support of the Basque derivation it is alleged that the oath was first common in Wales, to aid in the conquest of which Edward I. imported a number of Basque mercenaries. The phrase does not, however, appear in literature before the 17th century, first as conjurer’s jargon. Motteux, in his “Rabelais,” is the first to use “by jingo,” translating par dieu. The political use of the word as indicating an aggressive patriotism (Jingoes and Jingoism) originated in 1877 during the weeks of national excitement preluding the despatch of the British Mediterranean squadron to Gallipoli, thus frustrating Russian designs on Constantinople. While the public were on the tiptoe of expectation as to what policy the government would pursue, a bellicose music-hall song with the refrain “We don’t want to fight, but by Jingo if we do,” &c., was produced in London by a singer known as “the great MacDermott,” and instantly became very popular. Thus the war-party came to be called Jingoes, and Jingoism has ever since been the term applied to those who advocate a national policy of arrogance and pugnacity.
For a discussion of the etymology of Jingo see Notes and Queries, (August 25, 1894), 8th series, p. 149.
JINN (Djinn), the name of a class of spirits (genii) in Arabian
mythology. They are the offspring of fire, but in their form and
the propagation of their kind they resemble human beings.
They are ruled by a race of kings named “Suleyman,” one of
whom is considered to have built the pyramids. Their central
home is the mountain Kāf, and they manifest themselves to men
under both animal and mortal form and become invisible at will.
There are good and evil jinn, and these in each case reach the
extremes of beauty and ugliness.
JIREČEK, JOSEF (1825–1888), Czech scholar, was born at
Vysoké Mýto in Bohemia on the 9th of October 1825. He entered
the Prague bureau of education in 1850, and became minister of
the department in the Hohenwart cabinet in 1871. His efforts
to secure equal educational privileges for the Slav nationalities
in the Austrian dominions brought him into disfavour with the
German element. He became a member of the Bohemian Landtag
in 1878, and of the Austrian Reichsrat in 1879. His merits as
a scholar were recognized in 1875 by his election as president of
the royal Bohemian academy of sciences. He died in Prague on
the 25th of November 1888.
With Hermenegild Jireček he defended in 1862 the genuineness of the Königinhof MS. discovered by Wenceslaus Hanka. He published in the Czech language an anthology of Czech literature (3 vols., 1858–1861), a biographical dictionary of Czech writers (2 vols., 1875–1876), a Czech hymnology, editions of Blahoslaw’s Czech grammar and of some Czech classics, and of the works of his father-in-law Pavel Josef Šafařik (1795–1861).
His brother Hermenegild Jireček, Ritter von Samakow (1827– ), Bohemian jurisconsult, who was born at Vysoké Mýto on the 13th of April 1827, was also an official in the education department.
Among his important works on Slavonic law were Codex juris bohemici (11 parts, 1867–1892), and a Collection of Slav Folk-Law (Czech, 1880), Slav Law in Bohemia and Moravia down to the 14th Century (Czech, 3 vols. 1863–1873).
JIREČEK, KONSTANTIN JOSEF (1854– ), son of Josef, taught history at Prague. He entered the Bulgarian service in 1879, and in 1881 became minister of education at Sofia. In 1884 he became professor of universal history in Czech at Prague, and in 1893 professor of Slavonic antiquities at Vienna.
The bulk of Konstantin’s writings deal with the history of the southern Slavs and their literature. They include a History of the Bulgars (Czech and German, 1876), The Principality of Bulgaria (1891), Travels in Bulgaria (Czech, 1888), &c.
JIZAKH, a town of Russian Central Asia, in the province of Samarkand, on the Transcaspian railway, 71 m. N.E. of the city of Samarkand. Pop. (1897), 16,041. As a fortified post of Bokhara it was captured by the Russians in 1866.
JOAB (Heb. “Yah[weh] is a father”), in the Bible, the son
of Zeruiah, David’s sister (1 Chron. ii. 16). His brothers were
Asahel and Abishai. All three were renowned warriors and
played a prominent part in David’s history. Abishai on one
occasion saved the king’s life from a Philistine giant (2 Sam.
xxi. 17), and Joab as warrior and statesman was directly responsible
for much of David’s success. Joab won his spurs, according
to one account, by capturing Jerusalem (1 Chron. xi. 4–9); with
Abishai and Ittai of Gath he led a small army against the Israelites
who had rebelled under Absalom (2 Sam. xviii. 2); and
he superintended the campaign against Ammon and Edom
(2 Sam. xi. 1, xii. 26; 1 Kings xi. 15). He showed his sturdy
character by urging the king after the death of Absalom to
place his duty to his people before his grief for the loss of his
favourite son (2 Sam. xix. 1–8), and by protesting against David’s
proposal to number the people, an innovation which may have
been regarded as an infringement of their liberties (2 Sam. xxiv.;
1 Chron. xxi. 6).
The hostility of the “sons of Zeruiah” towards the tribe of Benjamin is characteristically contrasted with David’s own generosity towards Saul’s fallen house. Abishai proposed to kill Saul when David surprised him asleep (1 Sam. xxvi. 8), and was anxious to slay Shimei when he cursed the king (2 Sam. xvi. 9). But David was resigned to the will of Yahweh and refused to entertain the suggestions. After Asahel met his death at the hands of Abner, Joab expostulated with David for not taking revenge upon the guilty one, and indeed the king might be considered bound in honour to take up his nephew’s cause. But when Joab himself killed Abner, David’s imprecation against him and his brother Abishai showed that he dissociated himself from the act of vengeance, although it brought him nearer to the throne of all Israel (2 Sam. iii.). Fear of a possible rival may have influenced Joab, and this at all events led him to slay Amasa of Judah (2 Sam. xx. 4–13). The two deeds are similar, and the impression left by them is expressed in David’s last charges to Solomon (1 Kings ii.). But here Joab had taken the side of Adonijah against Solomon, and was put to death by Benaiah at Solomon’s command, and it is possible that the charges are the fruit of a later tradition to remove all possible blame from Solomon (q.v.). It is singular that Joab is not blamed for killing Absalom, but it would indeed be strange if the man who helped to reconcile father and son (2 Sam. xiv.) should have perpetrated so cruel an act in direct opposition to the king’s wishes (xviii. 5, 10–16). A certain animus against Joab’s family thus seems to underlie some of the popular narratives of the life of David (q.v.). (S. A. C.)
JOACHIM OF FLORIS (c. 1145–1202), so named from the
monastery of San Giovanni in Fiore, of which he was abbot,
Italian mystic theologian, was born at Celico, near Cosenza, in
Calabria. He was of noble birth and was brought up at the court
of Duke Roger of Apulia. At an early age he went to visit the holy
places. After seeing his comrades decimated by the plague at
Constantinople he resolved to change his mode of life, and, on his
return to Italy, after a rigorous pilgrimage and a period of ascetic
retreat, became a monk in the Cistercian abbey of Casamari. In
August 1177 we know that he was abbot of the monastery of
Corazzo, near Martirano. In 1183 he went to the court of Pope
Lucius III. at Veroli, and in 1185 visited Urban III. at Verona.
There is extant a letter of Pope Clement III., dated the 8th of
June 1188, in which Clement alludes to two of Joachim’s works,
the Concordia and the Expositio in Apocalypsin, and urges him
to continue them. Joachim, however, was unable to continue
his abbatial functions in the midst of his labours in prophetic
exegesis, and, moreover, his asceticism accommodated itself but
ill with the somewhat lax discipline of Corazzo. He accordingly
retired into the solitudes of Pietralata, and subsequently founded
with some companions under a rule of his own creation the abbey
of San Giovanni in Fiore, on Monte Nero, in the massif of La
Sila. The pope and the emperor befriended this foundation;
Frederick II. and his wife Constance made important donations
to it, and promoted the spread of offshoots of the parent house;
while Innocent III., on the 21st of January 1204, approved the
“ordo Florensis” and the “institutio” which its founder had
bestowed upon it. Joachim died in 1202, probably on the 20th
of March.
Of the many prophetic and polemical works that were attributed to Joachim in the 13th and following centuries, only those enumerated in his will can be regarded as absolutely authentic. These are the Concordia novi et veteris Testamenti (first printed at Venice in 1519), the Expositio in Apocalypsin (Venice, 1527), the Psalterium decem chordarum (Venice, 1527), together with some “libelli” against the Jews or the adversaries of the Christian faith. It is very probable that these “libelli” are the writings entitled Concordia Evangeliorum, Contra Judaeos, De articulis fidei, Confessio fidei and De unitate Trinitatis. The last is perhaps the work which was condemned by the Lateran council in 1215 as containing an erroneous
