Ja'keh (Heb. Yakeh', יָקֵה, pipous; Sept. δεζάμενος [reading' קחָה],-Vulg. vomens [reading יָקֵא]), a name given as that of the father of Agur, the author of the apothegms in Pr 30:1 sq. Interpreters greatly differ as to the person intended. SEE AGUR. The traditional view is that which gives the word a figurative import (q. d. יַקּהָה, obedience, sc. to God);
and it will then become an epithet of David, the father of Solomon, a term appropriate to his character, and especially so as applied to him by a son. Others understand a real name of some unknown Israelite; and, in that case, the most probable supposition is that it denotes the father of the author of some popular maxims selected by "the men of Hezekiah" (perhaps composed by them, or in their time), and thus incorporated with the proverbs of Solomon. But the allusion to these latter compilers in Pr 25:1, appears only to relate to an editing on their part of literary effusions (in part, perhaps, retained in the memory by oral recitation) which are expressly assigned to Solomon as their author. SEE PROVERBS. Prof. Stuart (Comment. ad loc.) adopts the suggestion of Hitzig (in Zeller's Theol. Yahrb. 1844, p. 283), assented to by Bertheau (Keurzgef. Exeg. Handb. ad loc.), and renders the clause thus: "The words of Agur, the son of her who was obeyed (reading יַקהָהּ) in Massa;" and in an extended comparison with the parallel passage (Pr 21:1),defends and illustrates this interpretation, making Jakeh to have been the son and successor of a certain queen of Arabia Petraea, chiefly on the ground that the phrase דַּברֵי למוּאֶל מֶלֶך מִשָּׂא will bear no other translation than The words of Lenmuel, kitzq of Massa. But if the construction be thus rendered more facile in this passage, it is more difficult in the other, where it בַּןאּיָקֶה הִמִּשָּׂאcannot be brought nearer his version than The son of Jakeh of allssa. Even this rendering violates in both passages the Masoretic punctuation, which is correctly followed in the Auth. Vers.; and the interpretation proposed, after all, attributes both names (Agur and Lemuel) to the same person, without so good reason for such variation as there would be if they were ascribed as epithets to Solomon. SEE ITHIEL.