UCAL.—See ITHIEL, 2

UEL.—One of the sons of Bani who had married a foreign wife (Ezr 10:34); called in 1 Es 9:34 Juel.

UKNAZ.—In 1 Ch 4:15 AVm gives ‘Uknaz’ instead of ‘even Kenaz’ (AV) or ‘and Kenaz’ ( RV). In all probability something has dropped out of the text, which had read originally ‘the sons of Elah: … and Kenaz.’ This is favoured by the plural ‘sons.’

ULAI.—A large river of Elam, emptying into the Persian Gulf. According to Dn 8:2, 16 and the Assyrian inscriptions, it flowed past the city of Shushan (Susa). It is the modern Karūn, which, however, does not now flow close to the site of Susa, but to the east of it. Cf. also

HYDASPES.

J. F. MCCURDY.

ULAM.—1. A Manassite family (1 Ch 7:18, 17). 2. A Benjamite family, specially noted as archers (1 Ch 8:39, 40; cf. also 2 Ch 14:7 (8)).

ULLA.—An Asherite family (1 Ch 7:39).

UMMAH.—An Asherite city (Jos 19:30) , probably a slip, owing to resemblance of Heb.

letters m and k, for Acco ( Ptolemais ).

UNCHASTITY.—See MARRIAGE, 7. 8.

UNCLEAN, UNCLEANNESS.—See CLEAN AND UNCLEAN.

UNCTION.—The same Gr. word as that translated ‘anointing’ in 1 Jn 2:27 is in 2:20 rendered ‘unction’ (RV ‘anointing’). It is used there metaphorically of the effect of the presence of the Holy Spirit upon the believer.

UNDERGIRDING.—See HELPS; SHIPS, etc., p. 850^b.

UNDERSETTER.—Only 1 K 7:30, 34, in the difficult description of Solomon’s lavers (TEMPLE, § 6 (d)) . In older English it meant ‘support’; the Heb. word is lit. ‘shoulders,’ and denotes something of the nature of a strut or brace. See the reff. in the above mentioned article.

A. R. S. KENNEDY.

UNICORN (re’ēm, Nu 23:22 etc.; rēm, Job 39:9; RV in all passages ‘wild ox’).—This is undoubtedly the rīmu of the Assyrians, often figured on their sculptures. A fine bas-relief of this animal was uncovered recently by the excavations of Nineveh. It is probably identical with the aurochs or Bos primigenius, the urus of Julius Cæsar. It was of great size and strength (Nu 23:22, 24:8, Ps 22:21), very wild and ferocious (Job 39:9–12) , and specially dangerous when hunted, because of its powerful double horns (Ps 92:10, Dt 33:17). In connexion with Is 34:7 it is interesting to note the inscription of Shalmaneser II., who says, ‘His land I trod down like a rīmu.’ The Arab. ri’m, the graceful Antilope leucoryx of Arabia, is a very different animal.

E. W. G. MASTERMAN.

UNKNOWN GOD.—St. Paul, wandering along the streets of Athens, saw an altar bearing the dedication, ‘To an Unknown God’ (Ac 17:23). He used this as the text of his sermon before the Areopagus. There is evidence in other ancient writers in favour of the existence of such a dedication, and the conjecture may be permitted that the altar was erected as a thank-offering for life preserved in some foreign country, the name of the proper divinity of which—a very important thing in Greek ritual—was unknown to the person preserved.

A. SOUTER.

UNLEAVENED BREAD.—See BREAD, LEAVEN, PASSOVER.

UNNI.—1. A Levitical family (1 Ch 15:18). 2. See UNNO.

UNNO (so Kethibh, followed by RV; Kerē Unni [so AV, cf. 1 Ch 15:18, 20]).—A family of Levites that returned with Zerub. (Neh 12:8 (9)).

UNTOWARD.—‘Untoward’ is ‘not toward,’ i.e. not well disposed. It occurs in Ac 2:40

‘this untoward generation.’ Cf. ‘untoward to all good … forward to evil’—Judgement of the Synode at Dort, p. 32. The subst. ‘untowardness’ occurs in the heading of Is 28, Hos 6. The word is still occasionally used, but in the more modern sense of ‘unfortunate’—as ‘an untoward accident.’

UNWRITTEN SAYINGS.—The name Agrapha or ‘Unwritten Sayings,’ is applied to

sayings ascribed to Jesus which are not found in the true text of the canonical Gospels. That some genuine sayings of the Lord not recorded by the Evangelists should linger in the oral tradition of the early Church is only what we should expect, but of the extant Agrapha it is only a small number that meet the tests of textual criticism, or satisfy the requirements of moral probability. It is significant of the value of the canonical Gospels as historical records that outside of them there are so few ‘sayings of Jesus’ that could possibly be accepted as conveying a veritable tradition of His actual words. The Unwritten Sayings may be classified as follows:—

1. Those in the NT.—Two varieties meet us here. (a) Those which are found in some MSS of the Gospels, but whose authenticity textual criticism renders doubtful. Among the most important of these are Mt 6:13, 17:21, Mk 9:49b, Lk 9:55f., 23:34, which all find a place in TR and are reproduced in AV, while RV removes all of them except the last to the margin. To this list must be added the sayings of Jesus in Mk 16:15–18 and Jn 8:7, 11, the conclusion of Mk. (16:9–20) and the Pericope Adulterœ in Jn. (7:53–8:11) being regarded by critical scholars as additions to the original texts, which may at the same time embody authentic traditions. Between Lk 6:4 and 5 Cod. D gives the striking saying:

‘On the same day he saw one working on the Sabbath, and said to him, Man, if thou knowest what thou doest, blessed art thou; but if thou knowest not, thou art accursed and a transgressor of the law.’

(b) Those outside of the Gospels.—The most notable is Ac 20:35 , but to this may be added Ac 1:5 (cf. 11:16) and the last part of 1 Co 11:25 (‘This do, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me’). In the opinion of some commentators, Ja 1:12 ‘the crown of life which the Lord promised to them that love him,’ is ‘a semi-quotation of some saying of Christ’s.’

2. In Apocryphal Gospels.—See these fully given in art. GOSPELS [APOCRYPHAL], III. 1. 2.

3. In the Fathers and other early Church writers (cf. p. 443).—Only a few examples of these can be set down:

Clem. Alex., Strom. vi. 5: ‘Wherefore Peter says that the Lord said to the apostles, if then any one of Israel wishes to repent and believe on God through my name, his sins shall be forgiven him. After twelve years go forth into the world, lest any one say, We did not hear.’

Origen, in Jer. xx. 3: ‘But the Saviour himself saith, He who is near me is near the fire; he who is far from me is far from the kingdom.’

Origen, in Joh. xix., speaks of ‘the commandment of Jesus which saith, Prove yourselves trustworthy money changers.’

Tertullian, de Bapt. xx., commenting on the words ‘Watch and pray,’ addressed to St. Peter in

Gethsemane, adds: ‘For the saying had also preceded, that no one untempted should attain to the heavenly kingdoms.’

4. In Mohammedan writers.—A large number of Agrapha, collected by Professor D. S. Margollouth from el-Ghazzali’s Revival of the Religious Sciences and other sources, were published by him in a series of papers in ExpT v. [1893–94] (cf. Hastings’ DB, Ext. Vol. 350, DCG ii. 882). Though interesting and sometimes striking, these have no claim to represent original traditions, but are frequently traceable to Gospels canonical or apocryphal. The following are among the best specimens:

‘Jesus one day walked with his apostles, and they passed by the carcase of a dog. The apostles said,

How foul is the smell of this dog! But Jesus said, How white are its teeth!’

‘Jesus said, Take not the world for your lord, lest it take you for its slaves.’

‘Jesus said, Whoso knows and does and teaches, shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.’

5. In the Oxyrhynchus papyri.—Special interest attaches to the ‘Sayings of Jesus’ unearthed at Oxyryhnchus by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt, all the more as they open a prospect of further discoveries of a like kind. The first series of these, published in 1897, contained some sayings that have Gospel parallels, but the following strike a note of their own:

‘Jesus saith, Except ye fast to the world, ye shall in no wise find the kingdom of God; and except ye make the sabbath a real sabbath, ye shall not see the Father.’

‘Jesus saith, I stood in the midst of the world, and in the flesh was I seen of them, and I found all men drunken, and none found I athirst among them, and my soul grieveth over the sons of men, because they are blind in their heart and see not.’

‘Jesus saith, Wherever there are two, they are not without God; and wherever there is one alone, I say,

I am with him. Raise the stone and there thou shalt find me; cleave the wood and there am I.’

More recently the same scholars discovered another papyrus with additional ‘Sayings’ of Jesus. In this case, unfortunately, the leaf was in a mutilated condition, and both re-construction and interpretation are difficult. A good account of this second series of ‘Sayings’ with the Gr. text as restored by Grenfell and Hunt themselves, will be found in an article by Professor Swete in ExpT xv. [1903–04] p. 488, with which cf. his art. on the 1897 Oxyrhynchus fragment in ExpT viii. [1896–97] p. 544. Here again some of the ‘Sayings’ have Gospel parallels, while others bear a more original character. From the two most important the following extracts (based on a text that is partly conjectural) may be given:

‘Jesus saith … If ye shall truly know yourselves, ye are the sons and daughters of the Father

Almighty, and ye shall know yourselves to be in the city of God, and ye are the city.’

‘Jesus saith … Do nothing save the things that belong to the truth, for if ye do these, ye shall know a hidden mystery.’

Of the value of the Oxyrhynchus ‘Sayings’ very different estimates have been formed. But it is pretty generally agreed that, in their present shape at all events, they were not uttered by Jesus, and do not belong to the first Christian age.

J. C. LAMBERT.

UPHARSIN.—See MENE MENE TEKEL UPHARSIN.

UPHAZ.—A supposed country or region mentioned in Jer 10:9, Dn 10:5, as a source of gold. Probably the word is miswritten for Ophir ( wh. see ).

J. F. MCCURDY.

UPPER ROOM.—See HOUSE, 5.

UR.—Father of one of David’s heroes (1 Ch 11:35).

UR OF THE CHALDEES, whence Abraham set out upon his journey to Canaan (Gn

11:28–31, 15:7, Neh 9:7), is usually identified with the well-known city of Uru in southern Babylonia, the site of which is marked by the mounds of Muqayyar. This city was in existence in the earliest period of Babylonian history, and was the seat of a dynasty of early kings before the foundation of the Bab. monarchy; it was always the centre of the worship of the moon-god in Southern Babylonia.

The identification has not been universally accepted, since from the narrative in Gn 11 it would appear that Harran was passed on the journey from Ur of the Chaldees to Canaan; hence, too, the traditional identification of the place with Urfa, the Gr. Edessa. The difficulty may perhaps be explained by the supposition that the narrative incorporates variant traditions with regard to Abraham’s origin; the fact that Uru and Harran were both of them centres of moon-worship is possibly significant.

L. W. KING.

URBANUS.—A Christian greeted by St. Paul in Ro 16:8. The name is common among slaves, and is found in inscriptions of the Imperial household.

URI.—1. The father of Bezalel (Ex 31:2, 35:30 38:22, 1 Ch 2:20, 2 Ch 1:5). 2. Father of Geber (1 K 4:19). 3. A porter (Ezr 10:24).

URIAH, or URIJAH (in AV 1 below appears as Uriah [Mt 1:6 Urias], 2 as Uriah in Is 8:2 and Urijah in 2 K 16:10–16, and 4 as Uriah in Ezr 8:33 and Urijah in Neh 3:4, 21; while Urijah only is found in the case of 3 and 5. In RV Urijah is found only in 2 K 16:10–16 , Uriah elsewhere).—1. One of David’s 30 heroes, the husband of Bathsheba. He was a Hittite, but, as the name indicates, doubtless a worshipper of Jahweh (2 S 11, 12:9, 10, 15, 1 k 15:6, Mt 1:6). After David’s ineffectual attempt to use him as a shield for his own sin, he was killed in battle in accordance with the instructions of David to Joab. 2. High priest in the reign of Ahaz; called a ‘faithful witness’ in Is 8:2, but subservient to the innovations of Ahaz in 2 K 16:10–16 . The omission of the name in 1 Ch 6:4–15 may be due to textual corruption, since it appears in Jos. Ant. X. viii. 6, which is based on Chronicles. 3. A prophet, son of Shemaiah of Kiriath-jearim.

His denunciations against Judah and Jerusalem in the style of Jeremiah aroused the wrath of king Jehoiakim. Uriah fled to Egypt, was seized and slain by order of Jehoiakim, and was buried in the common graveyard (Jer 26:20–23). 4. A priest (Neh 3:4, 21), son (representative) of Hakkoz, doubtless one of the courses of the priests (1 Ch 24:10) . He was father (or ancestor) of

Meremoth, an eminent priest (Ezr 8:33 [1 Es 8:62 Urias]). 5. A man who stood on the right hand of Ezra when he read the Law (Neh 8:4 [1 Es 9:43 Urias]).

GEORGE R. BERRY.

URIAS.—1. 1 Es 8:52 = Ezr 8:33 Uriah; perhaps identical with—2. 1 Es 9:43 = Neh 8:4 Uriah.

URIEL (‘flame of God’ or ‘my light is God’).—1. Mentioned in genealogies: (a) 1 Ch 6:24, 15:5, 11. (b) 2 Ch 13:2. 2. The angel who rebukes the presumption of Esdras in questioning the ways of God (2 Es 4:1, 5:20ff., 10:28), and converses with him at length. In 4:36 RV reads ‘Jeremiel.’ In Enoch 9.1 Uriel, or Urjan, is one of the four archangels, but in 40.9 and 71 his place is taken by Phanuel. In 19.1, 20.2 he is one of the ‘watchers,’ ‘the angel over the world and Tartarus’; and in 21, 27 he explains the fate of the fallen angels (cf. Sib. Orac., where he brings them to judgment). In 72 ff. Uriel, ‘whom the eternal Lord of glory sets over all the luminaries of heaven,’ shows Enoch the celestial phenomena; In 33.3, 4 he writes them down. In the lost ‘Prayer of Joseph’ he is the angel with whom Jacob wrestled, the eighth in rank from God, Jacob being the first.

C. W. EMMET.

URIM AND THUMMIM.—These denote the two essential parts of the sacred oracle by which in early times the Hebrews sought to ascertain the will of God. Our OT Revisers give as their meaning ‘the Lights and the Perfections’ (Ex 28:36 RVm). This rendering—or rather, taking the words as abstract plurals, ‘Light and Perfection’—seems to reflect the views of the late Jewish scholars to whom we owe the present vocalization of the OT text; but the oldest reference to the sacred lot suggests that the words express two sharply contrasted ideas. Hence if Thummim, as most believe, denotes ‘innocence,’ Urim should denote ‘guilt’—a sense which some would give it by connecting it with the verb meaning ‘to curse.’ Winckler and his followers, on the other hand, start from ‘light’ as the meaning of Urim, and interpret Thummim as ‘darkness’ (the completion of the sun’s course). ‘Urim and Thummim are life and death, yes and no, light and darkness’ (A. Jeremias, Das AT im Lichte d. alt. Orient 8:2 , 450; cf. Benzinger, Heb. Arch. 2 459 f.). There is thus a wide divergence among scholars as to the original signification of the words.

As to the precise nature of these mysterious objects there also exists a considerable, though less marked, divergence of opinion, notwithstanding the numerous recent investigations by British, American, and Continental scholars, of which the two latest are those by Kautzsch in

Hauck’s PRE 3xx. 328–336 [1907], with literature to date, and M’Neile, The Book of Exodus [1908], 181–184 . The most instructive, as it is historically the oldest, passage dealing with Urim and Thummim is 1 S 14:41f., as preserved in the fuller Greek text. The latter runs thus: ‘And Saul said, O J″ God of Israel, why hast thou not answered thy servant this day? If the iniquity be in me or in my son Jonathan, J″ God of Israel, give Urim; but if thou sayest thus. The Iniquity is in thy people Israel, give Thummim. And Saul and Jonathan were taken, but the people escaped,’ etc. Now, if this passage be compared with several others in the older narratives of Samuel, e.g. 1 S 23:2–4, 30:7, 8, 2 S 2:1, where mention is made of ‘enquiring of the LORD’ by means of the sacred lot associated with the ephod, the following points emerge: (1) There is good reason, as most scholars admit, for believing that the Urim and Thummim were two lots closely connected in some way, no longer intelligible, with the equally mysterious ephod. (2) As the lots were only two in number, only one question could be put at a time, capable of being answered by a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ according to the lot which ‘came out.’ (3) When, as was the case in 1 S 14, the situation was more complicated, it was necessary to agree beforehand as to the significance to be attached to the two lots.

As to the material, shape, etc., of the two lots and the precise method of their manipulation, we are left to conjecture. It seems, on the whole, the most probable view that they were two small stones, either in the shape of dice or in tablet form, perhaps also of different colours. Others, including Kautzsch (op. cit.), favour the view that they were arrows, on the analogy of a well-known Babylonian and Arabian method of divination (cf. Ezk 21:21). In addition to the two alternatives above considered, it may be inferred from 1 S 28:6 that neither lot might be cast. Were they contained within the hollow ephod-image, which was provided with a narrow aperture, so that it was possible to shake the image and yet neither lot ‘come out’? (The lot is technically said ‘to fall or come out,’ the latter Jos 16:1 RV, 19:1, etc.) The early narratives above cited show that the manipulation of the sacred lot was a special prerogative of the priests, as is expressly stated in Dt 33:8 (cf. LXX), where the Divine Urim and Thummim are assigned to the priestly tribe of Levi, and confirmed by Ezr 2:63 = Neh 7:65.

In the Priests’ Code the Urim and Thummim are introduced in Ex 28:30, Lv 8:8, Nu 27:21, but without the slightest clue as to their nature beyond the inference as to their small size, to be drawn from the fact that they were to be inserted in the high priest’s ‘breastplate of judgment’ (see BREASTPLATE) . But this is merely an attempt on the part of the Priestly writer to divest these ‘old-world mysteries’ of their association with ideas of divination now outgrown, and, moreover, forbidden by the Law. It is, besides, doubtful if P was acquainted, any more than ourselves, with the Urim and Thummim of the Books of Samuel, for the passage above cited from Ezr.-Neh. shows that they were unknown in the post-exilic period. In specially placing them within ‘the breastplate of judgment,’ it is not impossible that P was influenced by the analogy of the Babylonian ‘tablets of destiny’ worn by Marduk on his breast, but the further position that these ‘and the Urim and Thummim were originally one and the same’ (Muss-Arnoit, Urim and Thummim, 213 and passim) , as has been recently maintained, has yet to be proved.

A. R. S. KENNEDY.

USURY, INTEREST, INCREASE.—At the date of our AV ‘usury’ had not acquired its modern connotation of exorbitant interest; hence it should be replaced in OT by ‘interest,’ as in Amer. RV, and as the English Revisers have done in NT (see below). The OT law-codes forbid the taking of interest on loans by one Hebrew from another, see Ex 22:25 (Book of the Covenant), Dt 23:19f., Lv 25:35–38 (Law of Holiness). Of the two terms constantly associated and in EV rendered ‘usury’ (neshek) and ‘increase’ (tarbīth) , the former, to judge from Lv 25:37, denotes interest on loans of money, the latter interest on other advances, such as food stuffs, seed-corn, and the like, which was paid in kind. In Dt 23:20 neshek is applied to both kinds of loan. For the distinction in NT times, see Mishna, Baba mezia, v. 1. Cf. also Strack’s art. ‘Wucher’ in PRE³xxi. A large part of the Babylonian loan-system, which was fully developed before B.C. 2000, consisted of such loans (Johns, Bab. and Assyr. Laws, ch. xxiii. ‘Loans and Deposits’).

To appreciate the motives of the Hebrew legislators, it must be remembered that, until a late period in their history, the Hebrews were almost entirely devoted to agricultural and pastoral pursuits. The loans here contemplated are therefore not advances required for trading capital, but for the relief of a poor ‘brother’ temporarily in distress, who would otherwise be compelled to sell himself as a slave (Lv 25:47ff.). We have to do with an act of charity, not with a commercial transaction. In similar circumstances loans without interest were made from the Babylonian temple funds and by private individuals, as is still done by the Arabs to-day (Doughty, Arabia Deserta, i. 318).

In NT times conditions had greatly changed, and capital was required for many trading concerns. Our Lord twice introduces with approbation the investment of money with ‘the bankers,’ so as to yield a proper ‘interest’ (Mt 25:27, Lk 19:23 both RV). The rate of interest in the ancient world was very high. In Babylonia one shekel per mina per month, which is 20 per cent, per annum, was a usual rate; for advances of grain, for 400 or 300 ka the return was 100 ka,

i.e. 25 to 33 per cent, per annum (Meissner, Aus d. altbab. Recht, 15). For short loans for 15 days or thereby the rate might rise as high as 300 per cent. per annuml (Johns, op. cit.) . In Egypt 30 per cent. was not unusual. Even in Greece 12 per cent. was considered a low rate of interest. The recently discovered papyri from Elephantine in Egypt show members of the Jewish colony there already engaged (c. B.C. 430) in the characteristically Jewish business of money-lending. See also DEBT.

A. R. S. KENNEDY.

UTA (1 Es 5:30).—His sons returned among the Temple servants under Zerub. (Ezr. and Neh. omit).

UTHAI.—1. A family of Judah after the Captivity (1 Ch 9:4) = Neh 11:4 Athaiah. 2. One of the sons of Bigvai (Ezr 8:14) = 1 Es 8:40 Uthi.

UTHI (1 Es 8:40) = Ezr 8:14 Uthai.

UZ.—1. A son of Aram, grandson of Shem (Gn 10:23 and 1 Ch 1:17 [in emended text]). 2. A son of Nahor (Gn 22:21, AV Huz), whose descendants are placed in Aram-naharaim (Gn 24:10). 3. One of the Horites in the land of Edom (Gn 36:28 [v. 21 and v. 30], 1 Ch 1:42). 4. A region which is called the dwelling-place of the daughter of Edom (La 4:21). 5. A district containing a number of kings, situated between Philistia and Egypt, or, with a different pointing of the consonants of one word, between Philistia and the country of the Bedouin (Jer 25:20: the name not in LXX). 6. Job’s country (Job 1:1). As the first three are probably tribal designations, all may be regarded as geographical terms. It is not certain that they all refer to the same region. Nos. 1 and 2 seem to point to Mesopotamia. Nos. 3 and 4, and perhaps 5, indicate Edom or its neighbourhood. The locality of No. 6 is obscure. Ancient tradition is threefold. In LXX of Job 42:19 Uz is affirmed, on the authority of ‘the Syriac book,’ to lie on the borders of ldumæa and Arabia. In v. 23 it is located on the borders of the Euphrates. Josephus (Ant. I. vi. 4) associates the Uz of No. 1 with Damascus and Trachonitis. The evidence of the Book of Job itself about its hero’s home seems to favour the neighbourhood of Edom or N. Arabia. Teman (2:11) was an Edomite district containing the city of Bozrah (Am 1:12), and Eliphaz was an Edomite name (Gn 36:4). The Sabœans ( Job 1:15, 6:19) were a S. Arabian people who had settlements in the north. Tema (6:19) lay in N. Arabia, about 250 miles S.E. of Edom. The description of Job, however, as one of ‘the children of the East’ (1:3) is most naturally understood to refer to the east of

Palestine. The cuneiform inscriptions have a name Uzzai, which has been identified with Uz, but the identification is extremely uncertain.

Modern tradition, which can be traced back to early Christian times, locates Job in the Hauran, where the German explorer J. G. Wetzstein found a monastery of Job, a tomb and fountain and stone of Job, and small round stones called ‘worms of Job.’ Another German explorer, Glaser, finds Uz in W. Arabia, at a considerable distance to the N.W. of Medina. Decision at present is unattainable, both on the general question of the signification of Uz in OT and on the special question of its meaning in the Book of Job. All that can be said is that the name points to the E. and S.E. of Palestine, and that the Book of Job appears to represent its hero as living in the neighbourhood of the Arabian or Syro-Arabian desert.

W. TAYLOR SMITH.

UZAI.—Father of Palal (Neh 3:25).

UZAL.—1. A son of Joktan (Gn 10:27, 1 Ch 1:21). 2. A place named in Ezk 27:19 (RVm ‘from Uzal,’ AVm ‘Meuzal’)—a difficult passage, the text being in disorder. Davidson (Ezekiel, in loc.) suggests that, although the most serious objections occur to the rendering, it might read, ‘Vedan and Javan of Uzal furnished their wares, etc.’ Uzal is thought to be the ancient name of San‘a, the capital of el-Yemen. The name San‘a may have been given by the Abyssinians, in whose tongue it means ‘fortress.’ The modern Jewish inhabitants, who occupy a separate quarter, are reported to have come from India. But although none of the pre-Islamic Jewish stock remains, they were influential in the century before Mohammed (Harris, el-Yemen, 313). Probably the name Azal or Izal, by which the town was then known, may have been due to their revival of the ancient name (Glaser, Skizze, ii. 427). In Arabic azal means ‘eternity.’ This may account for the Arabs’ belief that it is the world’s oldest city (Margoliouth in Hastings’ D B,

s.v.). Iron is found in several districts of Central Arabia (Doughty, Arabia Deserta) . The steel made in San‘a is still highly esteemed, especially the sword- and dagger-blades (Harris, op. cit.

310 ff. ).

Standing on the floor of a spacious valley, 7250 feet above the level of the sea, San‘a is dominated by a fortress on Jebel Nujūm, which rises abruptly to the east. The height renders the climate delightful. The gardens and orchards are luxurious and fruitful. A river bed lies through the city, and in the rainy season is full of water. In the dry months water is supplied by deep wells. The splendid palace of Ghumdan, and the adjoining temple dedicated to Zahrah, the Arabian Venus, were destroyed by Othman, the third Caliph. The same fate befell the famous

Christian church built by Abraha el-Ashran, viceroy of el-Yemen under the Abyssinian king

Aryat, for the building of which the Emperor of Rome is said to have sent marble and workmen (Harris, op. cit. 291–322). According to Ibn Khaldun, San‘a was the seat of the Himyarite kings for centuries before Islam.

W. EWING.

UZZA.—1. A Benjamite family (1 Ch 8:7). 2. A family of Nethinim (Ezr 2:48 = Neh 7:51 [1

Es 5:31 Ozias]). 3. The driver of the cart on which the ark was removed from Kiriath-jearim (2 S 6:3, 6, 7, 8 [in vv. 6–8 the name is Uzzah] = 1 Ch 13:7, 9, 10, 11) . Uzza’s sudden death at a place called, in commemoration of this untoward incident, Perez-uzzah ( ‘breach of Uzzah’), led to the temporary abandonment of David’s project of transporting the ark to Jerusalem. Uzza’s death was attributed by the popular mind to anger on the part of Jahweh at his having presumed to handle the sacred emhlem too familiarly. 4. A ‘garden of Uzza’ (2 K 21:18, 26) was attached to the palace of Manasseh.

UZZAH.—1. A Merarite family (1 Ch 6:29 (14)). 2. See UZZA, 3.

UZZEN-SHEERAH.—See SHEERAH.

UZZI.—1. A descendant of Aaron (1 Ch 6:5, 9, 51, Ezr 7:4 [1 Es 8:2 Savias]). 2. A family of Issachar (1 Ch 7:2, 9). 3. A Benjamite family (1 Ch 7:7, 9:8). 4. A Levite (Neh 11:22). 5. A priestly family (Neh 12:19, 42).

UZZIA.—One of David’s heroes (1 Ch 11:44).

UZZIAH.—1. A king of Judah. See next article. 2. A Kohathite Levite (1 Ch 6:24). 3. The father of an officer of David (1 Ch 27:25). 4. A priest (Ezr 10:21 [1 Es 9:21 Azarias]). 5. A Judahite (Neh 11:4).