6). The IlIegillath Taanith (cap. v.) again has it that this interdict proceeded from the hinss of Greece' (=lin Sr rnNuorD il"z90 )2Inn1), who imitated the conduct of Jeroboam ; whilst Me Babylonian Talmud omits the dynasty altogether, and simply remarks that the prohibition emanated from sonze government (Taanith, 28 a). As the re ference to Jeroboam on the part of the 7erusalenz Talnzuti is simply to make this monarch the author of all the wicked deeds in connection with the Jews, and as, moreover, the ascription of this deed in the Taanith to Greek rulers is unhistorical— since Antiochus Epiphanes, to whom alone it could refer, totally abolished the temple-service, which rendered it useless to smuggle the first-fruits and wood—Graetz concludes that this prohibition could only proceed from Alexander Jannai, who forbade the offering of wood out of hatred to the Pharisees, and that then the above-named pious fannlies clandestinely furnished the fuel. When this interdict ceased with the reign of Alexander, and the ancient custom of wood-offering was re sumed, the concluding day for the delivery of it (comp. Manith, 3 r a) obtained a higher significance, and was elevated into a national festival (Graetz, iii. 477). It will be seen from the account of the nature of this festival that the custom for all the people to bring large supplies of firewood for the sacrifices of the year could not possibly have been designed to relieve the Nelhinim, and that these Nethininz did not bear a conspicuous part in it, as is supposed by the learned Plumptre (Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, s. v. Nethiuim').
4. plerature.—Afishna Taanith, iv. 5, 8 ; the ,erusalem and Babylon Cenzaras on this Afiskna ; Megillath Taanith, cap. v. p. 32-3g, ed. Meyer, Amsterdam 1724 ; Maimonides, Yad lIa-Chezaka Hilchoth .A'" lei Ila-Illikdash, vi. ; Herzfeld, Ce
schichte des Volkes Israel, vol. i. pp. 67, ff. ; 144, ff. ; Nordhausen 1855; Jost, Geschichte des 7udenthums, Vol. i. 169, Leipzig 1857 ; Graetz, Geschichle der 7uden, pp. 122, 477, E, 2d edition, Leipzig 1863. —C. D. G.
WOOL (-Irp). The fleece of the sheep, as such, was proPerly called or ;11;, while the material of which it was composed was called nny: hence npr ma, a fleece of wool (Judg. vi. 37).
Wool was used by the IIebrews from an early period extensively for clothing (Lev. xiii. 47 ; Dem. xxii. 11 ; Job xxxi. 20 ; PrOV. XXXI. r3 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 3 ; Hos. ii. 5). In the law the mixing of woollen and flax (Tsemer and Pishtinz) in a gar ment was forbidden (Lev. xix. 19 ; Dent. xxii. Such a mixture was called Sha'ainez (t=t;."), a word of obscure signification, rendered by the LXX. x113800s, adulterated, and by Aquila eirri iilcureigcrov, variea' ; it is probably of Egyptian origin, and may he, as Joblonski suggests, the Coptic Shoal:es—i.e. byssus jimbriatus, or a com pound of two Coptic words, saht, lexiztra, and noij, faints. These etymologies, however, are un certain. The prohibition itself stands in connec tion with other laws forbidding the mixing of different thing,s ; all of which rest apparently on the idea that a thing in its simple natural state as it comes from God is pure, but when mixed by man's art with something else, thereby loses its proper character, and is defiled (see Winer R. [V.13. under Saat ' and Verschiedenartiges ' for different views of the design of the law). Josephus says (Antiq. iv. 8. r r) that the garments of the priests were composed of woollen and linen interwoven, and this the Tahnudists also aver (Aliskna, ix. 1); but it is impossible to reconcile this with such passages as those above noted compared with Ezek. xliv. 17, ff.—W. L. A.