This is a visual explainer based on the Wikipedia article on the Encyclopaedia Biblica. Read the full source article here. (opens in new tab)

Biblica Unveiled

An authoritative exploration of the 1899 Encyclopaedia Biblica, detailing its scholarly contributions and unique theoretical perspectives on biblical history, literature, and geography.

Explore Content 👇 Meet the Scholars 🧑‍🏫

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!


When you are ready...
🎮 Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game🎮

Description

The Definitive Critical Dictionary

The Encyclopaedia Biblica: A Critical Dictionary of the Literary, Political and Religion History, the Archeology, Geography and Natural History of the Bible, published in 1899, stands as a monumental work in the field of biblical studies. Edited by Thomas Kelly Cheyne and J. Sutherland Black, it is often referenced in theological and biblical scholarship simply as Enc. Bib. or Cheyne and Black.

Scope and Depth

This comprehensive encyclopedia provides entries for virtually every name and place mentioned in the Bible and its traditional Apocrypha. It also covers biblical books and numerous related subjects, such as 'music' and 'tents'. Many articles are exceptionally detailed, often including variations in spelling across key ancient texts like the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint. The article on the Gospels, for instance, is noted for its extensive length, comprising over half a million words.

Scholarly Significance

The Encyclopaedia Biblica was highly regarded and frequently cited by its contemporaries, including the Catholic Encyclopedia, the 11th Edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica, and the Jewish Encyclopedia. Its influence extended indirectly to other scholarly works and even to resources like the English Wikipedia, particularly concerning Judaeo-Christian topics. Despite advancements in archaeology and shifts in interpretation, its articles remain a valuable resource for modern scholars and writers.

Distinguished Contributors

Leading Academics of the Era

The encyclopedia benefited from contributions by many of the most respected biblical scholars of its time. These individuals held senior professorships at prestigious universities and possessed the highest academic qualifications, such as the Doctor of Divinity (DD). Their collective expertise ensured a rigorous and comprehensive approach to the subject matter.

  • Anthony Ashley Bevan, Lord Almoner's Professor of Arabic, Cambridge.
  • A. E. Shipley, MA, FZS, Fellow, Tutor, and Lecturer at Christ's College, Cambridge.
  • Adolf Jülischer, Professor of Church History and New Testament Exegesis, University of Marburg.
  • Adolf Kamphausen, Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Bonn.
  • Archibald Kennedy, R. S., MA, DD, Professor of Hebrew and Semitic Languages, the University of Edinburgh.
  • C. Creighton, MD, Great Ormond Street Hospital
  • Charles Fox Burney, Lecturer in Hebrew, and Fellow of St John's College, Oxford.
  • C. H. W. Johns, MA, Queens' College, Cambridge.
  • C. J. Ball, MA, Chaplain to the Honourable Society of Lincoln's Inn, London.
  • Cornelis Petrus Tiele, Professor of Comparative History and Philosophy of Religion, Leiden University.
  • Eduard Meyer, Professor of Ancient History, University of Halle.
  • Francis Brown, DD, Davenport Professor of Hebrew and the cognate Languages in the Union Theological Seminary, New York.
  • George Adam Smith, DD LLD, Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis, Free Church College, Glasgow.
  • George Augustus Simcox, MA, Queen's College, Oxford.
  • Buchanan Gray, MA, Lecturer in Hebrew and Old Testament Theology, Mansfield College, Oxford.
  • George Foot Moore, DD, Professor of Hebrew in Andover Theological Seminary, Andover, Mass.
  • Hermann Guthe, a.o. Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, Leipzig University.
  • Baron Hermann von Soden, Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of Berlin.
  • Hope W. Hogg, MA
  • Heinrich Zimmern, a.o. Professor of Assyriology, Leipzig.
  • Israel Abrahams, London, Editor of the Jewish Quarterly Review.
  • Immanuel Benzinger, University of Berlin.
  • J. Armitage Robinson, DD, Canon of Westminster Cathedral.
  • John Massie, Yates Professor of New Testament Exegesis in Mansfield College, Oxford.
  • Karl Budde, Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, University of Strasbourg.
  • Karl Marti, Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and the Hebrew Language, University of Berne.
  • Lucien Gautier, Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and History, University of Lausanne.
  • Leonard William King, MA, FSA, Assistant to the Keeper of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities, British Museum.
  • Maurice A. Canney, MA (Oxon.)
  • Morris Jastrow Jr., PhD, Professor of Semitic Languages in the University of Pennsylvania.
  • M. R. James, LittD, Fellow and Dean of King's College, Cambridge.
  • Norman McLean, MA, Lecturer in Hebrew, and Fellow of Christ's College, Lecturer in Semitic Languages at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge.
  • Nathaniel Schmidt, Professor of Semitic Languages and Literature, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
  • Owen C. Whitehouse MA, Principal and Professor of Biblical Exegesis and Theology in the Countess of Huntingdon's College, Cheshunt, Herts.
  • Paul Wilhelm Schmiedel, Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of Zurich.
  • Robert Henry Charles, MA, DD, Professor of Biblical Greek in Trinity College, Dublin.
  • Robert W. Rogers, PhD, DD, Professor of Hebrew, Drew Theological Seminary, Madison, New Jersey.
  • Stanley A. Cook, MA (Cantab.)
  • Samuel Rolles Driver, DD, Regius Professor of Hebrew, Canon of Christ Church, Oxford.
  • Theophilus G. Pinches, MRAS, Egyptian and Assyrian Department, British Museum.
  • T. K. Cheyne, MA, DD, Oriel Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture at Oxford, Canon of Rochester Cathedral.
  • Theodor Nöldeke, Professor of Semitic Languages, University of Strasbourg.
  • T. W. Davies, PhD, Professor of Old Testament Literature, North Wales Baptist College; Lecturer in Semitic Languages, University College, Bangor.
  • Wilhelm Bousset, a.o., Professor of New Testament Exegesis, University of Göttingen.
  • W. E. Addis, MA, Lecturer in Old Testament Criticism, Manchester College, Oxford.
  • W. H. Bennett, Professor of Biblical Languages and Literature, Hackney Theological Seminary, and Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, New College, London.
  • W. H. Kosters, Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, Leiden University.
  • William John Woodhouse, MA, Lecturer in Classical Philology, University College of North Wales, Bangor, and later in Ancient History at St Andrews University.
  • W. Max Müller, Professor of Old Testament Literature, Reformed Episcopal Seminary, West Philadelphia.
  • William Ridgeway, Disney Professor of Archaeology, Cambridge.
  • William Robertson Smith, Professor of Arabic, Cambridge.
  • William Sanday, DD, LLD, Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, Canon of Christ Church, Oxford.
  • William Turner Thiselton-Dyer, CMG, LLD, FRS. Director of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
  • Willem Christiaan van Manen, Professor of Old Christian Literature and New Testament exegesis, University of Leiden.

Cheyne's Jerahmeelite Hypothesis

A Controversial Interpretation

Professor Thomas Kelly Cheyne proposed a distinctive and often-cited theory regarding the identity and significance of the "Jerahmeelites." This hypothesis posits that the Jerahmeelites were not merely a Judean clan but a powerful north-Arabian tribe with whom the early Hebrews engaged in prolonged conflict. Cheyne suggested that echoes of these historical contests are present throughout the Old Testament, though often obscured by textual corruption.

Textual Emendation and Reinterpretation

According to Cheyne's theory, many biblical names and places are actually corruptions of "Jerahmeel." He proposed that terms like "Amalekites" are misreadings of "Jerahmeelites," and that names such as Saul, Kish, and even geographical locations like Jericho, are derived from or corrupted forms of "Jerahmeel." He further suggested that "Jerahmeel" has been erroneously replaced by "Babylon" in certain passages and that figures like Ezekiel's wise men included "Jerahmeel" and "Arab."

The Jewish Encyclopedia, while acknowledging Cheyne's ingenuity, critically assessed his thesis. Hirsch and Barton stated: "The ingenuity of Cheyne's method may be admitted; but the thesis must be rejected as altogether arbitrary. That it has received serious attention is owing solely to the great service rendered by its sponsor in other departments of Old Testament research." This highlights that while Cheyne's broader contributions were respected, his specific Jerahmeelite hypothesis was largely considered speculative and lacking empirical support by his contemporaries.

Mainstream Views and Caution

Cheyne frequently integrated his Jerahmeelite theory into articles within the Encyclopaedia Biblica, often presenting it alongside more conventional interpretations. While detailing alternative, mainstream views, his own speculative conclusions were appended. Consequently, scholars often reference the encyclopedia for its comprehensive data and standard analyses, while treating Cheyne's specific theories, particularly the Jerahmeelite one, with caution or disregarding them entirely.

Primary References

Cited Works

The following sources were cited within the original text:

  1. for example, it is a source for the article 'Eve' in the Catholic Encyclopedia
  2. Smith, William Robertson; Robinson, Henry Wheeler (1911). "Hosea". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 13 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 784–786.
  3. the article on Aaron
  4. As reading material suggested by the University of Calgary
  5. As a source for the archaeology department at Tel Aviv University
  6. e.g.
  7. Davies, T. Witton (1950). "Van Manen, William Christian". In Jackson, Samuel MacAuley (ed.). New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. XII. Michigan: Baker Book House. p. 140 – via CCEL.
  8. Emil G. Hirsch, George A. Barton Jerahmeel // Jewish Encyclopedia

Further Reading

Academic Reviews

A critical review of the Encyclopaedia Biblica provides further insight into its reception and scholarly value:

  1. Toy, C. H. (1904). "Encyclopædia Biblica". The American Historical Review. 9 (2): 341–342. doi:10.2307/1833370. JSTOR 1833370.

Teacher's Corner

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

Edit and Print Materials from this study in the wiki2web studio
Click here to open the "Encyclopaedia Biblica" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit

Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Learn about encyclopaedia_biblica while playing the wiki2web Clarity Challenge game.
Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!

Play now

Explore More Topics

Discover other topics to study!

mcmillan reservoir
    
fletcher cox
    
j. h. elliott
    
2016–17 south carolina gamecocks women's basketball team
    
nanbu nobunao
    
kesamutti sutta
    
argyria
    
andy gray footballer born 1955
    
fabian forte
    
the statesman india
    

References

References

  1.  the article on Aaron, for example
  2.  As reading material suggested by the University of Calgary, for example: [1]
A full list of references for this article are available at the Encyclopaedia Biblica Wikipedia page

Feedback & Support

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer

Important Notice Regarding Historical Data

This page has been generated by an Artificial Intelligence and is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content is derived from a historical snapshot of publicly available data, specifically the Wikipedia article on the Encyclopaedia Biblica. While efforts have been made to ensure accuracy and completeness based on the source, the information may not reflect the most current scholarship or archaeological findings.

This content is not a substitute for professional academic or historical consultation. The interpretations and theories presented, particularly those from the late 19th and early 20th centuries, should be critically evaluated within their historical context. Always consult primary sources and contemporary scholarly works for the most up-to-date and nuanced understanding of biblical studies.

The creators of this page are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any actions taken based on the information provided herein.