander, who perceived that the usual channels of commerce might be advantageously altered; and that a city occupying this site could not fail to become the common emporium for the traffic of the eastern and western worlds, by means of the river Nile, and the two adjacent seas, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean: and the high prosperity which, as such, Alexandria very rapidly attained, proved the soundness of his judgment, and exceeded any expectations which even he could have entertained. For a long period Alexandria was the greatest of known cities; for Nineveh and Babylon had fallen, and Rome had not yet risen to pre-eminence: and even when Rome became the mistress of the world, and Alexandria only the metropolis of a province, the latter was second only to the former in wealth, extent, and importance; and was honoured with the magnificent titles of the second metropolis of the world, the city of cities, the queen of the East, a second Rome.
The city was founded in B.C. 332, and was built under the superintendence of the same architect (Dinocrates) who had rebuilt the Temple of Diana at Ephesus. The ancient city appears to have been of seven times the extent of the modern. If we may judge from the length of the two main streets (crossing each other at right angles) by which it was intersected, the city was about four miles long by one and a half wide: and in the time of Diodorus it contained a free population of 300,000 persons, or probably 600,000, if we double the former number, as Mannert suggests, in order to include the slaves. The port of Alexandria was secure, but difficult of access; in consequence of which, a magnificent pharos, or lighthouse, was erected upon an islet at the entrance, which was connected with the mainland by a dyke. This pharos was accounted one of the seven' wonders of the world. It was begun by Ptolemy Soter, and completed under Ptolemy Philadelphus, by Sostratus of Cnidus, B.C. 283. It was a square structure of white marble, on the top of which fires were kept constantly burning for the direction of mariners. It was erected at a cost of 800 talents, which, if Attic, would amount to 165,000l., if Alexandrian, to twice that sum. It was a wonder in those times, when such erections were almost unknown; but, in itself, the Eddystone lighthouse is, in all probability, ten times more wonderful.
The business of working out the great design of Alexander could not have devolved on a more fitting person than Ptolemy Soter. From his first arrival in Egypt, he made Alexandria his residence and no sooner had he some respite from war, then he bent all the resources of his mind to draw to his kingdom the whole trade of the East, which the Tyrians had, up to his time, carried on by sea to Elath, and from thence, by the way of Rhinocorura, to Tyre. He built a
city on the west side of the Red Sea, whence he sent out fleets to all those countries to which the Phoenicians traded from Elath. But, observing that the Red Sea, by reason of rocks and shoals, was very dangerous towards its northern extremity, he transferred the trade to another city, which he founded at the greatest practicable disance southward. This port, which was almost on the borders of Ethiopia, he called, from his mother, Berenice; but the harbour being found inconvenient, the neighbouring city of Myos Hormos was preferred. Thither the products of the East and South were conveyed by sea; and were from thence taken on camels to Coptus, on the Nile, where they were again shipped for Alexandria, and from that city were dispersed to all the nations of the west, in exchange for merchandise which was afterwards exported to the East. By these means, the whole trade was fixed at Alexandria, which thus became the chief mart of all the traffic between the East and West, and which continued to be the greatest emporium in the world for above seventeen centuries, until the discovery of the passage by the Cape of Good Hope opened another channel for the commerce of the East.
Alexandria became not only the seat of commerce, but of learning and the liberal sciences. This distinction also it owed to Ptolemy Soter, himself a man of education, who founded an academy, or society of learned men, who devoted themselves to the study of philosophy, literature, and science. For their use he made a collection of choice books, which, by degrees, increased under his successors until it became the finest library in the world, and numbered 700,000 volumes. It sustained repeated losses, by fire and otherwise, but these losses were as repeatedly repaired; and it continued to be of great fame
and use in those parts, until it was at length burnt by the Saracens when they made themselves masters of Alexandria in A.D. 642. Undoubtedly the Jews at Alexandria shared in the benefit of these institutions, as the Christians did afterwards; for the city was not only a seat of heathen, but of Jewish, and subsequently of Christian learning. It will be remembered that the celebrated translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek [SEPTUAGINT] was made, under every encouragement from Ptolemy Philadelphus, principally for the use of the Jews in Alexandria, who knew only the Greek language.
At its foundation Alexandria was peopled less by Egyptians than by colonies of Greeks, Jews, and other foreigners. The Jews, however much their religion was disliked, were valued as citizens; and every encouragement was held out by Alexander himself and by his successors in Egypt, to induce them to settle in the new city. The same privileges as those of the first class of inhabitants (the Greeks) were accorded to them, as well as the free exercise of their religion and peculiar usages: and this, with the protection and peace which a powerful state afforded against the perpetual conflicts and troubles of Palestine, and with the inclination to traffic, which had been acquired during the Captivity, gradually drew such immense numbers of Jews to Alexandria, that they eventually formed a very large portion of its vast population, and at the same time constituted a most thriving and important section of the Jewish nation. The Jewish inhabitants of Alexandria are therefore often mentioned in the later history of the nation; and their importance as a section of that nation would doubtless have been more frequently indicated, had not the Jews of Egypt thrown off
The inhabitants of Alexandria were divided into three classes: 1. The Macedonians, the original founders of the city; 2. the mercenaries who had served under Alexander; 3. the native Egyptians. Through the favour of Alexander and Ptolemy Soter, the Jews were admitted into the first of these classes, and this privilege was so important that it had great effect in drawing them to the new city,
their ecclesiastical dependence upon Jerusalem | ultimate result of this appeal is not known, but and its temple, and formed a separate establish- the Jews of Alexandria continued to be harassed ment of their own, in imitation of it, at a place during the remainder of Caligula's reign; and about twelve miles north of Heliopolis, and their alabarch Alexander Lysimachus (brother called Onion, from Onias, the expelled high- of Philo) was thrown into prison, where he priest, by whom it was founded. remained till he was discharged by Claudius, upon whose accession to the empire the Alexandrian Jews betook themselves to arms. This occasioned such disturbances that they attracted the attention of the emperor, who, at the joint entreaty of Herod and Agrippa, issued an edict conferring on the Jews of Egypt all their ancient privileges. The state of feeling in Alexandria which these facts indicate, was very far from being allayed when the revolt of the Jews in Palestine caused even those of the nation who dwelt in foreign parts to be regarded as enemies, both by the populace and the government. In Alexandria, on a public occasion, they were attacked, and those who could not save themselves by flight were put to the sword. Only three were taken alive, and they were dragged through the city to be consigned to the flames. The indignation of the Jews rose beyond all bounds at this spectacle. They first assailed the Greek citizens with stones, and then rushed with lighted torches to the amphitheatre, to set it on fire and burn all the people who were there assembled. The Roman prefect Tiberius Alexander, finding that milder measures were of no avail, sent out a body of 17,000 soldiers, who slew about 50,000 of the Jews, and plundered and burned their dwellings.
After the close of the war in Palestine, new disturbances were excited in Egypt by the Sicarii, many of whom had fled thither. They endeavoured to persuade the Jews to acknowledge no king but God, and to throw off the Roman yoke. Such persons as opposed their designs and tendered wiser counsels to their brethren, they secretly assassinated, according to their custom. But the principal Jews in Alexandria having in a general assembly earnestly warned the people against these fanatics, who had been the authors of all the troubles in Pa- || lestine, about 600 of them were delivered up to the Romans. Several fled into the Thebaid, but were apprehended and brought back. The most cruel tortures which could be devised had no effect in compelling them to acknowledge the emperor for their sovereign; and even their children seemed endowed with souls fearless of death, and bodies incapable of pain. Vespasian, when informed of these transactions, sent orders that the Jewish temple in Egypt should be destroyed. Lupus the prefect, however, only shut it up, after having taken out the consecrated gifts: but his successor Paulinus stripped it com pletely, and excluded the Jews entirely from it. This was in A.D. 75, being the 343rd year from the building of the temple by Onias.
St. Mark is said to have introduced the Christian religion into Alexandria, which early became one of the strongholds of the true faith. The Jews continued to form a principal portion of the inhabitants, and remained in the enjoy ment of their civil rights till A.D. 415, when they incurred the hatred of Cyril the patriarch, at whose instance they were expelled, to the number of 40,000, and their synagogues destroyed. However, when Amrou, in A.D. 640, took the
The dreadful persecution which the Jews of Alexandria underwent in A.D. 39, shows that, notwithstanding their long establishment there, no relations of friendliness had arisen between them and the other inhabitants, by whom in fact they were intensely hated. This feeling was so wen known, that at the date indicated, the Roman governor Avillius Flaccus, who was anxious to ingratiate himself with the citizens, was persuaded that the surest way of winning their affections was to withdraw his protection from the Jews, against whom the emperor was already exasperated by their refusal to acknowledge his right to divine honours, which he insanely claimed, or to admit his images into their synagogues. In consequence of the connivance of Flaccus, the unfortunate Jews were treated with every species of outrage and insult. Their synagogues were levelled with the ground, consumed by fire, or profaned by the emperor's statues. They were deprived of the rights of citizenship, and declared aliens. Their houses, shops, and warehouses were plundered of their effects, and they themselves were pent up in one narrow corner of the city, where the greater part were obliged to lie in the open air, and where the supplies of food being cut off, many of them died of hardship and hunger; and whoever was found beyond the boundary, whether he had escaped from the assigned limits, or had come in from the country, was seized and put to death with horrid tortures.
At length king Herod Agrippa, who stayed long enough in Alexandria to see the beginning of these atrocities. transmitted to the emperor such a report of the real state of affairs as induced him to send a centurion to arrest Flaccus, and bring him a prisoner to Rome. This put the rioters in a false position, and brought some relief to the Jews; but the tumult still continued, and as the magistrates refused to acknowledge the citizenship of the Jews, it was at length agreed that both parties should send delegates, five on each side, to Rome, and refer the decision of the controversy to the emperor. At the head of the Jewish delegation was the celebrated Philo, to whom we owe the account of these transactions; and at the head of the Alexandrians was the noted Apion. The latter chiefly rested their case upon the fact that the Jews were the only people who refused to consecrate images to the emperor, or to swear by his name. But on this point the Jewish delegates defended themselves so well, that Caligula himself said, These men are not so wicked as ignorant and unhappy, in not believing me to be a god!' The
place for the caliph Omar, he wrote to his master in these terms: I have taken the great city of the west, which contains 4000 palaces, 4000 baths, 400 theatres, 12,000 shops for the sale of vegetable food, and 40,000 tributary Jews. From that time the prosperity of Alexandria very rapidly declined; and when, in 959, the Fatemite caliphs seized on Egypt and built New Cairo, it was speedily reduced to the rank of a secondary Egyptian city. The discovery of the passage to the East by the Cape, in 1497, almost annihilated its remaining commercial importance; and although the commercial and maritime, enterprises of Mehemet Ali have again raised it to some distinction, Alexandria must still be accounted as one of those great ancient cities whose glory has departed. The number of Jews does not now exceed 500. The whole population at the present time (1843) is between 36,000 and 40,000, of whom 4876 are foreigners.
ALGUM, or AL'MUG TREES (1 Kings x. 11; 2 Chron. ix. 10, 11). With regard to Ophir, the place from which these trees were brought to us, there appears no doubt that it was to the southward of the Red Sea, and was most probably in some part of India. Various trees have been attempted to be identified with the almug, but the balance of evidence seems to be in favour of the sandal-wood, which is known and highly esteemed in India. The tree which produces it is a native of the mountainous parts of the coast of Malabar, where large quantities are cut for export to China, to different parts of India, and to the Persian and Arabian gulfs. The outer parts of this tree are white and without odour; the parts near the root are most fragrant, especially of such trees as grow in hilly situations and stony ground. The trees vary in diameter from 9 inches to a foot, and are about 25 or 30 feet in height, but the stems soon begin to branch. This wood is white, fine-grained, and agreeably fragrant, and is much employed for making rosaries, fans, elegant boxes, and cabinets.
That it, therefore, might have attained celebrity, even in very early ages, is not at all unlikely; that it should have attracted the notice of Phoenician merchants visiting the west coast of India is highly probable; and also that they should have thought it worthy of being taken as a part of their cargo on their return from Ophir. That it is well calculated for musical instruments is confirmed by the authority of Professor Wheatstone, who says, 'I know no reason why sandal-wood should not have been employed in ancient days for constructing musical instruments. It is not so employed at present, because there are many much cheaper woods which present a far handsomer appearance. Musical instruments would appear very unfinished to modern taste unless varnished or French-polished, and it would be worse than useless to treat fragrant woods in this way. Formerly perhaps it might have been more the fashion to delight the senses of smell and hearing simultaneously than it is with us, in which case odoriferous woods would be preferred for things so much handled as musical instruments are.'
ALLEGORY. This word is found in the Authorized Version of Gal. iv. 24, but it does not actually exist as a noun in the Greek Testament, nor even in the Septuagint. In the passage in question Saint Paul cites the history of the free-born Isaac and the slave-born Ishmael, and in proceeding to apply it spiritually, he says, not as in our version, which things are an allegory, but which things are allegorized. This is of some importance; for in the one case the Apostle is made to declare a portion of Old Testament history an allegory, whereas in truth he only speaks of it as allegorically applied. Allegories themselves are, however, of frequent occurrence in Scripture, although that name is not there applied to them.
An ALLEGORY has been sometimes considered as only a lengthened metaphor; at other times, as a continuation of metaphors. But the nature of allegory itself, and the character of allegorical interpretation, will be best understood by attending to the origin of the term which denotes it. Now the term Allegory,' according to its original and proper meaning, denotes a representation of one thing which is intended to excite the representation of another thing. Every alle gory must therefore be subjected to a twofold examination: we must first examine the immediate representation, and then consider what other representation it is intended to excite. In most allegories the immediate representation is made in the form of a narrative; and, since it is the object of the allegory itself to convey a moral, not an historic truth, the narrative is commonly fictitious. The immediate representation is of no further value than as it leads to the ultimate representation. It is the application or the moral of the allegory which constitutes its worth.
Every parable is a kind of allegory; and as an example, especially clear and correct, we may refer to the parable of the sower (Luke viii. 515). In this we have a plain narrative, a statement of a few simple and intelligible facts, such, probably, as had fallen within the observation of the persons to whom our Saviour addressed himself. When he had finished the narrative, or
the immediate representation of the allegory, he then gave the explanation or ultimate representation of it; that is, he gave the allegorical interpretation of it. And that the interpretation was an interpretation, not of the words, but of the things signified by the words, is evident from the explanation itself: The seed is the word of God; those by the wayside are they that hear,' &c. (ver. 11, &c.). The impressive and pathetic allegory addressed by Nathan to David affords a similar instance of an allegorical narrative accompanied with its explanation (2 Sam. xii. 1-14).
But allegorical narratives are frequently left to explain themselves, especially when the resemblance between the immediate and ultimate representation is sufficiently apparent to make an explanation unnecessary. Of this kind we cannot have a more striking example than that beautiful one contained in the 80th Psalm: 'Thou broughtest a vine out of Egypt,' &c.
The use of allegorical interpretation is not, however, confined to mere allegory, or fictitious narratives, but is extended also to history, or real narratives. And in this case the grammatical meaning of a passage is called its historical meaning, in contradistinction to its allegorical meaning. There are two different modes in which Scripture history has been thus allegorized. According to one mode, facts and circumstances, especially those recorded in the Old Testament, have been applied to other facts and circumstances, of which they have been described as representative. According to the other mode, these facts and circumstances have been described as mere emblems. The former mode is warranted by the practice of the sacred writers themselves; for when facts and circumstances are so applied, they are applied as types of those things to which the application is made: but no such authority in favour of the latter mode of allegorical interpretation can be produced.
ALLELUIA. [HALLELUJAH.] ALLIANCES. From a dread lest the example of foreign nations should draw the Israelites into the worship of idols, they were made a peculiar and separate people, and intercourse and alliance with such nations were strongly interdicted (Lev. xviii. 3, 4; xx. 22, 23). The tendency to idolatry was in those times so strong, that the safety of the Israelites lay in the most complete isolation that could be realized; and it was to assist this object that a country more than usually separated from others by its natural boundaries was assigned to them. It was shut in by the sea on the west, by deserts on the south and east, and by mountains and forests on the north. Among a people so situated we should not expect to hear much of alliances with other nations.
By far the most remarkable alliance in the political history of the Hebrews is that between Solomon and Hiram king of Tyre, which may primarily be referred to the affection which the latter entertained for David (1 Kings v. 2). He 'sent carpenters and masons' to build David an house (2 Sam. v. 11), and wishing to cultivate the friendly intercourse thus opened with the Hebrew nation, on the death of David he sent an embassy to condole with Solomon on the death of his father, and to congratulate him on his ac
cession (1 Kings v. 1). The plans of the young king rendered the friendship of Hiram a matter of importance, and accordingly a league' was formed (1 Kings v. 12) between them: and that this league had a reference not merely to the special matter then in view, but was a general league of amity, is evinced by the fact that more than 250 years after, a prophet denounces the Lord's vengeance upon Tyre, because she 'remembered not the brotherly covenant' (Amos i. 9). Under this league large bodies of Jews and Phoenicians were associated, first in preparing the materials for the Temple (1 Kings v. 6-18), and afterwards in navigating the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean (1 Kings ix. 26-28). The disastrous consequences of even the seemingly least objectionable alliances may be seen in the long train of evils, both to the kingdom of Israel and of Judah, which ensued from the marriage of Ahab with Jezebel, the king of Tyre's daughter [AHAB; JEZEBEL]. These consequences had been manifested even in the time of Solomon; for he formed matrimonial alliances with most of the neighbouring kingdoms, and to the influence of his idolatrous wives are ascribed the abominations which darkened the latter days of the wise king (1 Kings xi. 1-8).
The prophets, who were alive to these consequences, often raised their voices against such dangerous connections (1 Kings xi. 11; 2 Chron. xvi. 7; xix. 2; xxv. 7, &c.; Isa. vii. 17), without effect. The Jewish history, after Solomon, affords examples of several treaties with different kings of Syria, and with the kings of Assyria and Babylon (see 1 Kings xv. 16-20; 2 Kings xvi. 5, &c.; 2 Chron. xviii. 16, &c.). In later times, the Maccabees appear to have considered themselves unrestrained by any but the ordinary prudential considerations in contracting alliances. The most remarkable alliance of this kind was the treaty made with the Romans by Judas Maccabæus, which, having heen concluded at Rome, was graven upon brass and deposited in the Capitol (1 Macc. viii. 22-28; Josephus, Antiq. xii. 10).
Anterior to the Mosaical institutions, such alliances with foreigners were permitted, or at least tolerated. Abraham was in alliance with some of the Canaanitish princes (Gen. xiv. 13); he also entered into a regular treaty of alliance, being the first on record, with the Philistine king Abimelech (xxi. 22, sq.), which was renewed by their sons (xxvi. 26-30). Even after the law, it appears, from some of the instances already adduced, that such alliances with distant nations as could not be supposed to have any dangerous effect upon the religion or morals of the people, were not deemed to be interdicted. The treaty with the Gibeonites is a remarkable proof of this. Believing that the ambassadors came from a great distance, Joshua and the elders readily entered into an alliance with them; and are condemned for it only on the ground that the Gibeonites were in fact their near neighbours (Josh. ix. 3-27).
From the time of the patriarchs, a covenant of alliance was sealed by the blood of some victim. A heifer, a goat, a ram, a turtle dove, and a young pigeon, were immolated in confirmation of the covenant between the Lord and Abraham (Gen. xv. 9). The animal or animals sacrificed