JEBB, JOHN: Bishop of Limerick; b. at Drogheda (26 m. n, of Dublin), Ireland, Sept. 27, 1775; d. at East Hill, near Wandsworth (6 m. s.w. of London), Surrey, Dec. 9, 1833. He studied at the Londonderry grammar-school, and in 1791 entered Trinity College, Dublin (M.A.,1801; B.D. and D.D., 1821). He was ordained in 1799 and instituted to the curacy of Mogorbane, Tipperary county, in 1801. He became Archbishop Brodrick's examining chaplain in 1805 and archdeacon of Emly in 1820. For his services in maintaining order in his parish during the disturbances that followed the famine of 1822 he was rewarded with the bishopric of Limerick in Dec. Of that year. In 1827 a stroke of paralysis incapacitated him for active work. There after he resided at various places in England, devoting himself to literary pursuits. He had a strong tendency toward High-church ritual, and is regarded as a forerunner of the Oxford movement. His chief works are: Sermons (London, 1815); Sacred Literature (1820); Practical Theology (2 vols., 1830); and a Biographical Memoir of William Phelan (1832). His correspondence with Alexander Knox was edited by C. Forster (2 vols., 1834).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. Forster, Llfe and Letters of John Jebb, London 1851 Anne Mozley, Letters of J. H, Newman, i. 440, 470, ib. 1890; DNB, xxix, 259-261.

JEBUS, jî'bus, JEBUSITES, jeb'u-saits: Upon the basis of Judges xix. 10-11 and I Chron. xi. 4-5 Jebus was formerly supposed to have been the pre-Israelitic name of Jerusalem (cf. II Sam. v. 6). But Judges xix.-xxi, took its present form in post-exilic times, and probably Jebus did not occur in the original text; consequently the testimony for Jebus as the name of a city is late, for in all early narratives only the name Jerusalem is found, as it is in the Amarna Tablets (see AMARNA TABLETS, III.). The passages cited, therefore, embody the erroneous conclusion that the earlier name of the city was Jebus. It is to be noted, however, that the Jebusites were not spoken of as limited in their dwelling-place to the city, but as inhabiting the immediate region thereabout (II Sam, v. 6) or the mountain region in particular (Num. xiii. 29; Josh. xi. 3). The better conclusion therefore is hat the people derived its name from a district rather than a city. They are represented as holding an important point in the highland after Israel had carried on a victorious campaign against the *tnasnites*, and from the mountain fortress of Zion

114

ruling a small territory limited on the north by the Benjaminitic Nob, Gibeah of Saul, and Ramah, and on the south by Bethlehem of Judah. Their independence was not especially important until the time of David, when he wished to unite his northern and his southern territories, and therefore captured the place (II Sam. v. 6-8; I Chron, xi. 4-6). After that they were in part freemen on their own possessions (implied by the story of Araunah or Ornan, II Sam. xxiv. 16; I Chron. xxi. lb), and in part slaves (under Solomon, I Kings ix. 20-21). The text of the description of the boundary between Judah and Benjamin calls the hill north of the Valley of Hinnom "the Shoulder of the Jebusites " (Josh. xv. 8, xviii. 16), whence it may be concluded that the part of the city which the Jebusites occupied in later times was that to the southeast. It might be concluded from Josh. x. 5 that as Adonizedek is reckoned to the Amorites the Jebuaites were also Amorites; but this is not conclusive, as it may be held that the Amorites had recently come in, while the Jebusites were regarded as early inhabitants of the land. From the frequent mention of the people (e.g., Gen. x. 16; Deut. vii. 1, xx. 17) nothing certain can be gathered regarding the racial affinities of the Jebusites.

(H. GUTHE.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The subject is treated in the literature under AMARNA TABLETS and JERUSALEM. Consult also: G. F. Moore, Commentary on Judges, New York, 1895; K. Budde, Das Buch der Richter, Göttingen, 1896; DB, ii. 554-555; EB, ii. 2415-16.