[See page image]

Page 339

Syris (1617; Eng. transl., The Fabulous Gods Denounced in the Bible, Philadelphia, 1881), which attracted attention and was reprinted on the continent, and was long regarded as authoritative, though later oriental studies have shown that it relied too implicitly upon rabbinical sources, and was of course dependent upon the earlier philology and exegesis. This work was followed by a large number of oriental studies, made possible by his access to the rich collections of the Bodleian and of Lambeth palace. His most important investigations were: De succesaaonibus in bona defunctorum ad leges Ebrceorum (London, 1631, with a supplement, De successions in pontificatum Ebrworum, Leyden, 1638); De jure naturali et gentium juxta disciplinam Ebrceornm (London 1640); De anno civdi et calendario veteris eccdesite seu reipublicte Judaicte (1644); Uxor Ebraica, seu de nuptiis ed divortiis veterum Ebrceorum (1646); De synedriis et prcefecturis juridieis veterum Ebraorum (16501655). These publications were characterized by great learning, and in them Selden introduced to the western world many matters of oriental culture and history, such as the Coptic-Arabic calendar notation.

His Historie of Tithes (1618), in which he sought to prove that tithes had been enjoined by " ecclesiastical and positive law," but not by the jus di vinum, caused him to be brought before the court of high commission for trial. He was compelled to express regret for having published the book, which was suppressed and its author forbidden to answer his opponents.

Selden, in consequence of this act, entered politics and took a foremost part in the fight for individual liberty, being in parliament in 1623, 1626, and in 1628, and later, where he led the attack against the duke of Buckingham, Charles' minister, aided in the fight for the habeas-corpus act, and was repeatedly imprisoned. He took a prominent part in the ensuing conflicts against the clerical party. As a member of the Long Parliament and the Westminister Assembly he used his influence against the catholicizing State Church. In his Table-Talk (1689; reprint, Oxford, 1892) he took the position that the State was sovereign, but that Church and State should each manage its own affairs. Selden was accused of infidelity, a charge to which his friendship with Hobbes gave a pretext, but he opposed Hobbes' doctrines and believed to the end in the divine origin of the Christian religion.

In his later years he joined the Presbyterians but opposed the excesses that ended in the death of Charles. His name is honored for his integrity and versatile learning. His writings, which include many not mentioned above dealing with subjects in law and history, suffer from obscurity, prolixity, and an unsatisfactory method. They are distinguished by subtlety and fearless outspokenness. After the king's death he retired to scholarly private life. A large proportion of his books, manuscripts, and archeological treasures ultimately came into possession of the Bodleian library. His works were collected by Dr. Wilkins (3 vols., London, 1726, with Life prefixed).

BraLroa8Apny: J. Aikin, The Lives of J. Selden and Archbishop Usher, London, 1812; the Life by Wilkins in the Works, ut sup.; a biography by Singer appears in the editibns of the Table Talk after 1847; A. it Wood, Athens Oxonienaes, ed. P. Bliss. vol. iv., London, 1817; DNB, li. 212-224.

SELEUCID.E, sel-itYsi-di or ci-d5 ("descendants of Seleucus "): The name given to the dynasty founded in Syria by Seleucus, one of the generals of Alexander, which ruled Syria either in whole or in part and more or less continuously from about 321 to 65 D.C. The history of the dynasty necessarily involves also that of the usurpers or contestants who succeeded in establishing themselves for longer or shorter times, sometimes in only a part of the territory, during this stormy period. The history is of interest to the student of theolbgy for at least three reasons: (1) because of the nearly continuous contact with the Jews and the effects upon their fortunes, especially in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes (see below); (2) because of the Hellenization of the region, preparing for the culture which was to be in no small part Christian; and (3) because of the development of the city of Antioch, which was to become a great seat of Christian learning and activities (see ANTLOCH, SCHOOL. OF; ANTLOCH, SYNODS OF).

Seleucus I. fticator (306-281), the founder, was a Macedonian, and one of the generals of Alexander in his Asiatic campaigns. On the death of Alexander, and at the first distribution of the provinces, Seleucus did not at once receive a separate assignment of territory, but was attached as chiliarch to Perdiccas, the " protector of the kingdom." But in 321 he obtained Babylonia, whence, however, he was expelled in 316 by Antigonus, but with the help of. Ptolemy regained it in 312, thus fixing the era of te Seleucids (Oct. 1). After the victory over Antigonus at Ipsus in 301, Syria also came to him as a part of his dominions and Antioch displaced Babylon as the capital. Meanwhile, between 311 and 302 he carried his arms victoriously as far as the Indus, and in 306 assumed the title of king. With this success, he was too good a strategist to attempt to hold territory so far away as the extreme east, and so for a valuable consideration (500 elephants) yielded to Chandragupta (Sandracotta) the northwestern provinces of India. In the allotment after the battle of Ipsus Ptolemy had received Coele-Syria and Palestine, territory which Seleucus coveted, and in a momentary panic had withdrawn. Seleucus claimed this as forfeited, but Ptolemy again assumed control in spite of Seleucus' protests, and the regions became anew the source of strife for a century between Egypt and Syria (see PTOLEMY). In the contests which continued between those who were striving for Alexander's empire, Seleucus made constant gains, and at the end of his life all of Asia Minor except the extreme northeastern portion bordering on Armenia came into his possession; but this was really a source of weakness rather than of strength, as the history of the following reigns demonstrates. Meanwhile he was constantly engaged in the organization of his kingdom and in attempts at cementing the unrelated parts. He was assassinated by Ptolemy Ceraunos, son of Ptolemy I., in 281. He was a good administrator,