Zoology – Zuzim

Zoology

zo-ol'-o-ji: A systematic list of the animals of the Bible includes representatives of the principal orders of mammals, birds and reptiles, and not a few of the lower animals. For further notices of animals in the following list, see the articles referring to them:

Mammals:

PRIMATES: Ape

INSECTIVORA: Hedgehog. MOLE (which see) not found in Palestine

CHIROPTERA: Bat

CARNIVORA

(a) Felidae, Cat, Lion, Leopard

(b) Hyaenidae, Hyena

(c) Canidae, Dog (including Greyhound), Fox, Jackal, Wolf

(d) Mustelidae, Ferret, Badger, Marten (s.v. CAT)

(e) Ursidae, Bear

UNGULATA:

(a) Odd-toed: Horse, Ass, Mule, Rhinoceros

(b) Even-toed non-ruminants: Swine, Hippopotamus (Behemoth)

(c) Ruminants:

(1) Bovidae, Domestic Cattle, Wild Ox or Unicorn, Sinaitic Ibex (s.v. GOAT), Persian Wild Goat (s.v. CHAMOIS), Gazelle, Arabian Oryx (s.v. ANTELOPE), Chamois

(2) Cervidae, Roe Deer, Fallow Deer, Red Deer (s.v. DEER)

(3) Camelidae, Camel

PROBOSCIDEA: Elephant

HYRACOIDEA: Coney

SIRENIA: Dugong (s.v. BADGER)

CETACNA: Whale, Dolphin, Porpoise

RODENTIA: Mouse, Mole-Rat (s.v. MOLE), Porcupine, Hare Birds:

PASSERES: Sparrow, Swallow, Raven, Hoopoe, Night Hawk

RAPTORES: Great Owl, Little Owl, Horned Owl, Eagle, Vulture, Gier-Eagle, Osprey, Kite, Glede, Hawk, Falcon

COLUMBAE: Dove, Turtle-Dove

GALLINAE: Cock, Partridge, Quail, Peacock

GRALLATORES: Crane, Heron, Stork

STEGANOPODES: Pelican, Cormorant

RATTAE: Ostrich Reptiles:

CROCODILIA: Crocodile (Leviathan)

CHELONIA: Tortoise

OPHIDIA: Serpent, Fiery Serpent, Adder, Asp, Vipet (s.v. SERPENT)

LACERTILIA: Lizard, Great Lizard, Gecko, Chameleon, Land Crocodile, Sand Lizard (s.v. LIZARD) Amphibians: Frog

Fishes: Fish (in general)

Mollusks: Snail, Murex (Purple)

Insects:

HYMENOPTERA: Ant, Bee, Hornet

LEPIDOPTERA: Clothes-Moth (s.v. MOTH), Silk-Worm, Worm (Larva)

SIPHONAPTERA: Flea

DIPTERA: Fly

RHYNCHOTA; Louse, Scarlet-Worm

ORTHOPTERA: Grasshopper, Locust (s.v. INSECTS)

Arachnida: Spider, Scorpion

Coelenterata: Coral

Porifera:

Sponge

Some interesting problems arise in connection with the lists of clean and unclean animals in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. The list of clean animals in Deuteronomy 14:4–5 is as follows:

Probably the most valuable modern work on Bible animals is Tristram's Natural History of the Bible, published in 1867 and to a great extent followed in the Revised Version (British and American) and in articles in various Biblical encyclopedias. In the table given above, the Revised Version (British and American) really differs from Tristram only in 6, 8 and 10. Hart is the male of the red deer, the ibex is a kind of wild goat, and the oryx is a kind of antelope. The first three in the table are domestic animals whose identification is not questioned. The other seven are presumably wild animals, regarding every one of which there is more or less uncertainty. 'Aqqo, dishon and zemer occur only in this passage, te'o only here and in Isaiah 51:20. 'Ayyal occurs 22 times, tsebhi 16 times, yachmur only twice. The problem is to find seven ruminant mammals to correspond to these names. The camel (Deuteronomy 14:7) is excluded as unclean. The gazelle, the Sinaitic ibex, and the Persian wild goat are common. The roe deer was fairly common in Carmel and Southern Lebanon 20 years ago, but is now nearly or quita extinct. The fallow deer exists in Mesopotamia, and Tristram says that he saw it in Galilee, though the writer is inclined to question the accuracy of the observation. The oryx is fairly common in Northwestern Arabia, approaching the limits of Edom. Here, then, are six animals, the gazelle, ibex, Persian wild goat, roe deer, fallow deer, and oryx, whose existence in or near Palestine is undisputed.

The bubale, addax and Barbary sheep of Tristram's list are North African species which the writer believes do not range as far East as Egypt, and which he believes should therefore be excluded. In Asia Miner are found the red deer, the chamois and the Armenian wild sheep, but there is no proof that any of these ever ranged as far South as Palestine. The bison exists in the Caucasus, and the wild ox, urus or aurochs, seems to be depicted in Assyrian sculptures. The buffalo is found in Palestine, but is believed to have been introduced since Bible times. The Tartarian roe is named Cervus pygargus, and there is a South African antelope named Bubalis pygargus, but the pygarg of English Versions of the Bible has no real existence. The word means "white-rumped," and might apply to various deer and antelopes.

To complete the list of seven we are therefore driven to one of the following: the red deer, the chamois, the Armenian wild sheep, the bison and the aurochs, no one of which has a very good claim to be included; The writer considers that the roe, which has been the commonest deer of Palestine, is the 'ayyal (compare Arabic 'aiyil, "deer"). Tsebhi is very near to Arabic zabi, "gazelle," and, with its 16 occurrences in the Old Testament, may well be that common animal. There is reason to think that yachmur is the name of a deer, and the writer prefers to apply it to the fallow deer of Mesopotamia, as being more likely to have inhabited Palestine than the red deer of Asia Minor. There is little evidence regarding 'aqqo, which occurs only here. The etymology is uncertain. Septuagint has tragelaphos, "goat-stag." Targum and Syriac VSS, according to BDB, have ibex. Ya`el (Job 39:1; Psalms 104:18; 1 Samuel 24:2), English Versions of the Bible "wild goat," is quite certainly the ibex, but it is possible that 'aqqo may be another name for the same animal, ya`el not occurring in this list. In BDB dishon is derived from dush, "to tread," and is considered to be a kind of wild goat. Since we have assigned 'aqqo to the ibex, we may then assign this name to the other wild goat of the country, the Persian wild goat or pasang. Te'o is in the Revised Version (British and American) antelope and in the Septuagint orux, "oryx." This is a possible identification which suits also, Isaiah 51:20, and does not preclude the possibility that the re'em, the King James Version "unicorn," the Revised Version (British and American) "wild-ox," may also be the oryx. The oryx is known to the Arabs under at least three names, the most common of which, baqr el-wachsh, means "wild-ox." Under CHAMOIS, the writer suggests that zemer may be the pasang or Persian wild goat, which is figured in that article. There is little to choose in the assignment of the names, but as dishon has here been provisionally assigned to the pasang, nothing better is left for zemer than the "chamois" of English Versions of the Bible, the claims of which are referred to above.

The list of unclean animals is considered in the article on LIZARD.

Prophecies of the desolation of Babylon and Edom in Isaiah 13:21,Isaiah 13:22; Isaiah 34:11–15 contain names of animals, some of which present apparently insuperable difficulties. See under JACKAL and SATYR. The Book of Job contains some remarkable references to animals, especially in chapters 39; 40; 41: to the wild goat, the wild ass, the wild ox, the ostrich, the horse, the hawk, the behemoth and the leviathan.

Proverbs 30:1–33 contains some curious allusions to natural history:

".... Things which are too wonderful for me ....

The way of an eagle in the air;

The way of a serpent upon a rock (see EAGLE; WAY);

There are four things which are little upon the earth,

But they are exceeding wise:

The ants are a people not strong,

Yet they provide their food in the summer;

The conies are but a feeble folk,

Yet they make their houses in the rocks;

The locusts have no king,

Yet go they forth all of them by bands;

The lizard taketh hold with her hands,

Yet is she in kings' palaces.

There are three things which are stately in their march,

Yea, four which are stately in going:

The lion, which is might, lest among beasts,

And turneth not away for any;

The greyhound; the he-goat also;

And the king against whom there is no rising up."

An interesting grouping is found in the prophecy in Isaiah 11:6–8 (compare 65:25): "And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder's den."

The fauna of Palestine is mainly European and Asiatic, but resembles in some important points the fauna of Africa. The Syrian coney is not found elsewhere and its only near allies are the conies of Africa. The gazelle and oryx belong to the group of antelopes which is especially African. The lion and leopard range throughout Africa and Southwest Asia. The ostrich is found outside of Africa only in Arabia. Some of the smaller birds, as for instance the sun-bird, have their nearest allies in Africa. The fish of the Sea of Tiberias and the Jordan present important resemblances to African fishes. The same is true of some of the butterflies of Palestine. Allying the fauna of Palestine with that of Europe and North Asia may be noted the deer, bear, wolf, fox, hare and others. The ibex and Persian wild goat constitute links with central Asia, which is regarded as the center of distribution of the goat tribe.

The fauna of Palestine has undoubtedly changed since Bible times. Lions have disappeared, bears and leopards have become scarce, the roe deer has nearly or quite disappeared within recent years. It is doubtful whether the aurochs, the chamois and the red deer were ever found in Palestine, but if so they are entirely gone. The buffalo has been introduced and has become common in some regions. Domestic cats, common now, were perhaps not indigenous to ancient Palestine. In prehistoric times, or it may be before the advent of man, the glacial period had an influence upon the fauna of this country, traces of which still persist. On the summits of Lebanon are found two species of butterfly, Pieris callidice, found also in Siberia, and Vanessa urticae, common in Europe. When the glacial period came on, these butterflies with a host of other creatures were driven down from the North. When the cold receded northward they moved back again, except for these, and perhaps others since become extinct, which found the congenial cold in ascending the mountains where they became isolated. Syria and Palestine were never covered with a sheet of ice, but the famous cedar grove of Lebanon stands on the terminal moraine of what was once an extensive glacier.

Alfred Ely Day

Zophah

zo'-fa (tsophach, meaning uncertain): An Asherite (1 Chronicles 7:35,1 Chronicles 7:36).

Zophai

zo'fi, zo'-fa-i (tsophay, meaning uncertain): In 1 Chronicles 6:26 (Hebrew verse 11) = Zuph, the Qere of 1 Chronicles 6:35 (Hebrew, verse 20), and 1 Samuel 1:1.

See ZUPH, (1).

Zophar

zo'-far (tsphar, meaning doubtful, supposed from root meaning "to leap"; Sophar): One of the three friends of Job who, hearing of his affliction, make an appointment together to visit and comfort him. He is from the tribe of Naamah, a tribe and place otherwise unknown, for as all the other friends and Job himself are from lands outside of Palestine, it is not likely that this place was identical with Naamah in the West of Judah (Joshua 15:41). He speaks but twice (Job 11:1–20; Job 20:1–29); by his silence the 3rd time the writer seems to intimate that with Bildad's third speech (Job 25:1–6; see under BILDAD) the friends' arguments are exhausted. He is the most impetuous and dogmatic of the three (compare Job 11:2,Job 11:3; Job 20:2,Job 20:3); stung to passionate response by Job's presumption in maintaining that he is wronged and is seeking light from God. His words are in a key of intensity amounting to reckless exaggeration. He is the first to accuse Job directly of wickedness; averring indeed that his punishment is too good for him (11:6); he rebukes Job's impious presumption in trying to find out the unsearchable secrets of God (11:7-12); and yet, like the rest of the friends, promises peace and restoration on condition of penitence and putting away iniquity (11:13-19). Even from this promise, however, he reverts to the fearful peril of the wicked (11:20); and in his 2nd speech, outdoing the others, he presses their lurid description of the wicked man's woes to the extreme (20:5-29), and calls forth a straight contradiction from Job, who, not in wrath, but in dismay, is constrained by loyalty to truth to acknowledge things as they are. Zophar seems designed to represent the wrong-headedness of the odium theologicum.

John Franklin Genung

Zophim, The Field Of

zo'-fim, (sedheh tsophim; eis agrou skopian): The place on the top of Pisgah to which Balak took Balaam, whence only a part of the host of Israel could be seen (Numbers 23:14). Perhaps we should simply translate "field of watchers." Conder draws attention to the name Tal`at es-Sufa attached to an ascent leading up to the ridge of Neba from the North Here possibly is a survival of the old name. For Ramathaim-zophim see RAMAH.

Zorah

zo'-ra (tsor`ah; Saraa): A city on the border of Dan, between Eshtaol and Ir-shemesh (Joshua 19:41); the birthplace of Samson (Judges 13:2,Revelation 13:8); near here too he was buried (Judges 16:31); from here some Danites went to spy out the land (Judges 18:2,Revelation 17:11). In Joshua 15:33 it is, with Eshtaol, allotted to Judah, and after the captivity it was reinhabited by the "children of Judah" (Nehemiah 11:29, the King James Version "Zareah"). It was one of the cities fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11:10). It is probable that it is mentioned under the name Tsarkha along with Aialuna (Aijalon; 2 Chronicles 11:10) in the Tell el-Amarna Letters(No. 265, Petrie) as attacked by the Khabiri.

It is the modern Sur`a, near the summit of a lofty hill on the north side of the Wady es-Surar (Vale of Sorek). The summit itself is occupied by the Mukam Nebi Samit, overhung by a lofty palm, and there are many remains of ancient tombs, cisterns, wine presses, etc., around. From here Eshu`a (Eshtaol), `Ain Shems (Beth-shemesh) and Tibnah (Timnah) are all visible. See PEF, III, 158, Sh XVII.

E. W. G. Masterman

Zorathites

zo'-rath-its (tsor`athi; Sarathaioi (1 Chronicles 2:53, the King James Version "Zareathites"), Codex Vaticanus ho Arathei; Codex Alexandrinus ho Sarathi (4 2)): The inhabitants of Zorah, who are said to be descended from Kiriath-jearim families.

Zoreah

zo'-re-a (tsor`ah): the King James Version of Joshua 15:33 for ZORAH (which see).

Zorites

zo'-rits (tsor`i; Codex Vaticanus ho Hesarsei; Codex Alexandrinus ho Hesaraei) : In 1 Chronicles 2:54 for "Zorites" we should probably read ZORATHITES (which see). These formed a half of the inhabitants of MANAHATH (which see).

Zoroastrianism

zo-ro-as'-tri-an-iz'-m:

I. HISTORY SOURCES

II. RELATION TO ISRAEL

1. Influence on Occident

2. Popular Judaism

3. Possible Theological Influence

4. Angelology and Demonology

5. Eschatology

6. Messiah

7. Ethics

8. Summary

LITERATURE

I. History.

Sources:

The sacred book of the Persians, the Avesta, is a work of which only a small part has survived. Tradition tells that the Avestan manuscripts have suffered one partial and two total destructions (at the hands of Turanians, Macedonians, and Mohammedans, respectively), and what remains seems to be based on a collection of passages derived from oral tradition and arranged for liturgical purposes at the time of the first Sassanians (after 226 AD). None the less, a portion (the Gathas) of the present work certainly contains material from Zoroaster himself and much of the remainder of the Avesta is pre-Christian, although some portions are later. Outside of the Avesta there is an extensive literature written in Pahlavi. Most of this in its final form belongs to the 9th Christian century, or to an even later date, but in it there is embodied much very early matter. Unfortunately criticism of these sources is as yet in a very embryonic condition. The Greek historians, especially Plutarch and Strabo, are naturally of great importance, but the chief Greek work (that of Theopompus) is lost.

For a general account of Zoroastrianism, see PERSIAN RELIGION.

II. Relation to Israel.

1. Influence on Occident:

Zoroastrianism was an active, missionary religion that has exerted a profound influence on the world's thought, all the more because in the West (at any rate) Ahura Mazda was not at all a jealous god, and Mazdeism was always quite ready to enter into syncretism with other systems. But this syncretistic tendency makes the task of the historian very delicate. None of the three great streams that swept from Persia over the West--Mithraism, Gnosticism, and Manicheism--contained much more than a Mazdean nucleus, and the extrication of Mazdean from other (especially older Magian and Babylonian) elements is frequently impossible. Yet the motive force came from Zoroaster, and long before the Christian era "Magi" were everywhere (as early as 139 BC they were expelled from Rome; compare RAB-MAG; BRANCH). Often, doubtless, charlatans, they none the less brought teachings that effected a far-reaching modification of popular views and produced an influence on so basic a writer as Plato himself.

2. Popular Judaism:

Within the period 538-332 BC (that Cyrus was a Zoroastrian seems now established) Israel was under the rule of Mazdeans, and Mazdean influence on at least the popular conceptions was inevitable. It appears clearly in such works as Tobit (Expository Times, XI, 257 ff), and Hystaspis (GJV, edition 4, III, 592-95), in many Talmudic passages (ZDMG, XXI, 552-91), certain customs of the Essenes, various anti-demoniac charms (see EXORCISM; SORCERY), and, perhaps, in the feast of Purim. And the stress laid on the prophetic ability of the Magi in Matthew 2:1–12 is certainly not without significance. But the important question is the existence or extent of Mazdean influence on the formal Jewish religion.

3. Possible Theological Influence:

As a matter of fact, after Israel's contact with Persia the following elements, all known to Mazdeism, appear, and apparently for the first time:

(1) a formal angelology, with six (or seven) archangels at the head of the developed hierarchy;

(2) these angels not mere companions of God but His intermediaries, established (often) over special domains;

(3) in the philosophical religion, a corresponding doctrine of hypostases;

(4) as a result, a remoter conception of God;

(5) a developed demonology;

(6) the conception of a supreme head (Satan) over the powers of evil;

(7) the doctrine of immortality;

(8) rewards or punishments for the soul immediately after death;

(9) a schematic eschatology especially as regards chronological systems;

(10) a superhuman Messiah;

(11) bodily resurrection;

(12) a rationalized, legalistic conception of God's moral demands.

4. Angelology and Demonology:

In this list Mazdean influence may be taken as certain in points (1), (2), (5), (6). Of course belief in angels and (still more) in demons had always existed in Israel, and a tendency to classification is a natural product of increased culture. But the thoroughness and rapidity of the process and the general acceptance of its principles show something more than cultural growth (compare the influence of pseudo-Dionysius on Christianity). In particular, the doctrine of patrons (angelic or demoniac) seems to find no expression in the pre-exilic religion. Nor was the incorporation into a single being, not only of phases, but of the whole power of evil, a necessary growth from the earlier religion; the contrast between 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 shows a sharp alteration in viewpoint. On the other hand, the dualism that Ahriman was to explain produced no effect on Israel, and God remained the Creator of all things, even of Satan. See SATAN; ANTICHRIST. (3) presents a problem that still needs proper analysis. The Zoroastrian abstractions may well have stimulated Jewish speculation. But the influence of Greek thought can certainly not be ignored, and a rationalizing process applied to the angelelegy would account for the purely Jewish growth of the concepts. (4) is bound up to some degree with the above, and presents the most unpleasant feature of the later Judaism. Sharply counter to prophetic and pre-prophetic teaching, it was modified by the still later Talmudism. Its inconsistency with the teaching of Christ needs no comment. In part, however, it may well have been due to the general "transcendentalizing" tendencies of the intermediate period.

See GOD; SALVATION.

5. Eschatology:

It is possible, similarly, to understand the advanced Jewish eschatology as an elaboration and refinement of the genuinely prophetic Day of Yahweh concepts, without postulating foreign influence. In particular, a doctrine of immortality was inevitable in Judaism, and the Jewish premises were of a sort that made a resurrection belief necessary. The presence of similar beliefs in Mazdeism may have hastened the process and helped determine the specific form, and for certain details direct borrowing is quite likely (compare the twelve periods of world-history in Apocrypha Abraham 29; Syriac Baruch 53 ff; 2 Esdras 14). But too much stress cannot be laid on details. The extant Persian apocalypses are all very late, and literary (if not religious) influence on them from Christian and Jewish sources seems inevitable (for the Bahman Yast it is certain). Nor could the effect of the Mazdean eschatology have been very thorough. Of its two most cardinal doctrines, the Chinvat Bridge is absent from Judaism, and the molten-metal ordeal is referred to only in the vaguest terms, if at all. Indeed, the very fact that certain doctrines were identified with the "heathen" may well have deterred Jewish acceptance.

See PAROUSIA; RESURRECTION.

6. Messiah:

Similarly, the Messiah, as future king, was fixed in Jewish belief, and His elevation to celestial position was an inevitable step in the general refining process. The Persian Saoshyant doctrine may well have helped, and the appearance of the Messiah "from .... the sea" in 2 Esdras 13:3 certainly recalls the Mazdean appearance from a lake. But Saoshyant is not a celestial figure. He has no existence before his final appearance (or birth) and he comes from earth, not from heaven. The Jewish Son of man--Messiah--on the other hand, is a purely celestial figure and (even in 2 Esdras 13) existed from (or before) creation. The birth of Saoshyant from the seed of Zoroaster and that of the (non-celestial) Messiah from the seed of David have no connection whatever.

See MESSIAH; SON OF MAN.

7. Ethics:

Not much can be made of the parallel in legalism. Nearly every religion has gone through a similar legalistic state. The practical eudemonistic outlook of such works as Proverbs and Sirach (see WISDOM) doubtless have analogies in Mazdeism, and the comfortable union of religion and the good things of the present life among the Persians may well have had an effect on certain of the Jews, especially as the Persians preserved a good ethical standard. But only a part of Judaism was eudemonistic, and Mazdean and Jewish casuistry are based on entirely distinct principles.

8. Summary:

Summarizing, about the most that can be asserted for Mazdean influence is that it left its mark on the angelology and demonology and that it possibly contributed certain eschatological details. Apart from this, it may well have helped determine the development of elements already present in Israel's faith. On the common people (especially the more superstitious) its influence was considerably greater. But there is nothing in the formal theology of Judaism that can be described as "borrowed" from Mazdean teachings.

NOTE.

There is almost certainly no reference to Mazdean dualism in Isaiah 45:7.

LITERATURE.

The Avesta is in SBE, IV, 23, 31, but the Gathas are best studied in L.H. Mills, The Gathas of Zarathushtra (1900); Pahlavi texts in SBE, V, 18, 24, 37, 47. The best presentation of Mazdeism is in Saussaye's Lehrbuch der Religionsgeschichte, II, 162-233 (by Ed. Lehmann); compare the articles "Zoroastrianism" in Encyclopedia Biblica (Geldner and Cheyne) and HDB (J. H. Moulton, excellent); on the relation to Judaism, Stave, Uber den Einfluss des Parsismus auf das Judenthum (1898); Soderblom, La vie future d'apres le Mazdeisme (An. Mus. Guimet, 1901, needs checking); Boklen, Die Verwandtschaft der jud.-chr. mit der parsischen Eschatologie (1902, good material but very uncritical); L. H. Mills, Our Own Religion in Ancient Persia (1912, theory of parallel development; Mazdeism rather idealized); J. H. Moulton, Early Zoroastrianism (1913) and articles by T. K. Cheyne, The Expository Times, II, 202, 224, 248; and J. H. Moulton, The Expository Times, IX, 352. For details compare Clemen, Religionsgeschichtliche Erklarung des New Testament (1909, English translation, Primitive Christianity and Its non-Jewish Sources); Bousset, Religion des Judenthums (2nd edition, 1906); Offenbarung Johannis (1906); Hauptprobleme der Gnosis (1907, indispensable).

Burton Scott Easton

Zorobabel

zo-rob'-a-bel, zo-ro'-ba-bel (Zerobabel): In the King James Version; Greek form of "Zerubbabel," thus the Revised Version (British and American) (Matthew 1:12,Matthew 1:13; Luke 3:27).

Zorzelleus

zor-zel'-e-us (Zorzelleos, Codex Vaticanus (and Swete) Phaezeldaios; Fritzsche, Berzellaios; the King James Version Berzelus; the Revised Version margin "Phaezeldaeus"): The father of Augia, the wife of Jaddus, head of a family that "usurped the office of the priesthood" in the return under Zerubbabel (1 Esdras 5:38); "Barzillai" of Ezra 2:61; Nehemiah 7:63.

See BARZILLAI.

Zuar

zu'-ar, zoo'-ar (tsu`-ar "little one"; Sogar): Father of Nethanel (Numbers 1:8; Numbers 2:5; Numbers 7:18,Numbers 7:23; Numbers 10:15), who was head of the tribe of Issachar.

Zuph

zuf (tsuph, "honeycomb"):

(1) According to 1 Samuel 1:1 b; 1 Chronicles 6:35 (Hebrew verse 20) = "Zophai" of 1 Chronicles 6:26 (11), an ancestor of Elkanah and Samuel. But Budde and Wellhausen take it to be an adjective, and so read tsuphi, in 1 Samuel 1:1 b: "Tohu a Zuphite, an Ephraimite." It should probably be read also in 1:1a: "Now there was a certain man of the Ramathites, a Zuphite of the hill-country of Ephraim," as the Hebrew construction in the first part of the verse is otherwise unnatural. The Septuagint's Codex Alexandrinus has Soup; Lucian has Souph in 1 Samuel 1:1 b; 1 Chronicles 6:26 (11); Codex Vaticanus has Souphei; Codex Alexandrinus and Lucian have Souphi; 6:35 (20), Codex Vaticanus and Codex Alexandrinus have Souph; Lucian has Souphi; and the Kethibh has tsiph.

(2) The Septuagint's Codex Vaticanus and Codex Alexandrinus have Seiph; Lucian has Sipha, "the land of Zuph," a district in Benjamin, near its northern border (1 Samuel 9:5).

David Francis Roberts

Zur

zur (tsur "rock"):

(1) A prince or chief (Numbers 25:15; Numbers 31:8) of Midian, father of the woman slain with Zimri by Phinehas. Joshua 13:21 describes him as one of the princes of Sihon, but the reference there is regarded as a gloss.

(2) An inhabitant of Gibeon (1 Chronicles 8:30; 1 Chronicles 9:36), to be connected probably, according to Curtis, with "Zeror" of 1 Samuel 9:1.

Zuriel

zu'-ri-el (tsuri'-el, "my rock is El (God)"): Prince of the house of Merari (Numbers 3:35).

The word tsur, "rock," occurs also in the compound names Elizur (Numbers 1:5), Zurishaddai (Numbers 1:6, etc.) and Pedahzur (Numbers 1:10). Gray, Numbers 6, says that a Sabean name Suri'addana is found in an inscription said to be of the 8th century BC, or somewhat carrier (Hommel, Ancient Hebrew Tradition, 320), and bartsur, in a Zinjirli inscription of the 8th century BC (Panammu Inscr., 1. 1), and that possibly the Old Testament place-name "Beth-zur" should be added (Joshua 15:58; 1 Chronicles 2:45; 2 Chronicles 11:7; Nehemiah 3:16).

David Francis Roberts

Zurishaddai

zu-ri-shad'-a-i, zu-ri-shad'-i (tsurishadday, "my rock is Shadday"): Father of Shelumiel the head of the tribe of Simeon (Numbers 1:6; Numbers 2:12; Numbers 7:36,Numbers 7:41; Numbers 10:19).

See GOD, NAMES OF, II, 8; ZURIEL.

Zuzim

zu'-zim (zuzim; (ethne ischura, "strong nations." So Jerome in Quaest. Hebr.: genres fortes) : A people conquered by Chedorlaomer (Genesis 14:5) . They dwelt in Ham, a region not otherwise known but, from the connection, inferred to be East of the Jordan. It may also be inferred that they were a race of giants. They were perhaps to be identified with the Zamzummim.