-^>„>rs£5»- m '"" F;irt of the ADDieON - ER LTBiiAP-T, wlricl I sented by Mkssrs "■ A. Sti CUM* MSion -.«$■ r/U/CJ c J CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. VOLUME II. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library http://www.archive.org/details/cyclopaediaofb02kitt CYCLOPEDIA oir BIBLICAL LITERATURE EDITED BY / JOHN KITTO, D.D., F.S.A., EDITOR OF 'THE PICTORIAL BIBLE,' AUTHOR OF ' THE HISTORY AND PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY OF PALESTINE,' &c. &c II»LTj;STBATED BT NUMEROUS EHGRAVIN88, IN TWO VOLUMES. VOL. II. NEW YORK: MARK H. NEWMAN, 199 BROADWAY. CINCINNATI: WILLIAM H. MOORE & CO., 110 MAIN STREET. 1846. CYCLOPAEDIA OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. IBZAN. IBZAN (|y^^> illustrious ; Sept. 'AfiaLtro-dv), the tenth 'judge of Israel.' He was of Bethle- hem, probably the Bethlehem of Zebulun and not of Judah. He governed seven years. The pro- sperity of Ibzan is marked by the great number of his children (thirty sons and thirty daughters), and his wealth, by their marriages — for they were all married. Some have held, with little proba- bility, that Ibzan was the same with Boaz : B.C. 1182(Judg.xii. 8). I-CHABOD 0113 :»K, where is the glory; Sept. 'Ax»t&;/3), son of Phinehas and grandson of Eli. He is only known from the unhappy circum- stances of his birth, which occasioned this name to he given to him. The pains of labour came upon his mother when she heard that the ark of God was taken, that her husband was slain in battle, and that these tidings had proved fatal to his father Eli. They were death-pains to her ; and when those around sought to cheer her, saying, ' Fear not, for thou hast borne a son,' she only answered by giving him the name of I-chabod, ad- ding, 'The glory is departed from Israel' (1 Sam. iv. 19-22): b.c. 1111. The name again occurs in 1 Sam. xiv. 3 [Eli]. ICONIUM Qlit&viov), a town, formerly the capital of Lycaonia, as it is now, by the name of Konieh, of Karamania, in Asia Minor. It is situated in N. lat. 37° 51', E. long. 32° 40', about one hundred and twenty miles inland from the Mediterranean. It was visited by St. Paul in a.d. 45, when many Gentiles were converted ; but some unbelieving Jews excited against him and Barnabas a persecution, which they escaped with difficulty (Acts xiii. 51 ; xiv. 1, &c). He undertook a second journey to Iconium in a.d. 51. The church planted at this place by the apostle continued to flourish, until, by the persecutions of the Saracens, and afterwards of the Seljukians, who made it one of their sultanies, it was nearly extinguished. But some Christians of the Greek and Armenian churches, with a Greek metro- politan bishop, are still found in the suburbs of the city, not being permitted to reside within the walls. Konieh is situated at the foot of Mount Taurus, upon the border of the lake Trogitis, in a fertile plain, rich in valuable productions, particularly apricots, wine, cotton, flax, and grain. The circumference of the town is between VOL. II. IDDO. two and three miles, beyond which are suburbs not much less piopulous than the town itself. The walls, strong and lofty, and flanked with square towers, which, at the gates, are placed close to- gether [see cut, No. 317], were built by the Sel- jukian Sultans of Iconium, who seem to have taken considerable pains to exhibit the Greek in- scriptions, and the remains of architecture and sculpture, belonging to the ancient Iconium, which they made use of in building the walls. The town, suburbs, and gardens, are plentifully supplied with water from streams which flow from some hills to the westward, and which, to the north-east, join the lake, which varies in size with the season of the year. In the town carpets are manufactured, and blue and yellow leathers are tanned and dried. Cotton, wool, hides, and a few of the other raw productions which enrich the superior industry and skill of the manufacturers of Europe, are sent to Smyrna by caravans. The most remarkable building in Konieh is the tomb of a priest highly revered throughout Turkey, called Hazreet Mevlana, the founder of the Mevlevi Dervishes. The city, like all those renowned for superior sanctit3r, abounds with dervishes, who meet the passenger at every turn- ing of the streets, and demand paras with the greatest clamour and insolence. The bazaars and houses have little to recommend them to notice (Kinneir's Travels in Asia Minor ; Leake's Geography of Asia Minor ; Arundell's Tour in Asia Minor). 1. IDDO ('nj7, seasonable; Sept.' A85w), a pro- phet of Judah. who wrote the- history of Reho- boam and Abijah ; or rather perhaps, who, in conjunction with Seraiah, kept the public rolls during their reigns. It seems from 2 Chron. xiii. 22 that he named his book t^TlE), Midrash, or 'Exposition.' Josephus (Antiq. viii. 9. 1) states that this Iddo was the prophet who was sent to Jeroboam at Bethel, and consequently the same that was slain by a lion for disoliedience to his in- structions (1 Kings xiii.); and many commen- tators have followed this statement. 2. IDDO, grandfather of the prophet Zecha- riah (Zech. i. 1 ; Ear. v. 1 ; vi. 14). 3. IDDO O'lH), chief of the Jews of the capti- vity established at Casiphia, a place of which it is difficult to determine the position. It was to 2 2DD0. him that Ezra sent a requisition for Levites and Nethinim, none of whom had yet joined his caravan. Thirty-eight Levites and 250 Nethi- nim responded to his call (Ezra viii. 17-20), B.C. 457. It would seem from this . that Iddo was a chief person of the Nethinim, descended from those Gibeonites who were charged with the servile labours of the tabernacle and temple. This is one of several circumstances which indi- cate that the Jews in their several colonies under the Exile were still ruled by the heads of their nation, and allowed the free exercise of their worship. 4. IDDO (IT, lovely; Sept. 'laM), a chief of the half tribe of Manasseh beyond the Jordan (1 Chron. xxvii. 21). IDLE. The ordinary uses of this word re- quire no illustration. But the very serious pas- sage in Matt. xii. 36 may suitably be noticed in this place. In the Authorized Version it is trans- lated, ' I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give an account thereof in the day of judgment.' The original is, "On iruu privet apySv, b iav XaXrjffcocriv ol avOpanroi, airoSdaouai Treol avrov \6yov iv rip-ipa. Kpicrews. The whole question depends upon the meaning or rather force of the term prip.a apy6v, rendered ' idle word,' concerning which there has been no little difference of opinion. Many understand it to mean ' wicked and in- jurious words,' as if apy6v were the same as ■Kovwpdv, which is indeed found as a gloss in Cod. 126. The sense is there taken to be as follows : — ' Believe me, that for every wicked and injurious word men shall hereafter render an account.' And our Lord is supposed to have intended in this passage to reprehend the Pharisees, who had spoken impiously against Him, and to threaten them with the severest punishments ; inasmuch as every one of their injurious and impious words should one day be judged. This interpretation of the word dpyov is, however, reached by a somewhat cir- cuitous process of philological reasoning, which is examined with much nicety by J. A. H. Tittmann, and shown to be untenable. He adds : ' This in- terpretation, moreover, would not be in accordance with what precedes in verses 33-35, nor with what follows in verse 37. For it is not any wicked discourse which is there represented ; but the feigned piety of the Pharisees, and their affected zeal for the public welfare. In order to avoid a charge of levity and indifference, they had de- manded " a sign," anpLeiov; as if desirous that both they and others might know whether Jesus was truly the Messiah. Against this dissimula- tion in those who uttered nothing sincerely and from the heart, Jesus had inveighed in severe and appropriate terms in verses 33-35, using the com- parison of a tree, which no one judges to be good and useful unless it bears good fruit, and from which, if it be bad, no one expects good fruit. But if now the sense of verse 36 is such as these interpreters would make it, there is added in it a sentiment altogether foreign to what pre- cedes, and apySv becomes not only dpstitute of effect and force, but ir voltes a sentiment incon- gruous with that in verse 37. For where our Lord says that hereafter every one shall be judged according to his words, He cannot be understood to mean that every one will be capable of prov- JDOLATRT. ing his integrity and goodness merely by Hi.3 words alone — a sentiment surely as far as possible from the intention of our Divine Master. We must, therefore, necessarily understand a certain kind of words or discourse, which, under the appearance of sincerity or candour, is often the worst possible, and xaTa.diKci(ei rhu avQauirov, "con- demns a man," because it is uttered with an evil purpose. If, then, we interpret apySv according to established Greek usage, there arises a natural and very appropriate sense, namely, apyoy is the same as &epyov, otiosus, vain,' idle; then, void of effect, without result, followed by no corre- sponding event. Therefore prjfia apyov is empty or vain words or discourse, i. e. void of truth, and to which the event does not correspond. In short, it is the empty, inconsiderate, insincere language of one who sa}*s one thing and means another ; and in this sense apyos is very fre- quently employed by the Greeks.' This Tittmann confirms by a number of citations ; and then deduces from the whole that the sense of the pas- sage under review is : ' Believe me, he who uses false and insincere language shall suffer grievous punishment : your words, if uttered with sincerity and ingenuousness, shall be approved ; but if they are dissembled, although they bear the strongest appearance of sincerity, they shall be condemned ' (See Tittmann, On the Principal Causes of Forced Interpretations of the New Testament, in Am. Bib. Repository for 1831, pp. 481-484). IDOLATRY. In giving a summary view of the forms of idolatry which are mentioned in the Bible, it is expedient to exclude all notice of those illegal images which were indeed designed to bear some symbolical reference to the worship of the true God, but which partook of the nature of idolatry ; such, for example, as the golden calf of Aaron (cf. Neh. ix. 18); those of Jeroboam; the singular ephods of Gideon and Micah (Judg. viii. 27 ; xvii. 5) ; and the Teraphim. Idolatry was the most heinous offence against the Mosaic law, which is most particular in de- fining the acts which constitute the crime, and severe in apportioning the punishment. Tims, it is forbidden to make any image of a strange God ; to prostrate oneself before such an image, or before those natural objects which were also worshiprjed without images, as the sun and moon (Deut. iv. 19) ; to suffer the altars, images, or groves of idols to stand (Exod. xxxiv. 13); or to keep the gold and silver of which their images were made, and to suffer it to enter the house (Deut. vii. 25, 26); to sacrifice to idols, most especially to offer human sacrifices ; to eat of the victims offered to idols by others ; to prophesy in the name of a strange god; and to adopt any of the rites used in idol- atrous worship, and to transfer them to the wor- ship of the Lord (Deut. xii. 30, 31). As for punishment, the law orders that if an individual committed idolatry he should be stoned to death (Deut. xvii. 2-5); that if a town was guilty of this sin, its inhabitants and cattle should be slain, and its spoils burnt together with the town itself (Deut. xiii. 12-18). To what degree also the whole spirit of the Old Testament is abhorrent from idolatry, is evident (besides legal prohibition i, prophetic denunciations, and energetic appeals like thatinlsa. xii v. 9-20) from the literal sense of the terms which are u?ed as synonymes for idols and IDOLATRY. their worship. Tims idols are called DvySH, the inane (Lev. xix. 4) ; Evil!"!, vanities— the ra udrata of Acts xiv. 15— (Jer. ii. 5) ; ])ti, nothing (Isa. lxvi. 3); D^lpC, abominations (1 Kings xi. 5) ; Qvv3, stercora (Ezek. vi. 4) ; and their worship is called tvhoredom, which is expressed by the derivatives of HJT- The early existence of idolatry is evinced by Josh. xxiv. 2, where it is stated that Abram and »is immediate ancestors dwelling in Mesopotamia ' served other gods.' The terms in Gen. xxxi. 53, and particularly the plural form of the verb, eeem to show that some members of Terah's family had each diilerent gods. From Josh. xxiv. 14, and Ezek. xx. 8, we learn that the Israelites, during their sojourn in Egypt, were seduced to worship the idols of that country ; although we possess no particular account of their transgression. In Amos v. 25, and Acts vii, 42, it is stated that they committed idolatry in their journey through the wilderness ; and in Num. xxv. 1, sq., that they worshipped the Moabite idol Baal-peor at Shit.tim. After the Israelites had obtained pos- session of the promised land, we find that they were continually tempted to adopt the idolatries of the Canaanite nations with which they came in contact. The book of Judges enumerates several successive relapses into this sin. The gods which they served during this period were Baal and Ashtoreth, and their modifications ; and Syria, Sidon, Moab, Ammon, and Philistia, are named in Judg. x. 6, as the sources from which they derived their idolatries. Then Samuel ap- pears to have exercised a beneficial influence in weaning the people from this folly (1 Sam. vii.) ; and the worship of the Lord acquired a gradually increasing hold on the nation until the time of Solomon, who was induced in his old age to per- mit the establishment of idolatry at Jerusalem. On the division of the nation,, the kingdom of Israel (besides adhering to the sin of Jeroboam to the last) was' specially devoted to the worship of Baal, which Ahab had renewed and carried to an unprecedented height ; and although the energetic measures adopted by Jehu, and afterwards by the priest Jehoiada, to suppress this idolatry, may- have tseen the cause why there is no later express mention of Baal, yet it is evident from 2 Kings xiii. 6, and xvii. 10, that (lie worship of Asherah continued until the deportation of the ten tribes. This event also introduced the peculiar idolatries of the Assyrian colonists into Samaria. In the kingdom of Judah, on the other hand, idolatry continued during the two succeeding reigns ; was suppressed for a time by Asa (1 Kings xv. 12); was revived in consequence of Joram marrying into the family of Ahab; was continued by Aha/.; received a check from Hczekiah; broke out again moic violently under Manasseh ; until Josiah blade the most vigorous attempt to suppress it. But even Josiah's efforts to restore the worship of the Lord were ineffectual; I'm- the- later prophets, Zephaniah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, still continue to utter reproofs against idolatry. Nor did the capture of Jerusalem under Jehniachim awaken this peculiarlj sensual people; for Ezekiel (viii.) shows that those who were left in Jerusalem under the government of Zedekiab had given themselves up to many kinds of idolatry; and Jeremiah (xliv. S) charges those inhabitants of Judah who. IDOLATRY. S had found an asylum in Egypt, with having turned to serve the gods of that country. On the restoration of the Jews after the Babylonian cap- tivity, they appear, for the first time in their his- tory, to have been permanently impressed with a sense of the degree to which their former idolatries had been an insult to God, and a degradation of their own understanding — an advance in the cul- ture of the nation which may in part be ascribed to the influence of the Persian abhorrence of images, as well as to the effects of the exile as a chastisement. In this state they continued until Antiochus Epiphanes made the last and fruitless attempt to establish the Greek idolatry in Pales- tine (1 Mace. i.). The particular forms of idolatry into which the Israelites fell are described under the names of the different gods which they worshipped [Ash- toreth, Baajj; &c] : the general features of their idolatry require a brief notice here. According to Movers (Die Phonizier, i. 148), the religion of all the idolatrous Syro-Arabian nations was a deification of the powers and laws of nature, an adoration of those objects in which these powers are considered to abide, and by which they act. The deity is thus the invisible power in nature itself, that power which manifests itself as the generator, sustainer, and destroyer of its works. This view admits of two modifications: either the separate powers of nature are regarded as so many different gods, and the objects by which these powers are manifested — as the sun, moon, &c. — are regarded as their images and supporters ; or the power of nature is considered to be one and indivisible, and only to differ as to the forms under which it manifests itself. Both views co- exist in almost all religions. The most, simple and ancient notion, however, is that which con- ceives the deity to be in liftman form, as male and female, and which considers the male sex to be the type of its active, generative, and de- structive power ; while that, passive power of na- ture whose function is to conceive and bring forth, is embodied under the female form. The human form and the diversity of sex lead natu- rally to the diilerent ages of life- — to the old man and the youth, the matron and the virgin — ac- cording to the modifications of the conception; and the myths which represent the influences, the changes, tiie laws, and the relations of these na- tural powers under the sacred histories of sucli gods, constitute a harmonious development of such a religious system. Those who saw the deity manifested by, or conceived him as resident in, any natural objects, could not fail to regard the sun and moon as the potent rulers of day and night, and the sources of those influences on which all animated nature depends. Hence star-worship I'onns a prominent feature in all the false religions mentioned in the Bible. Of this character chiefly were the Egyptian, the Canaanite, the Chaldaean, and the Persian re- ligions. The Persian form of astrolatry, however, deserves to be distinguished from the others; for it allowed no images nor temples of the god, but ,'l>ed him in bis purest symbol, fire. It is understood that this form is alluded to in most. of those passa ;es which mention the worship of the miii, moon, and heavenly host, by ilieense, OH heights (2 Kings xxiii. 5, 12; Jer. xix. 13). The other form of astrolatry, in which the idea of the b2 4 IDU3L93A. sun, moon, and planets, is blended with the wor- ship of the god in the form of an idol, and with the addition of a mythology (as may be seen in the relations of Baal and his cognates to the sun), easily degenerates into lasciviousness .and cruel rites. The images of the gods, fhe standard terms for which are nH?jO, 2VJJ, and Ef?\?, were, as to material, of stone, wood, silver, and gold. The first two sorts are called ?DS, as being hewn or carved ; those of metal had a trunk or stock of wood, and were covered with plates of silver or gold (Jer. x. 4); or were cast (H3DD). The general rites of idolatrous worship consist in burning incense ; in offering bloodless sacrifices, as the dough-cakes (D'OIS) and libations in Jer. vii. 18, and the raisin-cakes (Q^J? lE^K) in Hos. iii. 1 ; in sacrificing victims (1 Kings xviii. 26), and especially in human sacrifices [Moloch]. These offerings were made on high places, hills, and roofs of houses, or in shady groves and valleys. Some forms of idolatrous worship had libidinous orgies [Ashtoreth]. Divinations, oracles (2 Kings i. 2), and rabdo- mancy (Hos. iv. 12) form a part of many of these false religions. The priesthood was generally a numerous body ; and where persons of both sexes were attached to the service of any god (like the D^lp and niKHp of Ashtoreth), that service was infamously immoral. It is remarkable that the Pentateuch makes no mention of any temple of idols; afterwards we read often of such. — J.N. IDTJM^A. 'l5ov/j.zia is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Edom, or, according to Josephus (Antiq. ii. 1. 1), it is onty a more agreeable mode of pronouncing what would otherwise be 'AdZfia (com p. Jerome on Ezek. xxv. 12). In the Sep- tuagint we sometimes meet, with 'E8c£,u, but more generally with 'lSovj.iala (the people being called 'ISov/acuoi), which is the uniform orthography in the Apocrypha as well as in Mark iii. 8, the only passage in the New Testament where it occurs. Our Authorized Version has in three or four places substituted for Edom ' Idumea,' which is the name employed by the writers of Greece and Rome, though it is to be noted that they, as well as Josephus, include under that name the south of Palestine, and sometimes Pales- tine itself, because a large portion of that coun- try came into possession of the Edomites of later times. The Hebrew Qltf Edom, as the name of the people is masculine (Num. xx. 22) ; as the name of the country, feminine (Jer. xlix. 17). We often meet with the phrase Eretz-Edom, 'the Land of Edom,' and once with the poetic form Sedeh-Edom, ' the Field of Edom ' (Judg. v. 4). The inhabitants are sometimes styled Beni-Edom, 'the Children of Edom,' and poetically Bath- Edom, ' the Daughter of Edom' (Lam. iv. 21, 22). A single person was called ''Dl^ Adomi, ' an Edomite ' (Deut. xxiii. 8), of which the femi- nine plural JV01& Adomith occurs in 1 Kings xi. 1. The name was derived from Isaac's son Edom, otherwise called Esau, the elder twin- brother of Jacob [Esau]. It, signifies red, and seems first to have been suggested by his appear- ance at his birth, when ' he came out all red ' (i. e. covered with red hair, Gen. xxv. 25), and IDUMEA, was afterwards more formally and permanently imposed on him on account of his unworthy dis- posal of his birth-right for a mess of red lentiles (Gen. xxv. 30). The region which came to bear his name, is the mountainous tract on the east side of the great valleys El Ghor and El Araba, extending between the Dead Sea and theElanitic Gulf of the Red Sea. Some have conjectured that the latter sea was called ' Red," because it washed the shore of ' Edom ;' but it never bears in Hebrew the name of Yam-Edom: it is uniformly designated Yam-Suph, i. e. ' the Sea of Madre- pores.' Into this district Esau removed during his father's life-time, and his posterity gradually ob- tained possession of it as the country which God had assigned for their inheritance in the prophetic blessing pronounced by his father Isaac (Gen. xxvii. 39, 40; xxxii. 3; Deut. ii. 5-12, 22). Previously to their occupation of the country, it was called y$9 ")H, Mount Seir, a designation indeed which it never entirely lost. The word seir means hairy (being thus synonymous with Esau), and, when applied to a country, may sig- " nify rugged, mountainous, and so says Josephus (Antiq. i. 20. 3) : ' Esau named the country "Roughness" from his own hairy roughness.' But. in Gen. xxxvi. 20, we read of an individual of the name of Seir, who had before this inhabited the land, and from whom it may have received its first appellation. Part of the region is still called Ush-Shei'a/i, in which some find a trace of Seir, but the two words have no etymological relation : the former wants the #, a letter which is never dropped, and it signifies ' a tract, a pos session,' and sometimes ' a mountain.' The first mention made of Mount. Seir in Scrip- ture is in Gen. xiv. 6, where Chedorlaomer and his confederates are said to have smitten ' the Horim in their Mount Seir.' Among the earliest human habitations were caves, either formed by nature or easily excavated, and for the construc- tion of these the mountains of Edom afforded peculiar facilities. Hence the designation given to the Aboriginal inhabitants — Horim, i. e. cave- dwellers (from in, a ' cave'), an epithet of similar import with the Greek Troglodytes. Even in the days of Jerome ' the whole of the southern part of Idumsea, from Eleutheropolis to Petra and Aila, was full of caverns used as dwellings, on account of the sun's excessive heat ' (Jerome on Obadiah, ver. 1) ; and there is reason to believe that the possessors of the country in every age occupied similar habitations, many traces of which are yet seen in and near Petra, the renowned metropolis. We are informed in Deut. ii. 12, that ' the children of Esau succeeded \_marg. inherited] the Horim when they bad destroyed .them from be- fore them, and dwelt in their stead, as Israel did unto the land of his possession, which Je- hovah gave unto them.' From this it may be inferred, that the extirpation of the Horim by the Esauites was, like that of the Canaanites by Israel, very gradual and slow. Some think this supposition is confirmed by the genealogical tables preserved in the 36th chapter of Genesis (comp. 1 Chron. 1.), where we have, along with a list of the chiefs of- Edom, a similar catalogue of Horite chieftains, who are presumed to have been their contemporaries. But for the chronology of these ancient documents we possess no data what- soever, and very precarious, therefore, must be IDUM^EA. any deductions that are drawn from them. This much, however, we there learn of the political con- stitution'of the Seirite Aborigines, that, like the Esauites and Israelites, they were divided into tribes, and these tribes were sub-divided into families — the very polity which still obtains among the Arabs by whom Idumaea is now peopled. Each tribe had its own Alluf — a term which is unhappily rendered in the English Ver- sion by ' Duke ' — for though that has, no doubt, the radical meaning of the Latin dux, a ' leader,' it now only suggests the idea of a feudal title of nobility. Of these chiefs of the Hordes seven are enumerated, viz., Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. The only one of these who is spoken of as related to the other is Anah, the son of Zibeon. The primitive and pastoral character of the people is incidentally brought out by the circumstance that this Anah, though a chieftain's son, was in the habit of tend- ing his father's asses. It was when thus employed that he found in the wilderness eth-h-a-yemim, ren- dered in the English Version by ' the mules,' but meaning more probably ' the hot springs ;' and thus interpreted, the passage seems to be an inti- mation that he was the first to discover the faculty with which asses and other animals are endowed, of snuffing the moisture of the air, and thus sometimes leading to the opportune discoveiy of hidden waters in the desert. There is in the country to the south-east of the Dead Sea (which formed part of the Seirite possessions), a place, Kallirhoe, celebrated among the Greeks and Romans for its warm baths, and which has been visited by modern travellers (Josephus, De Bell. Jud. i. 33. 5; Pliny, Hist. Nat. v/5. 17 ; Legh's Travels). Esau first married into two Canaanitish families of the Hittite and Hivite tribes (Gen. xxvi. 34 ; xxxvi. 2 ; in one or other of which places, how- ever, the text seems corrupt) ; but anxious to pro- pitiate his offended parents, he next formed a matrimonial alliance with one of the race of Abraham, viz., Mahalath, otherwise called Bashe- matb, daughter of Ishmael, and sister of Ne- baioth, whose descendants, the Nabathceans, by a singular coincidence, obtained in after times pos- session of the land of Edom (Gen. xxviii. 9). Esau's first-born (by Adali or Bashemath, of the daughters of Heth) was Eliphaz, whose son Teman gave name to a district of the country (Gen. xxxvi. 1 1, 34 ; 1 Chron. i. 45 ; Ezek. xxv. 13; Ohad. verse 9). The Tcmanites were re- nowned for their wisdom (Jer. xlix. 7, 20 ; Baruch iii. 22, 23): The chief speaker in the book of Job is another Eliphaz, a Temanite, — which is one of the circumstances that have leu many to place the scene of that story in the land of Edom [Job]. The name of Teman was preserved to the days of Eusebius in that of Thaiman, a small town live Roman miles from Petra. Another son of the first-mentioned Eliphaz was Amcdek, who is not to be confounded, however, with the father of the Amalekites, one of the doomed nations of Canaan, of whom we hear so early as the age of Abraham (Gen. xiv. 7). * As a modem Arab sheikh is often found to ex- ercise influence far beyond the sphere of his here- ditary domain, so in tiie list of the Edomite emirs preserved by Moses we have perhaps only the names of the more distinguished individuals who IDUM^A. 5 acquired more or less authority over all the tribes. This oligarchy appears gradually to have changed into a monarchy, as happened too among the Israelites ; for in addition to the above mentioned lists, both of Horite and Esauite- leaders, we have, at Gen. xxxvi. 31, a* catalogue of eight kings (Bela, Jobab, Kusham, Hadad, Samlah, Saul, Baal-hanan, Hadar or Hadad) who ' reigned in the land of Edom before there reigned any king over the children of IsraeL' It is not necessary to suppose that this was said by Moses prophett- cally : it is one of those passages which may have been inserted by Ezra when finally arranging the canon, inasmuch as it occurs also in the first book of Chronicles, of which he is the reputed compiler. The period when this change to regal government took place in Idumsea can only be matter of conjecture. In the Song of Moses (Exod. xv. 15) it is said that at the tidings of Israel's triumphant passage of the Red Sea the riders or princes (Alluf) of Edom trembled with affright, but when, some forty years afterwards, application had to be made by the Israelites for leave to traverse the land of Edom, it was to the king (Melek) that the request was addressed (Num. xx. 14). The road by which it was sought to penetrate the country was termed ' the king's highway ' (ver. 17), supposed by Robinson to be the Wady el-Ghuweir, for it is almost the only valley that affords a direct and easy passage through those mountains. From a comparison of these incidents it may be inferred that the change in the form of government took place during the wanderings of the Israelites in the desert, unless we suppose, with Rosenmiiller, that it was only this north-eastern part of Edom which was now subject to a monarch, the rest of the country re- maining under the sway of its former chieftains. But whether the regal power at this period em- braced the whole territory or not, perhaps it did not supplant the ancient constitution, but was rather grafted on it, like the authority of the Judges in Israel, and of Saul, the first king, which did not materially interfere with the go- vernment that previously existed. It further ap- pears, from the list of Idumaean kings, that the monarchy was not hereditary, but elective (for no one is spoken of as the son or relative of his pre- decessor) ; or probably that chieftain was acknow- ledged as sovereign who was best able to vindi- cate his claim by force of aims. Every succes- sive king appears to have selected his own seat of government : the places mentioned as having en- joyed that distinction areDinhabah, Avith, Pagu or Pai. Even foreigners were not excluded from the throne, for the successor of Samlah of Masre- kah was Saul, or Shaul, ' of Rechoboth, on the river.' The word 'Rechoboth' means, literally, streets, and was a not uncommon name given to towns; but the emphatic addition of 'the river,' points evidently to tiie Euphrates, and between Rakkah and Anah, on that, river, there are still the remains of a place called by the Arabs Ra- chabath-Malik-Ibn Tauk. in the age of Solo- mon we read of one Hadad, who 'was of the king's seed inEdotn' (I Kings xi. 14); from which some have conjectured thai by that period there vva - a royal dynasty of one particular family -. but all that the expression may imply is. that he was a blood-relation oi' 'A- • lost king of the country Hadad was the name of one of tiie early sove- 6 IDUM^EA. reigns ' who smote Midian in the field of Moab1 (Gen. xxxvi. 35). The unbrotherly feud which aiose between Esau and Jacob was prolonged for ages between their posterity. The Israelites, indeed, were com- manded 'not to abhor an Edomite, for he was their brother' (Deut. xxiii. 7) ; but a variety of circumstances occurred to provoke and perpetuate the hostility. The first time they were brought into direct collision was when the Edomites, though entreated by 1heir ' brother Israel,' refused the latter a passage through their territories; and they had consequently to make a retrograde and toil- some march to the Gulf of Elatb, whence they had to ' compass the land of Edom' by the moun- tain desert on the east. We do not again hear of the Edomites till the days of Saul, who warred against them with partial success (I Sam. xiv. 47) ; but their entire subjugation was reserved for David, who first signally vanquished them in the Valley of Salt (supposed to be in the Ghor, beside Usdum, the Mountain of Salt) ; and, finally, placed garrisons in all their countiy (2 Sam. viii. 14 ; 1 Chron. xviii. 11-13 ; 1 Kings xi. 15. Comp. the inscription of Ps. Ix. and v. R, 9 ; cviii. 9, 10, where ' the strong city' may denote Selah or Petra). Then were fulfilled the prophecies in Gen. xxv. 23 and xxvii. 40, that the ' elder should serve the younger ;' and also the prediction of Balaam (Num. xxiv. IS), that Edom and Seir should be for possessions to Israel. Solomon created a naval station at Ezion-geber, at the head of the Gulf of Elath, the modem Akaba (1 Kings ix. 26 ; 2 Chron. viii. 18). To- wards the close of his reign an attempt was made to restore the independence of the country by one Hadad, an Idumsean prince, who, when a child, had been carried into Egypt at the time of David's invasion, and had there married the sister of Tah- panhes the queen (1 Kings xi. 14-23) [Hadad]. If Edom then succeeded in shaking off the yoke, it was only for a season, since in the days of Jeho- shaphat, the fourth Jewish monarch from Solomon, it. is said, 'there was no king in Edom ; a deputy was king ;' i. e. he acted as viceroy for the king of Judah. For that, the latter was still master of the country is evident from the fact of his having fitted out, like Solomon, a fleet at Ezion-geber (1 Kings xxii. 47, 48; 2 Chron. xx. 36, 37). It was, no doubt, his deputy (called king) who joined the confederates of Judah and Israel in their attack upon Moab (2 Kings i;i. 9, 12, 26). Yet there seems to have been a partial revolt of the Edomites, or at least of the mountaineers of Seir, even in the reign of Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xx. 22) : and under his successor, Jehoram, they wholly rebelled, and ' made a king over them- selves' (2 Kings viii. 20, 22 ; 2 Chron. xxi. 8, 10). From its being added that, notwithstanding the temporary suppression of the rebellion, ' Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day,' it is probable that the Jewish dominion was never completely restored. Amaziah, indeed, invaded the country, and having taken the chief city, Selah or Petra, he, in memorial of the con- quest, changed its name to Joktheel (q. d. sub- dued of God); and his successor, Uzziah, re- tained possession of Elath (2 Kings xiv. 7; 2 Chron. xxv. 11-14; xxvi. 3). But in the reign of Abaz, hordes of Edomites made incursions into Judah, and earned away captives (2 Chron. xxviii. IDUM^A. 17). About the same period Rezin, king of Syria, expelled the Jews from Elath, which f according to the correct reading of 2 Kings xvi. G) was thence- forth occupied by the Edomites. In our version it is said, 'the Syrians dwelt in Elath;' but the Kcri, or marginal Masoretic reading, instead of frETltf, Aramaeans, has D^HX, Edomites, the letter 1 being substituted for 1 ; and this is fol- lowed by many MSS., as well as by the Sept. and Vulgate, and best accords with historical fact. But then, to make both clauses of the verse to- correspond, we must, with Le Clerc and Houbi- gant, read the whole thus : ' At that time Rezin, king of Aram, recovered Elath to Edom, and drove the Jews from Elath ; and the Edomites came to Elath, and continued there unto this day.' Now was fulfilled the other part of Isaac's prediction, viz. that, in course of time, Esau ' should take his brother's yoke from off his neck' (Gen. xxvii. 40). It appears from various inci- dental expressions in the later prophets, that the Edomites employed their recovered power in the enlargement of their territory in all directions. They spread as far south as Dedan in Arabia, and northward to Bozrah in the Hhauran ; though it is doubtful if the Bozrah of Scripture may not have been a place in Idumaea Proper (Isa. xxxiv* 6; lxiii. 1; Jer. xlix. 7, 8-20; Ezek.' xxv. 13; Amos i. 12). When the Chaldaeans invaded Judah, under Nebuchadnezzar, the Edomites be- came their willing auxiliaries, and triumphed with fiendish malignity ovier the ruin of their kinsmen the Jews, of whose desolated land they hoped to obtain a large portion to themselves (Obad. verses 10-16; Ezek. xxv. 12-14; xxxv. 3-10; xxxvi. 5; Lament, iv. 21). By this cir- cumstance the hereditary hatred of the Jews was rekindled in greater fury than ever, and hence the many dire denunciations of the ' daughter of Edom,' to be met wi Ih in the Hebrew prophets (Ps. exxxvii. 7-9 ; Obad. passim; Jer. xlix. 7; Ezek. xxv. and xxxv.). From the language of Malachi (i. 2, 3), and also from the accounts pre- served by Josephus (Antiq. 'x. 9. 7), it would seem that the Edomites did not wholly escape the Chal- dsean scourge ; but instead of being carried captive, like the Jews, they not only retained possession of their own territory, but became masters of the south of Judah, as far as Hebron (1 Mace. v. 65, comp. with Ezek. xxxv. 10 ; xxxvi. 5). Here, however, they were, in course of time, successfully at- tacked by the Maccabees, and about b.c. 125, were finally Subdued by John Hyrcanus, who compelled them to submit to circumcision and other Jewish rites, with a view to incorporate them with the nation (1 Mace. v. 3, 65 ; 2 Mace, x. 16 ; xii. 32; Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 9. 1 ; 15. 4). The amalgamation, however, of the two races seems never to have been effected, for we after- wards hear of Antipater, an Idnmaaan by birth, being made by Caesar procurator of all Judaea ; and his son, commonly called Herod the Great, was, at the time of Christ's birth, king of Judaea, including Idumaea ; and hence Roman writers often speak of all Palestine under that name (Joseph. Antiq.' xiv. 1. 3; 8.5; xv. 7. 9 ; xvii. 11. 4). Not long before the siege of Jerusalem by Titus, 20,000 Idumaeans were called in to the defence of the city by the Zealots ; but both par- ties gave themselves up to rapine and murder (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. iv. 4. 5 ; 6. 1 ; vii. 8. 1). IDU3VLEA, This is the last mention made of the Edomites in history. The author of a work on Job, once ascribed to Origen, says that their name and lan- guage had perished, and that, like the Ammonites and Moabites, they had all become Arabs. In the second century Ptolemy limits the name Idumaea to the country west of the Jordan. 360. [Ravine in Idum^a.] But while, during the captivity of the Jews in Babylon, the Edomites had thus been extending their territory to the north-west, they were them- selves supplanted in the southern part of their native region by the Nabathaeans, the descendants of Ishmael's eldest son, and to the article Ne- baioth, we must refer the reader for the subse- quent history of the land of Edom. From the era of the Crusades down to the pre- sent century the land of Esau was, to Europeans, a terra incognita. Its situation was laid down on the best maps more than a hundred miles from the true position, and as if lying in a direction where it is now known there is nothing but a vast expanse of desert. Volney had his attention drawn towards it, when at Gaza, by the vague reports of the Arabs, and in 1 807 the unfortunate Seetzen penetrated a certain way into the country, and heard of the wonders of the Wady Musa ; but the first modern traveller who 'passed through the land of Edom ' was Burckhardt, in the year 1812. And it has been well remarked by Dr. Robinson (Amer. Bib. Reposit. vol. in. p. 250), that • had he accomplished nothing but his re- searches in these regions, his journey would have been worth all the labour and cost expended on it, although his discoveries thus shed their strongest light upon subjects which were not comprehended in the plan or purpose either of himself or his employers.' Burckhardt entered Idumaea from the north, and in the year 1818. he was followed in the same direction by Messrs. Legh, Bankes, Irby and Mangles. In 1828 IDUM^A. 7 Laborde and Linant found access from the south ; and since then it has been visited and described by so many that the names of its localities have become familiar as household words. The limit of the wanderings of the Israelites in the desert was the brook Zered, after crossing which they found themselves in the territory of Moafe (Deut. ii. 13-18). This brook is supposed to be identical with the Wady-el-Ahsy, which, rising near the Castle el-Ahsy, on the route to Mecca of the Syrian caravan upon the high eastern desert, penetrates through the whole chain of mountains to near the south-east corner of the Dead Sea. It was thus the southern border of Moab and the northern of Edom, whence the latter region extended southwards as far as to Elath on the Red Sea. The valley which runs between the two seas consists first of El-Ghor, which is comparatively low, but gradually rises into the more elevated plain of El-Arabah to the south. The country lying east of this great valley is the land of Idumaea. It is a mountain tract, consisting at the base of low hills of lime- stone or argillaceous rock, then lofty mountains of porphyry forming the body of the mountain ; above these, sandstone broken up into irregular ridges and grotesque groups of cliffs ; and again farther back, and higher than all, long elevated ridges of limestone without precipices. East of all these stretches off indefinitely the high plateau of the great eastern desert. Robinson and Smith estimated the height of the porphyry clifl's at about 2000 feet above the Arabah; the elevation of Wady Musa above the same is, perhaps, 2000 or 2200 feet, while the limestone ridges further back probably do not fall short of 3000 feet. The whole breadth of the mountainous tract between the Arabah and the eastern desert does not exceed fifteen or twenty geographical miles. Of these mountains the most remark- able is Mount Hor, near the Wady Musa. [Hor, Mount]. While the mountains on the west of the Arabah, though less elevated, are wholly barren, those of Idumaea seem to enjoy a sufficiency of rain, and are covered with tufts of herbs and occasional trees. The wadys, too, are full of trees and shrubs and flowers, while the eastern and higher parts are extensively culti- vated, and yield good crops. Hence Robinson thinks its appearance fulfils the promise made to Esau (Gen. xxvii. 39), ' Thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth and of the dew of heaven from above.' Yet many critics are of opinion (e. g. Vater, De Wette, Geddes, Von Bohlen) that "OfDiyD should there be rendered ' from,' i. e. ' far away from, or destitute of," the fatness of the earth, &c. ; and it is immediately added, ' for thou shalt live by thy sword ;' and it does not appear that Idumasa was ever particularly noted for its fertility. This mountainous region is at present divided into two districts. The northern bears the name of Jeba/, i. e. ' The Mountain,' the Gebal of the Hebrews (Ps. Ixxxiii. S), and the Gebalene of the Greeks and Romans. Commencing at Wady el-Ahsy, it terminates, according to Burckhardt, at Wady el-Ghuweir, the largest place in it being Tulileh, perhaps the Tophel of Deut. i. 1. The southern district is esh-Sherah, extending as f;ir as Akabah, and including Shobak, Wady Mfisa, Maan, &c. Burckhardt mentions a third dis- s IDUMtEA. trict, Jebal Hesma ; but Robinson says that though there is a sandy tract, el-Hismah, with mountains around it, on the east of Akabah, it does nut constitute a separate division. The whole of this region is at present occupied by various tribes of Bedouin Arabs. The chief tribe in the Jebal is the Hejaya, with a branch of the Kaabineh, while in esh-Sherah they are all of the numerous and powerful tribe of the Haweitat, with a few independent allies. The Bedouins in Idumaea have of late years been par- tially subject to the Pacha of Egypt, paying an annual tribute, which, in the case of the Beni Sukhr, is one camel for two tents. The fellahin, or peasants, are half Bedouin, inhabiting the few villages, but dwelling also in tents ; they too pay tribute to the Egyptian government, and furnish supplies of grain. Among the localities connected with Edom which are mentioned in Scripture may be noticed Dinhabab, Bozrah, Theman, Maon (now Maan), Kadesh-barnea (which Robinson identifies with el-Weibeh in the Wady el-Jeib), Zephath (which he supposes to be the pass of Es-Sufah), Elath, and Ezion-geber, &c. ; but the most celebrated place in all the region was the chief city, Selah or Petra, for a description of which the reader is referred to the latter head [Petra]. Could the scene of the book of Job be with certainty fixed in Idumaea, we should then pos- sess much curious and valuable information re- specting both the country and people soon after it had been colonized by the descendants of Esau (See Mason Good, Wemyss, and others upon Job). But all that we leam directly of the ancient Edomites from the historical books of Scripture represents them as not, indeed, neglect- ing agriculture or trade (Num. xx. 17), yet, on the whole, as a -warlike and predatory race, who, according to the prediction of their progenitor Isaac, e lived by their sword.' The situation of the country afforded peculiar facdities for com- merce, which seems to have been prosecuted from a very early period. ' Bordering,' says Volney, ' upon Arabia on the east and south, and Egypt on the south-west, and forming, from north to south, the most commodious channel of commu- nication between Jerusalem and her dependencies on the Red Sea. through the continuous valleys of El-Ghor and El-Araba, Idumaea may be said to have long formed the emporium of the com- merce of the East.' The era of its greatest pros- perity was after the Nabathaeans had become masters of the country and founded the kingdom of Arabia Petraea, of which the renowned metro- polis was Petra. The relic/ion of the early Edom- ites was, perhaps, comparatively pure ; but in process of time they embraced idolatry : in 2 Chron. xxv. 20, we read of the ' gods of Edom,' one of whom, according to .losephus (Antiq. xv. 7. 9), was called Kotze. With respect to the striking fulfilment of the prophetic denunciations upon Edom, we need ordy refer the reader to the well-known work of Keith, who frequently errs, however, in straining the sense of prophecy be- yond its legitimate import, as well as in seeking out too literally minute an accomplishment. On Idumaea generally, see C. B. Michaelis, Diss, cle Antiquiss. Idumczcr. Hist, in Pott and Ruperti's Sylloge Comment. Theologic. Part VI. p. 121 ; J. D. Michaelis, Comment. d$ik{ ■ This name occurs only in Esther i. 1 : viii. 9, where the Per- sian king is described as reigning ' from India unto Ethiopia, over a hundred and Seven and twenty provinces.' It is found" again, how< . ha, allele India is mentioned among the countries which the Romans took from Auti- 10 INDIA. ochus and gave to Eumenes (1 Mace. viii. 8). It is also with some reason conceived that in Acts ii. 9, we should read ^Ivtiav, India, and not 'lovdalay, Judaea. If this could be admitted, an interesting subject of inquiry would arise ; for these dwellers in India — that is, Jews of India — are described as being present in Jerusalem at the Passover. There is much to say in favour of this reading, but more in favour of Idumaea ; for the name of that country, 'iSov/xaiav, might, much more easily than that of India, 'Ivdtau, have been accidentally, or rather carelessly, corrupted into 'lovSalav • and, at the same time, the name of Idumaea would come better into the list than that of India, seeing that the enumeration is manifestly taken from east to west; which allows Idumaea with great propriety to follow Mesopotamia, but forbids India to do so. Whichever may be right, Judaea can- not but be wrong ; and, indeed, on the face of the list, we cannot but see the superfluousness of the information, that the people of Judaea were present in their own city at the Passover. It is evident on the face of the above intima- tions, and indeed from all ancient history, that the country known as India in ancient times extended more to the west, and did not reach so far to the east — that is, was not known so far to the east — as the India of the moderns. When we read of ancient India, we must clearly not understand the whole of Hindostan, but chiefly the northern Darts of it, or the countries between the Indus and the Ganges ; although it is not necessary to assert that the rest of that peninsula, particularly its western coast, was then altogether unknown. It was from this quarter that the Persians and Greeks (to whom we are indebted for the earliest accounts of India) invaded the country ; and this was con- sequently the region which first became generally known. The countries bordering on the Ganges continued to be involved in obscurity, the great kingdom of the Prasians excepted, which, situated nearly above the modern Bengal, was dimly dis- cernible. The nearer we approach the Indus, the more clear becomes our knowledge of the ancient geography of the country ; and it. follows that the districts of which at the present day we know the least, were anciently best known. Besides, the western and northern boundaries were not the same as at present. To the west, India was not then bounded by the river Indus, but by a chain of mountains which, under the name of Koh (whence the Grecian appellation of the Indian Caucasus), extended from Bactria to Makran, or Gedrosia, enclosing the kingdoms of Candahar and Cabul, the modern kingdom of Eastern Persia, or Afghanistan. These districts anciently formed part of India, as well as, further to the south, the less perfectly known countries of the Arabi and Haurs (the Arabitae and Orita? of Arrian, vi. 21), bordering on Gedrosia. This western boundary continued at all times the same, and was removed to the Indus only in consequence of the victories of Nadir Shah. Towards the north, ancient India overpassed not less its present limit. It comprehended the whole of the mountainous region above Cashmir, Badakshau, Belur Land, the western boundary mountains of Little Bucharia, or Little Thibet, and even the desert of Cobi, so far as it was known. The discovery of a passage by sea to the coasts of India has contributed to withdraw INHERITANCE. from these regions the attention of Europeans, and left them in an obscurity which hitherto ha» been little disturbed, although the current of events seems likely ere long to lead to our better knowledge. From this it appears that the India of Scripture included no part of the present India, seeing that it was confined to the territories possessed by the Per- sians and the Syrian Greeks, that never extended beyond the Indus, which, since the time of Nadir Shah, has been regarded as the western boundary of Lidia. Something of India beyond the Indus became known through the conquering march of Alexander, and still more through that of Seleu- cus Nicator, who penetrated to the banks of the Ganges ; but the notions thus obtained are not embraced in the Scriptural notices, which, both in the canonical and the Apocryphal text, are confined to Persian India. (See Heeren's Histo- rical Researches, i. c. 1, § 3, on Persian India; and Rennebs Geoff, of Herodotus). INHERITANCE. The laws and observances which determine the acquisition and regulate the devolution of property, are among the influences which affect the vital interests of states ; and it is therefore of high consequence to ascertain- the nature and bearing of the laws and observances relating to this subject, which come to us with the sanction of the Bible. We may also premise that, in a condition of society such as that in which we now live, wherein the two diverging tendencies which favour immense accumulations on the one hand, and lead to poverty and pau- perism on the other, are daily becoming more and more decided, disturbing, and baneful, there seems to be required on the part of those who take Scripture as their guide, a careful study of the foundations of human society, and of the laws of property, as they are developed in the divine records which contain the revealed will of God. That will, in truth, as it is the source of all created things, and specially of the earth and its intelligent denizen, man, so is it the original foundation of property, and of the laws by which its inheritance should be regulated. God, as the Creator of the earth, gave it to man to be held, cultivated, and enjoyed (Gen. i. 28, sq. ; Ps. cxv. 16 ; Eccles. v. 9). The primitive records are too brief and fragmentary to supply us with any details respecting the earliest distribution or transmission of landed property ; but from the passages to which reference has been made, the important fact appears to be established beyond a question, that the origin of property is to be found, not in the achievements of violence, the success of the sword, or any imaginary implied contract, but in the will and the gift of the com- mon Creator and bountiful Father of the human race. It is equally clear that the gift was made, not to any favoured portion of our race, but to the race itself — to man as represented by our great primogenitor, to whom the use of the divine gift was first graciously vouchsafed. The indi- vidual appropriation of portions of the earth, and the transmission of the parts thus appropriated, in other words, the consuetudinary laws of pro- perty, would be determined in each instance by the pecidiar circumstances in which an indivi- dual, a family, or a clan, might find itself placed in relation to the world and its other inhabitants ; INHERITANCE. "Dor is it now, in the absence of written evidence, possible to ascertain, and it is useless, if not worse, to attempt to conjecture, what these laws were. This, however, is certain, that if in any case they inflicted injury, if they aided the aggran- disement of the i'ew, and tended to the depression of the many, they thereby became unjust, and not only lost rheir divine sanction, but, by opposing the very purposes for which the earth was given to man, and operating in contravention of the divine will, they were disowned and condemned of God, the (enure of the property was forfeited, and a recurrence to first principles and a re-distribution became due alike to the original donor, and to those whom He had intended impartially to be- nefit. The enforcement of these principles has, in different periods of human history, been made by the seen hand of God, in those terrible providen- tial visitations which upturn the very foundations of society and reconstruct the social frame. The Deluge was a kind of revocation of the divine gift ; the Creator took back into his own hands the earth which men had filled with injustice and violence. The trust, however, was, after that terrible punishment, once more committed to man, to be held, not for himself, but for God, and to be so used and improved as to further the divine will by furthering human good. And, whatever conduct may have been pursued, at any period, at variance with the divine purpose, yet it is in trust, not in absolute possession, it is for God's purposes, not our own,. that the earth at large, and every portion of the earth, has been and is still held. In truth, man is the tenant, nor Hie proprietor, of the earth. It is the tem- porary use, not the permanent possession of it that he enjoys. The lord of ten thousand broad acres, equally with the poor penniless squatter, is a sojourner and pilgrim in the land, as all his fathers were, and is bound, not less than the other, to remember, "not only that property has its duties as well as its rights, but also that its best titles are held' by a momentary tenure, revocable at the will of an omnipotent power, and subject to unerring scrutiny, in regard both to tlieir origin and their use, in a court where the persons of men are not respected, where justice is laid to the line, and judgment to the plummet (Isa. xviii. 17). The impression which the original gift of the eartli was calculated to make on men, the Great Donor was pleased, in the case of Palestine, to render, for his own wise purposes, more decided and emphatic by an express re-donation to the patriarch Abraham (Gen. xiii. 14, sq.). Many years, however, elapsed before the promise was fulfilled. Meanwhile the notices which we have regarding the state of property in the patriarchal ages, are few and not very definite. The products of the earth, however, wen; at an early period ac- cumulated and held as property. Violence in- vaded (lie possession; opposing violence recovered the goods. War soon sprang out of the passions of the human heart. The necessity of civil go- vernment was felt. Consuetudinary laws ac- cordingly developed themselves. The head of the family was supreme. His will was law. The physical superiority which he possessed gave him this dominion. The same influence would secure its transmission in the male rather than the fe- INHERITANCE. II male line. Hence too the rise of the rights of primogeniture. In the early condition of society which is called patriarchal, landed property had its origin, indeed, but could not be held of first importance by those who led a wandering life, shifting continually, as convenience suggested, from one spot to another. Cattle were then the chief property (Gen. xxiv. 35). But land, if held, was held on a freehold tenure; nor could any other tenure have come into existence till more complex and artificial relations arose, resulting, in all probability, from the increase of population and the relative insufficiency of food. "When Joseph went down into Egypt, he appears to have found the freehold tenure prevailing, which, how- ever, he converted into a tenancy at will, or, at any rate, into a conditional tenancy. Other in- timations are found in Genesis which confirm the general statements which have just been made. Daughters do not appear to have had any inheritance. If there are any exceptions to this rule, they only serve to prove it. Thus Job (the book so called is undoubtedly very old, so that there is no impropriety in citing it in this con- nection) is recorded (xlii. 15) to have given his daughters an inheritance conjointly with their brothers — a record which of itself proves the sin- gularity of the proceeding, and establishes our position that inheritance generally followed the male line. How highly the privileges conferred by primogeniture were valued, may be learnt from the history of Jacob and Esau. In the patriarchal age doubtless these rights were very great. ' The eldest son, as being by nature the first fitted for command, assumed influence and control, under his father, over the family and its dependents ; and when the father was removed by death, he readily, and as if by an act of Providence, took his father's place. Thus he succeeded to the pro- perty in succeeding to the headship of the family, the clan, or the tribe. At first the eldest son most probably took exclusive possession of his father's property and power; and when, subsequently, a division became customary, he would still retain the largest share — a double portion, if not more (Gen. xxvii. 25, 29, 40). That in the days of Abraham other sons partook with the eldest, and that too though they were sons of concubines, is clear from the story of Hagar's expulsion : — ' Cast out (said Sarah) this bondwoman and her son ; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac ' (Gen. xxi. 10). The few notices left us in Genesis of the transfer of property from baud to hand are interesting, and bear a remarkable similarity to what takes place in Eastern countries even at this day (Gen. xxi. 22, sq. ; xxiii. 9, sq.). The purchase of the Cave of Machpelah as a family burying- place for Abraham, detailed in the last passage, serves to show the safety of property at that early period, and the facility with which an inheritance was transmitted even to sons' sons (comp. Gen. xlix. 29). That it was customary, timing the father's lifetime, to make a disposition of property, is evident from Gen. xxiv. 3u, whore it is said that Abraham had given all he had to Isaac. This statement is further confirmed by ch. xxv. 5, 6, where it is added that Abraham gave to the sons of his concubines 'gifts, sending them away from Isaac his son, while he yet lived, eastward unto the east country.' Sometimes, however, so far 12 INHERITANCE. were the children of unmarried females from being dismissed with a gift, that they shared, with what we should teim the legitimate children, in the father's property and rights. Thus Dan and Naphtali were sons of Bilhah, Rachel's maid, whom she gave to her husband, failing to bear children herself. So Gad and Asher were, under similar circumstances, sons of Zilpah, Leah's maid (Gen. xxx. 2-14). In the event of the eldest son's dying in the father's lifetime, the next son took his place; and if the eldest son left a widow, the next son made her his wife (Gen. xxxviii. 7, sq.), the offspring of which union was reckoned to the first-born and deceased son. Should the second likewise die, the third son took his place (Gen. xxxviii. 11). While the rights of the first-born were generally established and recognised, yet were they sometimes set aside in favour of a younger child. The blessing of the father or the grandsire seems to have been an act essential in the devolution of power and pro- perty— in its effects not unlike wills and testa- ments with us; and instances are not wanting in which this (so to term it) testamentary bequest set aside consuetudinary laws, and gave prece- dence to a younger son (Gen. xlviii. 15, sq.). Special claims on the parental regards were ac- knowledged and rewarded by special gifts, as in the case of Jacob's donation to Joseph (Gen. xlviii. 22). In a similar manner, bad conduct on the part of the eldest son (as well as of others) subjected him, if not to the loss of his rights of property, yet to the evil influence of his father's dying malediction (Gen. xlix. 3) ; while the good and favoured, though younger, son was led by the paternal blessing to anticipate, and probably also to reap, the richest inheritance of individual and social happiness (Gen. xlix. 8-22). The original promise made to Abraham of the land of Palestine was solemnly repeated to Isaac (Gen. xxvi. 3), the reason assigned being, be- cause ' Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws ;' while it is expressly declared that the earlier inhabitants of the country were dispos- sessed and destined to extermination for the greatness of their iniquity. The possession of the promised land was embraced by Isaac in his dying benediction to Jacob (Gen. xxviii. 3, 4), to whom God vouchsafed (Gen. xxviii. 15 ; see also xxxv. 10, 11) to give a renewed assurance of the destined inheritance. That this donation, how- ever, was held to be dependent for the time and manner of its fulfilment on the divine will, ap- pears from Gen. xxxiii. 18, where Jacob., on coming into the land of Canaan, bought for an hundred pieces of money ' a parcel of a field, at the hand of the children of Hamor.' Delayed though the execution of the promise was, con- fidence never deserted the family of Abraham, so that Joseph, dying in the land of Egypt, assured his brothers that the}' would be visited of God and placed in possession of Canaan, enjoining on them, in tliis conviction, that, when conducted to their possession, they should carry his bones with them out of Egypt (Gen. 1. 25). A promise thus given, thus repeated, and thus believed, easily, and indeed unavoidably, became the fundamental principle of that settlement of property which Moses made when at length he had effected the divine will in the redemption INHERITANCE. of the children of Israel. The observances and practices, too, which we have noticed as prevailing among the patriarchs would, no doubt, have great influence on the laws which the Jewish legislator originated or sanctioned. The land of Canaan was divided among the twelve tribes descended through Isaac and Jacob from Abraham. The division was made by lot for an inheritance among the families of the sons of Israel, accord- ing to the tribes, and to the number and size of families in each tribe. The tribe of Levi, how- ever, had no inheritance ; but forty-eight cities with their suburbs were assigned to the Levites, "each tribe giving according to the number of cities that fell to its share (Num. xxxiii. 50 ; xxxiv. 1 ; xxxv. 1). The inheritance thus acquired was never to leave the tribe to which it belonged ; every tribe was to keep strictly to its own inherit- ance. An heiress, in consequence, was not allowed to marry out of her own tribe, lest property should pass by her marriage into another tribe (Num. xxxvi. 6-9). This restriction led to the marriage of heiresses with their near relations : thus the daughters of Zelophehad ' were married unto their father's brother's sons,' ' and their inheritance re- mained in the tribe of the family of their father ' (ver. 11, 12; comp. Joseph. Antiq. iv. 7. 5). In general cases the inheritance went to sons, the first-bom receiving a double portion, 'for he is the beginning of his father's strength.' If a man had two wives, one beloved, the other hated, and if the first-born were the son of her who was hated, he nevertheless was to enjoy ' the right of the first-born ' (Deut. xxi. 15). If a man left no sons, the inheritance passed to his daughters ; if there was no daughter, it went to his brothers ; in case there were no brothers, it was given to his father's brothers ; if his father had no brothers, it came into possession of the nearest kinsman (Num. xxvii. 8). The land was Jehovah's, and could not therefore be permanently alienated. Every fiftieth year, whatever land had been sold returned to its former owner. The value and price of land naturally rose or fell in proportion to the number of years there were to elapse prior to the ensuing fiftieth or jubilee-year. If he who sold the land, or a kinsman, could redeem the land before the year of jubilee, it was to be restored to him on his paying to the purchaser the value of the produce of the years remaining till the jubilee. Houses in villages or unwalled towns might not be sold for ever; they were re- stored at the jubilee, and might at any time be redeemed.' If a man sold a dwelling-house situ- ated in a walled city, he had the option of re- deeming it within the space of a full year after it had been sold ; but if it remained unredeemed, it belonged to the purchaser, and did not return to him who sold it even at the jubilee (Lev. xxv. 8. 23). The Levites were not allowed to sell the land in the suburbs of their cities, though they might dispose of the cities themselves, which, however, were redeemable at any time, and must return at the jubilee to their original possessors (Lev. xxvii. 16). The regulations which the laws of Moses esta- blished rendered wills, or a testamentary dispo- sition of (at least) landed property, almost, if not pjite, unnecessary ; we accordingly find no pro- vision for anything of the kind. Some difficulty may have been now and then occasioned when INSPIRATION. near relations failed; but this was met by the traditional lav/, which furnished minute direc- tions on the point (Misch. Baba Bathra, iv. 3, c. 8, 9). Personal properly would naturally fol- low the land, or might be bequeathed' by word of mouth. At a later period of the Jewish polity the mention of wills is found, but the idea seems to have been taken from foreign nations. In princely families they appear to have been used, as we learn from Josephus (Antiq. xiii. 16. 1 ; xvii. 3. 2 ; Be Bell. Jucl. ii. 2. 3) ; but such a prac- tice can hardly suffice to establish the general use of wills among the people. In the New Tes- tament, however, wills are expressly mentioned (Gal. iii. 15; Heb. ix. 17). Michaelis (Com- mentaries, i. 431) asserts that the phrase (2 Sam. xvii. 23 ; 2 Kings xx. 1 : 'UVli? iTl¥) 'set thine house in order ' has reference to a will or testa- ment. But his grounds are by no means sufficient, the literal rendering of the words being, ' give commands to thy house." The utmost which such an expression could inferentially be held to comprise in regard to property, is a dying and final distribution of personal property ; and we know that it was not unusual for fathers to make, while yet alive, a division of their goods among their children (Luke xv. 12 ; Rosenmiill. Mor- gsnl. v. 197).— J. R. B. INK, INKHORN. [Writing.] INSPIRATION. This word is sometimes used to denote the excitement and action of a fervent imagination in the poet or orator. But even in this case there is generally a reference to some supposed divine influence, to which the ex- cited action is owing. It is once used in Scrip- ture to denote that divine agency by which man is endued with the faculties of an intelligent being, when it is said, ' the inspiration of the Al- mighty giveth him understanding.' But the in- spiration now to be considered is that which belonged to those who wrote the Scriptures, and which is particularly spoken of in 2 Tim. iii. 16, and in 2 Pet. i. 21 : ' All Scripture is given by inspiration of God ;' ' Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.' These pas- sages relate specially to the Old Testament; but there is at least, equal reason to predicate divine inspiration of the New Testament. The definition which Dr. Knapp gives of in- spiration is the one we shall adopt. He says, ' It may be best- defined, according to the repre- sentations of the Scriptures themselves, as an ex- traordinary divine agency upon teachers while giving instruction, whether oral or written, by which they were taught what and how they should write or speak.' Or we may say more briefly, that the sacred penmen were completely under the direction of the Holy Spirit, or that they wrote under a plenary inspiration. Dr. Calamy's definition agrees substantially with that of Dr. Knapp. To prove that {he Scriptures are divinely in- spired wc might with propriety refer to the excellence of the doctrines, precepts, and pro- mises, and other instructions, which they contain ; to the simplicity and majesty of their style; to the agreement of the different parts, and the scope of the whole ; especially to the full dis- covery they make of man's fallen and ruined state, and the way of salvation through a Re- INSPIRATION. 13 deemer; together with their power tc enlighten and sanctify the heart, and the accompanying witness of the spirit in believers. These are cir- cumstances of real importance, and the discerning advocates of inspiration have not overlooked them. But the more direct and conclusive evidence that the Scriptures were divinely inspired, is found in the testimony of the tenters themselves. And as the writers did, by working miracles, and in other ways, sufficiently authenticate their divine commission, and establish their authority and in- fallibility as teachers of divine truth, their testimony, in regard to their own inspiration, is entitled to our full confidence. For who can doubt that they were as competent to judge of, and as much disposed to speak the truth on this sub- ject as on any other? If then we admit their divine commission and authority, why should we not rely upon the plain testimony which they give concerning the divine assistance afforded them in their work ? To reject their testimony in this case would be to impeach their veracity, and thus to take away the foundation of the Christian religion. And it is well known that those who deny the justice of the claim which they set up to divine inspiration, do, in fact, give up the in- fallible truth and authority of the Scriptures, and adopt the principles of deism. It is, then, of the first importance to inquire what representations are made by the prophets, and by Christ and his apostles, respecting the inspi- ration, and the consequent authority, of the sacred Scriptures. The prophets generally professed to speak the word of God. What they taught was introduced and confirmed by a ' Thus saith the Lord ;' or ' The Lord spake to me, saying.' And, in one way or another, they gave clear proof that they were divinely commissioned, and spoke in the name of God, or as it is expressed in the New Testament, that God spake by them. But the strongest and most satisfactory proof of the inspiration and divine authority of the Old Testament writings, is found in the testimony of Christ and the apostles. The Lord Jesus Christ possessed the spirit of wisdom without measure, and came to bear wit- ness to the truth. His works proved that he was what he declared himself to be — the Messiah, the great Prophet, the infallible Teacher. The faith which rests on him rests on a rock. As soon then as we learn how he regarded the Scriptures, we have reached the end of our inquiries. His word is truth. Now every one who carefully attends to the four Gospels will find, that Christ every- where spoke of that collection of writings called the Scripture, as the word of God ; that he re- garded the whole in this light; that he treated the Scripture, and every part of it, as. infallibly true, and as clothed with divine authority, — thus distinguishing it from every mere human produc- tion. Nothing written by man can be entitled to the respect which Christ showed to the Scriptures. This, to all Christians, is direct and incontro- vertible evidence of the divine origin of the Scriptures, and is, by itself, perfectly conclusive. But there is clear concurrent evidence, and evidence still more specific, in the writings of the Apostles. In two texts in particular, divine in- spiration is positively asserted. In the first (2 Tim. iii, 16), Paul lays it down as the churac- u INSPIRATION. terististic of 'all Scripture,' that it ' is given by inspiration of God ' (deoirvevarros, ' divinely in- spired'); and from this results its profitableness. Some writers think that the passage should be rendered thus : All divinely inspired Scripture, or, all Scripture, being divinely inspired, is profitable. According to the common render- ing, inspiration is predicated of all Scripture. According to the other, it is presupposed, as the attribute of the subject. But this rendering is liable to insuperable objections. .For Beoirveu- crros and wcp€\e/j.os here are, if there be an ellipsis of the substantive verb icrri, this verb must be supplied after the former of the two, and regarded as re- peated after the latter. Now there exists pre- cisely such an ellipsis in the case before us ; and as there is nothing in the context which would lead to any exception to the rule, we are bound to yield to its force.' And he adds, that ' the evidence in favour of the common rendering, derived from the Fathers, and almost all the ver- sions, is most decided.' It cannot for a moment be admitteds that the Apostle meant to signify that divine inspiration belongs to a part of Scrip- ture, but not to the whole ; or that he meant, as Semler supposes, to furnish a criterion by which to judge whether any work is inspired or not, namely, its utility. ' That author proceeds fear- lessly to apply this criterion to the books of the Old Testament, and to lop off eight of them, as not possessing the requisite marks of legitimacy. Most of the German divines adopt Semler"s hypo- thesis.' But it is very manifest that such a sense is not by any means suggested by the passage itself, and that it is utterly precluded by other parts of the New Testament. For neither Christ nor any one of his apostles ever intimates a dis- tinction between some parts of Scripture which are inspired and other parts which are not in- spired. The doctrine which is plainly asserted in the text under consideration, and which is fully sustained by the current language of the New Testament, is, that all the writings deno- minated the Scriptures are divinely inspired. The other text (2 Pet. i. 21) teaches that ' Pro- phecy came not by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.' This passage, which the apostle Peter applied particularly to the subject of which he was speaking, may be considered as explanatory of what is intended by inspiration. For to say that all Scripture is divinely inspired, and that men of God wrote it as they were moved by the Holy Ghost; is one and the same thing. The various texts in which Christ and the Apos- tles speak of Scripture as the toord of God, and as invested with authority to decide all questions of truth and duty, fully correspond with the texts above considered. From this view of the subject it follows, that the attempt which has been made by a certain class of writers, to account for the production of tfce whole or any part of the Scriptures by the INSPIRATION. will or agency, the ingenuity, diligence or fide- lity of men, in the use of the means within their reach, without the supernatural influence of the spirit, is utterly at variance with the teachings of Christ and the Apostles as to the origin of the sacred writings. - - As the Christian dispensation surpasses the former in all spiritual privileges and gifts, it is reasonable to presume that the New Testament was written under at least an equal degree of divine influence with the Old, and that it comes recommended to us by equal characteristics of infallible truth. But of this there is clear positive evidence from the New Testament itself. In the first place, Jesus Christ, whose works proved him to be the great unerring Teacher, and to be possessed of all power in Heaven and earth, gave commission to his Apostles to act in his stead, and to carry out the work of instruction .which he had begun, confirming their authority by investing them with power to perform miracles. But how could such a commission have answered the end proposed, had not the Divine Spirit so guided the Apostles as to render them infallible and perfect teachers of divine truth ? But, secondly, in addition to this, Jesus ex- pressly promised to give them the Holy Spirit, to abide with them continually, and to guide them into all the truth. He said to them, ' When they shall deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye.shall speak ; for it shall be given you in the same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you.' Storr and Flatt think this is the idea intended : ' The instructions which ye in general give are derived not so much from yourselves as from the Holy Spirit. Hence, when ye are called on to defend your doctrines, ye need feel no anxiety, but may confidently rely on the Holy Spirit to vindicate his own doctrines, by suggesting to you the very words of your defence.' If these promises were not fulfilled, then Jesus was not a true prophet. If they were fulfilled, as they certainly were, then the Apostles had the constant assistance of the Holy Spirit, and, whe- ther engaged in speaking or writing, were under divine guidance, and, of course, were liable to no mistakes either as to the matter or manner of their instructions. In the third place, the writers of the New Testament manifestly considered themselves to be under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and their instructions, whether oral or written, to be clothed with divine authority, as the word of God. ' We speak,' they say, ' as of God.' Again, 'Which things we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but in words which the Holy Ghost teacheth.' They declared what they taught to be the toord of God, and the things they wrote to be the commandments of God. Now the Apostles, being honest, unassuming, humble men, would never have spoken of them- selves and their writings in such a manner, had they not known themselves to be under the un- erring guidance of the Holy Spirit, and their instructions perfectly in accordance with the mind of God. From several passages in Paul's epistles to the Corinthians, it has been supposed that, in the cases referred to, he meant to disclaim inspiration. INSPIRATION. But that those passages will bear another con- struction, and ought to he understood in another manner, has been satisfactorily argued by several writers, particularly by Haldane and Gaussen in their treatises on inspiration, and by Henderson in his lectures. And the writer of this article would take the liberty to refer also to his lectures on the sarne subject. It is perfectly consistent with the plenary in- spiration here maintained, that God operated on the minds of inspired men in a variety of ways, sometimes by audible words, sometimes by direct inward suggestions, sometimes by outward visible signs, sometimes by the Urim and Thummim, and sometimes by dreams and visions. This variety in the mode of divine influence detracted nothing from its certainty. God made known his will equally in different ways : and, whatever the mode of his operation, he made it manifest to his servants that the things revealed were from him. But inspiration was concerned not only in making known the will of God to prophets and apostles, but also in giving them direction in writing the sacred books. They wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. And in this, also, there was a diversity in the mode of divine influence. Sometimes the Spirit of God moved and guided his servants to write things which they could not know by natural means, such as new doctrines or precepts, or predictions ■ of future events. Sometimes he moved and guided them to WTite the history of events which were wholly or partly known to them by tradition, or by the testimony of their contemporaries, or by their own observation or experience. In all these cases the Divine Spirit eii'ectually preserved them from all error, and influenced them to write just so much and in such a manner as God saw to be best. Sometimes he moved and guided them to write a summary record of- larger histories, containing what his infinite wisdom saw to be adapted to the end in view, that is, the benefit of his people in all ages. Sometimes he influenced them to make a record of important maxims in common use, or to write new ones, derived either from their own reason or experience, or from special divine teaching. Sometimes he influenced them to write parables or allegories, particularly suited to make a salutary impression of divine things on the minds of men ; and sometimes to record super- natural visions. In these and all other kinds of writing the sacred penmen manifestly needed special divine guidance, as no man could of him- self attain to infallibility, and no wisdom, except that of God, was sufhcient to determine what things ought to be written for permanent use in the church, and what manner of writing would be best fitted to promote the great ends of revela- tion. Some writers speak of different modes and different kinds, and even different degrees of in- spiration. And if their meaning is that God influenced the minds of inspired men in different ways; that he adopted a variety of modes in re- vealing divine tilings to their minds ; that he guided them to give instruction in prose and in poetry, and in all the different forms of composi- tion ; that lie moved and guided them to write history, prophecy, doctrines, commands, promises, reproofs, and exhortations, and that he adapted INSPIRATION. 15 his mode of operation to each of these cases — against this no objection can be made. It is a fact, that the Scriptures exhibit specimens of all these different kinds of writing and these different modes of divine instruction. Still each and every part of what was written was divinely in- spired, and equally so. It is all the word of God, and clothed with divine authority, as much as if it had all been made known and written in one way. Dr. Henderson, who labours perhaps with too much zeal against carrying inspiration to extreme lengths, still says tiiat if those who hold to different modifications of inspiration intend that there are different modifications and degrees of authority given to Scripture, their opinion must meet with unqualified reprobation from every sincere be- liever. He insists that a diversity in the modes and degrees of divine operation did exist in the work of inspiration, and that this diversity was the result of infinite wisdom adapting itself to different circumstances. He thinks that, unless we admit such a diversity, we cannot form correct ideas of the subject. But he is confident that the distinction which he endeavours to establish is not in the slightest degree hostile to the divine au- thority of Scripture. He affirms that no part of that holy book was written without miraculous influence; that all parts were equally inspired ; that in regard to the whole volume the great end was infallibly attained, namely, the commitment to writing of precisely such matters as God de- signed for the religious instruction of mankind ; that the sacred penmen wrote what had for its object not merely the immediate benefit of indi- vidual persons or churches, but what would be useful to Christians in all future times ; and that in regard to the most minute and inconsiderable things which the Scripture contains we are com- pelled to say, this also cometh from the Lord. The controversy among orthodox divines re- specting what is called verbal inspiration, appears to arise, in a great measure, from the different senses affixed to the phrase. Dr. Henderson, who is among the most candid and able writers op- posed to the doctrine of verbal inspiration, seems to understand the doctrine as denoting the imme- diate communication to the writers of every word, and syllable, and letter of what they wrote, inde- pendently of their intelligent agency and without any regard to their peculiar mental faculties or habits : — while those who most earnestly and suc- cessfully contend lor the higher views of inspira- tion, particularly Calamy, Haldane. and Gaussen, consider the doctrine they maintain as entirely consistent with the greatest diversity of mental endowmenls, culture, and taste in the writers, and with the most perfect exercise of their intelligent agency, — consistent with their using their own memory, their own reason, their own manner of thinking, and their own language, — consistent, too, with their making what they were to write the subject of diligent and laborious study, — only inff that it was all under the unerring guidance of the Divine Sj In a controversy of such a character as this, we may often succeed in removing difficulties, and seating the subject in a light which will be satisfactory to all concerned, by laying aside an ambiguous word or phrase, and making use of one which will express the idea intended with INSPIRATION, 16 clearness and certainty. The word verbal, in its most common senses, is not well suited to the present subject. According to the best philolo- gists its first signification is, 'spoken, expressed to the ear in words, not written.1 But no one sup- poses that when God inspired the sacred writers he generally spoke to them in audible words. It is, indeed, true, that he sometimes uttered articu- late words in making known his will, as at Sinai, at the baptism of Christ, and on some other occa- sions. In such cases he did, properly speaking, make verbal communications, or give verbal in- struction. But we should hardly call this verbal inspiration. Who can suppose that this was commonly, if ever, the way, in which God inspired holy men of old while engaged in writing the Scriptures ? Who can suppose that he taught them what to write by speaking words in their ears, as a man teaches his amanuensis? His in- fluence was doubtless inward. He guided them in writing by an operation in their minds. The next meaning of verbal is ' oral, uttered bjr the mouth ;' and this agrees no better with our subject. Other significations of verbal are, ' con- sisting in mere words ; respecting words only ; literal, as in a translation, ' having word answer- ing to word.' Neither of these senses is adapted to the subject. Now it would be nothiug strange, if applying this word to inspiration, and thus giving it an unusual sense, should occasion need- less perplexity and confusion. For the sake of avoiding this evil, why would it not be expedient to employ such words as will convey the idea intended clearly and definitely ; and, if necessary, to incur the inconvenience of using an exact ex- planation, instead of the word or phrase which causes the difficulty ? The real question, and the whole question at issue, may be stated thus : did the work of the Divine Spirit in the sacred penmen relate to the language they used, or their manner of express- ing their ideas ; and if so, how far, and in what way ? All those with whom, we are concerned in the discussion of this question, hold that divine in- spiration had some respect to the language em- ployed by the inspired writers, at least in the way of general supervision. And Dr. Henderson shows, in various passages of his excellent lectures, that there is no material difference between him and those who profess to maintain higher ground. He allows that, to a certain extent, what is called verbal inspiration, or the inspiration of words, took place. ' In recording what was immediately spoken with an audible voice by Jehovah, or by an angel interpreter ; in giving expression to points of revelation which entirely surpassed the comprehension of the writers ; in recording pro- phecies, the minute bearings of which they did not perceive ; in short, in committing to writing any of the dictates of the Spirit, which they could not have otherwise accurately expressed, the writers,' lie alleges, ' were supplied with the words as well as the matter.' He says, that even when Biblical writers made use of their own faculties, and wrote each one in his own manner, without, having their mental constitution at all disturbed, they were yet ' always secured by celestial influence against the adoption of any forms of speech, or collocation of words, that would have injured the exhibition of divine truth, INSPIRATION. or that did not adequately give it expression;' that the characteristic differences of style, so apparent among the sacred writers, were employed by the Holy Spirit for the purposes of inspiration. and ' were called forth in a rational way ;' that the writers, ' being acted upon by the Divine Spirit, expressed themselves naturally : that while the divine influence adapted itself to whatever was peculiar in the minds of inspired men, it constantly guided them in writing the sacred volume.' He declares his belief that the Scrip- tures were written not under a partial or imper- fect, but under a plenary and infallible inspira- tion ; that they were entirely the result of divine intervention, and are to be regarded as the oracles of Jehovah. Referring to 2 Tim. iii. 16, he says, ' We are here expressly taught the divine inspi- ration of the whole of the Old Testament Codex; that the Scriptures are inspired as written docu- ments ; that they are the result of the special and extraordinary influence of the Spirit, and contain whatever the Spirit caused to be written for our instruction.' Referring to 1 Cor. ii. 13, he says, ' It is past all dispute that the apostle here unequivocally ascribes both the doctrines which he and his fellow-labourers taught, and their manner of propounding them, to the influ- ence of the same divine agent ;' that the passage conveys the idea ' that the style, or mode of ex- pression which they used, was such as they were instructed by the Spirit to employ ;' that ' in delivering their doctrines they were under the constant guidance of the Great Instructor, and clothed them in that garb which he directed them to use ;' that, in the passage alluded to, the apostle refers ' to the entire character of the style which the first teachers of Christianity were taught to use in announcing its all important doctrines.' The passage in Matt. x. 9, 10, he says, implies, ' that the subject matter of apology was to be supplied to the' apo3tle3 ; and they might be well assured that if this, which was the most important, was secured by divine instruc- tion, the mere expression would not be wanting.' ' To remove all ground of hesitation from their minds, our Lord says, it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father zohich speaketh in you. By his teaching and superintending influ- ence, they would always be enabled to express themselves in a manner worthy of the divine cause which they were called to defend — a man- ner which they could never have attained by the exertion of their unassisted powers ; so that, al- though these powers were not to be superseded, but employed, it was to be as the organs of the divine agency by which they were employed.1 And he concedes that, as to all practical pur- poses, they were favoured with divine influence in composing their writings, as well as in their public speaking. Our author says that on the day of Pentecost, when the apostles were filled with the Holy Ghost, and spake with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance, ' verbal inspiration in the strictest sense of the term took place.' ' The im- mediate supply of words,' he holds, ' was in this and every similar instance absolutely necessary.1 And he thinks that direct verbal inspiration was indispensably requisite in all instances in which prophets and apostles were employed to write what they did not clearly comprehend. The INSPIRATION. passages in which such terms as the word of God, the Lord spake, etc., occur, are, in this view, de- scriptive of immediate verbal communications. He supposes that, in all such cases, words were literally spoken, or audibly pronounced by God himself, or by an angel in his name. In this opinion, however, I think he is mistaken. For unquestionably the word of the Lord often, if Dot generally, came to the prophets in the way of dreams, ot other modes of inward suggestion. The doctrine of a plenary inspiration of all Scripture in regard to the language employed, as well as the thoughts communicated, ought not to be rejected without valid reasons. The doctrine is so obviously important, and so consonant to the feelings of sincere piety, that those evangelical Christians who are pressed with speculative ob- jections against it, frequently, in the honesty of their hearts, advance opinions which fairly imply it. This is the case, as we have seen, with Dr. Henderson, who says, that the Divine Spirit guided the sacred penmen in writing the Scrip- tures ; that their mode of expression was such as they were instructed by the Spirit to employ ; that Paul ascribes not only the doctrines which the apostles taught, but the entire character of their style, to the influence of the Spirit. He indeed says, that this does not always imply the immediate commtmication of the ivords of Scrip- ture?; and lie says it with good reason. For im- mediate properly signifies, acting without a medium, or without the intervention of another cause or means, not acting by second causes. Now those who hold the highest views of inspira- tion do not suppose that the Divine Spirit, except in a few instances, so influenced the writers of Scripture as to interfere with the use of their rational faculties or their peculiar mental habits and tastes, or in any way to supersede secondary causes as the medium through which his agency produced the desired effect. In regard to this point, therefore, there appears to be little or no ground for controversy. For, if God so influenced the sacred writers that, either with or without the use of secondary causes, they wrote just what he intended, and in the manner he intended, the end is secured ; and what they wrote is as truly his word, as though he had written it with his own hand on tables of stone, without any human instrumentality. The very words of the decalogue were all such as God chose. And they would have been equally so if Moses had been moved by the Divine Spirit to write them with his liand. The expression, that God immediately imparted or communicated to the writers the very words which they wrote, is evi- dently not well chosen. The exact truth is that the writers themselves were the subjects of the divine influence. The Spirit employed them as active instruments, and directed them in writing, both as to matter and manner. They wrote 'as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.' The mat- ter, in many cases, was what they before knew, and the manner was entirely conformed to their habits; il was their men. But what was written was none the less inspired on that account. God may have influenced and guided an apostle as infallibly in writing what he had before known, and that guidance 7iiay have been as really neces- sary, as in writing a new revelation. And God may have influenced Paul or John to write a VOL. II. INSPIRATION 17 nook in his own peculiar style, and that influence may have been as real and as necessary as if the style had been what some would call a divine style. It was a divine style, if the writer used it under divine direction. It was a divine style, and it was, at the same time, a human style, and the writers own style, all in one. Just as the believer's exercises, faith and love, are his own acts, and at the same time are the effects of divine influence. 'In efficacious grace,' says Edwards, ' we are not merely passive, nor yet does God do some and we do the rest. But God does all, and we do all. God produces all, and we act all. For that is what he produces, namely, our own acts. God is the only proper author and founda- tion : we only are the proper actors. W e are. in different respects, wholly passive and wholly active. In the Scriptures, the same things are represented as from God and from us. God is said to convert men, and men are said to convert and turn. God makes a new heart, and we are commanded to make us a new heart — not merely because we must use the means in order to the effect, but the effect itself is our act and our duty. These things are agreeable to that text, "God worketh in you both to will and to do.'" The mental exercises of Paul and of John had their own characteristic peculiarities, as much as their style. God was the author of John's mind and all that was peculiar to his mental faculties and habits, as really as of Paul's mind and what was peculiar to him. And in the work of inspi- ration he used and directed, for his own purposes, what was peculiar to each. When God inspired different men he did not make their minds and tastes all alike, nor did he make their language alike. Nor had he any occasion for this; for while they had different mental faculties and habits, they were as capable of being infallibly directed by the Divine Spirit, and infallibly speaking and writing divine truth, as though their mental facul- ties and habits had been all exactly alike. And it is manifest that the Scriptures, written by such a variety of inspired men, and each part agreeably to the peculiar talents and style of the writer, are not only equally from God, but, taken together, are far better adapted to the purposes of general instruction, and all the objects to be accomplished by revelation, than if they had been written by one man, and in one and the same manner. This view of plenary inspiration is fitted to relieve the difficulties and objections which have arisen in the minds of men from the variety of talent and taste which the writers exhibited, and the variety of style which they used. See, it is said, how each writer expresses himself naturally, in his own way, just as he was accustomed to do when not inspired. And see too. we might say in reply, how each apostle, Peter, Paul, or John, when speaking before rulers, with the promised aid of the Holy Spirit, spoke laturally, with his bwn voice, and in his own way, as he ban been accustomed to do on other occasions when not inspired. There is no more objection to plenary inspiration in the one case than in the other. The mental faculties and habits of the apostles, their style, their voice, their mode of speech, all re- mained as they were. What, then, had the divine Spirit to do? What was the work which ap]*r- tained to Him? We reply, His work was so to direct the apostles in the use of their own talents 13 INSPIRATION. and habits, their style, their voice, and all their peculiar endowments, that they should speak or write, each in his own way, just what God would have them speak or write, for the good of the Church in all ages. The fact that, the individual peculiarities of the sacred penmen are everywhere so plainly impressed on their writings, is often mentioned as an objection to the doctrine, that inspiration ex- tended to their language as well as their thoughts. This is, indeed, one of the most common ob- jections, and one which has obtained a very deep lodgment in the minds of some intelligent Chris- tians. It may, therefore, be necessary to take some further pains completely to remove it. And in our additional remarks relative to this and other objections, it will come in our way to show that such a writer as Gaussen, who contends with great earnestness and ability for the highest views of inspiration, does still, on all important points, agree with those who advocate lower views of the subject. Gaussen says, 'Although the title of each book should not indi cate to us that we are passing from one author to another ; yet we could quickly discover, by the change of their characters, that a new hand has taken the pen. It is perfectly easy to recog- nise each one of them, although they speak of the same master, teach the same doctrines, and relate the same incidents.' But how does this prove that Scripture is not, in all respects, inspired ? ' So far are we,' says this author, ' from overlooking human individuality everywhere impressed on our sacred books, that, on the contrary, it is with profound gratitude, and with an ever-increasing admiration, that we regard this living, real, human character infused so charmingly into every part of the Word of God. We admit the fact, and we see in it clear proof of the divine wisdom which dictated the Scriptures.' Those who urge the objection above men- tioned are plainly inconsistent with themselves. For while they deny the plenary inspiration of some parts of Scripture, because they have these marks of individuality, they acknowledge inspi- ration in the fullest sense in other parts, parti cu- cularly in the prophecies, where this individuality of the writers is equally apparent. In truth, what can be more consonant with our best views of the wisdom of God, or with the gene- ral analogy of his works, than that he should make use of the thoughts, the memories, the peculiar talents, tastes, and feelings of his servants in recording his Word for the instruction of men ? Why should he not associate the peculiarities of their personal character with what they write under his personal guidance? But, independently of our reasoning, this matter is decided by the Bible itself. 'All Seripture is divinely inspired,' and it is all the Word of God. And it is none the less the Word of God, and none the less inspired, because it comes to us in the language of Moses, and David, and Paul, and the other sacred writers. ' It is God who speaks to us, but it is also man ; it is man, but it is also God.' The Word of God, in order to be intelligible and profitable to us, ' must be uttered by mortal tongues, and be written by mortal hands, and must put on the features of human thoughts. This blending of humanity and divinity in the Scriptures reminds us of the majesty and the condescension of God. INSPIRATION. Viewed in this light, the Word of God has urra-' quailed beauties, and exerts an unequalled powe? over our hearts.' The objection to the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures, from the inaccuracy of the translations and the various readings of the ancient manu- script copies, is totally irrelevant. For what we assert is, the inspiration of the original Scriptures, not of the translations or the ancient copies. The1 fact that the Scriptures were divinely inspired^ cannot be expunged or altered by any subsequent event. The very words of the decalogue were written by the finger of God, and none the less so because the manuscripts which transmit it to us contain some variations. The integrity of the copies has nothing to do with the inspiration of the original. It is, however, well known that the variations are hardly worthy to be mentioned. But if the copies of the Scriptures which we have are not inspired, then how can the in- spiration of the original writings avail to our benefit? The answer is, that, according to the best evidence, the original writings have been transmitted to us with remarkable fidelity, and that our present copies, so far as anything of con- sequence is concerned, agree with the writings as they came from inspired men ; so that, through the gracious care of divine providence, the Scrip- tures now in use are, in all important respects, the Scriptures which were given by inspiration of God, and are stamped with divine authority. In this matter, we stand on the same footing with the apostles. For when they spoke of the Scriptures, they doubtless referred to the copies which had been made and preserved among the Jews, not to the original manuscripts written by Moses and the prophets. It has been made an objection to the plenary inspiration of the writers of the New Testament, that they generally quote from the Septuagint version, and that their quotations are frequently wanting in exactness. Our reply is, that their quotations are made in the usual manner, accord- ing to the dictates of common sense, and always in such a way as to subserve the cause of truth ; and therefore, that the objection is without force. And as to the Septuagint version, the. apostles never follow it so as to interfere with the authority of the Hebrew Scriptures. Their references to the Old Testament are just such as the case required. There is a noble freedom in their quotations, but that freedom never violates truth or propriety. If any one, like Priestley and others of the same school, alleges, that there are in the Scriptures errors in reasoning and in matters of fact, he opens the door to the most dangerous consequences. In- deed he takes the ground of infidelity. And if any one holds, that some parts are inspired, while other parts are not inspired, then we ask, who shall make the distinction? And if we begin this work, where will it end? But our present concern is with those who deny that inspiration respected the lan- guage of Scripture. There are some who maintain that all which was necessary to secure the desired results, was an infallible guidance of the thoughts of the sacred writers; that with such a guidance they might be safely left to express their thoughts in their own way, without any special influence from above. Now, if those who take this view of the subject mean that God not only gives the. sacred penmen INSPIRATION. the very ideas which they are to write, but, in some way, secures an infallible connection between those ideas and a just expression of them in words ; then, indeed, we have the desired result — an infal- lible revelation from God, made in the proper language of the writers. But if any one supposes that there is naturally such an infallible connec- tion between right thoughts and a just expression of them in language, without an effective divine superintendence, he contradicts the lessons of daily experience. But those to whom we refer evidently do not themselves believe in such an infallible connection. For when they assign their reason for denying that inspiration related to the language of the Scriptures, they speak of the different, and, as they regard them, the contradictory statements of facts by different writers — for example, the dif- ferent accounts of the crucifixion and the resur- rection, and the different accounts of the numbers of the slain in Num. xxv. 9 and 1 Cor. x. 8. Who. they say, can believe that the language was inspired, when one writer says that 24,000 were slain, and the other 23,000 ? But it is easy to see that the difficulty presses with all its force upon those who assert the inspiration of the thoughts. For surely they will not say that, the sacred writers had true thoughts in their minds, and yet uttered them in the language of falsehood. This would contradict their own idea of a sure connection between the conceptions of the mind and the utterance of them in suitable words, and would clearly show that they themselves i'eel it to be necessary that the divine guidance should extend to the words of inspired men as well as. their thoughts. But if Paul, through inadvertence, committed a real mistake in saying that 23,000 fell in one day, it must have been a mistake in his thoughts as well as in his words. For when he said 23,000, had he not the idea of that num- ber in his mind ? If, then, there was a mistake, it lay in his thoughts. But if there was no mis- take in either of the writers, then there is nothing to prove that inspiration did not extend to the language. If, however, there was a real mistake, then the question is not, what becomes of verbal inspiration, but what becomes of inspiration in any sense.. As to the way of reconciling the two statements above mentioned, but a few words can be offered here. Some writers attempt to remove the diffi- culty in this manner. The first writer says, 21,000 were slain, meaning to include in that number all who died in consequence of that rebel- lion. The other writer says, 23,000 fell in one day, leaving us to conclude that an addition of 10U0 fell the next day. But it may perhaps be more satisfactory to suppose, that neither of the writers intended to state the exact number, this being of no consequence to their objects. The real number might be between 23,000 and 21,000, and it might be sufficient for them to express it in general terms, one of them calling it 24,000, and the other 23,000. that is, about so many, either of the numbers being accurate enough to make the impression designed. Suppose that the exact, number was 23,57!), and that both the writers knew it to be so. ll was not at all neces- sary, in order to maintain their character as men of veracity, that they should, when writing for such a purpose, mention the particular number. The particularity and length of the expression INSPIRATION. 19 would have been inconvenient, and might have made a less desirable impression of the evil of sin and the justice of God, than expressing it more briefly in a round number; as we often say, with a view merely to make a strong impression, that in such a battle 10,000, or 50,000, or 500,000 were slain, no one supposing that we mean to state the number with arithmetical exactness, as our object does not require this. And who can doubt that the Divine Spirit might lead the sacred pen- men to make use of this principle of rhetoric, and to speak of those who were slain, according to the common practice in suchacase.in round numbers? It is sometimes said that the sacred writers were of themselves generally competent to express their ideas in proper language, and in this respect had no need of supernatural assistance. But there is just as much reason for saying that they were of themselves generally competent to form their own conceptions, and so had no need of super- natural aid in this respect. It is just as reason- able to say that Moses could recollect what took place at the Red Sea, and that Paul could recol- lect that he was once a persecutor* and Peter what took place on the mount of transfiguration, without supernatural aid, as to say that they could, without such aid, make a proper record of these recollections. We believe a real and infallible guidance of the Spirit in both respects, because this is taught in the Scriptures. And it is obvious that the Bible could not be what Christ and the apostles considered it to be, unless they were divinely inspired. The diversity in the narratives of the Evan- gelists is sometimes urged as an objection against the position we maintain in regard to inspiration, but evidently without reason, and contrary to reason. For what is more reasonable than to exjiect that a work of divine origin will have marks of consummate wisdom, and will be suited to accomplish the end in view. Now it will not be denied that God determined that there should be four narratives of the life and death of Jesus from four historians. If the narratives were all alike, three of them would be useless. Indeed such a circumstance would create suspicion, and woul/i bring discredit upon the whole concern. The narratives must then be different. And if, besides this useful diversity, it is found that the seeming contradictions can be satisfactorily re- conciled, and if each of the narratives is given in the peculiar style and manner of the writers, then all is natural and unexceptionable, and we have the highest evidence of the credibility and truth of the narratives. We shall advert to one more objection. It is alleged that writers who were constantly under a plenary divine inspiration would not descend to the unimportant details, the trifling incidents, which are found in the Scriptures. To this it may be replied thai the details alluded to must be admitted to be according to truth, and that those things which, at first view, seem to be trifles may, when taken in their connections, prove to be of serious moment. Audit is moreover manifest that, considering what human beings and human affairs really are, if all those things which are called trilling and unimportant were excluded, the Scriptures would fail of being conformed to fact; they would not be faithful histories of hu- man life : so that the very circumstance v'-.eu c2 20 INTERPRETATION. is demanded as proof of inspiration would be- come an argument against it. And herein we cannot but admire the perfect wisdom which guided the sacred writers, while we mark the weakness and shallowness of the objections which are urged against their inspiration. On the whole, after carefully investigating the subject of inspiration, we are conducted to the important conclusion that 'all Scripture is di- vinely inspired ;' that the sacred penmen wrote ' as they were moved by the Holy Ghost ;' and that these representations are to be understood as implying that the w riters had, in all respects, the effectual guidance of the divine Spirit. And we are still more confirmed in this conclusion be- cause we find that it begets in those who seriously adopt it, an acknowledgment of the divine origin of Scripture, a reverence for its teachings, and a practical regard to its requirements, like what appeared in Christ and his apostles. Being con- vinced that the Bible has, in all parts and in all respects, the seal of the Almighty, and that it is truly and entirely from God, we are led by reason, conscience, and piety to bow (submissively to its high authority, implicitly to believe its doctrines, however incomprehensible, and cor- uially to obey its precepts, however contrary to our natural inclinations. We come to it from day to day, not as judges, but as learners, never questioning the propriety or utility of any of its contents. This precious Word of God is the per- fect standard of our faith, and the rule of our life, our comfort in affliction, and our sure guide to heaven. — L. W. INTERPRETATION (BIBLICAL), and HERMENEUTICS. There is a very ancient and wide-spread belief that the knowledge of divine things in general, and of the divine will in parti- cular, is by no means a common property of the whole human race, but only a prerogative of a few specially-gifted and privileged individuals'. It has been considered that this higher degree of knowledge has its source in light and instruction proceeding directly from God, and that it can be imparted to others by communicating to them a key to the signs of the divine will. Since, how- ever, persons who in this manner have been indi- rectly taught, are initiated into divine secrets, and consequently appear as the confidants of deity, they also enjoy, although instructed only through the medium of others, a more intimate communion with God, a more distinct perception of his thoughts, and consequently a mediate conscious- ness of deity itself. It therefore follows, that persons thus either immediately or mediately instructed are supposed to be capable, by means of their divine illumination and their knowledge of the signs of the divine will, to impart to mankind the ardently-desired knowledge of divine things and of the will of deity. They are considered to be interpreters or explainers of the signs of the divine will, and, consequently, to be mediators between God and man. Divine illumination and a communicable knowledge of the signs and ex- pressions of the divine will, are thus supposed to be combined in one and the same person. This idea is the basis of the Hebrew K^!33, pro- phet. The prophet is a divinely-inspired seer, and, as such, he is an interpreter and preacher of the divine will. He may either be directly called by God, or have been prepared for his office in the INTERPRETATION. schools of the prophets (comp. Knobel, Der Pro* phetismus der Hebrder vollstandig dargestellt, Breslau, 1837, pt. i. p. 102, sq. ; pt. ii. p. 45, sq.). However, the being filled with the Holy Ghost was the most prominent feature in the Hebrew idea of a prophet. This is even implied in the usual appellation &?'Q3, which means a person in the state of divine inspiration (not a predicrer of future events). Prophetism ceased altogether as- soon as Jehovah, according'to ihe popular opinion ceased to communicate his Spirit. The ancient Greeks and Romans kept the idea of divine inspiration more distinct from the idea of interpretation of the divine will. They, accord- ing to a more natural manner of viewing the sub- ject, recognised generally, in the mediator between G-od and man, more of an experienced and skilful interpreter than of a divinely-inspired seer. They distinguished the interpreter and the seer by dif- ferent names, of which we will speak hereafter. It was the combination of the power of interpreta- tion with inspiration, which distinguished the Hebrew prophets or seers from those of other ancient nations. The Hebrew notion of a 85^33 appears, among the Greeks, to have been split into its two constituent parts of ixd.vrls, from jiaivecrOai, to rave (Platonis Phadrus, § 48, ed. Steph. p. 244, a. b.), and of i^rjyrjT7]s, from i^rjye?ffdai, to expound. However, the ideas of fxdvris and of e^oyrirrjs could be combined in the same person. Comp. Boissonnade, Anecdota Grceca, i. 96, Adjxiraiv ovi;T)yr)TJis /xavTis yap Ijv kv, interpretation of tongues: consequently they were not el^yriTal. The Romans obtained the interpretaiio from tne Etruscans (Cicero, De Divinatione, i. 2, and Ottl'ried Miiller, Die Etrusker, ii. S, sq.) ; but -4he above distinction was the cause that the interpretatio degenerated into a common art, whicli was exercised without inspiration, like a contemptible soothsaying, the rules of which were contained in writings. Cicero {De Divinatione, i. 2) says: — Furoris divinationemSibyllinismax- ime versibus contiueri arbitrati, eorum decern interpretes delectos e civitate esse voluerunt : — ' Supposing that divination by raving was espe- cially contained in the Sibylline verses, they ap- pointed ten public interpreters of the same.' The ideas of interpres and of interpretatio were not confined among the Romans to sacred sub- jects ; which, as we have seen, was the case among the Greeks with the corresponding Greek terms. The words interpres and inicrpretatio were not only, as among the Greeks, applied to the expla- nation of the laws, but also, in general, to the ex- planation of whatever was obscure, and even to a mere intervention in (he settlement of affairs ; for instance, we find in Livy (xxi. 12) pacis INTERPRETATION. 21 interpres, denoting Alorcas, by whose instrumen- tality peace was offered. At an earlier period interpretes meant only those persons by means of whom affairs between God and man were settled (comp. Virgilii JEneis, x. 175, and Servius on this passage). The words interpretes and con- jectores became convertible terms : — unde etiam somniorum atque ominum interpretes conjectores vocantur : — 'for which reason the interpreters of dreams and omens are called also conjecturers'' (Quintal. Instit. iii. 6). From what we have stated it follows that i^yncns and interpretatio were originally terms confined to the unfolding of supernatural subjects, although in Latin, at an early period, these terms were also applied to profane matters. The Chris- tians also early felt the want of an interpretation of their sacred writings, which they deemed to be of divine origin ; consequently they wanted in- terpreters and instruction by the aid of which the true sense of the sacred Scriptures might be dig- covered. The right understanding of the nature and will of God seemed, among the Christians, as well as at an early period among the heathen, to depend upon a right understanding of certain external signs ; however, there was a progress from the unintelligible signs of nature to more intelli- gible written signs, which was certainly an im- portant progress. The Christians retained about the interpreta- tion of their sacred writings the same expressions which had been current in reference to the inter- pretation of sacred subjects among the heathen. Hence arose the fact that the Greek Christians employed with predilection the words k^'(\yi\ais and e^rjy7iT7]s in reference to the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. But the circumstance that St. Paul employs the term epp.r}ueia yXcaaacov for the interpretation of the yXucraais AaAely (1 Cor. xii. 10, xiv. 26), greatly contributed that words belonging to the root kpp.t)vei>siv were also made use of. According to Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica, iii. 9), Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, wrote, as early as about a.d. 100, a work under the title of Aoy'icav Kvpio.Kuv i^yfiats, which means an interpretation of the discourses of Jesus. Papias explained the religious contents of these discourses, which he had collected from oral and written traditions. He distinguished between the meaning of e£iry€«r6c« and ip/XTjueveiv, as appears from his observation (preserved by Eusebius in the place quoted above), in which he says concerning the Xoyia of St. Mathew, written in Hebrew, epicentre Se aura &s eSvyaro eKaffros, ' but every one interpreted them according to his ability". In the Greek Church, 6 e&iyrjTi'is and efyiyriral rov \6yov were the usual terms lor teachers of Christianity. (See Eusebii Ilistoria Ecclesiastica, vii. 30, and Heinichcn on this passage, note 21; Photii Biblioth. Eod. 1(15; Cave, Hist. Liter, i. 146). Origen called his com- mentary on the Holy Scriptures e,^-)TjTiKa ; and Procopius of Gaza wrote a work on several books of the Bible, entitled crxoAou e^yriTiKaL How- ever, we find the word tp,u7}:'a'a employed as a synonym of e^yi'icTis, especially among the inha- bilants of Antioch. For instance, Gregorius Nyssenus says, concerning KphraimSynis, ypa(p))v 6'A.tjj/ axpifSSis npls Xe^iv vlpixrlvev(Tev (see Gregorii Nysseni Vita Ephraimi tiyri; Opera,, Paris, ii. p. 1033). Theodorus of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, 22 INTERPRETATION. and others, wrote commentaries on the sacred Scriptures under the title of ipix-qi/eia (compare A. H. Niemeyer, de Isidori Pelusiotee Vita,Scriptis, et Doctrina, Halae, 1825. p. 207). Among the Latin Christians the word interpres had a wider range than the corresponding Greek term, and the Latins had no precise term for the exposition of the Bible which exactly corresponded with the Greek. The word interpretatio was applied only in the sense of occupation or act of an expositor of the Bible, but not in the sense of contents elicited from biblical passages. The words tractare, tractator, and tractatus were in preference employed with respect to bib- lical exposition, and the sense which it elicited. Together with these words there occur commen- tarius and expositio. In reference to the exege- tical work of St Hilary on St. Matthew, the codices fluctuate between commentarvus and tractatus. St. Augustine's tractatus are well known ; and this father frequently mentions the divinarum scripturarum tractator es. For in- stance, Retractationes 1.23. divinorum tractatores eloquiorum. Sulpicius Severus, Dial. i. 6. originis .... qui tractator sacrorum peritissimus habebatur. Vincentius Lirinensis observes in his Commonitorium on ICor. xii. 28 : — tertio doctores qui tractatores nunc appellantur ; quos hie idem apostolus etiam prophetas interdum nuncupat, eo quod per eos prophetarum mysteria populis aperi- antur : — ' in the third place teachers who are now called tractatores ; whom the same apostle some- times styles prophets, because by them the mysteries of the prophets are opened to the people1 (com- pare Dufresne, Glossarium media et infmice Latinitatis, sub tractator et tractatus ; and Baluze, ad Servat. Lupum, p. 479). However, the occupation of interpres, in the nobler sense of this word, was not unknown to St. Jerome ; as may be seen from his Prafatio in libros Samuelis (Opera, ed. Vallarsi, ix. p. 459) : — Quicquid enim crebrius vertendo et emendando solicitius et didicimus et tenemus, nostrum est. Et quum intellexeris, quod antea nesciebas, vel interpretem me estimato si gratus es, vel irapa- (ppaar^v si ingratus : — ' for whatever by frequently translating and carefully correcting we have learned and retain, is our own. And if you have understood what you formerly did not know, con- sider me to be an expositor if you are grateful, or a paraphrast if you are ungrateful.' In modern times the word interpretatio has again come into repute in the sense of scriptural exposition, for which, indeed, interpretation is now the standing technical term. The German language also distinguishes be- tween the words auslegen atid erkluren in such a manner that the former corresponds to i£rjy or eiratT'riyMj. Every art may be reduced to the skilful applica- tion of certain principles, which, if they proceed from one highest principle, may be said to be based on science. Here we have to consider not the spoken, but the written language only. The rules to be ob- served by the interpreter, and the gifts which qualify him for the right understanding of written language, are applicable either to all written lan- guage in general, or only to the right understand- ing of particular documents ; they are, therefore, to be divided into general and particular, or espe- cial rales and gifts. In Biblical interpretation arises the question, whether the general hermeneutical rules are applicable to the Bible and sufficient for rightly understanding it, or whether they are in- sufficient, and have to undergo some modification. Most Biblical interpreters, as we might infer from the principle of dogmatical and allegorical interpretation, have declared the general hermen- eutical principles to be insufficient for explaining the Bible, and required for this purpose especial hermeneutical rules, because the Bible, they said, which liari been written under the direct guidance of thb Holy Ghost, could not be measured by the common rules which are applicable only to the lower sphere of merely human thoughts and com- positions. Therefore, from the most ancient times, peculiar hermeneutical rules, meeting the exigency of biblical interpretation, have been set forth, which deviated from the rules of general hermeneutics. Thus Biblical Hermeneutics were changed into an art of understanding the Bible according to a certain ecclesiastical system in vogue at a certain period. The advocates of grammatical interpretation have opposed these Biblical hermeneutics, as proceeding upon merely arbitral y suppositions. Sometimes they merely limited its assertions, and sometimes they reiected it altogether. In the INTERPRETATION. latter case they said that the principles of general hermeneutics ought to be applicable to the Holy Scriptures also. Against the above-mentioned train of argument cited from Origen, on which the demand of particular Biblical hermeneutics essen- tially rests, the following argument might, with greater justice, be opposed : if God deemed it requisite to reveal his will to mankind by means of intelligible books, he must, in choosing this medium, have intended that the contents of these books should be discovered according to those general laws which are conducive to the right understanding of documents in general. If this were not the case God would have chosen insuffi- cient and even contradictory means inadequate to the purpose he had in view. The interpretation, which, in spite of all eccle- siastical opposition, ought to be adopted as being the only true one, strictly adheres to the demands of general hermeneutics, to which it adds those par- ticular hermeneutical rules which meet the requi- sites of particular cases. This has, in modern times, been styled the historico-grammatical mode of interpretation. This appellation has been chosen because the epithet grammatical seems to be too narrow and too much restricted to the mere verbal sense. It might be more correct to style it simply the historical interpretation, since the word historical comprehends every- thing that is requisite to be known about the lan- guage, the turn of mind, the individuality, &c. of an author in order rightly to understand his book. In accordance with the various notions con- cerning Biblical interpretation which we have stated, there have been produced Biblical her- meneutics of very different kinds; for instance, in the earlier period we might mention that of the Donatist Ticonius, who wrote about the fourth century his Regulcs ad investigandam et inveni- endam Intelligentiam Scripturarum Septem ; Augustinus, De Doctrina Christiana, lib. i. 3; Isidorus Hispalensis, Senient. 419, sq. ; Santis Pagnini (who died in 1511) Isagoga ad Mysticos Sacree Scriptures Sensus, libri octodecim, Colon. 1540; Sixti Senensis (who died 1599) Biblio- theca Sancta, Venetiis, 1566. Of this work, which has been frequently reprinted, there be- longs to our present subject only Liber tertius Artern exponendi Sancta Scripta Catholicis Ex- positoribus aptissimis Regulis et Exemplis ostendens. At a later period the Roman Catholics added to these the works of Bellarmine, Marti anay, Calmet, Jahn, and Arigler. On the part of the Lutherans were added by Matt. Flacius, Clavis Scriptures Sacree, Basileae, 1537, and often reprinted in two volumes ; by Johann Gerhard, Tractatus de Legitime Scrip- tures Sacree Interpretatione, Jens, 1610; by Solomon Glassius, Philologies Sacree, libri quinque, Jenae, 1623, and often reprinted; by Jacob Rambach, Institutiones Hermeneuticce Sacree, Jens, 1723. On the part of the Calvinists there were fur- nished by J. Alph. Turretinus, De Scriptures Sacree Interpretatione Tractatus Bipartitus, Dortreajit, 1723, and often reprinted. In the English Church were produced by Herbert Marsh Lectures on the Criticism and Interpretation of the Bible, Cambridge, 1828. Since the middle of the last century it has been usual to treat on the Old Testament hermeneutics INTRODUCTION. and on those of the New Testament in separate works. For instance, G. W. Meyer, VersucJi einer Hermeneutik des Alien Testamentes, Lii- beck, 1799 ; J. H. Pareau, Institutio Interprets Veteris Testamenti, Trajecti, 1822; J. A. Er- nesti, Institutio Interpretis Novi Testamenti, Lipsiaa, 1761, ed. 5ta., curante Ammon, 1809. Translated into English by Terrot, Edinburgh, 1833; Morus, Super HermeneuUca Novi Testa- menti acroases academicce, ed. Eichstaedt,Lipsiae, 1797-1S02, in two volumes, but not completed; K. A. G. Keilj Lehrbuch der Hermeneutik des Neuen Testamentes, nach Grundsdlzen der grammatisch-historischen Interpretation, Leipzig, 1810; the same work in Latin, Lipsise, 1811; T. T. Conybeare, The Bampton Lectures for the year 1824, being an attempt to trace the History and to ascertain the limits of the se- condary and spiritual Interpretation of Scripture, Oxford, 1824 ; Schleiermacher, Hermeneutik und Kritik mit bcsonderer Beziehung auf das Neue Testament, herausgegeben von Liicke, Berlin, 1838; H. Nik. Klausen, Hermeneutik des Neuen Testamentes, aus dem Danischen, Leipzig, 1841 ; Chr. Gottlieb Wilke, Die Her- meneutik des Neuen Testamentes systematisch dargestellt, Leipzig, 1843.* — K. A. C. INTRODUCTION, BIBLICAL. The Greek word el>*' Clip with peculiar predilection, because it points out the omnipotent covenant-fidelity of the Lord ; which was to be considered, especially as it guarantees the truth of the contents of those prophecies which are attacked by our opponents. This circumstance is so striking that Yon Coellu and De Wette, on this account, and in contradic- tion to every argument, declare even the correspond- ISAIAH. ing chapter of Jeremiah to be spurious. This is; certainly a desperate stroke, because the chaptee is otherwise written in the very characteristic style of that prophet. This desperation, how- ever, gives us the advantage afforded by an in- voluntary testimony in favour of those portions of Isaiah which have been attacked. The words of Isaiah, in ch. li. 15, ' I am the Lord thy God who moves the sea that its waves roarr' are re- peated in Jer. xxxi. 35. The image of the cup of fury in Isa. li. 17, is in Jer. xxv. 15-29, trans- formed into a symbolic act, according to his custom of embodying the imagery of earlier pro- phets, and especially that of Isaiah. In order to prove that other prophets also made a similar use of Isaiah, we refer to Zephaniah ii. 15, where we find Isaiah's address to Babylon applied to Nineveh, ' Therefore hear now this, thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart I am, and none else beside me,' &c. Zephaniah, living towards the termina- tion of prophetism, has, like Jeremiah, a depend- ent character, and has here even repealed the characteristic and difficult word '•DDX- Kiiper (p. 138) has clearly demonstrated that the passage cannot be original in Zephaniah. The wolds of Isaiah (lii. 7). ' How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace,' are repeated by Nahum in ch. i. 15 (ii. 1) ; and what he adds, ' the wicked shall no more pass through thee,' agrees remarkably with Isa. lii. 1, ' for henceforth shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.' Nahum iii. 7 contains an allu- sion to Isa. li. 19. Beside these references to the portions of Isaiah which are said to be spurious, we find others to the portions which are deemed genuine (compare, for instance, Nahum i. 13, with Isa. x. 27). 6. Again, the most ancient production of Jew- ish literature after the completion of the canon, furnishes proof of the integral authenticity of Isaiah. The book of Jesus Siracb, commonly called Ecclesiasticus, was written as early as the third century before Christ, as Hug has clearly demonstrated, in opposition to those who place it in the second century before Christ. In Eccle- siasticus xlviii. 22-25, Isaiah is thus praised: ' For Hezekiah had done the thing that pleased the Lord, and was strong in the ways of David his father, as Isaiah the prophet,, who was great and faithful in his vision, had commanded him. In his time the sun went backward, and he lengthened the king's life. He saw by an ex- cellent spirit what should come to pass at the last, and he comforted them that mourned in Sion. He showed what should come to pass for ever, and secret things or ever they came.' This commendation especially refers, as even Gesenius grants, to the disputed portions of the prophet, in which we find predictions of the most distant futurity. The comfort for Zion is found more particularly in the second part of Isaiah, which begins with the words ' Comfort ye, comfort ye, my people.' The author of this second part him- self says (xlviii. 3), ' I have declared the former things from the beginning ; and they went forth out of my mouth, and I showed them.' Thus we per- ceive that Jesus Sirach, the learned scribe, con- fidently attributes the debated passages to Isaiah, in such a mariner as plainly indicates that there ISAIAH. was no doubt in his days respecting the integral authenticity of that book, which has the testimony of historical tradition in its favour. Jesus Sirach declares his intention (Ecclus. xliv.-l.) to praise the most celebrated men of his nation. The whole tenor of these chapters shows that he does not confine himself to celebrated authors. We therefore say that the praise which he bestows upon Isaiah is not intended for the book personi- fied, but for the person of the prophet. If Jesus Sirach had entertained doubts respecting the genuineness of those prophecies on which, in par- ticular, he bases Ins praise, he could not have so lauded the prophet. In the Jewish synagogue the integral authen- ticity of Isaiah has always been recognised. This general recognition cannot be accounted for except by the power of tradition based upon truth ; and it is supported as well by the New Testament, in which Isaiah is quoted as the author of the whole collection which bears his name, as also by the express testimony of Jo- sephus, especially in his Antiquities (x. 2. 2, and xi. 1. 1). After such confirmation it would be superfluous to mention the Talmudists. 7. According to the hypothesis of our oppo- nents, the author or authors of the spurious por- tions wrote at the end of the Babylonian exile. They confess that these portions belong to the finest productions of prophetism. Now it is very remarkable that in the far from scanty historical accounts of this period, considering all circum- stances, no mention is made of any prophet to whom we could well ascribe these prophecies. This is the more remarkable, because at that period prophetism was on the wane, and the few prophets who still existed excited on that account the greater attention. What Ewald (p. 57) writes concerning the time about the conclusion of the Babjdonian exile, is quite unhistorical. He says, ' In this highly excited period of liberty regained, and of a national church re-established, there were rapidly produced a great number of prophecies, circulated in a thousand pamphlets, many of which were of great poetical beauly.' What Ewald states about a new flood of prophetic writings which then poured forth, is likewise un- historical. History shows that during the exile prophetism was on the wane. What we read in the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel proves that these propliets were isolated; and from the k "\ of Ezra we learn what was the spiritual cou>l Ton of the new colony. If we compare with ftteir predecessors the prophets who then prophesied, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, we cannot say much about a revival of the prophetic spirit to- wards the conclusion of the exile. Everything concurs to show that the efficiency of prophetism was drawing towards its end. The later the pro- phets are, the more do they lean upon the earlier prophets ; so that we are enabled to trace the gradual transition of prophetism into the learning of scribes. Prophetism dug, as it were, ifs own grave. The authority which it demands for its earlier productions necessarily caused that the later were dependent upon the earlier; am! the more this became the case during the progress of time, the more limited became the field for new productions. It is not only unhistorical, but, according to the condition of the later productions of prophecy, quite impossible, that about the con- ISAIAH. 41 elusion of the exile there should have sprung up a fresh prophetic literature of great extent. In this period we hear only the echo of prophecy. That one of the later prophets of whom we possess most, namely Zechariah, leans entirely upon Jere- miah and Ezekiel, as upon his latest predecessors. There is not a vestige of an intervening prophetic literature. The feebleness of our opponents is manifested by their being obliged to have recourse to such unhistorical fictions in order to defend their opinions. Tims we have seen that we possess a series of external arguments in favour of the integral au- thenticity of Isaiah. Each of these arguments is of importance, and, in their combination, they have a weight which could only be counterbalanced by insurmountable difficulties in the contents of these prophecies. We now proceed to show that there are no such difficulties, and that the internal arguments unite with the external in demonstrating the authenticity of Isaiah as a whole. 1. The portions of Isaiah which have been de- clared by our opponents to be spurious are, as we have already said, almost entirely such as con- tain prophecies of an especially definite character. It is this very definiteness which is brought for- ward as the chief argument against their genuine- ness. Those of our adversaries who go farthest assert in downright terms that predictions in the stricter sense, such, namely, as are more than a vague foreboding, are impossible. The more considerate of our opponents express this argu- ment in milder terms, saying, that it was against the usage of the Hebrew prophets to prophesy with so much individuality, or to give to their prophe- cies so individual a bearing. They say that these prophecies were never anything more than general prophetic descriptions, and that, consequently, where we find a definite reference to historical facts quite beyond the horizon of a human being like Isaiah, we are enabled by analogy to declare those portions of the work in which they occur to be spurious. Although this assertion is pronounced with great assurance, it is sufficiently refuted by an impartial examination of the prophetic writings. Our opponents have attempted to prove the spuri- ousness of whatever is in contradiction with this assertion, as, for instance, the book of Daniel ; but there still remain a number of prophecies an- nouncing future events with great definiteness. Micah, for example (iv. 8-10), announces the Babylonian exile, and the deliverance from that exile, one hundred and fifty years before its ac- complishment, and before the commencement of any hostilities between Babylon and Judah, and even before Babylon was an independent state. All the propliets, commencing with the earliest, predict the coming destruction of their city and temple, and the exile of the people. All the prophets whose predictions refer to the Assy- rian invasion, coincide in asserting that the Assyrians would not be instrumental in realising these predictions j that Judah should be delivered from those enemies, from whom to be delivered seemed impossible ; and this not by Egyptian aid, which seemed to be the least unlikely, but by an immediate intervention of the Lord; and. on the contrary, all the prophets whose predictions refer to the successors of the Assyrians, the Chaldees, unanimously announce that these were to fulfil the 42 ISAIAH. ancient prediction, and exhort to resignation to this inevitable fate. These are facts quite beyond hnman calculation. At the period when the Chaldeean empire had reached the summit of its power, Jeremiah not only predicts in general terms its fall, and the destruction of its chief city, but also details particular circumstances con- nected therewith ; for instance, the conquest of the town by the Medes and their allies ; the en- trance which the enemy effected through the dry bed of the Euphrates, during a night of general revelry and intoxication ; the return of the Israelites after (he reduction of the town ; the utter destruction and desolation of this city, which took place, although not at once, yet cer- tainly in consequence of the first conquest, so that its site can scarcely be shown with certainty. In general, all those proud ornaments of th.e ancient world, whose destruction the prophets pre- dicted— Nineveh, Babylon, Tyre, Memphis, the chief cities of the Moabites and Ammonites, and many others — have perished, and the nations to whom the prophets threatened annihilation — the Ammonites, Moabites, Philistines, and Idu- maeans — have entirely disappeared from the stage of history. There is not a single city nor a single people, the fate of which has been at variance with , prophecy. All this is not a casual coincidence. The ruins of all these cities, every vestige of the former existence of those once flourishing nations, are loud-speaking witnesses, testifying to the fu- tility of the opinion which raises into a fact the subjective wish that prophecy might not exist. Zechariah clearly describes the conquests of Alex- ander (ix. 8). He foretells that the Persian empire, which he specifies by the symbolic name Hadrach, shall be ruined ; that Damascus and Hamath shall be conquered ; that the bulwarks of the mighty Tyre shall be smitten in the sea, and that the city shall be burned ; that Gaza shall lose its king, and that Ashdod shall be peopled with the lowest rabble ; and that Jerusalem shall be spared during all these troubles. These prophe- cies were fulfilled during the expedition of Alex- ander (comp. Jahn's Einleitung, vol. i. p. 84, sq. ; vol. ii. p. 349, sq.). Eichhorn despaired of being able to explain the exact correspondence of the fulfilment with the predictions ; he, therefore, in his work, Die Hebr'dischen Propheten, endeavours to prove that these prophecies were veiled historical descriptions. He has recourse to the most violent operations in order to support this hypothesis ; which proves how fully he recognised the agree- ment of the prophecies with their fulfilment, and that the prophecies are more than general poetical descriptions. The Messianic predictions prove that the prophecies were more than veiled histo- rical descriptions. There is scarcely any fact in Gospel history, from the birth of our Saviour at Bethlehem down to his death, which is unpre- dicted by a prophetical passage. Eichhoru's hypothesis is also amply refuted by the unquestioned portion of Isaiah. How can it be explained that Isaiah confidently predicts the destruction of the empire of Israel by the As- syrians, and the preservation of the empire of Judah from these enemies, and that he with cer- tainty knew beforehand that no help would be afforded to Judah from Egypt, that the Assyrians would advance to the gates of Jerusalem, and there be destroyed only by the judgment of the ISAIAH. Lord ? No human combinations can lead to such result. Savonarola, for instance, was a pious man, and an acute observer ; but when he fancied himself to be a prophet, and ventured to predict events which should come to pass, he was im- mediately refuted by facts, (comp. Biographie Savonarola's, von Rudelbach). If we had nothing of prophetic literature, be- side the portions of Isaiah which have been at- tacked, they alone would afford an ample refuta tion of our opponents, because they contain, in chapter liii., the most remarkable of Old Testa- ment prophecies, predicting the passion, death, and glory of our Saviour. If it can be proved that this one prophecy necessarily refers to Christ, we can no longer feel tempted to reject other pro- phecies of Isaiah, on account of their referring too explicitly to some event, like that of the Babylo- nian exile. As soon as only one genuine pro- phecy has been proved, the whole argument of our opponents falls to the ground. This argu- ment is also opposed by the authority of Christ and his apostles ; and whoever will consistently maintain this opinion must reject the authority of Christ. The prophets are described in the New Testament not as acute politicians, or as poets full of a foreboding genius, but as messengers of God raised by His Spirit above the intellectual sphere of mere man. Christ repeatedly mentions that the events of his own life were also destined to realise the fulfilment of prophecy, saying, ' this must come to pass in order that the Scripture may be fulfilled.' And after his resurrection, he inter- prets to his disciples the prophecies concerning him- self. Peter, speaking of the prophets, says, in his First Epistle (i. 11), ' Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow;' and, in his Second Epistle (i. 21), ' For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man ; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost ' — inrb irvev/xaTos aytov a higher position, the causes of facts which at an earlier period we could not compre- hend. A later age frequently understands what was hidden to the preceding. However, the pur- pose of definite predictions is not hidden to those who recognise the reality of the divine scheme for human salvation. There is one truth in the opinion of our oppo- nents. The predictions of the future by the pro- phets .are always on a general basis, by which they are characteristically distinguished from soothsaying. Real prophecy is based upon the idea of God. The acts of God are based upon his essence, and have therefore the character of necessity ._ The most elevated prerogative of the prophets is that they have possessed themselves of his idea, that they have penetrated into his es- sence, that they have become conscious of the ISAIAH. / eternal laws by which the world is governed. For instance, if they demonstrate that sin is the perdition of man, that where the carcase is, the eagles will be assembled, the most important point in this prediction is not the how but the what which first by them was clearly communi- cated to the people of God, and of which the lively remembrance is by them kept up. But if the prophets had merely kept to the that, and had never spoken about the now, or if, like Savo- narola, they had erroneously described this how, they would be unfit effectually to teach the that to those people who have not yet acquired an inde- pendent idea of God. According to human weak- ness, the knowledge of the form is requisite in order to fertilize the knowledge of the essence, especially in a mission to a people among whom formality so much predominated as among the people of the Old Covenant. The position of the prophets depends upon these circumstances. They had not, like the priests, an external warrant. There- fore Moses (Deut. xviii.) directed them to produce true prophecies as their warrant. According to verse 22, the true and the false prophet are dis- tinguished by the fulfilment or non-fulfilment of prophecy. This criterion is destroyed by the modern opinion respecting prophetism. Without this warrant, the principal point of prophetical preaching, the doctrine of the Messiah, could not be brought to the knowledge of the people, a3 being of primary importance. Without this ful- filment the prophets had no answer to those who declared that the hopes raised by them were fan- tastic and fanatical. It is true that, according to what we have stated, the necessity of prophecy arises only from the weakness of man. Miracles also are necessary only on account of this weakness. Prophecy is necessary only under certain conditions; but these conditions were fully extant during the period of the ancient Covenant. During the New Covenant human weakness is supported by other and more powerful means, which were wanting during the time of the Old Covenant ; especially by the operation of the Spirit of Christ upon the hearts of the faithful ; which operation is by far more powerful than that of the Spirit of God during the Old Covenant; consequently, definite predictions can be dispensed with, especially since the faithful of the New Testament derive benefit also from the prophecies granted to the people of the Old Testament. The predictions of futurity in the Old Testa- ment have also a considerable bearing upon the contemporaries of the prophet. Consequently, they stand not so isolated and unconnected as our opponents assert. The Chaldxans, for in- stance, who are said to threaten destruction to Israel, were, in the days of Isaiah, already on the stage of history ; and their juvenile power, if com- pared with the decline of the Assyrians, might lead to the conjecture that they would some time or other supplant the Assyrians in dominion over Asia. Babylon, certainly, was as yet under Assy- rian government; but it was still during the life- time of the prophet that this city tried to shake off their yoke. This attempt was unsuccessful, but the conditions under which it might succeed at a future period were already in existence. The future exaltation of this city might be foreseen from history, and its future fall from theology. In a pagan nation success is always the forerunner of ISAIAH. 43 pride, and all its consequences. And, according to the eternal laws by which God governs the world, an overbearing spirit is the certain fore- runner of destruction. The future liberation of Israel might also be theologically foreseen ; and we cannot look upon this prediction as so abrupt as a prediction of the deliverance of other nations would have been, and as, for instance, a false pre- diction of the deliverance of Moab would have appeared. Even the Pentateuch emphatically in- forms us that the covenant-people cannot be given up to final perdition, and that mercy is always concealed behind the judgments which befall them. 2. Attempts have been made to demonstrate the spuriousness of several portions from the cir- cumstance that the author takes his position not in the period of Isaiah, but in much later times, namely, those of the exile. It has been said, ' Let it be granted that the prophet had a know- ledge of futurity : in that case we cannot suppose that he would predict it otherwise than as future, and he cannot proclaim it as present.' The prophets, however, did not prophesy in a state of calculat- ing reflection, but virb irvev/Aaros aryiov (pepofj.zvoi, ' borne along by the Holy Ghost.' The objects offer- ed themselves to their spiritual vision. On that account they are frequently called seers, to whom futurity appears as present. Even Hebrew gram- mar has long ago recognised this fact in the terms prceterita prophetica. These prophetical prseter tenses indicate a time ideally past, in contra-dis- tinction to the time which is really past. Every chapter of Isaiah furnishes examples of this grammatical fact. Even in the first there is con- tained a remarkable instance of it. Interpreters frequently went astray, because they misunder- stood the nature of prophecy, and took the prce- terita prophetica as real prseterites ; consequently, they could only by some inconsistency escape from Eichhorn's opinion, that the prophecies were veiled historical descriptions. The prophets have futurity always before their eyes. Prophetism, therefore, is subject to the laws of poetry more than to those of history (compare the ingenious remarks on the connection of poetry and pro- phetism in the work of Steinbeck, tier Diclder em Seher, Leipzig, 183G). Prophetism places us in medias res, or rather the prophet is placed in medias res. The Spirit of God ele- vates him above the terra firma of common reality, and of common perception. The pro- phet beholds as connected, things externally separated, if they are linked together by their in- ternal character. The pnvphet beholds what is distant as near, if its hidden basis, although con- cealed to the eyes of flesh, already exists. This was, for instance, the case with Israel's captivity and deliverance. Neither happened by chance. Both events proceeded from the justice and mercy of God, a living knowledge of which necessarily produced the beholding knowledge of the same. The prophet views things in the light of that God who calls the things that are not as though they were, and to whom the future is present. 3. What the prophet says about what is present to him (namely, about that which appears to him in the form of the present time), is correctly and minutely detailed ; and what he describes as future, are ideal and animated hopes which far exceed terrene reality. Hence our opponents u ISAIAH. attempt to prove that the present time in those portions which they reject, is not ideal but real ; and that the author was actually an eye-witness of the exile, because, they say, if the prophet merely placed himself in the period of the exile, then this present time Would be ideal, and in that case there could be no difference between this ideally present time and the more distant future. But we cpiestion this fact most decidedly. The descriptions of the person of Messiah in the second part of Isaiah are far more circumstantial than the descriptions of the person of Cyrus. Of Cyrus these prophecies furnish a very incomplete description. Whoever does not fill up from history what is wanting, ob- tains a very imperfect idea of Cyrus. But there is sufficient information to show the relation between history and prophecy ; and nothing more was required than that the essence of prophecy should be clear. The form might remain obscure until it was cleared up by its historical fulfilment. The Messiah, on the contrary, is accurately de- picted, especially in ch. liii., so that there is scarcely wanting any essential trait. It is quite natural that there should be greater clearness and definiteness here, because the anti-type of redemp- tion stands in a far nearer relation to the ideal than is the case with Cyrus, so that form and essence less diverge. The assertion that the animated hopes, ex- pressed in the second part of Isaiah, had been very imperfectly fulfilled, proceeds from the erroneous supposition that these hopes were to be entirely fulfilled in the times immediately following the exile. But if we must grant that these prophecies refer both to the deliverance from captivity, and to the time of the Messiah in its whole extent, from the lowliness of Christ to the glorious com- pletion of his kingdom, then the fulfilment is clearly placed before our eyes; and we may expect that whatever is yet unfulfilled, will, in due time, find its accomplishment. In this hope we are supported by the New Testament, and still more by the nature of the matter in question. If the prophecies of Isaiah were nothing but arbi- trary predictions on his own external authority, without any internal warrant, one might speak here of an evasion of the difficulty ; but as the matter stands, this objection proves only that those who make it are incapable of comprehending the idea which pervades the whole representation. The entire salvation which the Lord has destined to his people has been placed before the spiritual eye of the prophet. His prediction is not entirely fulfilled in history, so that we could say we have now done with it, but every isolated fulfilment is again a prediction de facto, supporting our hojDe of the final accomplishment of the whole word of prophecy. 4. Our opponents think that they have proved that a portion of Isaiah is not genuine, if they can show that there occur a few Aramaic words and forms of speech, which they endeavour to ex- plain from the style prevalent in a period later than Isaiah. That this argument is very feeble even our opponents have granted in instances where it can be adduced with by far greater stringency than in the questioned portions of Isaiah. This appears especially from the example of the Song of Solo- mon, in which there occur a considerable number of Aramaic words and expressions, said to belong ISAIAH. to the later Hebrew style. Bertholdt, Umbreit, and others, base upon this their argument, that the Song of Solomon was written after the Baby- lonian exile. They even maintain that it could not have been written before that period. On the contrary, the two most recent commentators, Ewald and Doepke, say most decidedly that the Song of Solomon, in spite of its Aramaisms, was written in the days of Solomon. Hirzel, in his work De Ckaldaismi Biblici origine, Leipsic, 1830, has contributed consider- ably to the formation of a correct estimate of this argument. He has proved that in all the books of the Old Testament, even in the most ancient, there occur a few Chaldaisms. This may be explained by the fact that the patriarchs were surrounded by a population whose language was Chaldee. Such Chaldaisms are especially found in poetical language in which unusual expressions are preferred. Consequently, not a few isolated Chaldaisms, but only their decided prevalence, or a Chaldee tincture of the whole style, can prove that a book has been written after the exile. No- body can assert that this is the case in those portions of Isaiah whose authenticity has* been questioned. Even our opponents grant that the Chaldaisms in this portion are not numerous. After what have erroneously been called Chal- daisms are subtracted, we are led to a striking result, namely, that the unquestionable Chal- daisms are more numerous in the portions of Isaiah of which the genuineness is granted, than in the portions which have been called spurious. Hirzel, an entirely unsuspected witness, mentions in his work De Chaldaismo, p. 9, that there are found only four real Chaldaisms in the whole of Isaiah ; and that these all occur in the portions which are declared genuine ; namely, in vii. 14 (where, however, if the grammatical form is rightly understood, we need not admit a Chal- daism) ; xxix. 1 ; xviii. 7 ; xxi. 12. 5. The circumstance that the diction in the attacked portions of Isaiah belongs to the first, and not to the second period of the Hebrew lan- guage, must vender us strongly inclined to admit their authenticity. It has been said that these portions were written during, and even after, the Babylonian exile, when the ancient Hebrew lan- guage fell into disuse, and the vanquished people began to adopt the language of their conquerors, and that thus many Chaldaisms penetrated into the works of authors who wrote in ancient He- brew. Since this is not the case in the attacked portions of Isaiah, granting the assertions of our opponents to be correct, we should be compelled to suppose that their author or authors had inten- tionally abstained from the language of then- times, and purposely imitated the purer diction of former ages. That this is not quite impossible we learn from the prophecies of Haggai, Malachi, and especially from those of Zechariah, which are nearly as free from Chaldaisms as the writings before the exile. But it is improbable, in this case, because the pseudo-Isaiah is stated to have been in a position very different from that of the prophets just mentioned, who belonged to the newly returned colony. The pseudo-Isaiah has been placed in a position similar to that of the strongly Chaldaizing Ezekiel and Daniel; and even more unfavourably for the attainment of purity of diction, because he had not, like these ISAIAH. ISAIAH. 45 prophets, spent his youth in Palestine, but is said to have grown up in a country in which the Aramaean language was spoken ; consequently, it would have been more difficult for him to \vrite pure Hebrew than for Ezekiel and Daniel. In addition to this it ought to be mentioned that an artificial abstinence from the language of their times occurs only in those prophets who entirely lean upon an earlier prophetic literature ; but that union of purity in diction with independence, which is manifest in the attacked portions of Isaiah, is nowhere else to be found. The force of this argument is still more in- creased when we observe that the pretended pseudo- Isaiah has, in other respects, the characteristics of the authors before the exile ; namely, their clearness of perception, and their freshness and beauty of description. This belongs to him, even according to the opinion of all opponents. These excellences are not quite without example among the writers after the exile, but they occur in none of them in the same degree ; not even in Zechariah, who, besides, ought not to be compared with the pseudo-Isaiah, because he does not manifest the same independence, but leans entirely upon the earlier prophets. To these characteristics of the writers before the exile belongs also the scarcity of visions and symbolic actions, and what is con- nected therewith (because it proceeds likewise from the government of the imagination), the naturalness and correctness of poetical images. What Umbreit says concerning the undisputedly genuine portions of Isaiah fully applies also to the disputed portions : ' Our prophet is more an orator than a symbolic seer. He has subjected the external imagery to the internal government of the word. The few symbols which he exhibits are simple and easy to be understood. In the pro« phets during and after the exile visions and sym- bolic actions prevail, and their images frequently bear a grotesque Babylonian impress. Only those authors, after the exile, have not this character, whose style, like that of Haggai and Malachi, does not rise much above prose. A combination of vivacity, originality, and vigour, with natural- ness, simplicity, and correctness, is not found in any prophet during and after the exile.' Nothing but very strong arguments could induce us to as- cribe to a later period prophecies which rank in language and style with the literary monuments of the earlier period. In all the attacked portions of Isaiah independence and originality are mani- fest in such a degree, as to make them harmonize not only with the prophets before the exile in general, but especially with the earliest cycle of these prophets. If these portions were spurious, they would form a perfectly isolated exception, which we cannot, admit, since, as we have before shown, the leaning of the later prophets upon the earlier rests upon a deep-seated cause arising from the very nature of prophetism. A prophet form- ing such an exception would stand, as it were, without the cycle of the prophets. We canuot imagine such an exception. (i, A certain difference of style between the portions called genuine and those called spurious does not prove what our opponents assert. Such a difference may arise from various causes in the productions of one and the same author. It is fre- quently occasioned by a difference of the subject- matter, and by a difference of mood arising there- from ; for instance, in the prophecies of Jeremiah against foreign nations, the style is more elevated and elastic than in the home-prophecies. How little this difference of style can prove, we may learn by comparing with each other the prophecies which our opponents call genuine ; for instance, ch. ix. 7-x. 4. The authenticity of this pro- phecy is not subject to any doubt, although it has not that swing which we find in many prophecies of the first part. The language has as much ease as that in the second part, with which this piece has several repetitions in common. The difference of style in the prophecies against foreign nations (which predictions are particularly distinguished by sublimity), from that in chapters i.-xii., which are now generally ascribed to Isaiah, appeared to Bertholdt a sufficient ground for assigning the former to another author. But in spite of this difference of style it is, at present, again generally admitted that they belong to one and the same author. It consequently appears that our op- ponents deem the difference of style alone not a sufficient argument for proving a difference of authorship ; but only such a difference as does not arise from a difference of subjects and of moods, especially if this difference occurs in an author whose mind is so richly endowed as that of Isaiah, in whose works the form of the style is produced directly by the subject. Ewald cor- rectly observes (p. 173), 'We cannot state that Isaiah had a peculiar colouring of style. He is neither the especially lyrical, nor the especially elegiacal, nor the especially oratorical, nor the especially admonitory prophet, as, perhaps, Joel, Hosea, or Micah, in whom a particular colouring more predominates. Isaiah is capable of adapting his style to the most different subject, and in this consists his greatness and his most distinguished excellence.1 The chief fault of our opponents is, that they judge without distinction of persons ; and here distinction of persons would be proper. They mea- sure the productions of Isaiah with the same mea- sure that is adapted to the productions of less- gifted prophets. Jeremiah, for example, does not change his tone according to the difference of subject so much that it could be mistaken by an experienced Hebraist. Of Isaiah, above all, we might say what Fichte wrote in a letter to a friend in Kbnigsberg -. ' Strictly speaking, I have no style, because I have all styles ' (Fichtes' Leben von seinem Sohne, th. i. p. 19G). If we ask how the difference of style depends upon the difference of subject, the answer must be very favourable to Isaiah, in whose book the style does not so much diner according to the so-called genuineness or spuriousness, as rather according to the subjects of the first and second parts. The peculiarities of the second part arise from the subjects treated therein ; and from the feelings to which these subjects give rise. Here the prophet addresses not so much the multitude who live around him, as the future people of the Lord, purified by his judgments, who are about to spring from the e'/cAoy?';, that is, the small number of the elect who were contemporaries of Isaiah. Here he does not speak to a mixed congregation, but to a congregation of brethren whom he com- forts. The commencement, ' Comfort ye, comfort ye, my people,' is the theme of the whole. Hence arise the gentleness and tenderness of style, and 46 ISAIAH. the frequent repetitions. Comforting love has many words. Hence the addition of many epi- thets" to the name of God, which are so many shields by which the strokes of despair are warded off, and so many bulwarks against the attacks of the visible world which was driving to despair. The sublimity, abruptness, and thunders of the first part find no place here, where the object of Isaiah is not to terrify and to shake stout-hearted sinners, but rather to bring glad tidings to the meek ; not to quench the smoking flax, nor to break the bruised reed. But wherever there is a similarity of hearers and of subject, there we meet also a remarkable similarity of style, in both the first and second part ; as, for example, in the description of the times of Messiah, and of the punishments, in which (lvi.-lix.) the prophet has the whole nation before his eyes, and in which he addresses the careless sinners by whom he is surrounded. We attach no importance to the collections of isolated words and expressions which some critics have gleaned from the disputed parts of Isaiah, and which are not found in other portions that are deemed genuine. We might here well apply what Kriiger wrote on a similar question in pro- fane history (De authentia et integritate Anab. XenopAontis, Halle, 1824, p. 27): Hoc argu- mentandi genus perquam lubricum est. Si quid Humerus valeret, urgeri posset, quod in his libris amplius quadraginta vocabula leguntur, qua in reliquis XenopJiontis operibus frustra queerantur. Si quis propter vocabula alibi ab hoc scriptore vel alia potestate, velprorsus non usurpata, Anabasin ab eoprofectam neget, hac ratione ad?nissa quod- vis aliud ejus opus injuria ei tribui, ostendi potest ; that is, ' This is a very slippery mode of reasoning. If number were of importance, it might be urged that in these books occur more than forty words for which one searches in vain in the other works of Xenophon. But if it should be denied on account of those words which this author has either employed in a dif- ferent sense, or has not made use of at all, that the Anabasis was written by him, it could, by the same reasoning, be shown that every other work was falsely attributed to him.' 7. We find a number of characteristic peculi- arities of style which occur both in what is ac- counted genuine and what is styled spurious in Isaiah, and which indicate the identity of the author. Certain very peculiar idioms occur again and again in all parts of the book. Two of them are particularly striking. The appellation of God, ' the Holy One ' of Israel,' occurs with equal frequency in what has been ascribed to Isaiah and in what has been attributed to a pseudo- Isaiah; it is found besides in two passages in which Isaiah imitates Jeremiah, and only, three times in the whole of the remainder of the Old Testament. Another peculiar idiom is that ' to be called' stands constantly for 'to be.' These are phenomena of language which even our oppo- nents do not consider casual ; but they say that the later poet imitated Isaiah, or that they originated from the hand of a uniformising editor, who took an active part in modelling the whole. But there cannot be shown any motive for such inter- ference ; and we find nothing analogous to it in the whole of the Old Testament. Such a sup- position cuts away the linguistic ground from ISAIAH. under the feet of higher criticism, and deprives it of all power of demonstration. In this manner every linguistic phenomenon may easily be re- moved, when it is contrary to preconceived opi- nions. But everything in Isaiah appears so natural, bears so much the impress of originality, is so free from every vestige of patch-work, that no one can conscientiously maintain this hypothesis. We have still to consider the other conjecture of our opponents. If we had before us a prophet, strongly leaning, like Jeremiali and Zechariah, upon preceding prophets, that conjecture might be deemed admissible, in case there were other arguments affording a probability for denying that Isaiah was the author of these portions — a supposition which can here have no place. But here we have a prophet whose independence and originality are acknowledged even by our op- ponents. In him we cannot think of imitation, especially if we consider his peculiarities in connection with the other peculiar character- istics of Isaiah, and of what has been said to belong to a pseudo-Isaiah ; we refer here to the above-mentioned works of Moelle and of Kleinert (p. 231, sq.). In both portions of Isaiah there occur a number of words which are scarcely to be found in other places ; also a freqnent repe- tition of the same word in the parallel members of a verse. This repetition very seldom occurs in other writers (compare the examples collected by Kleinert, p. 239). Other writers usually employ synonymes in the parallel members of verses. It further belongs to the characteristics of Isaiah to employ words in extraordinary ac- ceptations ; for instance, JHT is used contemptu- ously for brood; DlX, for rabble; t£H&>, for a shoot. Isaiah also employs extraordinary con- structions, and has the peculiar custom of ex- plaining his figurative expressions by directly subjoining the prosaical equivalent. This custom has induced many interpreters to suppose that explanatory glosses have been inserted in Isaiah. Another peculiarity of Isaiah is that he inter- sperses his prophetic orations with hymns ; that he seldom relates visions, strictly so-called, and seldom performs symbolic actions ; and that he employs figurative expressions quite peculiar to himself, as, for example, pasted-up eyes, for spiri- tual darkness ; morning-red, for approaching hap- piness ; the remnant of olive-trees, vineyards, and orchards, for the remnant of the people which have been spared during the judgments of God ; re- jected tendrils or branches, for enemies which have been slain. In addition to this we find an almost verbal harmony between entire passages ; for instance, the Messianic description commencing xi. 6, compared with lxv. 25. ■ IV. The origin of the present Collection, and its arrangement. — No definite account respecting the method pursued in collecting into books the utterances of the Prophets has been handed down to us. Concerning Isaiah, as well as the rest, these accounts are wanting. We do not even know whether he collected his prophecies himself. But we have no decisive argument against this opinion. The argument of Kleinert, in his above-mentioned work (p. 112), is of slight importance. He says, If Isaiah himself had collected his prophecies, there would not be wanting some which are not to be found in the existing book. To this we ISAIAH. reply, that it can by no means be proved with any degree of probability that a single prophecy of Isaiah has been lost, the preservation of which would have been of importance to posterity, and which Isaiah himself would have deemed it neces- sary to preserve. Kleinert appeals to the fact, that there is no prophecy in our collection which can with certainty be ascribed to the days of Jotham ; and he thinks it incredible that the pro- phet, soon after having been consecrated to his office, should have passed full sixteen years with- out any revelation from God. This, certainly, is unlikely ; but it is by no means unlikely that during this time he uttered no prophecy which he thought proper to preserve. Nay, it appears very probable, if we compare the rather general cha- racter of chapters i.-v., the contents of which would apply to the days of Jotham also, since during his reign no considerable changes took place ; consequently the prophetic utterances moved in the same sphere with those preserved to us from the reign of Uzziah. Hence it was na- tural that Isaiah should confine himself to the communication of some important prophetic ad- dresses, which might as well represent the days of Jotham as those of the preceding reign. We must not too closely identify the utterances of the prophets with their writings. Many prophets have spoken much and written nothing. The minor prophets were generally content to write down the quintessence alone of their numerous utterances. Jeremiah likewise, of his numerous addresses under Josiah, gives us only what was most essential. The critics who suppose that the present book of Isaiah was collected a considerable time after the death of the prophet, and perhaps after the exile, lay especial stress upon the assertion that the historical section in the 26th and following chapters was transcribed from 2 Kings xviii.-xx. This supposition, however, is perfectly unfounded. According to Ewald (p. 39 ), the hand of a later compiler betrays itself in the headings. Ewald has not, however, adduced any argument suffi- cient to prove that Isaiah was not the author of these headings, the enigmatic character of which seems more to befit the author himself than a compiler. The only semblance of an argument is that the heading ' Oracle (better translated burden") concerning Damascus ' (xvii. 1), does not agree with the prophecy that follows, which refers rather to Samaria. But we should consider that the headings of prophecies against foreign nations are always expressed as concisely as possible, and that it was incompatible with the usual brevity more fully to describe the subject of this prophecy. We should further consider that this prophecy re- fers to the connection of Damascus witli Samaria, in which alliance Damascus was, according to chap, vii., the prevailing power, with which Ephraim stood and fell. If all this is taken into account, the absve heading will be found to agree with the prophecy. According to the Talmudists, the book of Isaiah was collected by the men of Hezekiah. But this assertion rests merely upon Prov. xxv. 1, where the men of Hezekiah are said to have compiled the Proverbs. The Talmudists do not sufficiently distinguish between what might be and what is. They habitually state bare possi- bilities as historical facts. To us it seems impossible that Isaiah left it to others to collect his prophecies into a volume, ISAIAH. 47 because we know that he was the author of histo- rical works; and it is not likely that a man accustomed to literary occupation would have left to others to do what he could do much better himself. Hitzig has of late recognised Isaiah as the col- lector and arranger of his own prophecies. But he supposes that a number of pieces were inserted at a later period. The chronological arrangement of these prophecies is a strong argument in favour of the opinion that Isaiah himself formed them into a volume. There is no deviation from this arrangement, except in a few instances where pro- phecies of similar contents are placed together : but there is no interruption which might appear attributable to either accident or ignorance. There is not a single piece in this collection which can satisfactorily be shown to belong to another place. All the portions, the date of which can be ascer- tained either by external or internal reasons, stand in the right place. This is generally granted with respect to the first twelve chapters, although many persons erroneously maintain that ch. vi. should stand at the beginning. Chaps, i.-v. belong to the later years of Uzziah ; chap. vi. to the year of his death. What follows next, up to chap. x. 4, belongs to the reign of Ahaz. Chaps, x.-xii. is the first portion apper- taining to the reign of Hezekiah. Then follows a series of prophecies against foreign nations, in which, according to the opinions of many, the chro- nological arrangement has been departed from, and, instead of it, an arrangement according to con- tents has been adopted. But this is not the case. The predictions against foreign nations are also in their right chronological plate. They all belong to the reign of Hezekiah, and are placed together because, according to their dates, they belong to the same period. In the days of Hezekiah the nations of Western Asia, dwelling on the banks of the Eu- phrates and Tigris, more and more resembled a threatening tempest. That the prophecies against foreign nations belong to this period is indicated hy the home-prophecy in ch. xxii., which stands among the foreign prophecies. The assertion that the first twelve chapters are a collection of home-pro- phecies is likewise refuted by the fact that there occur in these chapters two foreign prophecies. The prophetic gift of Isaiah was more fully un- folded in sight of the Assyrian invasion under the reign of Hezekiah. Isaiah, in a series of visions, describes what Assyria would do, as a chastising rod in the hand of the Lord, and what the successors of the Assyrians, the Chal dees, would perform, accord- ing to the decree of God, in order to realise divine justice on earth, as well among Israel as among the heathen. The prophet shows that mercy is hidden behind the clouds of wrath. There is no argument to prove that the great prophetic picture in chaps. xxiv.-xxvii. was not depicted under Hezekiah. Chaps, xxviii.-xxxiii. manifestly belong to the same reign, but somewhat later than the time in which chaps, x., xi., and xii. were written. They were composed about the time when the result of the war against the Assyrians was decided. With the termination of this war terminated also the public life of Isaiah, who added an historical section in chaps, xxxvi.-xxxix., in order to faci- litate the right understanding of the prophecies uttered by him during the most fertile period of his prophetic ministry. Then follows the conclusion 4S ISAIAH. of his work on earth. The second part, which contains his prophetic legacy, is addressed to the small congregation of the faithful strictly so called. This part is analogous to the last speeches of Moses in the fields of Moab, and to the last speeches of Christ in the circle of his disciples, related by John. Thus we have every- where order, and such an order as could scarcely have proceeded from any one but the author, i V. Contents, Character, and Authority of the Book of Isaiah. — It was not the vocation of the prophets to change anything in the religious con- stitution of Moses, which had been introduced by- divine authority ; and they were not called upon to substitute anything new in its place. They had only to point out the new covenant to be introduced by the Redeemer, and to prepare the minds of men for the reception of it. They themselves in all their doings were subject to the law of Moses. They were destined to be extra- ordinary ambassadors of God, whose reign in Is- rael was not a mere name, not a mere shadow of earthly royalty, but rather its substance and essence. They were to maintain the government of God, by punishing all, both high and low, who manifested contempt of the Lawgiver by offending against his laws. It was especially their vocation to counteract the very ancient delusion, according to which an external observance of rites was deemed sufficient to satisfy God. This opinion is contrary to many passages of the law itself, which admonish men to circumcise the heart, and describe the sum of the entire law to consist in loving God with the whole heart ; which make salvation to depend upon being internally turned towards God, and which condemn not only the evil deed, but also the wicked desire. The law had, however, at the first assumed a form corresponding to the wants of the Israelites, and in accordance with the sym- bolical spirit of antiquity. But when this form, which was destined to be the living organ of the Spirit, was changed into a corpse by those who were themselves spiritually dead, it offered a point of coalescence for the error of those who contented themselves with external observances. The prophets had also to oppose the delusion of those who looked upon the election of the people of God as a preservative against the divine judg- ments ; who supposed that their descent from the patriarchs, with whom God had made a covenant, was an equivalent for the sanctification which they wanted. Even Moses had strongly opposed this delusion ; for instance, in Lev. xxvi. and Deut. xxxii. David also, in the Psalms, as in xv. and xxiy., endeavours to counteract this error, which again and again sprang up. It was the vocation of the prophets to insist upon genuine piety, and to show that a true attachment to the Lord necessarily manifests itself by obedience to his precepts ; that this obedience would lead to happiness, and dis- obedience to misfortune and distress. The pro- phets were appointed to comfort the faint-hearted, by announcing to them the succour of God, and to bring glad tidings to the faithful, in order to strengthen their fidelity. They were commissioned to invite the rebellious to return, by pointing out to them future salvation, and by teaching them that without conversion they could not be par- takers of salvation ; and in order that their admo- nitions and rebukes, their consolations and awaken- ings, might gain more attention, it was granted ISAIAH. to them to behold futurity, and to foresee the blessings and judgments which would ultimately find their full accomplishment in the days of Messiah. The Hebrew appellation nebiim is by far more expressive than the Greek irpo^TTjs, which denotes only a part of their office, and which has given rise to many misunderstandings. The word &03J (from the root N3J, which occurs in Arabic in the signification of to inform, to explain, to speali) means, according to the usual significa- tion of the form ?*t2p, a person into whom God has spoken ; that is, a person who communicates to the people what God has given to him. The Hebrew word indicates divine inspiration. What is most essential in the prophets is their speaking eV irvevfiari ; consequently they were as much in their vocation when they rebuked and admo- nished as when they predicted future events. The correctness of our explanation may be seen in the definition contained in Deut. xviii. 18, where the Lord says, ' I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth ; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.' - The prophet here mentioned is an ideal person. It is prophetism itself personified. It is a charac- teristic mark that God gives his word into the mouth of the prophet, by means of which he is placed on an equality with the priest, who is like- wise a bearer of the word of God. The prophet is at the same time distinguished from the priest, who receives the word of God from the Scriptures, while the prophet receives it without an inter- vening medium. The internal communications of God to the prophets are given to them only as being messengers to his people. By this circum- stance the prophets are distinguished from mystics and theosophers, who lay claim to divine commu- nications especially for themselves. Prophetism has an entirely practical and truly ecclesiastical character, remote from all idle contemplativeness, all fantastic trances, and all anchoretism. In this description of the prophetical calling there is also contained a statement of the contents of the prophecies of Isaiah. He refers expressly in many places to the basis of the ancient cove- nant, that is, to the law of Moses ; for instance, in viii. 16, 20, and xxx. 9, 10. In many other passages his utterance rests on the same basis, although he does not expressly state it. All his utterances are interwoven with references to the law. It is of importance to examine at least one chapter closely, in order to understand how pro- phecies are related to the law. Let us take as ■ an example the first. The beginning ' Hear, O heavens, and give ear O earth,' is taken from Deut. xxxii. Thus the prophet points out that his prophecies are a commentary upon the Magna Charta of prophetism contained in the books of Moses. During the prosperous condition of the state under Uzziah and 'Jotham, luxury and im- morality had sprung up. The impiety of Ahaz had exercised the worst influence upon the whols people. Great part of the nation had forsaken the religion of their fathers and embraced gross idolatry ; and a great number of those who wor- shipped God externally had forsaken Him in their hearts. The divine judgments were ap- proaching. The rising power of Assyria was appointed to be the instrument of divine justice. ISAIAH. ISAIAH. 49 Among the people of God internal demoralisation was always the forerunner of outward calamity. This position of affairs demanded an energetic intervention of prophetism. Without prophetism the e/cAoy/7, the number of the elect, would have been constantly decreasing, and even the judg- ments of the Lord, if prophetism had not fur- nished their interpretation, would have been mere facts, which would have missed their aim, and, in many instances, might have had an effect opposite to that which was intended, because punishment which is not recognised to be punish- ment, necessarily leads away from God. The pro- phet attacks the distress of his nation, not at the surface, but at the root, by rebuking the prevail- ing corruption. Pride and arrogance appear to him to be the chief roots of all sins. He inculcates again and again not to rely upon the creature, but upon the Greater, from whom all temporal and spiritual help proceeds ; that in order to attain salvation, we should despair of our own and all human power, and rely upon God. He opposes those who expected help through foreign alliances with powerful neighbouring na- tions against foreign enemies of the state. The people of God have only one enemy, and one ally, that is, God. It is foolish to seek for aid on earth against the power of heaven, and to fear man if God is our friend. The panacea against all distress and danger is true conversion. The politics of the prophets consist only in point- ing out this remedy. The prophet connects with his rebuke and with his admonition, his threaten- ings of divine judgment upon the stiff-necked. These judgments are to be executed by the inva- sion of the Syrians, the oppression of the Assyrians, the Babylonian exile, and by the great final separation in the times of the Messiah. The idea which is the basis of all these threaten ings, is pro- nounced even in the Pentateuch (Lev. x. 3), ' I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorified;' and also in the words of Amos (iii. 2), ' You only have I known of all the families of the earth ; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.' That is, if the people do not voluntarily glorify God, He glorifies Himself against them. Partly in order to recal the rebellious to obedience, partly to comfort the faithful, the prophet opens a prospect of those blessings which the faithful por- tion of the covenant-people shall inherit. In almost all prophetic utterances, we find in regular succession three elements — rebuke, threatening, and promise. The prophecies concerning the de- struction of powerful neighbouring states, partly belong, as we. have shown, to the promises, be- cause they are intended to prevent despair, which, as well as false security, is a most dangerous hindrance to conversion. In the direct promises of deliverance the pur- fiose to comfort is still more evident. This de- iverance refers either to burdens which pressed upon the people in the days of the prophet, or to burdens to come,. which were already announced by the prophet ; such, for instance, were the op- pressions of the Syrians, the Assyrians, and finally, of the Chaldaans. The proclamation of the Messiah is the inex- haustible source of consolation among the pro- phets. In Isaiah this consolation is so clear that VOL. II. some fathers of the church were inclined to style him rather evangelist than prophet. Ewald pointedly describes (p. 169) the human basis of Messianic expectations in general, and of those of Isaiah in particular : — ' He who experienced in his own royal soul what infinite power could be granted to an individual spirit in order to influ- ence and animate many, he who daily observed in Jerusalem the external vestiges of a spirit like that of David, could not imagine that the future new congregation of the Lord should ori- ginate from a mind belonging to another race than that of David, and that it should be main- tained .and supported by any other rulex than a divine ruler. Indeed every spiritual revival must proceed from the clearness and firmness of an ele- vated mind ; and this especially applies to that most sublime revival for which ancient Israel longed and strove. This longing .attained to clearness, and was preserved from losing itself in Indefiniteness, by the certainty that such an ele- vated mind was to be expected.' Isaiah, however, was not the first who attained to a knowledge of the personality of Messiah. Isaiah's vocation was to render the knowledge of this personality clearer and more definite, and to render it more efficacious upon the souls of the elect by giving it a greater individuality. The person of the Redeemer is mentioned even in Gen. xlix. 10, ' The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh (the tranquilliser') come; and unto Him shall the gathering of the people be ' (i. e. Him shall the nations obey). The personality of Messiah occurs also in several psalms which were written before the times of Isaiah; for instance, in the 2nd and II 0th, by David; in the 45th, by the sons of Korah ; in the 72nd, by Solomon. Isaiah has especially developed the perception of the prophetic and the priestly office of the Re- deemer, while in the earlier annunciations of the Messiah the royal office is more prominent ; al- though in Psalm ex. the priestly office also is pointed out. Of the two states of Christ, Isaiah has expressly described that of the exinanition of the suffering Christ, while, before him, his state of glory was made more prominent. In the Psalms the inseparable connection between justice and suffering, from which the doctrine of a suffering Messiah necessarily results, is not expressly ap- plied to the Messiah. We must not say that Isaiah first perceived that the Messiah was to suffer, but we must grant that this knowledge was in him more vivid than in any earlier writer ; and that this knowledge was first shown by Isaiah to be an integral portion of Old Testament doctrine. The following are the outlines of Messianic prophecies ill the book of Isaiah : — A scion of David, springing from his family, after it has fallen into a very low estate, but being also of divine nature, shall, at first in lowliness, but as a prophet filled with the spirit of God, proclaim the divine doctrine, develope the law in truth, and render it the animating principle of national life; he shall, as high priest, by his vicarious suffering and his death, remove the guilt of his nation, and that of other nations, and finally rule as a mighty king, not only over the covenant-people, but over all nations of the earth who will subject themselves to his peaceful 50 TSAIAH. sceptre, not by violent compulsion, but induced by love and gratitude. He will make both the moral and the physical consequences of sin to cease ; the whole earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord, and all enmity, hatred, and destruction shall be removed even from the brute creation. This is the survey of the Messianic preaching by Isaiah, of which he constantly renders prominent those portions- which were most calculated to impress the people under the then existing circumstances. The first part of Isaiah is directed to the whole people, consequently the glory of the Messiah is here dwelt upon. The fear lest the kingdom of God should be over- whelmed by the power of heathen nations, is re- moved by pointing out the glorious king to come, who would elevate the now despised and appa- rently mean kingdom of God above all the king- doms of this world. In the second part, which is more particularly addressed to the e/cAoyj;, the elect, than to the whole nation, the prophet ex- hibits the Messiah more as a divine teacher and high-priest. The prophet here preaches righteous- ness through the blood of the servant of God, who will support the weakness of sinners and take upon Himself their sorrows. We may show, by an example in chap. six. 18- 25, that the views of futurity which were granted to Isaiah were great and comprehensive, and that the Spirit of God raised him above all narrow- minded nationality. It is there stated that a time should come when all the heathen, subdued by the judgments of the Lord, should be converted to him, and being placed on an equality with Israel, with equal laws, would equally partake of the kingdom of God, and form a brotherly alliance for his wor- ship. Not the whole mass of Israel is destined, according to Isaiah, to future salvation, but only the small number of the converted. This truth he enounces most definitely in the sketch of his prophecies contained- in chapter vi. Isaiah describes with equal vivacity the divine justice which punishes the sins of the nation with inexorable severity. Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of Sabaoth, is the key-note of his prophe- cies. He describes also the divine mercy and co- venant-fidelity, by which there is always preserved a remnant among the people : to them punish-, ment itself is a means of salvation, so that life everywhere proceeds from death, and the congre- gation itself is led to full victory and glory. Isaiah saw the moral and religious degradation of his people, and also its external distress, both then present and to come (chap. vi.). But this did not break his courage; be confidently ex- pected a better futurity, and raised himself in God above all that is visible. Isaiah is not afraid when the whole nation and its king tremble. Of this we see a remarkable instance in chapter vii., and another in the time of the Assyrian invasion under Hezekiah, during which the courage of his faith rendered him the saviour of the commonwealth, and the originator of that great religious revival which followed the preservation of the state. The faith of the king and of the people was roused by that of Isaiah. Isaiah stands pre-eminent above all other pro- phets, as well in the contents and spirit of his predictions, as also in their form and style. Sim- plicity, clearness, sublimity, and freshness, are ISAIAH. the never-failing characters of his prophecies. Even Eichhorn mentions, among the first merits of Isaiah, the concinnity of his expressions, the beautiful outline of his images, and the fine exe- cution of his speeches. In reference to richness ef imagery he stands between Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Symbolic actions, which frequently occur in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, seldom occur in Isaiah. The same is the case with visisns, strictly so called, of which there is only one, namely, that in chapter vi. ; and even it is distinguished by its simplicity and clearness above that of the later prophets. But one characteristic of Isaiah is, that he likes to give signs — that is, a fact thei> present, or near at hand — as a pledge for the more distant futurity ; and that he thus supports the feebleness of man (comp. vii. 20 ; xxxvii. 30 ; xxxviii. 7, sqq.). The instances in chapters vii. and xxxviii. show how much he was convinced of his vocation, and in what intimacy he lived with the Lord, by whose assistance alone he could effect what he offers to do in the one passage, and what he grants in the other. The spiritual riches of the prophet are seen in the va- riety of his style, which always befits the subject. When he rebukes and threatens, it is like a storm,, and, when he comforts, his language is as tender and mild as (to use his own words) that of a mother comforting her son. With regard to style, Isaiah is comprehensive, and the other prophets divide his riches. Isaiah enjoyed an authority proportionate to his gifts. We learn from history how great this authority was during his life, especially under the reign of Hezekiah. Several of his most defi- nite prophecies were fulfilled while he was yet alive -T for instance, the overthrow of the king- doms of Syria and Israel ; the invasion of the Assyrians, and the divine deliverance from it; the prolongation of life granted to Hezekiah ; and several predictions against foreign nations. Isaiah is honourably mentioned in the historical books.. The later prophets, especially Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Jeremiah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, clearly prove that his book was dili- gently read, and that his prophecies were atten- tively studied. The authority of the prophet greatly increased after the fulfilment of his prophecies by the Baby- lonian exile, the victories of Cyrus, and the de- liverance of the covenant-people. Even Cyrus (according to the above-mentioned account in Jo- sephus, Antiq.sd. I. § 1, 2) was induced to set the Jews at liberty by the prophecies of Isaiah concern- ing himself. This prediction of Isaiah made so deep an impression upon him that he probably took from it the name by which he is generally known in history. Jesus Sirach (xlviii. 22-25) bestows splendid praise upon Isaiah, and both Philo and Josephus speak of him with great veneratioa. He attained the highest degree of authority after the times of the New Testament had proved the most important part of his prophecies, namely, the Mes- sianic, to be divine. Christ and the apostles quote no prophecies so frequently as those of Isaiah, i:> order to prove that He who had appeared was one and the same with Him who had been promised. The fathers of the church abound in praises o! Isaiah.— E. W. H. ISHBI, or ISHBI-BENOB. [Giants.] ISH-BOSHETH. ISH-BOSHETH (T\f2 K»tf, man of shame; Sept. 'IejSocrfle'), a son of king Saul, and the only one who survived him. In i Chron. viii. 33, and ix. 39, this name is given as pJDt^K Eshbaal. Baal was the name of an idol, accounted abomi- nable by the Hebrews, and which scrupulous per- sons avoided pronouncing, using the word bosheth, * shame ' or ' vanity,' instead. This explains why the name Eshbaal is substituted for lsh-bosheth; Jerubbaal for Jerubbesheth (comp. Judg. viii. 35 with 2 Sam. xi. 21), and Merib-baal for Mephi- bosheth (comp. 2 Sam. iv. 4 with 1 Chron. viii. 34 andrix. 40). Ish-bosheth was not present in the disastrous battle at Gilboa, in which his father and brothers perished; and, too feeble of himself to seize the sceptre which had fallen from the hands of Saul, he owed the crown entirely to his uncle Abner, who conducted him to Mahanaim, be- yond the Jordan, where he was recognised as king by ten of the twelve tribes. He reigned seven, or, as some will have it, two years— if a power so uncertain as his can be called a reign. Even the semblance of authority which he pos- sessed he owed to the will and influence of Ab- ner, who himself kept the real substance in his own hands. A sharp quarrel between them led at last to the ruin of Ish-bosheth. Although accus- tomed to tremble before Abner, even his meek temper was roused to resentment by the disco- very that Abner had invaded the haram of his late father Saul, which was in a peculiar manner sacred under his care as a son and a king. By this act Abner exposed the king to public con- tempt; if it did not indeed leave himself open to the suspicion of intending to advance a claim to the crown on his own behalf. Abner. highly re- sented the rebuke of Ish-bosheth, and from that time contemplated uniting all the tribes under the sceptre of David. Ish-bosheth, however, reverted to his ordinary timidity of character. At the first de- mand of David, he restored to him his sister Michal, who had been given in marriage to the son of Jesse by Saul, and had afterwards been taken from him and bestowed upon another. It is, perhaps, right to attribute this act to his weakness ; although, as David allows that he was a righteous man, it may have been owing to his sense of justice. On the death of Abner Ish-bosheth lost all heart and hope, and perished miserably, being murdered in his own palace, while he took his mid-day sleep, by two of his officers, Baanah and Rechab. They sped with his head to David, expecting a great reward for their deed ; but the monarch — as both right feeling and good policy required — testified the utmost horror and concern. He slew the murderers, and placed the head of Ish-bosheth with due respect in the sepulchre of Abner : b.c. 1048 (2 Sam. ii. 8-11; iii. 6-39; iv.). There is a serious difficulty in the chronology of this reign. In 2 Sam. ii. 10 Ish-bosheth is said to have reigned two years; which some understand as the whole amount of his reign. And as David reigned seven and a half years over Judali before he became king of all Israel upon the death of Ish-bosheth, it is conceived by the Jewish chro- nologer (Seder Olam Rdb6a, p. 37), as well as by Kim'ehi and others, that there was a vacancy of five years in the throne of Israel. It is not, however, agreed by those who entertain this opi- ISHMAEL. 51 nion, whether this vacancy took place before or after the reign of Ish-bosheth. Some think it was before, it being then a matter of dispute whether he or Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan, should be made king ; but others hold that after his death five years elapsed before David was generally recognised as king of all Israel. If the reign of Ish-bosheth be limited to two years, the latter is doubtless the best way of accounting for the other five, since no ground of delay in the accession of Ish-bosheth is suggested in Scripture itself; for the claim of Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan, which some have produced, being that of a lame boy live years old, whose father never reigned, against a king's son forty years of age, would have been deemed of little weight in Israel. Besides, our notions of Abner do not allow us to suppose that under him the question of the succession could have remained five years in abeyance. But it is the more usual, and perhaps the better course, to settle this question by supposing that the reigns of David over Judah, and of Ish-bosheth over Israel, were nearly con- temporaneous, and that the two years are men- tioned as those from which to date the commence- ment of the ensuing events — namely, the wars be- tween the house of Saul and that of David. 1. ISHMAEL (^yW, God hears, Sept.; 'Io-jUaTjA), Abraham's eldest son, born to him by Hagar ; the circumstances of whose birth, early history, and final expulsion from bis father's tents, are related in the articles Abraham, Hagar [See also Isaac, Inheritance]. He afterwards made the desert into which he had been cast his abode, and by attaching himself to, and ac- quiring influence over, the native tribes, rose to great authority and influence. It would seem to have been the original intention of his mother to have returned to Egypt, to which country she belonged ; but this being prevented, she was content to obtain for her son wives from thence. Although their lots were cast apart, it does not appear that any serious alienation existed between Ishmael and Isaac ; for we read that they both joined in the sepulchral rites of their father Abraham (Gen. xxv. 9). This fact has not been noticed as it deserves. It is full of suggestive matter. As funerals in the East take place almost immediately after death, it is evident that Ish- mael must have been called from the desert to the death-bed of his father; which implies that relations of kindness and resjject had been kept up, although the brevity of the sacred narrative pre- vents any special notice of this circumstance. Ishmael had, probably, long before' received an endowment from his father's property, similar to that which had been bestowed upon the sons of Keturah (Gen. xxv. 6). Nothing more is re- corded of him than that he died at the age of 137 years, and was the father of twelve sons, who gave their names to as many tribes (Gen. xvii. 20; xxvii. 9). He had also two daughters, one of whom became the wife of Esau. It has been shown, in the article Arabia, that Ishmael has no claim to the honour, which is usually assigned to him, of being the founder of the Arabian nation. That nation existed before he was born. He merely joined it, and adopted its habits of life and character ; and the tribes e2 52 ISHMAEL. which sprung frnm him formed eventually an important section of the tribes of whichit was composed. The celebrated prophecy which de- scribes the habits of life which he, and in him his descendants, would follow, is, therefore, to be regarded not as describing habits which he would first establish, but such as he would adopt. The description is contained in the address of the angel to Hagar, when, before the birth of Ishmael, she fled from the tents of Abraham : — ' Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael (God hears), because the Lord hath heard thine affliction. And he shall be a wild man : his hand shall be against every man, and every man's hand against him, and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren' (Gen. xvi. 11, 12). This means, in short, that he and his descendants should lead the life of the Bedouins of the Arabian deserts ; and how graphically this description portrays their habits, may be seen in the article Arabia, in the notes on these verses in the ' Pictorial Bible,' and in the works of Niebuhr, Burckhardt, Lane, &c. ; and, more particularly, in the Arabian romance of Antar, which presents the most perfect picture of real Bedouin manners now in existence. The last clause, ' He shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren,' is pointedly alluded to in the brief notice of his death, which states that 'he died in the presence of all his brethren' (Gen. xxv. 18). Of this expression various explanations have been given, but the plainest is the most probable : which is, that Ishmael and the tribes springing from him should always be located near the kindred tribes descended from Abraham. And this was a promise of benefit in that age of mi- gration, when Abraham himself had come from beyond the Euphrates, and was a stranger and sojourner in the land of Canaan. There was thus, in fact, a relation of some importance between this promise and the promise of the heritage of Canaan to another branch of Abraham's off- spring. It had seemingly some such force as this — The heritage of Canaan is, indeed, des- tined for another son of Abraham ; but still the lot of Ishmael, and of those that spring from him, shall never be cast far apart from that of his brethren. This view is confirmed by the circum- stance, that the Israelites did, in fact, occupy the country bordering on that in which the various tribes descended from Abraham or Terah had settled — the Israelites, Edomites, Midianites, Mo- abites, Ammonites, &c. Most interpreters find in this passage, a promise that the descendants of Ishmael should never be subdued. But we are unable to discover this in the text ; and, more- over, such has not been the fact, whether we regard the Ishmaelites apart from the other Arabians, or consider the promise made to Ish- mael as applicable to the whole Arabian family. The Arabian tribes are in a state of subjection at this moment ; and the great Wahabee confederacy among them, which not many years ago filled Western Asia with alarm, is now no longer heard of. 2. ISHMAEL, a prince of the royal line of Judah, who found refuge among the Ammonites from the ruin which involved his family and nation. After the Chaldseans had departed he ISRAEL. returned, and treacherously slew the too-confiding Gedaliah, who had been made governor of the miserable remnant left in the land [Gedaliah], Much more slaughter followed this, and Ishmael, with many people of consideration as captives, hastened to return to the Ammonites. But he was overtaken near the pool of Gibeon by Joha- nan, a friend of Gedaliah, and was compelled to abandon his prey and escape for his life, with only eight attendants, to Baalis, king of the Am- monites, with whom he appears to have had a secret understanding- in these transactions : B.C. 5SS (Jer. xli.). ISLE, ISLAND (»N ; Sept. yjja-os, Tulg. insula). The Hebrew word is invariably trans- lated, either by the former or by the latter of these English words, which, having the same meaning, will be considered as one. It occurs in the three following senses. First, that of dry land in opposi- tion to water ; as ' I will make the rivers islands' (Isa. xlii. 15). In Isa. xx. 6, the Isle of Ashdod means the country, and is so rendered in the margin. In Isa. xxiii. 2, 6, 'the isle 'means the country of 'By re, and in Ezek. xxvii. 6, 7, that of Chittim and Elisha. (See also Job xxii. 30). Secondly ; it is used both in Hebrew and Eng- lish, according to its geographical meaning, for a country surrounded by water, as in Jer. xlvii. 4, ' the isle (margin) of Caphtor,' which is probably that of Cyprus. ' The isles of the sea ' (Esth. x. 1) are evidently put in opposition to ' the land,' or continent. In Ps. xcvii. 1, ' the multitude of the isles' seem distinguished from the earth or continents, and are evidently added to complete the description of the whole world. Thirdly ; the word is used by the Hebrews to designate all those countries divided from them by the sea. In Isa. xi. 1 1,' after an enumeration of countries lying on their own continent, the words, ' and the islands of the sea,' are added in order to comprehend those situate beyond the ocean. The following are additional instances of this usage of the word, which is of very frequent occurrence (Isa. xlii, 10; lix. 18; Ixvi. 19; Jer. xxv. 22; Ezek. xxvii. 3, 15; Zeph. ii. 11). It is observed by Sir I. Newton (on Daniel, p. 276), ' By the earth the Jews understood the great continent of all Asia and Africa, to which they had access by land ; and by the isles of the sea they understood the places to which they sailed by sea, particularly all Europe.'— J. F. D. ISRAEL 6»li#; Sept. 'Itrpc^A) is the sacred and divinely bestowed name of the pa- triarch Jacob, and is explained to mean, ' A prince with God,' from TfW, principatuin tenuit. Winer (Heb. Lexicon) interprets it pugnator Dei, from another meaning of the same root. Al- though, as applied to Jacob personally, it is an honourable or poetical appellation, it is the com- mon prose name of his descendants ; while, on the contrary, the title Jacob is giv.en to them only in poetry. In the latter division of Isaiah (after the 39th chapter), many instances occur of the two names used side by side, to subserve the parallelism of Hebrew poetry, as in ch. xl. 27 ; xli, 8, 14, 20, 21; xlii. 24 ; xliii. 1, 22, 28, &c. ; so, indeed, in xiv. 1. The modern Jews, at least in the East, are fond of being named Israeli in preference to Yahucli, as more honourable. ISRAEL. The separation of the Hebrew nation into two parts, of which one was to embrace ten of the tribes, and be distinctively named Israel, had its origin in the early power and ambition of the tribe of Ephraim. The rivalry of Ephraim and Judah began almost from the first conquest of the land ; nor is it unsignificant, that as Caleb be- longed to the tribe of Judah, so did Joshua to that of Ephraim. From the very beginning Judah learned to act by itself ; but the central position of Ephraim, with its fruitful and ample soil, and the long-continued authority of Joshua, must have taught most of the tribes west of the Jor- dan to look up to Ephraim as their head ; and a still more important superiority was conferred on the same tribe by the fixed dwelling of the ark at Shiloh for so many generations (Josh, xviii. &c). Judah could boast of Hebron, Macpelah, Beth- lehem, names of traditional sanctity; yet so could Ephraim point to Shechem, the ancient abode of Jacob ; and while Judah, being on the frontier, was more exposed to the attack of the powerful Philistines, Ephraim had to fear only those Canaanites from within who were not subdued or conciliated. The haughty behaviour of the Ephraimites towards Gideon, a man of Manasseh (Judg. viii. 1), sufficiently indicates the preten- sions they made. Still fiercer language towards Jephthah the Gileadite (Jud. xii. 1) was retorted by less gentleness than Gideon had shown ; and a bloody civil war was the result, in which their pride met with a severe punishment. This may in part explain their quiet submission, not only to the priestly rule of Eli and his sons, who had their centre of authority at Sliiloh, but to Samuel, whose administration issued from three towns of Benjamin. Of course his prophetical character and jjersonal excellence eminently contributed to this result ; and it may seem that Ephraim, as well as all Israel besides, became habituated to the predominance of Benjamin, so that no serious resistance was made to the supremacy of Saul. At his death a new schism took place through their jealousy of Judah ; yet, in a few yeats' time, by the splendour of David's victories, and afterwards by Solomon's peaceful power, a per- manent national union might seem to have been effected. But the laws of inheritance in Israel, excellent as they were for preventing permanent alienation of landed property, and the degradation of the Hebrew poor into praedial slaves, neces- sarily impeded the perfect fusion of the tribes, by discouraging intermarriage, and hindering the union of distant estates in the same hands. Hence, when the sway of Solomon began to be felt as a tyranny; the old jealousies of the tribes revived, and Jeroboam, an Ephraimite (1 Kings xi. 26), being suspected of treason, fled to Shishak, king of Egypt. The death of Solomon was followed by a defection of ten of the tribes, which esta- blished the separation of Israel from Judah (b.c. 975). This was the most important event which had befallen the Hebrew nation since their conquest of Canaan. The chief territory anil population were now with Jeroboam, but the religions sanc- tion, the legitimate descent, lay with the rival monarch. From the political danger of allowing the ten tribes to go up to the sanctuary of Jeru- salem, the princes of Israel, as it were in self- defence, set up a sanctuary of their own ; and the ISRAEL. 53 intimacy of Jeroboam with the king of Egypt may have determined his preference for the form of idolatry (the calves) which he established at Dan and Bethel. In whatever else his successors differed, they one and all agreed in upholding this worship, 'which, once established, appeared essential to their national unity. Nevertheless it is generally understood to have been a worship of Jehovah, though under unlawful and degrading forms. Worse by far was the worship of Baal, which came in under one monarch only, Ahab, and was destroyed after his son was slain, by Jehu. A secondary result of the revolution was the ejection of the tribe of Levi from their lands and cities in Israel ; at least, such as remained were spiritually degraded by the compliances re- quired, and could no longer offer any resistance to the kingly power by aid of their sacred cha- racter. When the priestly tribe had thus lost independence, it lost also the power to assist the crown. The succession of Jeroboam's family was hallowed by no religious blessing; and when his son was murdered, no Jehoiada was found to rally his supporters and ultimately avenge his cause. The example of successful usurpation was so often followed by the captains of the armies, that the kings in Israel present to us an irregular series of dynasties, with several short and tumultuous reigns. This was one cause of disorder and weakness to Israel, and hindered it from swallowing up Judah : another was found in the relations of Israel towards foreign powers, which will presently be dwelt upon. We must first attend to the chronology ; in discussing which Israel and Judah must be taken together. It lies on the face of the narrative that the years of reign assigned are generally only broken years: thus Nadab is said to have come to the throne in the second and to have been slain in the third year of Asa, and yet to have reigned two years (1 Kings xv. 25, 28) ; conse- quently every reign is liable to a deduction not exceeding eleven months. Instances will also appear in which reigns are MMffejTated by a frac- tion of a year : it is doubtful whether this is another sort of phraseology, or is an error properly so called. Some have further maintained (as Mr. Greswell) that the reigns of kings were counted, at least occasionally, from the beginning of the Jewish year. To illustrate the effect of this : sup- pose a king of England to come to the throne in September, an event which happened in the fol- lowing March might be assigned to the second year of his reign, though he would not have com- pleted even a single year. The great objections to applying this principle are, 1. that we have no proof that it was actually used ; 2. that it introduces great vagueness, since we do not once know at what season of the year any king began his reign ; 3. that it solves none of the greater difficulties en- countered, and that it is not worth while appealing to it for the smaller ones. Even if applied, the total effect of it on the chronology is almost inap- preciable, for the limits of possible error remain perhaps exactly as without it. The once favourite system, of imagining a king to rule conjointly with his father, when it is not intimated in the Scripture, is now deservedly exploded by all the ablest chronologers. The following table contains the materials for chronology furnished in the Scriptures: — 51 ISRAEL ISRAEL. ■ III! ■ ■■■ H 1 ■ ■■■■ Years Year of pre- Years Year of pre- of ceding king Accession of a king of Israel. of ceding king Reign. of Israel. Reign. of Judah. *17 22 — 3 18th 41 20th Nadab 2 2nd 24 3rd 2 26th Zimri ...... 7 days 27th 12 *(31st) *22 38th *25 4th 2 17th 12 18th 8 5th 1 12th [Queen Athaliah] . . 7 — *28 — 40 7th 17 23rd 16 *37th 29 2nd Jeroboam II. . . < f41 15th *52 |27th Zachariah . . > • i 38th Shallum . . . . « i 39th Menahem .... *10 39th Pekahiah .... 2 50th f20 52nd 16 2nd 16 17th 9 12th 29 *3rd Samaria taken . . . — 6th Some of these data are inconsistent with others, and it is important to decide lohich of them need correction. Of course (other things being equal), those changes are to be preferred which least dis- turb the system as a whole. But it is well to distinguish between the numbers marked with an asterisk (*) and those to which an obelus (f ) is added. The former are wrong only by a unit or two, and therefore perhaps can be resolved by interpretation : the latter are quite untenable. These must be separately remarked upon. I. — 1. Rehoboam is said to have reigned 17 years; yet Abijah succeeded him in the 18th year of Jeroboam. We must then explain 17 to mean 17 and a fraction, which is contrary to the usual Hebrew method. 2. Ahab seems to hare reigned less than 21 years, since Jehoshaphat succeeded in his 4th year, and Ahaziah followed in Jehoshaphat's 17th year. It is better to alter 22 to 21 than 4th to 5th, or 17th to 18th; for if 4th were changed to 5th, Asa's reign would be- come (more than) 42, not 41 years : if 17th were made 18th, the accession of Jehoramin the 18th year must be further disturbed. 3. The length of Jehoshaphat's reign involves a difficulty at first sight : since Jehoram of Israel came to the throne in his 18th year, and in Jehoram's 5th the other Jehoram followed, Jehoshaphat appears to have reigned less than 18 + 5 years. It is true that his son was installed in power during his life (2 Kings xviii. 16); but in the opinion of Mr. Clinton and others the son's reign could not be reckoned from that event, but from the father's death. If this be true, 25 must be altered to 2f or 22, as by far the simplest remedy. Neverthiv less Mr. Clinton's opinion v. here by no meanc self-evident. * If Jehoram received not merely actual power, as Jotham did, who was regent for his father (2 Kings xv. 5), but a ceremonial in- stallation, it is credible trist his reign should have been dated from this event, although Jehoshaphat's reign would still be estimated from its commence- ment to his death. We may then neglect the 25 as insignificant to tire chronology, regarding Jehoram in any case to have commenced his reign in the 22nd or 23rd of his father. [After these remarks a very simple process determines that from Jeroboam to Jehu includes more than 8S and less than 92 years. Thus — Jeroboam . Abijah Asa Jehoshaphat Jehoram of Israel Jehu . Years. Mnths. Years: Mnths. 0 18 20 60 77 0 or IS ,, 20 ,, 61 „ 79 „ 91 0 0 11 10 9 Hence no decisive result is attainable from the data.] But further : 4. Jehu's reign exceeded 28 years, since Jehoash succeeded in his 7th year, and Jehoahaz in Jehoash's 23rd. We must in- terpret 28 to mean 28 and a fraction, as in Reho- boam's case. 5. Jehoash of Judah reigned less than 39 full years if his namesake of Israel began to reign in his 37th year, and in the 2nd year of ISRAEL. the latter Amaziah succeeded. The Sept. has 39 instead of 37 'in some copies,' says Mr. Clin- ton (the Vatican Sept. agrees with the received text, and so does Josephus) ; and though this is probably a mere correction, it seems to be right} since it is requisite to make good the 17 years of reign for Jehoahaz. 6. Uzziah reigned more than 52 full years, since Pekah came to the •throne in his 52nd and Jotham in Pekalvs 2nd year. Once more, then, 52 means 52 and a frac- tion. 7. Menahem, for a like reason, reigned not 1-0 years current, but 10 years and some months, since he succeeded in Uzziah's 39tb, and Pekahiah followed in Uzziah's 50th. In ail the cases where a whole number is thus used with the omission of a fraction, a cautious chronologer ought perhaps to add days less than a month, if that is enough to satisfy the other conditions. 8. Ahaz reigned not 16 years current, but less than 15 full years, if Hoshea succeeded in his 12th and Hezekiah in Hoshea 's 3rd year ; but which of the three numbers concerned is to be re- garded as faulty is extremely doubtful. Winer and Clinton both make Hezekiah ascend the throne in the fourth year of Hoshea; but it would serve equally well to alter ' 12th of Ahaz' into 13th or 14th. II. — Some greater deviations must now be no- ticed. I. The accession of Omri is placed in the 31st year of Asa; but this must clearly be reck- oned from his residence in Samaria (1 Kings xvi. 23). Even this is inconsistent with the statement that he reigned ' six years in Tirzah ;' for in the 31st of Asa^fe full years were not completed. 2. A great error, and not a mere ■numerical one, is found in 2 Kings i. 17, which makes Jehoram king of Israel come to the throne in the second year of his namesake of Judah, whom he really preceded by four full years (viii. 16). 3. Uzziah cannot have succeeded in the 27th year of Jeroboam II,, otherwise his father's xeign would be more than 14 + 26 years. The number 27 is variously corrected to 14, 16, and 17. 4. The 41 years' reign of Jeroboam II. can- not be correct. Interpreters in general choose to imagine an interregnum of 11 years between Jeroboam and his son, which is contrary to the plain meaning of the text, and intrinsically im- probable after an eminently prosperous reign. A well-known and able writer even dilates on the ' 1 1 years of anarchy and civil strife' as a proved fact of great moment in the history ! But to in- vent facts of this sort in deference to a mere num- ber, where so many numbers are not trustworthy, -and with violence to the narrative, is highly ob- jectionable. 5. Similar remarks apply to the interregnum invented after the death of Pekah. Of his murderer it is written (2 Kings xv. 30), 1 he slew him and reigned in his stead ;' which certainly does not hint at an anarchy of nine years between. If Hoshea could not immediately force himself into the vacant throne, he was not likely to survive his daring deed for so many years, and then effect his purpose. The date, however, in that verse is quite untenable. It places the murder in the 20th year of Jotham ; but Jotham reigned only 16 years, and Pekah survived him (xvi. 5). The date in another text (xv. 27), which assigns to Pekah 20 years of reign, must also be rejected, in preference to tam- pering with the historical facts. ISRAEL. 55 Counting downwards from Jehoash of IsTael, and representing fractional parts of years by Greek letters :— Jehoash of Israel Amaziah . . Jeroboam . . Uzziah * Zachariah 0 1 +«- . • 15 + a + jS . , 29 + a + y . . 66-f a + 7-f-S It is hence easy to see that Jeroboam reigned more than 50 full years, and certainly less than 52 : it is probable then that the 41 years assigned to him ought to be 51. Assuming this, it will follow that Uzziah followed Jeroboam by less than 14 full years ; so that ' the 27th,' in 2 Kings xv. 1, will need to be corrected ' the 14th.' It cannot be made greater than 15th, consistently with the other date, even if Jeroboam's reign be prolonged into a 52nd or 53rd year, by throwing it as early as possible, and that of Zachariah as late as possible. Pekah will have reigned more than 27 and less than 29 full years, if we correct the date of Hezekiah's accession, with Winer and Clinton, as above noticed. If, on the contrary, we alter the accession of Hoshea to the 13th or 14th year of Ahaz, Pekah's reign exceeds 28, but is less than 31 years. If we suppose 30 more likely to have been corrupted into 20, than 28 or 29, we may choose this alternative. So much being premised, it readily appears that from Jehu to Uzziah is more than 73 years, and less than 76 ; thus : — Years. Mntlis. Years. Mnths. Jehu .... 0 0 0 0 Jehoash . « . 6 1 or 6 11 Amaziah ... 45 2 „ 46 10 Uzziah 6 ' i . 73 3 „ 75 9 and that from Uzziah to the capture of Samaria is more than 88, and less than 91 years : — Years. jVInths. Years. Mhths. Uzziah * * . 0 O 0 0 Jotham ... 52 2 or 52 11 Ahaz i ... 67 3 ,,,68 10 Hezekiah ... 82 4 „ 83 9 Samaria taken .88 5 „ 90 8 From Jehu to the capture of Samaria then is more than 161 years, and less than 167 : finally, the whole period of the Israel itish monarchy lies between the limits of 249 and 259 years. Since positive truth is here unattainable, it does not appear worth while to disturb (as a wlrole) any received chronological system : it is enough to mark (when possible) the limits of error. The date of the capture of Samaria now most re- ceived is B.C. 721 ; yet this is arrived at through the reigns of the early Persian kings, and without any very satisfactory check upon error. The following scheme of chronology agrees with Winer in its total range, but has minor changes by a single unit in some of the kings :— B.C. Rehoboam . . . 975 Jeroboam. Abijah .... 957 Asa ...» 955 954 Nadab. •952 Baasha. \ 929 Elah. J Q28 Zruiri, Omri. ¥ 56 ISRAEL. B.C. 917 Ahab. 1 Jehoshaphat . 914 -, i 897 Ahaziah. j 896 Jehoram. J Jehoram . . . 889 Ahaziah . 885 Queen Athaliah . 884 Jehu. h Jehoash . 878 855 Jehoahaz. ' 840 Jehoash. Amaziah . . . 838 r 824 Jeroboam II. Uzziah . . 809 772 Zachariah. ' 771 Shallum, Menahen 760 Pekahiah. 758 Pekah. Jotham . 757 Afaaz . . 741 729 Hoshea. Hezekiah . . 726 721 Samaria captured. The dynasties in Israel are denoted by brackets. Leaving the subject of chronology, we pass to the substance of the history. Jeroboam originally fixed on Shecheni as the centre of his monarchy, and fortified it ; moved perhaps not only by its natural suitability, but by the remembrances of Jacob which clove to it, and by the auspicious fact that here first Israel had decided for him against Rehoboam. But the natural delightfulness of Tirzah (Cant. vi. 4) led him, perhaps late in his reign, to erect a palace there (1 Kings xiv. 17). After the murder of Jeroboam's son, Baasha seems to have intended to fix his capital at Ramah, as a convenient place for annoying the king of Judah, whom he looked on as his only dangerous enemy ; but when forced to renounce this plan (xv. 17, 21), he acquiesced in Tirzah, which continued to be the chief city of Israel, until Omri, who, since the palace at Tirzah had been burned during the civil war (1 Kings xvi. 18), built Samaria, with the ambition not uncommon in the founder of a new dynast)7" (xvi. 24). Samaria continued to the end of the monarchy to be the centre of administration ; an'd its strength appears to have justified Omri*s choice. For. details, see Samaria ; also Tirzah and Sheckem. There is reason to believe that Jeroboam carried back with him into Israel the good will, if not the substantial assistance, of Shishak ; and this will ac- count for his escaping the storm from Egypt which swept over Rehoboam in his fifth year. During that first period Israel was far from quiet within. Although the ten tribes collectively had decided, in favour of Jeroboam, great numbers of indivi- duals remained attached to the family of David and to the worship at Jerusalem, and in the three first years of Rehoboam migrated into Judah (2 Chron. xi. 16, 17). Perhaps it was not until this process commenced, that Jeroboam was worked up to the desperate measure of erecting rival sanctuaries with visible idols (1 Kings xii. 27) : a measure which met the usual ill-success of pro- fane state-craft, and aggravated the evil which he feared. It set him at war with the whole order of priests and Levites, whose expulsion or subjuga- ISRAEL. tfon, we may be certain, was not effected without convulsing his whole kingdom, and so occupying him as to free Rehoboam from any real danger, although no peace was made. The king of Judah improved the time by immense efforts in fortifying his territory (2 Chron. xi. 5-11); and, although Shishak soon after carried off the most valuable spoil, no great or definite impression could be made by Jeroboam. Israel having so far taken the place of heathen nations, and being already perhaps even in alliance with Egypt, at an early period — we know not how soon — sought and obtained the friendship of the kings of Damascus. A sense of the great advantage derivable from such a union seems to have led Ahab afterwards- to behave with mildness and conciliation towards Benhadad, at a time when it could have been least expected (1 Kings xx. 31-34). From that transaction we learn that Benhadad I. had made in Damascus 'streets for Omri,' and Omri for Benhadad in Samaria. This, no doubt, implied that ' a quarter ' was assigned for Syrian mer- chants in Samaria, which was probably fortified like the ' camp of the Tyrians ' in Memphis, or the English factory at Calcutta; and in it, of course, Syrian worship would be tolerated.. Against such intercourse the prophets, as might be expected, entered their protest (ver. 35-43) ; but it was in many ways too profitable to be renounced. In the reign of Baasha, Asa king of Judah, sen- sible of the dangerous advantage gained by his rival through the friendship of the Syrians, deter- mined to buy them off at any price [see also, under Judah] ; and by sacrificing ' the treasures' of the house of the Lord and the treasures of the king's house ' (xv. 18), induced Benhadad I. to break his. league with Baasha and to ravage all the northern district of Israel. This drew off the Israelitish monarch, and enabled Asa to destroy the fortifications of Ramah, which would have stopped the course of his trade (xv. 17), perhaps that with the sea-coast and with Tyre. Such was the beginning of the war between Israel and Syria, on which the safety of Judah at that time depended. Cordial union was not again restored between the two northern states until the days of Rezin king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Rema- liab, when Damascus must have already felt the rising power of Nineveh. The renewed alliance instantly proved so disastrous to Judah, which was reduced to extremest straits (Isa. vii. 2 ;. 2 Kings xv. 37 ; 2 Chron. xxviii. 5, 6), as may seem to justify at least the policy of Asa's pro- ceeding. Although it was impossible for a pro- phet to approve of it (2 Chron. xvi. 7), we may only so much the more infer that Judah was already brought into most pressing difficulties,, and that the general course of the war, in spite of occasional reverses, was decidedly and increas- ingly favourable to Israel. The wars of Syria and Israel were carried on chiefly under three reigns, those of Benhadad II., Hazael, and Benhadad III., the two first monarchs being generally prosperous, especially Hazael, the last being as decidedly unsuccessful. Although these results may have depended in part on per- sonal qualities, there is high probability that the feebleness displayed by the Syrians against. Jehoash and his son Jeroboam was occasioned by the pressure of the advancing empire of Nineveh. To make this clear, a small table of synchronisms ISRAEL. ISRAEL. 57 B.C. Syhia. B.C. Assyria. 000? 980? Rezon. .1. Hizion. 1050 Nineveh unable to resist the king of Zobah, and quite unheard of in Palestine. 960? Tabrimon. 940 910? 885 1 Benhadad I. Benhadad II. Hazael. 940 Nineveh still unable to interfere with the*Syrians, but perhaps beginning to rise into empire by the conquest of Media and Babylon. 845 Benhadad III. 850 800 765? Assyria undoubtedly coming forward into great power. Assyria probably in possession of Northern Syria. The king of Assyria marches for the first time into Israel. 800? 758 [Damascus taken by Jeroboam II.] Rezin. representing the two heathen powers may be ser- viceable. The dates are only approximate. Asa adhered, through the whole of his long reign, to the policy of encouraging hostility be- tween the two northern kingdoms; and the first Benhadad had such a career of success that his son found himself in a condition to hope for an entire conquest of Israel. His formidable inva- sions wrought, an entire change in the mind of Jehoshaphat (1 Kings xxii. 44), who saw that if Israel was swallowed up by Syria there would be no safety for Judah. We may conjecture that this consideration determined him to unite the two royal families ; for no common cause would have induced so religious a king to select for his son's wife Athaliah the daughter of Jezebel. The age of Ahaziah, who was sprung from this mar- riage, forces us to place it as early as B.C. 912, which is the third year of Jehoshaphat and sixth of Ahab. Late in his reign Jehoshaphat threw himself most cordially (1 Kings xxii. 4) into the' defence of Ahab, and by so doing probably saved Israel from a foreign yoke. Another mark of the low state into which both kingdoms were falling, is, that after Ahab's death the Moabites refused their usual tribute to Israel, and (as far as can be made out from the ambiguous words of 2 Kings iii. 27) the united force of the two kingdoms failed of doing more than irritate them. Soon after, in the reign of Jehoram son of Jehoshaphat, the Edomites followed the example, and esta- blished their independence. This event possibly engaged the whole force of Judah, and hindered it from succouring Samaria during the cruel siege which it sustained from Benhadad II., in the reign of Jehoram son of Ahab. The declining years and health of the king of Syria gave a short respite to Israel ; but, in b.c 885, Hazael, by de- feating the united Hebrew armies, commenced the career of conquest and harassing invasion by which he ' made Israel like the dust by threshing,.' Even under Jehu he subdued the traus-Jordanic tribes (2 Kings x. 32). Afterwards, since he took the town of Gath (2 Kings xii. 17) and pre- pared to attack Jerusalem — an attack which Jehoash king of Judah averted only by strictly ■ following Asa's precedent — it is manifest that all the passes and chief forts of the country west of the Jordan must have been in his hand. Indeed, as he is said ' to have left to Jehoahaz onljr fifty horsemen, ten chariots, and ten thousand footmen,' it would seem that Israel was strictly a conquered province, in which Hazael dictated (as the Eng- lish to the native rajahs of India) what military force should be kept up. From this thraldom Israel was delivered by some unexplained agency. We are told merely that ' Jehovah gave to Israel a saviour, so that they went out from under' the hand of the Syrians; and the children of Israel dwelt in their tents as beforetime,' 2 Kings xiii. 5. It is allowable to conjecture that the (apparently unknown) deliverer was the Assyrian monarchy, which, assaulting Hazael towards the end of the reign of Jehoahaz, entirely drew awa3' the Syrian armies. That it was some urgent, powerful, and continued pressure, considering the great strength which the empire of Damascus had attained, seems clear from the sudden weakness of Syria through the reigns of Jehoash and Jeroboam II., the former of whom thrice defeated Benhadad III. and ' recovered the cities of Israel ;' the latter not only regained the full territory of the ten tribes, but made himself master (for a time at least) of Damascus and Hamath. How entirely the friendship of Israel and Judah had been caused and cemented by their common fear of Syria, is proved by the fact that no sooner is the power of Damascus broken than new war breaks out be- tween the two kingdoms, which ended in the plunder of Jerusalem by Jehoash, who also broke down its walls and carried off hostages ; after which there is no more alliance between Judah and Israel. The empire of Damascus seems to have been entirely dissolved under the son of Hazael, and no mention is made of its kings for eighty years or more. When Pekah, son of Rema- liahj reigned in Samaria, Rezin, as king of Da- mascus, made a last but ineffectual effort for its independence. The same Assyrian power which had doubtless so seriously shaken, and perhaps temporarily over- turned, the kingdom of Damascus, was soon to be felt by Israel. Menahem was invaded by Pul (the first sovereign of Nineveh whose name we know), and was made tributary. His successor, Tiglath-pileser, in the reign of Pekah. son of 58 ISRAEL. Remaliah, carried captive the eastern and northern tribes of Israel (i. e. perhaps all their chief men as hostages ?), and soon after slew Rezin, (fee ally of Petal], and subdued Damascus. The following emperor, Shalmanezer, besieged and captured Sa- maria, and terminated the kingdom of Israel, b.c. 721. This branch of the Hebrew monarchy suffered far greater and more rapid reverses than the other. From the accession of Jeroboam to the middle of Baasha's reign it probably increased in power ; it then waned with the growth of the Damascene empire ; it struggled hard against it under Ahab and Jehoram, but sank lower and lower ; it was dismembered under Jehu, and made subject under Jehoahaz. From b.c. 940 to b.c. 850 is, as nearly as can be ascertained, the period of de- pression ; and from b.c. 914 to b.c. 830 that of friendship or alliance with Judah. But after (about) b.c. 850 Syria began to decline, and Israel soon shot out rapidly ; so that Joash and his son Jeroboam, appear, of all Hebrew monarchs, to come next to David and Solomon. How long this burst of prosperity lasted does not distinctly appear ; but it would seem that entire dominion over the ten tribes was held until Pekah received the first blow from the Assyrian conqueror. Besides that which was a source of weakness to Israel from the beginning, viz. the schism of the crown with the whole ecclesiastical body, other causes may be discerned which made the ten tribes less powerful, in comparison with the two, than might have been expected. The marriage of Ahab to Jezebel brought with it no political advantages at all commensurate with the direct moral mischief, to say nothing of the spiritual evil; and Ihe reaction against the worship of Baal was a most ruinous atonement for the sin. To suppress the monstrous iniquity, the prophets let loose the remorseless Jehu, who, not satisfied ■with the blood of. Ahab's wife, grandson, and seventy sons, murdered first the king of Judah himself, and next forty-two youthful and innocent princes of his house ; while, strange to tell, the daughter of Jezebel gained by his deed the throne of Judah, and perpetrated a new massacre. The horror of such crimes must have fallen heavily on Jehu, and have caused a wide-spread disaffection among his own subjects. Add to this, that the Phoenicians must have deeply resented his pro- ceedings ; so that we get a very sufficient clue to the prostration of Israel under the foot of Hazael during the reign of Jehu and his son. Another and more abiding cause of political debility in the ten tribes was found in the imper- fect consolidation of the inhabitants into a single nation. Since those who lived east of the Jordan retained, to a great extent at least, their pastoral habits, their union with the rest could never have been very firm ; and when a king was neither strong independently of them, nor had good hereditary pretensions, they were not likely to contribute much to his power. After their con- quest of the Hagarenes and the depression of the Moabites and Ammonites by David, they had free room to spread eastward ; and many of their clref men may have become wealthy in flocks an -' herds (like Machir the son of Ammiel, of Lodebar, and Barzillai the Gileadite, 2 Sam. xvii. 27), over whom the authority of the Israel- itish crown would naturally be precarious ; while ISSACHAR. west of the Jordan the agrarian law of Moses made it difficult or impossible for a landed no- bility to form itself, which could be formidable to the royal authority. That the Arab spirit ot freedom was rooted in the eastern tribes, may perhaps be inferred from the case of the Re- chabites, who would neither live in houses nor plant vines ; undoubtedly, like some of the Na- bathaaans, lest by becoming settled and agricul- tural they should be enslaved. Yet the need of imposing this law on his descendants would not have been felt by Jonadab, had not an opposite tendency been rising, — that of agricultural settle- ment. On another point our information is defective, viz. what proportion of the inhabitants of the land consisted of foreign slaves, or subject and degraded castes [Solomon]. Such as belonged to tribes who practised circumcision [Circumcision] would with less difficulty become incorporated with the Israelites ; but the Philistines who were intermixed with Israel, by resisting this ordi- nance, must have continued heterogeneous. In 1 Kings xv. 27 ; xvi. 15, we find the town of Gibbethon in the hand of the Philistines during the reigns of Nadab, Baasha, and Zimri : nor.is i( stated that they were finally expelled. Gibbethon being a Levitical town, it might be conjectured that it had been occupied by the Philistines wher the Levites emigrated into Judah ; but the possi bilities here are many. Although the priests and Levites nearly dis appeared out of Israel, prophets were perhaps even more numerous and active there than in Judah j and Abijah, whose prediction first endangered Jeroboam (1 Kings xi. 29-40), lived in honour a< Shiloh to his dying day (xiv. 2). Obadiah alone saved one hundred prophets of Jehovah from the rage of Jezebel (xviii. 13). Possibly their extra- social character freed them from the restraint imposed on priests and Levites ; and while they felt less bound to the formal rites of the Law, the kings of Israel were also less jealous of them. In fact, just as a great cathedral in Christendom tends to elevate the priestly above the prophetical functions, so, it is possible, did the proximity of Jerusalem ; and the prophet may have moved most freely where he came least into contact with the priest. That most inauspicious event — the rupture of Israel with Judah — may thus have been overruled for the highest blessing of the world, by a fuller development of the prophetical spirit. F. W. N. 1. ISSACHAR 03PB>?, Sept. 1gffiXap), a son of Jacob and Leah, born b.c. 1749, who gave name to one of the tribes of Israel (Gen. xxx. 18 ; Num. xxvi. 25). 2. The tribe called after Issachar. Jacob, on his death-bed, speaking metaphorically of the character and destinies of his sons, or rather of the tribes which should spring from them, said, ' Issachar is a strong ass couching down between two burdens' (Gen. xlix. 14, 15). Remembering the character of the ass in eastern countries, we may be sure that this comparison was not intended in disparagement. The ass is anything but stupid ; and the proverbial obstinacy which it sometimes exhibits in our own country, is rather the result of ill-treatment than a natural charac- teristic of the animal. Its true attributes are ITHAMAR. patience, gentleness, great capability of endurance, laborious exertion, and a meek submission to au- thority. Issachar, therefore, the progenitor of a race singularly docile, and distinguished for their patient industry, is exhibited under the similitude of the meekest and most laborious of quadrupeds. The descriptive character goes on : — ' And he saw that rest was good, and the land that it was pleasant, and he bowed his shoulder to bear, and became a servant unto tribute ;' which probably does not imply that reproach upon Issachar, as addicted to ignominious ease, which some commentators find in it. It seems simply to mean that finding itself in possession of a most fertile portion of Palestine, the tribe de- voted itself to the labours of agriculture, taking little interest in the public affairs of the nation. Accordingly Josephus says that the heritage of the tribe ' was fruitful to admiration, abounding in pastures and nurseries of all kinds, so that it would make any man in love with husbandry' (A)itiq. v. 1. 22). But although a decided pre- ference of agricultural over commercial or mili- tary pursuits is here indicated, there seems no reason to conclude, as some gather from the last clause, that the tribe would be willing to purchase exemption from war by the payment of a heavy tribute. The words do not necessarily imply this ; and there is no evidence that the tribe ever declined any military service to which it was called. On the contrary, it is specially com- mended by Deborah for the promptitude with which it presented itself in the war with Jabin (Judg. v. 15) ; and in the days of David honour- able testimony is borne to its character (1 Chron. xii. 32). In this passage the ' children of Issa- char' are described as ' men that had understand- ing of the times, to know what Israel ought to do :' which, compared with Esther i. 13, has been supposed to mean that they were skilled in the various practical applications of astronomy. But what need there was- of astronomy on the occasion of calling David to the throne of Israel after the death of Abner and Ishbosheth, is not very easy to discover. It more probably means that they were men held in esteem for their pru- dence and wisdom, and who knew that the time was come when it was no longer safe to delay calling David to the throne of all Israel. On quitting Egypt the tribe of Issachar numbered 54,000 adult males, which gave it the fifth nume- rical rank among tire twelve tribes, Judah, Simeon, Zebulun, and Dan being alone above it. In the wilderness it increased nearly 10,000, and then ranked as the third of the tribes, Judah and Dan only being more numerous (Num. i. xxvi.). The territory of the tribe comprehended the whole of the plain of Esdraelou and the neighbouring districts ■ — the granary of Palestine. It was bounded on the east by the Jordan, on the west and south by Manasseh, and on the nortli by Asher and Zebu- lun. It contained the towns of Megiddo, Taanach, Shunem, Jezreel, and Bethshan, with the villages of Endor, Aphek, and Ibleam, all historical names : the mountains of Tabor and Gilboa, and the valley of Jezreel, were in the territory of this tribe, and the course of the river Kishon lay through it. ITHAMAR ("iftlVN, palm-island; Sept. Jddfuip), fourth son of Aaron. He was conse- ITUR^A. 59 crated to the priesthood along with his brothers (Exod. vi. 23; Num. iii. 2, 3). Nothing is in- dividually recorded of him, except that the pro- perty of the tabernacle was placed under his charge (Exod. xxxviii. 21), and that he superin- tended all matters connected with its removal by the Levitical sections of Gershon and Merari (Num. iv. 28). The sacred utensils and their removal were entrusted to his elder brother Ele- azar. Ithamar, with his descendants, occupied the position of common priests till the high- priesthood passed into his family in the person of Eli, under circumstances of which we are igno- rant. Abiathar, whom Solomon deposed, was the last high-priest of that line ; and the ponti- ficate then reverted to the elder line of Eleazar in the person of Zadok (1 Kings ii. 27). ITURAEA ('Iroupaia), a district in the north- east of Palestine, forming the tetrarchy of Philip. The name is supposed to have originated with 11t3* Itur, or Jetur, one of Ishmael's sons (1 Chron. i. 31). In 1 Chron. v. 19 this name is given as that of a tribe or nation with which Reuben (beyond the Jordan) warred ; and from its being joined with the names of other of Ishmael's sons it is evident that a tribe descended from his son Jetur is intimated. In the latter text the Sept. takes this view, and for ' with the Hagarites, with Jetur, and Nephish, and Nodab,' reads, ' with the Hagarites, and Ituraeans, and Nephi- sseans and Nadabaeans' — nera rZv 'Ayap^vaiv, nal 'Irovpalcav, iced NatpLiraiav, kou NaSaPaioov. The old name seems to be still preserved in that of Jedur, which the same region, or a part of it, now bears. We may thus take the district to have been occupied by Ishmael's son, whose descend- ants were dispossessed or subdued by the Amo- rites, under whom it is supposed to have formed part of the kingdom of Bashan, and subsequently to have belonged to that half tribe of Manasseh which had its possessions east of the Jordan. From 1 Chron. v. 19, it appears that the sons of Jetur, whether under tribute to the Amorites, as some suppose, and forming part of the kingdom of Bashan, or not, were in actual occupation of the country, and were dispossessed by the tribes beyond the Jordan ; which is a sufficient answer to those who allege that Ituraea lay too far to the north-east to have belonged to Manasseh. Dur- ing the Exile this and other border countries were taken possession of by various tribes, whom, al- though they are called after the original names, as occupants of the countries which had received those names, we are not bound to regard as de- scendants of* the original possessors. These new Ituraeans were eventually subdued by King Aris- tobulus (b.c. 100) ; by whom they were con- strained to embrace the Jewish religion, and were at the same time incorporated with the state (Jo- seph. Antiq. xiii. 11. 3). Nevertheless the Ituraeans were still recognizable as a distinct people in the time of Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 23). As already intimated, Herod the Great, in dividing his dominions among his sons, bequeathed Ituraea to Philip, as part of a tetrarchy composed, accord- ing to huke, of Trachonitis and Ituraea ; and as Josephus (Antiq. xvii. 8. 8) mentions his territory as composed of Auranitis, Trachonitis, and 13ata- naea, it would appear as if the Evangelist regard- ed Auranitis and Paneas as comprehended under Ituraea. The name is indeed so loosely applied 60 IVORY. by ancient writers that it is difficult to fix its boundaries with precision. Perhaps it may suf- fice for general purposes to describe it as a district of indeterminate extent, traversed by a line drawn from the Lake of Tiberias to Damascus ; and by different writers, and under di fferent circumstances, mentioned with extensions in various directions, beyond the proper limits of the name. The present Jedur probably comprehends the whole or greater part of the proper Ituraea. This is described by Burckhardt (Syria, p. 286) as ' lying south of Jebelkessoue, east of Jebel es-Sheik (Mount Her- mon), and west of the Hadj road.' He adds, that it now contains only twenty inhabited villages. By the help of these lights we may discover that Itureea was a plain country, about thirty miles long from north to south, and twenty-four from east to west, having on the north Abilene and the Damascene district; on the south Auranitis and part of Bashan ; on the east the stony region of Trachonitis ; and on the west the hill country of Bashan. IVORY (D^rna? shenhabbim; Chald. jfc? b^QI shin diphel; Syr. gremphila ; Sept. oSovres eAecpdi/Tivot. New Test. hXely decayed teeth in the human mouth. This kind of ivory does not split, and therefore was anciently most useful for military instruments. Elephants' teeth were largely imported as merchandise, and also brought as tribute into Egypt. The processions of human figures bearing presents, &c, still extant on the walls of palaces and tombs, attest by the black crisp-haired bearers of huge teeth, that some of these came from Ethiopia or Central Africa; and by white men similarly laden, who also bring an Asaiatic elephant and a white bear, that others came from the East. Phoenician traders had ivory in such abundance that the chief seats of their galleys were inlaid with it. In the Scriptures, IYAR. according to the Chaldee Paraphrase, Jacob's bed was made of this substance (Gen. xlix. 33); we find king Solomon importing it from Tar- shish (1 Kings x. 22) ; and if Psalm xlv. 8 was written before his reign, ivory was extensively used in 'the furniture of royal residences at a still earlier period. The same fact is corroborated by Homer, whotaotices this article of luxury in the splendid palace of Menelaus, when Greece had not yet formed that connection with Egypt and the East which the Hebrew people, from their geo- graphical position, naturally cultivated. As an instance of the superabundant possession and bar- barian use of elephants' teeth, may be mentioned the octagonal ivory hunting '-tower built by Akbar, about twenty-four miles west of Agra : it is still standing, and bristles with 128 enormous tusks disposed in ascending lines, sixteen on each face. Mr. Roberts, remarking on the words of Amos (vi. 4), they ' that lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch themselves upon their couches,' refers the last word, in conformity with the Tamul version, to swinging cots, often mentioned in the early tales of India, and still plentifully used by the wealthy. But it does not appear that they were known in Western Asia, or that figures of them occur on Egyptian bas-reliefs. It is more likely* that ' palkies ' (those luxurious travelling litters) are meant, which were borne on men's shoulders, whilst the person within was stretched at ease. They were in common use even among the Ro- mans ; for Cicero fell into his assassins' hands while he was attempting to escape in one of them towards Naples. The tusks of African elephants are generally much longer than those of the Asiatic ; and it may be observed in this place, that the ancients, as well as the moderns, are mis- taken when they assert elephants' tusks to be a kind of horns. They are genuine teeth, com- bining in themselves, and occupying, in the upper jaw, the whole mass of secretions which in other animals form the upper incisor and laniary teeth. They are useful for defence and offence, and for holding down green branches, or rooting up water- plants ; but still they are not absolutely necessary, since there is a variety of elephant in the Indian forests entirely destitute of tusks, and the females in most of the races are either without them, or have them very small ; not turned downwards, as Bochart states, but rather straight, as correctly described by Pliny [Elephant]. — C. H. S. IYAR ("I^N ; 'lap, Josephus, Antiq. viii. 3. 1 ; the Macedonian 'Apre/xicrLos) is the late name of that month which was the second of the sacred, and the seventh of the civil year of the Jews, and which began with the new moon of May. The few memorable days in it are the 10th, as a fast for the death of Eli; the 14th, as the second or lesser Passover, for those whom uncleanness or absence prevented from celebrating the feast in Nisan (Num. ix. 11); the 23rd, as a feast insti- tuted by Simon the Maccabee in memory of his taking the citadel Acra in Jerusalem (1 Mace, xiii. 51, 52) ; the 28th, as a fast for the death of Samuel. Gesenius derives Iyar from the Hebrew root "IIX, to shine ; but Benfey and Stern, following out their theory of the source from which the Jews obtained such Barnes, deduce it from the assumed Zend representative of the Persian bahar, JABAL. c spring ' (Monatsnamen, p. 134). The name lyar does not occur in the Old Testament, this month being always described as the second month, except in four places in which it is called Ziv (1 Kings v. 1, 37 ; Dan. ii. 31 ; iv. 33). Ziv, which is written "|* and I^T, is not considered to be a proper flame, but an appellative. It is derived from 1HT, and is a curtailed form for Vi"!T, ' zehiv,' bright, an appropriate epithet of the month of flowers. — J. N. JABAL (?%l, a stream; Sept. 'IwfZ-fiK), a de- scendant of Cain, son of Lamech and Adah, who is described in Gen. iv. 20, as 'the father of such as dwell in tents, and have cattle.' This obviously means that Jabal was the first who adopted that nomade life which is still followed by numerous Arabian and Tartar tribes in Asia. Abel had long before been a keeper of sheep ; but Jabal in- vented such portable habitations (formed, doubt- less, of skins) as enabled a pastoral people to re- move their dwellings with them from one place to another, when they led their flocks to new pastures. JABBOK (|?3J; Sept. 'Ia^/c), one of the streams which traverse the country east of the Jordan, and which, after a course nearly from east to west, falls into that river about thirty miles below the lake of Tiberias. It seems to rise in the Hauran mountains, aud its whole course may be computed at sixty-five miles. It is mentioned in Scripture as the boundary which separated the kingdom of Sihon, king of the Amorites, from that of Og, king of Bashan (Josh. xii. 1-6); and it appears afterwards to have been the boundary between the tribe of Reuben and the half-tribe of Manasseh. The earliest notice of it occurs in Gen. xxxii. 22. The Jabbok now bears the name of Zerka. In its passage westward across Hie plains, it more than once passes under ground ; and in summer the ujjper portion of its channel becomes dry. But on entering the more hilly country imme- diately east of the Jordan, it receives tribute from several springs, which maintain it as a perennial stream, although very low in summer. From this it appears that not only its volume, but the length of its course, is much smaller in summer than in winter. On approaching the Jordan it flows through a deep ravine, the steep banks being over- grown with the solatium furiosum, which attains a considerable size. But the ravine is not so well wooded as the immediate neighbourhood. The water is pleasant, and the bed being rocky the stream runs clear (Burckhardt's Syria, p. 347 ; Irby and Mangles, Travels, p. 3 1 9 ; Buckingham, Palestine, ii. 109 ; Lindsay, ii. 123). ^ JABESH (^and B^*; Sept. 'lafch and 'IctjGiV), or Jabesu-Gii.ead, a town beyond the Jordan, in the land of Gilead. Jabesh belonged to the half-tribe of Manasseh, and was sacked by (he Israelites for refusing to join in the war against Benjamin (Judg. xxi. 8). It is chiefly memorable for the siege it sus- tained from Nahash, king of the Ammonites, the raising of which formed the first exploit of JACOB. C2 the newly-elected king, Saul, and procured his confirmation in the sovereignty. The inhabitants had agreed to surrender, and to have their right eyes put out (to incapacitate them from military service), but were allowed seven days to ratify the treaty. In the meantime Saul collected a large army, and came to their relief (1 Sam. xi.). This service was gratefully remembered by the Jabeshites ; and, about forty years after, when the dead bodies of Saul and his sons were gib- beted on the walls of Bethshan, on the other side of the river, they made a forced march by night, took away the bodies, and gave them honourable burial (1 Sam. xxxi.). Jabesh still existed as a town in the time of Eusebius, who places it six miles from Pella towards Gerasa ; but the knowledge of the site is now lost, unless we accept the conclusion of Mr. Buckingham, who thinks it may be found in a place called Jehaz or Jejaz, marked by ruins upon a hill, in a spot not far from which, accord- ing to the above indications, Jabesh must have been situated {Travels, ii. 130-134). 1. JABIN (jHl*, discerner; Sept. 'lafriv) king of Hazor, and one of the most powerful of all the princes who reigned in Canaan when it was invaded by the Israelites. His dominion seems to have extended over all the north part of the coun- try ; and after the ruin of the league formed against the Hebrews in the south by Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem, he assembled his tributaries near the waters of Merom (the lake Huleh), and called all the people to arms. This coalition was destroyed, as the one in the south had been, and Jabin himself perished in the sack of Hazor, his capital, b.c. 1450. This prince was the last powerful enemy with whom Joshua combated, and his over- throw seems to have been regarded as the crown- ing act in the conquest of the Promised Land (Josh. xi. 1—14). 2. JABIN, king of Hazor, and probably de- scended from the preceding. It appears that during one of the servitudes of the Israelites, probably when they lay under the yoke of Cushan or Eglon, the kingdom of Hazor was reconstructed. The narra- tive gives to this second Jabin even the title of 'king of Canaan ;' and this, with the possession of 900 iron-armed war-chariots, implies unusual power and extent of dominion. The iniquities of the Israelites having lost them the Divine protection, Jabin gained the mastery over them ; and, stimu- lated by the remembrance of ancient wrongs, oppressed them heavily for twenty years. From this thraldom they were relieved by the great vic- tory won by Barak in the plain of Esdraelon, over the hosts of Jabin, commanded by Sisera, one of the most renowned generals of those times, b.c. 1285. The well-compacted power of the king of Hazor was not yet, however, entirely broken. The war was still prolonged for a time, but ended in the entire ruin of Jabin, and the subjugation of his territories by the Israelites (Judg. iv.). This is the Jabin whose name occurs in Ps. lxxxiii. 10. JACHIN AND BOAZ, the names of two brazen pillars in the porch of Solomon's temple [Temple]. JACINTH. [Leshem.] JACOB (3b_V! ; Sept. 'IaK^/3) was the second son of Isaac by his wife Rebekah. Her con- 62 JACOB. JACOB. ceiving is stated to have been supernatural. Led by peculiar feelings she went to inquire of the Lord, and was informed that she was indeed with child, that her offspring should be the founders of two nations, and that the elder should serve the 3'ounger : circumstances which ought to be borne in mind when a judgment is pronounced on her conduct in aiding Jacob to secure the pri- vileges of birth to the exclusion of his elder bro- ther Esau — conduct which these facts, connected with the birth of the boys, may well have in- fluenced. Some have indeed denied the facts, and taken from them the colouring they bear in the Bible ; and such persons may easily be led on to pronounce a severe and indiscriminate sentence of condemnation on Rebekah ; but those who pro- fess to receive and to respect the Biblical records are unjustifiable, if they view any part of them, or any event which they record, in any other light than that which the Bible supplies, in any other position than that which the Bible presents. It is as a whole that each separate character should be contemplated — under the entire assemblage of those circumstances which the Bible narrates. If we first maim an historical person we may very readily misrepresent him. As the boys grew, Jacob appeared to partake of the gentle, quiet, and retiring character of his father, and was accordingly led to prefer the tranquil safety and pleasing occupations of a shepherd's life to the bold and daring enterprises of the hunter, for which Esau had an irresistible predilection. Jacob, therefore, passed his days in or near the paternal tent, simple and unpretending in his manner of life, and finding in the flocks and herds which he kept, images and emotions which both filled and satisfied his heart. His domestic habits and affections seem to have co- operated with the remarkable events that attended his birth, in winning for him the peculiar regard and undisguised preference of his mother, who probably in this merely yielded to impressions which she could scarcely account for, much less define, and who had not even a faint conception of the magnitude of influence to which her pre- dilection was likely to rise, and the sad conse- quences to which it could hardly fail to lead. That selfishness and a prudence which ap- proached to cunning had a seat in the heart of the youth Jacob, appears but too plain in his deal- ing with Esau, when he exacted from a famishing brother so large a price for a mess of pottage, as the surrender of his birthright. Nor does the simple narrative of the Bible afford grounds by which this act can be well extenuated. Esau asks for food, alleging as his reason, ( for I am faint.' Jacob, unlike both a youth and a brother, answers, ' Sell me this day thy birthright.' What could Esau do ? ' Behold,' he replies, ' I am at the point to die, and what profit (if by retain- ing my birthright I lose my life) shall this birth- right do me?' Determined to have a safe bar- gain, the prudent Jacob, before he gave the needed refreshment, adds, ' Swear to me this day.' The oath was given, the food eaten, and Esau ' went his way,'' leaving a home where he had received so sorry a welcome. The leaning which his mother had in favour of Jacob would naturally be augmented by the con- duct of Esau in marrying, doubtless contrary to his parents' wishes, two Hittite women, who are recorded to have been a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah. Circumstances thus prepared the way for pro- curing the transfer of the birthright, when Isaac being now old, proceeded to take steps to pro- nounce the irrevocable blessing which acted with all the force of a modern testamentary bequest. This blessing, then, it was essential that Jacob should receive in preference to Esau. Here Rebekah appears the chief agent; Jacob is a mere instrument in her hands. Isaac directs Esau to procure him some venison. This Re- bekah hears, and urges her reluctant favourite to personate his elder brother. Jacob suggests diffi- culties : they are met by Rebekah, who is ready to incur any personal danger so that her object be gained. ' My father, peradventure, will feel me, and I shall seem to him as a deceiver, and I shall bring a curse upon me and not a blessing. His mother said unto him, Upon me be thy curse, my son, only obey my voice.' Her voice is obeyed, the venison is brought, Jacob is equipped for the deceit ; he helps out his fraud by direct false- 'hood, and the old man, whose senses are now fail- ing, is at last with difficulty deceived. It cannot be denied that this is a most reprehensible transac- tion, and presents a truly painful picture ; in which a mother conspires with one son in order to cheat her aged husband, with a view to deprive another son of his rightful inheritance. Justification is here impossible ; but it should not be forgotten in the estimate we form that there was a promise in favour of Jacob, that Jacob's qualities had en- deared him to his mother, and that the prospect to her was dark and threatening which arose when she saw the neglected Esau at the head of tho house, and his hateful wives assuming command over herself. Punishment in this world always follows close upon the heels of transgression. Fear seized the guilty Jacob, who is sent by his father, at the suggestion of Rebekah, to the original seat of the family, in order that he might find a wife among his cousins, the daughters of his mother's brother, Laban the Syrian. Before he is dismissed Jacob again receives his father's blessing, the object ob- viously being to keep alive in the young man's mind the great promise given to Abraham, and thus to transmit that influence which, under the aid of divine providence, was to end in placing the family in possession of the land of Palestine, and in so doing to make it ' a multitude of people.' The language, however, employed by the aged father suggests the idea, that the religious light which had been kindled in the mind of Abraham had lost somewhat of its fulness, if not of its clearness also; since 'the blessing of Abraham,' which had originally embraced all nations, is now restricted to the descendants of this one patriarchal family. And so it appears, from the language which Jacob employs (Gen. xxviii. 16) in relation to the dream that he had when he tarried all night upon a certain plain on his journey eastward, that his idea of the Deity was little more than that of a local god — ' Surely the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not.' Nor does the language which he immediately after employs show that his ideas of the relations between God and man were of an. exalted and refined nature : — ' If God will be with me, and will keep me in the way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and raiment to put on, JACOB. JACOB. 63 80 that I come again to my father's house in peace, then shall the Lord be my God.' The vision therefore with which Jacob was favoured was not without occasion, nor could the terms in which he was addressed by the Lord, fail to en- large and correct his conceptions, and make his religion at once more comprehensive and more influential. Jacob, on coming into the land of the people of the East, accidentally met with Rachel, Laban's daughter, to whom, with true eastern simplicity and politeness, he showed such courtesy as the duties of pastoral life suggest and admit. And here his gentle and affectionate nature displays itself under the influence of the bonds of kindred and the fair form of youth : — 'Jacob kissed Rachel, and lifted up his voice and wept.' After he had been with his uncle the space of a month, Laban inquires of him what reward he ex- pects for his services. He asks for the ' beautiful and well-favoured Rachel.' His request is granted on condition of a seven years' service — a long period truly, but to Jacob ' they seemed but a few days for the love he had to her.' When the time was expired, the crafty Laban availed him- self of the customs of the country, in order to sub- stitute his elder and ' tender-eyed' daughter Leah. In the morning Jacob found how he had been beguiled ; but Laban excused himself, saying, ' It must not be done in our country, to give the younger before the first-born.' Another seven years' service gains for Jacob the beloved Rachel. Leah, however, has the compensatory privilege of being the mother of the first-born — Reuben; three other sons successively follow, namely, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, sons of Leah. This fruitful - ness was a painful subject of reflection to the barren Rachel, who employed language on this occasion that called forth a reply from her husband which shows that, mild as was the character of Jacob, it. was by no means wanting in force and energy (Gen. xxx. 2). An arrangement, however, took place, by which Rachel had children by means of her maid, Bilhali, of whom Dan and Naphtali were born. Two other sons — Gad and Asher — were born to Jacob of Leah's maid, Zilpah. Leah herself bare two more sons, namely, Issachar and Zebulun ; she also bare a daughter, Dinah. At length Rachel herself bare a son, and she called his name Joseph. Most faithfully, and with great success, had Jacob served his uncle for fourteen years, when he became desirous of returning to his parents. At the urgent request of Laban, however, he is induced to remain. The language employed upon this occasion (Gen. xxx. 25, sq.) shows that Jacob's character had gained considerably during his service both in strength and comprehensive- ness; but the means which he employed in order to make his bargain with his uncle work so as to enrich himself, prove too clearly that his moral feelings had not undergone an equal improve- ment, and that the original taint of prudence, and the sad lessons of his mother in deceit, had pro- duced some of their natural fruit in his bosom. Those who may wish to inquire into the nature and etHcacy of the means which Jacob employed, may, in addition to the original narrative, con- sult Michaelis and Rosenmiiller on the subject, as well as the following : — Hieron. Qucest. in Gen. ; Plin. Hist. Nat. vii. 10; Oppian, Cyneg. i. 330, sq. ; Hastfeer, ilber Schafzucht ; Bochart, Hieroz. i. 6 19. Winer, Handioort., gives a parallel passage from JSA'ian (Hist. Anim. viii. 21). The prosperity of Jacob displeased and grieved Laban, so that a separation seemed desirable. His wives are ready to accompany him. Accord- ingly he set out, with his family and his property, ' to go to Isaac his father in the land of Canaan.7 It was not till the third day that Laban learned that Jacob had fled, when he immediately set out in pursuit of his nephew, and after seven days' journey overtook him in Mount Gilead. Laban, however, is divinely warned not to hinder Jacob's return. Reproach and recrimination ensued. Even a charge of theft is put forward by Laban — ' Wherefore hast thou stolen my gods ? ' In truth, Rachel had carried off certain images which were the objects of worship. Ignorant of this misdeed, Jacob boldly called for a search, adding, ' With whomsoever thou findest thy gods let him not live.' A crafty woman's cleverness eluded the keen eye of Laban. Rachel, by an appeal which one of her sex alone could make, deceived her father. Thus one sin begets another ; superstition prompts to theft, and theft necessitates deceit. Whatever opinion may be formed of the tera- phim which Rachel stole, and which Laban was so anxious to discover, and whatever kind or de- gree of worship may in reality have been paid to them, their existence in the family suffices of itself to show how imperfectly instructed regard- ing the Creator were at this time those who were among the least ignorant on divine things. Laban's conduct on this occasion called forth a reply from Jacob, from which it appears that his service had been most severe, and which also proves that however this severe service might have encouraged a certain servility, it had not pre- vented the development in Jacob's soul of a high and energetic spirit, which when roused could assert its rights and give utterance to sentiments both just, striking, and forcible, and in the most poetical phraseology. Peace, however, being restored, Laban, on the ensuing morning, took a friendly, if not an affec- tionate farewell of his daughters and their sons, and returned home. Meanwhile Jacob, going on his way, had to pass near the land of Seir, in which Esau dwelt. Remembering his own con- duct and his brother's threat, he was seized with fear, and sent messengers before in order to pro- pitiate Esau, who, however, had no evil design against him ; but, when he ' saw Jacob, ran to meet him and embraced him, and fell on his neck and kissed him, and they wept' — the one tears of joyful recognition, the other of gladness at unexpected escape. The passage in which this meeting is recorded is very striking and picturesque. In moral qua- lities it exhibits Jacob the inferior of his generous, high-minded, and forgiving brother; for Jacob's bearing, whatever deduction may be made for Oriental politeness, is crouching and servile. In- dependently of the compellation, ' my lord,' which he repeatedly uses in addressing Esau, what can be said of the following terms : — 'I have seen thy face as though I had seen the face of God, and thou wast pleased with me' (Gen. xxxiii. 10). It was immediately preceding this interview that Jacob passed the night in wrestling with ' a 64 JACOB. man,' who is afterwards recognised as God, and who at length overcame Jacob by touching the hollow of his thigh. His name also was on this event changed by the mysterious antagonist into Israel, ' for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed ' (Gen. xxxii. 28). It is added that on this account his de- scendants abstained from eating the thigh of slaughtered animals. This passage is one which we are not sure that we understand. The narrator did not, we think, intend it for the account of a dream. A literal interpretation would seem difficult, for this would make the Omnipotent vanquish one of his own creatures, not without a long struggle, and at last only by a sort of art or stratagem. At the same time it must be said that the only way to expound the narrative is to divest ourselves of our own modern associations, and endeavour to contemplate it from the position in which its author stood. Still the question recurs — what was the fact which he has set forth in these terms ? (see De Wette, Krit. cl. Is. Gesch. p. 132 ; Ewald's Israel- iten, i. 405 ; Rosenmiiller's Scholia, in loc.) The design (says Wellbeloved, in loc.) ' was to en- courage Jacob, returning to his native land, and fearful of his brother's resentment, and to confirm his faith in the existence and providence of God. And who will venture to say that in that early Eeriod any other equally efficacious means could ave been employed ?' Compare the language already quoted (ver. 28). A very obvious end pursued throughout the history of Jacob, was the development of his religious convictions, and the event in question, no less than the altars he erected and the dreams he had, may have ma- terially conduced to so important a result. Having, by the misconduct of Hamor the Hivite and the hardy valour of his sons, been involved in danger from the natives of Shechem in Canaan, Jacob is divinely directed, and under the divine protection proceeds to Bethel, where he is to ' make an altar unto God that appeared unto thee when thou fleddest from the face of Esau thy brother.' Obedient to the divine com- mand, he first purifies his family from ' strange gods,' which lie hid under ' the oak which is by Shechem ;' after which God appeared to him again with the important declaration, ' I am God Almighty,' and renewed the Abrahamic covenant. While journeying from Beth-el to Ephrath, his beloved Rachel lost her life in giving birth to her second son, Benjamin. At length Jacob came to his father Isaac at Mamre, the family residence, in time to pay the last attentions to the aged pa- triarch. Not long after this bereavement Jacob was robbed of his beloved son Joseph through the jealousy and bad faith of his brothers. This loss is the occasion of showing us how strong were Jacob's paternal feelings ; for on seeing what ap- peared to be proofs that ' some evil beast had devoured Joseph,' the old man ' rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his loins, and mourned for his son many days, and refused to be com- forted.'— ' I will go down into the grave unto my son mourning' (Gen. xxxvii. 33). A widely extended famine induced Jacob to send his sons down into Egypt, where he had heard there was corn, without knowing by whose instrumentality. The patriarch, however, re- tained his youngest son Benjamin, ' lest mischief JACOB. should befall him,' as it had befallen Joseph. The young men returned with the needed sup- plies of corn. They related, however, that they had been taken for spies, and that there was but one way in which they could disprove the charge, namely, by carrying down Benjamin to ' the lord of the land.' This Jacob vehemently refused : — ' Me have ye bereaved ; Joseph is not, and Simeon is not, and ye will take Benjamin ; my son shall not go down with you ; if mischief befall him, then shall ye bring down my grey hairs with sorrow to the grave ' (Gen. xlii. 36). The pressure of the famine, however, at length forced Jacob to allow Benjamin to accompany his brothers on a second visit to Egypt ; whence in due time they brought back to their father the pleasing intelligence, ' Joseph is yet alive, and he is governor over all the land of Egypt.' How naturally is the effect of this on Jacob told — ' and Jacob's heart fainted, for he believed them not." When, however, they had gone into particulars,- he added, ' Enough, Joseph my son is yet alive. ; I will go and see him before I die.' Touches of nature like this suffice to show the reality of the history before us, and since they are not unfre- quent in the book of Genesis, they will of them- selves avail to sustain its credibility against all that the enemy can do. Each competent and un- prejudiced judge, on reading these gems of truth, may well exclaim, ' This is history, not mytho- logy; reality, not fiction.' The passage, too, with others recently cited, strongly proves how much the character of the patriarch had improved. In the entire of the latter part of Jacob's life, he seems to have gradually parted with many less desirable qualities, and to have become at once more truthful, more energetic, more earnest, affec- tionate, and, in the largest sense of the word, religious. Encouraged ' in the visions of the night,' Jacob goes down to Egypt. ' And Joseph made ready his chariot, and went up to meet Israel his father, to Goshen, and presented himself unto him ; and he fell on his neck, and wept on his neck a good while. And Israel said unto Joseph, Now let me die, since I have seen thy face, because thou art yet alive' (Gen. xlvi. 29). Joseph proceeded to conduct his father into the presence of the Egyptian monarch, when the man of God, with that self- consciousness and dignity which religion gives, instead of offering slavish adulation, ' blessed Pharaoh.' Struck with the patriarch's venerable air, the king asked, ' How old art thou ? ' What composure and elevation is there in the reply, ' The days of the years of my pilgrimage are an hundred and thirty years ; few and evil have the days of the years of my life been, and have not attained unto the days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their pilgrimage : and Jacob blessed Pharaoh, and went out from before Pharaoh' (Gen. xlvii. 8-10). This fine passage has been travestied after his own manner by Voltaire (Diction. 'Philosophy : ' That which the good man Jacob replied to Joseph must forcibly strike those who can read. How old are you 1 said the king. I am a hundred and thirty years of age, answered the old man, and I have not yet had one happy day in this short pilgrimage :' — ' A proof this,' says Niemeyer (Charak. derBibel, ii. 196), 'how faithfully Voltaire, who is always complaining of the quotations of others, cites the Bible ; so tha< JAEL. oae may almost cone] ude that lie himself must not. be ranked among those vjho can read.' Jacob, with his sons, now entered into posses- sion of some of the best land of Egypt, where they carried on their pastoral occupations, and enjoyed a' very large share of earthly prosperity. Tbe aged patriarch, after being strangely tossed about on a very rough ocean, found at last a tranquil harbour, where all the best affections of his nature were gently exercised and largely un- folded. After a lapse of time Joseph, being in- formed that his lather was sick, went to him, when * Israel strengthened himself, and sat up in his bed.' He acquainted Joseph with the divine pro- mise of the land of Canaan which, yet remained to be fulfilled, and took Joseph's sons, Epbraim and Manasseh, in place of Reuben and Simeon, whom he had lost. How impressive is his bene- diction in Joseph's' family ! ' And Israel said unto Joseph, I had not thought to see thy face : and, lo, God hath showed me also thy seed' (Gen. xlviii. 11). ' God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day, the angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads ; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers ; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth ' (ver. 15, 16). ' And Israel said unto Joseph, Behold I die ; but God will be with you and bring you again unto the land of your fathers ' (ver. 21). Then having convened his sons, the venerable patriarch pronounced on them also a blessing, which is full of the loftiest thought, expressed in the most poeti- cal diction, and adorned by the most vividly de- scriptive and engaging imagery, showing how deeply religious his character had become, how freshly it retained its fervour to the last, and how greatly it had increased in strength, elevation, and dignity : — 'And when Jacob had made an end of commanding his sons, he gathered up his feet into the bed and yielded up tbe ghost, and was gathered unto his people' (Gen. xlix. 33). — J. R. B. JAEL (bVl loild goat; Sept. 'tcrfjX), wife of Heber, the Kenite. When Sisera, the general of Jabin, had been defeated, he alighted from his chariot, hoping to escape best on foot from the hot pursuit of the victorious Israelites. On reach- ing the tents of the nomade chief, he remembered that there was peace between his sovereign and the house of Heber ; and, therefore, applied for the hospitality and protection to which he was thus entitled. This request was very cordially granted by the wife of the absent chief, who received the vanquished warrior into the inner part of the tent, where he could not be discovered by strangers without such an intrusion as eastern customs would not warrant. She also brought him milk to drink, when he asked only water ; and then covered him from view, that he might enjoy repose the more securely. As he slept, a horrid thought occurred to Jael, which she hastened too promptly to execute. She took one of the tent nails, and with a mallet, at one fell blow, drove it through the temples of the sleeping Sisera. Soon after, Barak and his people arrived in pursuit, and were shown the lifeless body of the man they sought This deed drew much attention to Jael, and preserved the camp from molestation by the victors ; and there is no disputing that her act VOL. II. JAIR. 65 is mentioned with great praise in the triumphal song wherein Deborah and Barak celebrated the deliverance of Israel (Judg. v. 24). It does not seem difficult to understand the object of Jael in this painful transaction. Her motives seem to have been entirely prudential, and, on prudential grounds, the very circumstance which renders her act the more odious — the peace subsisting between the nomade chief and the king of Hazor — must, to her, have seemed to make it the more expedient. She saw that the Israelites had now the upper hand, and was aware that, as being in alliance with the oppressors of Israel, the camp might expect very rough treatment from the pursuing force ; which would be greatly ag- gravated if Sisera were found sheltered within it. This calamity she sought to avert, and to jilace the house of Heber in a favourable posi- tion with the victorious party. She probably justified the act to herself, by the consideration that as Sisera would certainly be taken and slain, she might as well make a benefit out of his inevitable doom, as incur utter ruin in the at- tempt to protect him. We have been grieved to see the act vindicated as authorized by the usages of ancient warfare, of rude times, and of ferocious manners. There was not warfare, but peace between the house of Heber and the prince of Hazor; and, for the rest, we will venture to affirm that there does not now, and never did exist, in any country, a set of usages under which the act of Jael would be deemed right. It is much easier to explain the conduct of Jael than to account for the praise which it receives in the triumphal ode of Deborah and Barak. But the following remarks will go far to remove the difficulty : — There is no doubt that Sisera would have been put to death, if he had been taken alive by the Israelites. The war usages of the time warranted such treatment, and there are numerous examples of it. They had, therefore, no regard to her private motives, or to the particular relations between Heber and Jabin, but beheld her only as the instrument of accom* plashing what was usually regarded as the final and crowning act of a great victory. And the unusual circumstance that this act was performed by a woman's hand, was, according to the notions of the time, so great a humiliation, that it could hardly fail to be dwelt upon, in contrasting the result with the proud confidence of victory which had at the outset been entertained (Josh. iv. 5). 1. JAIR O^, enlightener ; Sept. 'Ia'/pi), son of Segub, of the tribe of Manasseh by his mother, and of Judah by his father. He appears to have distinguished himself in an expedition against the kingdom of Bashan, the time of which is disputed, but may probably be referred to the last year of the life of Moses, B-c. 1451. It seems to have formed part of the operations connected with the conquest of the country cast of the Jordan. He settled in the part of Argob bordering on Gilead, where we find twenty-three villages named collectively Havoth-jair, or ' Jair's villages' (Num. xxxii. 41; Deut. iii. 14; Josh. xiii. 30; 1 Chron. ii. 22). 2. JAIR, eighth judge of Israel, of Gilead, in in Manasseh, beyond the Jordan ; and therefore, probabl y descended from the preceding, with whom, indeed, he is sometimes confounded. He ruled 6rT JAIRUS. twenty-two years, and his opulence is indicated in a manner characteristic of the age in which he lived. 'He had thirty sons, that rode on thirty ass-colts, and they had thirty cities, which are ealled Havoth-jair, in the land of Gilead.' A young ass was the most valuable beast for riding then known to the Hebrews ; and that Jair bad so many of them, and was able to assign a village to every one of his thirty sons, is very striking evidence of his wealth. The twenty-three vil- lages of the more ancient Jair were probably among the thirty which this Jan* possessed (Judg. x. 3). b.c. 1210. JAIRUS Qldeipos), a raler of the synagogue at Capernaum, whose daughter Jesus restored to life (Mark v. 22 ; Luke viii. 41). JAMBRES AND JANNES Qla^s ko.I *Iaw7)s), two of the Egyptian magicians who attempted by their enchantments (D^D?, occultcs artes, Gesenius) to counteract the influence on Pharaoh's mind of the miracles wrought by Moses. Their names occur nowhere in the Hebrew Scriptures, and only once in the New Testament (2 Tim. iii. 8). The Apostle Paul became ac- quainted with them, most probably, from an ancient Jewish tradition, or, as Theodoret ex- presses it, ' from the unwritten teaching of the Jews ' (ttjs aypdicpov to>v 'lovSaloov SiSarrnaAias). They are found frequently in the Talmudical and Rabbinical writings, but with some variations. Thus, for Jannes we meet with DW, DW, SOrm, ^HIV, -atel*. Of these, the three last are forms of the Hebrew pPH*, which has led to the supposition that 'lavvrjs is a contracted form of the Greek 'lwavv7]s. Some critics consider that these names were of Egyptian origin, and, in that case, the Jewish writers must have been misled by a similarity of sound to adopt the forms above- mentioned. For Jambres we find &HOD, *1DD, Dnnft', DraCV.and in the Shalsheleth Hakka- bala the two names are given ItWHIXDNI l0W]v, ft e. Johannes and Ambrosius ! The Tar- gum of Jonathan inserts them in Exod. vii. 11. The same writer also gives as a season for Pha- raoh's edict for the destruction of the Israelitish male children, that ' this monarch had a dream in which the land of Egypt appeared in one scale and a lamb in another ; that on awakening he sought for its interpretation- from his wise men ; whereupon Jannes and Jambres (D'H2KD',1 D1^) said — j' A son is to be bom in the congregation of Israel who will desolate the whole land of Egypt.' Several of the Jewish writers speak of Jannes and Jambres as the two sons of Balaam, and assert that they were the youtlis Ql'~$2) servants? Auth. Yers.) who went with him to the' king of Moab (Num. xxii. 22). The Pythagorean philosopher Numenius mentions these persons in a passage preserved by Eusebius (Prcep. Evang. ix. 8), and by Origen (c. Cels. iv. p. 1&8, ed. Spencer) ; also Pliny {Hist. Nat. xxx. I). There was an ancient apocryphal writing entitled Jannes and Mambres, which is referred to by Origen (in Matt. Com- ment. \ 117 ; Opera, v. 29), and by Ambrosiaster, or Hilary the Deacon : it was condemned by Pope Gelasius (Wetstenii Nov. Test. Greec. ii. 362 ; Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. Rabb. col. 945 ; Lightfoot's Sermon on Jannes and Jambres • Works, vii, 89 ; Erubhin, or Miscellanies, ch. xxiv. ; Works, JAME". if. 33; Lardner's Credibility, vt. 1*. dr. <5v Works, vii. 381.)— J. E. R. JAMES, 'lanwfios. Two, if not three persor- of this name are mentioned in the New Testa naent. 1. Jamesj the son of Zebedee QTaKufios S rov Ztfiedaiov), and brother of the evangelist John. Their occupation was that of fishermen, probably at Betbsaida, in partnership with Simon Pete? (Luke v. 1&). On comparing the account given in Matt. iv. 21, Mark i. 19, with that in John L, it would appear that James and John had been? acquainted with our Lord, and had reseived him as the Messiah,, some time before he called them to attend upon him statedly — a call with which they immediately complied. Their mother's name was Salome. We find James, John, and Peter associated on several interesting occasions in the Saviour's life. They alone were present at the Transfiguration (Matt. xvii. 1 ; Mark ix. 2 j Luke ix. 28) ; at the restoration to life of Jairus's daughter (Mark v. 42 ; Luke viii. 51) j and in the garden of Gethseraane during the agony (Mark xiv. 33 ; Matt. xxvi. 37 ; Luke xxi. 37). With Andrew they listened in private to our Lord's discourse on the fall of Jerusalem (Mark xiii. 3). James and his brother appear to have indulged in false notions of the kingdom of the Messiah, and were led by ambitious views to join in the request made to Jesus by their mother (Matt. xx. 20-23; Mark x. 35). From Luke ix. 52, we may infer that their temperament was warm and impetuous. On account, probably, of their boldness and energy in discharging their Apostleship, they received from their Lord the appellation of Boanerges, or Sons of Thunder (For the various explanations of this title given by the fathers see Suieeri Thes. Eccles. s. v. Bpoj'T^ and Liicke's Commentar, Bonn, 1840; Einlei- tzmg, c. J. § 2, p. 17). James was the first martyr among the Apostles. Clement of Alexandria, in a fragment preserved by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. i. &), reports that the officer who conducted James to the tribunal was so influenced by the bold de- claration of his faith as to embrace the Gospel and avow himself also a Christian ; in consequence oi which he was beheaded at the same time. 2. James, the son of Alpheeus ('Ic&c&j/Jos 6 rod 'Ahtpalov), one of the twelve Apostles (Mark iii, 18; Matt. x. 3; Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 53). His mother's narnewas Mary (Matt, xxvii. 56 ; Mark xv. 40) ; in the latter passage he is ealled James the^ Less (6 fjtutpos, the Little), either as being A \ younger than James the son of Alphseus,_ or on account of his low stature (Mark xvi. 1 ; Luke xxiv. 10). ^ ff-fVv 3. James, the brother of the Lord (6 aSeA^Ss Kvpiov ; Gal. i, 19). Whether this James i3 identical with the son of Alphseus, is a question which Dr. Neander pronounces to be the most difficult in the Apostolic history,. and which cannot yet be considered as decided. We read in Matt. xiii. 55, ' Is not his mother called Mary, and his brethren James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas ?' and in Mark vi. 3, ' Is not this the car- penter, the son of Mary, and brother of Jam eg and Joses, and of Juda and Simon? and arp not his sisters here with us?' Those critics who sup- pose the terms of affinity in these and parallel passages to be used in the laxer sense of near rela- tions, have remarked that in Mark xv. 40, mention JAMES. fa made of ' Mary, the mother of James the less Mid of Joses;' and that in John xix. 25, it is said, 'there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother and his mother's sister, Mary, the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene :' they therefore infer that Jhe wife of Cleophas is the same as the sister of the mother of Jesus, and, consequently, that James (supposing Cleophas and Alphseus to be the same name, the former according to the Hebrew, the latter according to the Greek orthography) was a first cousin of our Lord, and, on that account, termed his brother, and that the other individuals called the brethren of Jesus stood in the same relation. It is also urged that in the Acts, after the death of James the son of Zebedee, we read only of one James ; and, moreover, that it is improbable that our Lord would have committed his mother to the care of the beloved disciple, had there been sons of Joseph living, whether the offspring of Mary or of a former marriage. Against this view it has been alleged that in several early Christian writers James, the brother of the Lord, is distin- guished from the son of Alphseus ; that the iden- tity of the names Alphseus and Cleophas is some- what uncertain ; and that it is doubtful whether the words 'his mother's sister,' in John xix. 21, are to be considered in apposition with those imme- diately following — ' Mary, the wife of Cleophas,' or intended to designate a different individual ; since it is highly improbable that two sisters should have had the same name. Wieseler (Studien _ und Kridken, 1 840, iii. 643) maintains that not three, but four persons are mentioned in this pas- sage, and that since in Matt, xxvii. 56, Mark xv. 40, besides Mary of Magdala, and Mary, the mother of James and Joses, Salome also (or the mother of the sons of Zebedee) is named as pre- sent at the Crucifixion, it follows that she must have been the sister of our Lord's mother. This would obviate the difficulty arising from the sameness of the names of the two sisters, and would set aside the proof that James, the Lord's brother, was the son of Alphseus. But -.ven allowing that the sons of Alphseus were related to our Lord, the narrative in the Evange- lists and the Acts presents some reasons for sus- pecting that they were not the persons described as 'the brethren of Jesus.' 1. The brethren of Jesus are associated with his mother in a manner that strongly indicates their standing in the filial relation to her (Matt. xii. 46; Mark iii. 31; Luke viii. 19 ; Matt. xiii. 56, where ' sisters ' are also mentioned; they appear constantly together as forming one family, John ii. 12). 'After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples' (Kuinoel, Comment, in Matt. xii. 46). 2. It is explicitly stated, that at a period posterior to the appoint- ment of the twelve Apostles, among whom we find ' the son of Alplneus,' 'neither did his brethren be- lieve on him' (John vii. 5 ; Liicke's Commentar). Attempts, indeed, have been made by Grotius and Lardnor to dilute the force of this language, as if it meant merely thai their faith was imperfect or wavering — ' that they did not believe as they should ;' but the language of Jesus is decisive: — ' My time is not yet come, but your time is always ready; the world cannot hate you. but me it hateth' (compare this with John xv. IS, 19 : * If the world hate you,' &c). This appears to overthrow the argument for the identity of the brethren of Jesus JAMES. 07 with the sons of Alphseus, drawn from the same- ness of the names ; for as to the supposition that what is affirmed in John's Gosjjel might apply to ordy some of his brethren, it is evident that, ad- mitting the identity, only one brother of Jesus would be left out of the ' company of the Ajwstles.1 3. Luke's language in Acts i. 13, 14, is op- posed to the identity in question ; for, after enume- rating the Apostles, among whom, as usual, is 'James, the son of Alphseus,' he adds, 'they all continued with one accord in prayer and suppli- cation with the women, and Mary, the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren? From this pas- sage, however, we learn that, by this time, his brethren had received him as the Messiah. That after the death of the son of Zebedee we find only one James mentioned, may easily be accounted for on the ground that probably only one, ' the brother of the Lord,' remained at Jerusalem ; and, under such circumstances, the silence of the his- torian respecting the son of Alphseus is not more strange than respecting several of the other Apostles, whose names never occur after the catalogue in ch. i. 13. Paul's language in Gal. i. 19, has been adduced to prove the identity of the Lord's bro- ther with the son of Alphseus, by its ranking him among the Apostles, but Neanderand Winer have shown that it is by no means decisive. (Winer's Grammatik, 4th ed. p. 517 ; Neander's History of the Planting, &c. vol. ii. p. 5, Eng. transl.). If we examine the early Christian writers, we shall meet with a variety of opinions on this subject. Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. ii. 1) says that James, the first bishop of Jerusalem, brother of the Lord, son of Joseph, the husband of Mary, was surnamed the Just by the ancients, on account of his eminent virtue. He uses similar language in his Evangelical Demonstration (iii. 5). In his commentary on Isaiah he reckons fourteen Apo- stles ; namely, the twelve, Paul, and James, the brother of our Lord. A similar enumeration is made in the ' Apostolic Constitutions ' (vi. 14). Epiphanius, Chrysostom, and Theophylact speak of James, the Lord's brother, as being the same as the son of Cleopas. They suppose that Jo- seph and Cleopas were brothers, and that the latter dying without issue, Joseph married his widow for his first, wife, according to the Jewish custom, and that James and his brethren w ere the offspring of this marriage (Lardner's Credibility, pt. ii. ch. 118, Works, iv. 548; ch. i. 163, Works, v. 160 ; History of Heretics, c. xi. §11, Works, viii. 527 ; Supplement to the Credibility, ch. 17, Works, vi. 18S). A. passage from Jose- phus is quoted by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. ii. 23), in which James, the brother of ' him who is called Christ,' is mentioned; but in the opinion of Dr. Lardner and other eminent critics this clause is an interpolation (Lardner's Jeicish Testi- monies, ch. iv. ; Works, vi. 496). According to Hegesippus (a converted Jew of the second cen- tury), James, the brother of the Lord, undertook the government of the church along with the Apostles (fifra toiv airov cbroCToAojp). Eusebius (I. c.) relates that he was the first who held the episco- pate of Jerusalem (Jerome says for thirty years) ; and both he and Josephus (Antiq. xx. 9. 1) give JAMES, EPISTLE OF. an account of his martyrdom. To him, therefore, is the authorship of an epistle addressed to the Jewish Christians with good reason ascribed. The other opinion, which considers the epistle as pseudepigraphal, we shall consider in treating of its Axdhenticity and Canonical Authority. — Euse- bius (ut supra) observes that 'James, the brother of Jesus, who is called Christ, is said to have written the first of the Catholic epistles; but it is to be observed, that it is considered spurious (voQevGTai). Not many of the ancients have men- tioned it, nor that called the Epistle of Jude. . . . Nevertheless, we know that, these, with the rest, are publicly read in most of the churches.' To the same effect St. Jerome : — ' St. James, suraamed the Just, who is called the Lord's brother, is the author of only one epistle, one of the seven called Catholic, which, however, is said to have been published by some other who assumed his name, although in the progress of time it gradually acquired authority.' Dr. Lardner is of opinion that this statement of St. Jerome is a mere repeti- tion of that of Eusebius. It was also rejected in the fourth century by Theodore of Mopsuestia, and in the sixth by Cosmas Indicopleust.es [An- tilegomena]. It is, however, cited by Clemens Romanus in his first or genuine Epistle to the Corinthians (ch. x., comp. with James ii. 21, 23 ; and ch. xi., comp. with James ii. 25, and Heb. xi. 31). It seems to be alluded to in the Shep- herd of Hermas, ' Resist the devil, and he will be confounded and flee from you.' It is also generally believed to be referred to by Irenseus (Hcer. iv. 16, 2), ' Abraham believed God, and it was,', &c. Origen cites it in his Comment, on John i. xix. iv. 306, calling it, however, the reputed epistle of James [Antilegomena]. We have the authority of Cassiodorus for the fact that Clemens Alexandrinus commented on this epistle ; and it is not only expressly cited by Ephrem Syrus (Opp. Grcec. iii. 51, ' James the brother of our Lord says " weep and howl," ' to- gether with other references), but it forms part of the ancient Syriac version, a work of the second century, and which contains no other of the Anti- legomena, except the Epistle to the Hebrews. But though ' not quoted expressly by any of the Latin fathers before the fourth century' (Hug's Iniro- duction), it was, soon after the time of the Council of Nice, received both in the eastern and western churches without any marks of doubt, and was admitted into the canon along with the other Scriptures by the Councils of Hippo and Carthage. Nor (with the above exceptions) does there appear to have been a voice raised against it since that period until the era of the Reformation, when the ancient doubts were revived by Erasmus (who maintains that the author was not an apostle, Annot. in N. T.), Cardinal Cajetan (Comment, in 7 Canonic. Epist., 1532), and Luther. Cajetan observes that ' the salutation is unlike that of any other of the apostolical salutations, containing nothing of God, of grace, or peace, but sending greetings after the profane manner, from which, and his not naming himself an apostle, the author is rendered uncertain.' We have already re» ferred to Luther's opinion [Antilegomena], who is generally accused of calling this an epistle of straw. The following are his words : — 'This epistle, in comparison with the writings of John, JAMES, EPISTLE OF. Paul, and Peter, is a right strawy epistle (eine rechte stroheme epistel), being destitute of an evangelic character' (Prof, to N. T.). And again (Praf. to James and John), — -' This epistle, although rejected by the ancients, I notwithstand- ing praise and esteem, as it teaches no doctrines of men, and strenuously urges the law of God. But, to give my opinion frankly, though without prejudice to any other person, I do not hold it to be the writing of an apostle — and these are my reasons ; first, it directly opposes St. Paul and other Scriptures in ascribing justification to works, saying that Abraham was justified by works, whereas St. Paul teaches that Abraham was justified by faith without works ; .... but this James does nothing but urge on to the law and its works, and writes so confusedly and un- connectedly that it appears to me like as if some good pious man got hold of a number of say- ings from the apostles' followers, and thus flung them on paper; or it is probably written by some one after the apostle"s preaching.' The centuriators of Magdeburg follow the same train of thought. ' In addition to the argument de- rived from the testimony of antiquity, there are other and by no means obscure indications from which it may be collected that the authors of these epistles (James and Jude) were not apostles. The Epistle of James diners not slightly from the analogy of doctrine, in ascribing justification not to faith alone, but to works, and calls the law "a law of liberty," whereas the law " generates to bondage." .... Nor is it unlikely that it was written by some disciple of the apo- stles at the close of this (the first) century, or even later ' {Cent. i. 1. 2. c. 4. col. 54). The same sen- timents are followed by Cheunits, Brentius, and others among the Lutherans, and among the Greeks by Cyril Lucaris, patriarch of Constantinople in the seventeenth century (JLettres Anecdotes de Cy- rille Lucar, Amst. 1718, Letter vii. p. 85). As Luther was the first who separated the ca- nonical from the deutero-canonical or apocryphal books in the Old Testament [Deutero-canon- icai,], he also desired to make a similar dis- tinction in the New [Antilegomena ; Hagio- grapha] ; but the only variation which he actu- ally adopted consisted in his placing the Epistle to the Hebrews between the Epistles of John and James [Jude]. The Calvinists, who never questioned the au- thority of this epistle, followed the arrangement of the Council of Laodicea, in which the Epistle of James ranks as the first of the Catholic epistles ; while the Council of Trent followed the order of the Council of Carthage and of the apos- tolical canons, viz., four Gospels, Acts, fourteen epistles of Paul (viz., Romans, 1 and 2 Corin- thians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colos- sians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews), 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, James, Jude, Apocalypse. The Lutherans themselves soon acquiesced in the deci- sions of the universal church in regard to the canon, of the New Testament, until the contro- versy, which had long slept, was again revived in Germany in modern times (De Wette, Einleh- tung). De Wette maintains that although this epistle was anterior to the Clementine, it could not have been written so early as the time of James, principally because the degree of tran- JAMES, EPISTLE OF. 69 quillity and comfort which appears to have been enjoyed by those to whom the epistle was ad- dressed, seems to him to be inconsistent with the state of persecution which the Christians were subject to during the lifetime of St. James. He conceives it to have been written by some one who assumed the name of James in order to give authority to his arguments against Paul's doc- trine of justification. Dr. Kern also, in his Essay on the Origin of the Epistle of Sti James (in the Tubingen Zeitschrift fiir Theologie, 1835), took the same view, which, however, he has lately abandoned in his Commentary. But no one in modern times has combated this opi- nion with greater success than Neander {History of the First Planting of the Christian Church, vol. ii.). Neander (whose reasonings will not admit of abridgment) maintains that there is no discrepancy whatever between St. Paul and St. James ; that it was not even the design of the latter to oppose any misapprehension respecting St. Paul's doctrine, but that they each addressed different classes of people from different standing points, using the same familiar examples. ' Paul,' he says, ' was obliged to point out to those who placed their dependence on the justify- ing power of the works of the law, the futility of such works in reference to justification, and to demonstrate that justification and sanctification could proceed only from the faith of the gospel : James, on the other hand, found it necessary to declare to those who imagined that they could be justified in God's sight by faith in the Jewish sense .... that this was completely valueless if their course of life were not conformed to it.' And in another place he observes that James 'received the new spirit under the old forms, similarly to many Catholics who have attained to free evangelical convictions, and yet have not been able to disengage themselves from the old ecclesiastical forms ; or, like Luther, when he had already attained a knowledge of justification by faith, but before he was aware of the consequences flowing from it as opposed to the prevalent doc- trines of the church.' Age of the Epistle. — By those who consider James the Just, bishop of Jerusalem, to have been the author of this epistle, it is generally be- lieved to have been written shortly bei'ore his martyrdom, which took place a.d. 62, six years before the destruction of Jerusalem, whose im- pending fate is alluded to in chap. v. Neander fixes its date at a time preceding the separate formation of Gentile Christian churches, before the relation of Gentiles and Jews to one another in the Christian Church had been brought under discussion, in the period of the first spread of Christianity in Syria, Cilicia, and the adjacent regions. It is addressed to Jewish Christians, the descendants of the twelve tribes ; but the fact of its being written in Greek exhibits the author's desire to make it generally available to Christians. Contents and Character of the Epistle. — 'This epistle commences with consolations addressed to the faithful converts, with exhortations to patience, humility, and practical piety (ch. i. 1-27). Undue respect to persons is then con- demned, and love enjoined (ch. ii.). Erroneous ideas on justification are corrected (ii. 13-26), the temerity of new teachers is repressed (iii. 12) ; an unbridled tongue is inveighed against, and J% 70 JAPHETH. heavenly wisdom contrasted with a spirit of covetousness (13-18). Swearing is prohibited (v. 12). The efficacy of prayer is proved by ex- amples, and the unction of the sick by the Pres- byters, together with prayer and mutual confession, are enjoined as instruments of recovery and of forgiveness of sins (v. 14-18). The approaching advent of the Lord is foretold (v. 7). The style of this epistle is close and sententious, and is characterized by Calmet as consisting of ' expressions thrown together without connection, and adorned by poetical similitudes.' It has, however, been illustrated by no one with greater felicity than by the late learned and pious Bishop of Limerick, who has adduced many examples from James of poetical parallelism — which was the principal characteristic of Hebrew poetry. In reference to one of these passages (iii. 1-12) the bishop observes that 'its topics are so various, and, at first sight, so unconnected, not to say incongruous, that it may be thought a rash undertaking to explore the writer's train of thought, and to investigate the probable source and the orderly progress of his ideas — an evidence at once most brilliant and satisfactory that the easy flow of a great mind, when concentrated on a great object, will be found at least as logically just as it may be poetically beautiful.' 'His general manner,' he observes, ' combines the plain- est and most practical good sense with the most vivid and poetical conception ; the imagery various and luxuriant ; the sentiments chastened and sober ; his images, in truth, are so many analogical arguments, and if, at the first view, we are disposed to recreate ourselves with the poet, we soon feel that we must exert our hardier powers to keep pace with the logician ' (Jebb's Sacred Literature). Seiler designates the style of this epistle as 'sometimes sublime and prophe- tical, nervous, and full of imagery ' (Biblical Hermeneutics, § 315 ; Wright's translation, p. 518). Wetstein (note to cli. iv. 5) conceives the author to have been familiar with the book of Wisdom. In ch. i. 17 and iv. 4 the following perfect hexameters have been noticed — Xlaaa. SSffiS' aya9'}] ical irav 5cupr]iJ.a, TeXeiov and Moixol /cat ju.oixaA.i5es ovk oiSare on dxa()> son of Jehu, king of Israel, who succeeded his father in b.c. 856, and reigned seventeen years. As he followed the evil courses of the house of Jeroboam, the Syrians under Hazael and Benhadad were suffered to prevail over him ; so that; at length, lie had only left of all his forces fifty horsemen, ten chariots, and 10,000 foot. Overwhelmed by his calamities, Jehoahaz at length acknowledged the authority of Jehovah over Israel, and humbled himself before him; in con- sideration of which a deliverer was raised up for Israel in the person of Joash, this king's son, who was enabled to expel the Syrians and re-establish the affairs of the kingdom (2 Kings xiii. 1-9, 25). 2. JEHOAHAZ, otherwise- called Shallum, seventeenth king of Judah, son of Josiah, whose reign began and ended in the year B.C. 60S. After his father had been slain in resisting the progress of Pharaoh Necho, Jehoahaz, who was then twenty-three years of age, was raised to the throne by the people, and received at Jeru- salem the regal anointing, which seems to have been usually omitted in times of order and of regular succession. He found the land full of trouble, but free from idolatry. Instead, however, of following the excellent example of his father, Jehoahaz fell into the accustomed crimes of his predecessors ; and under the encou- ragements which his example or indifference offered, the idols soon re-appeared. It seems strange that in a time so short, and which must have been much occupied in arranging plans for resisting or pacifying the Egyptian king, he should have been able to deserve the stigma which the sacred record has left upon his name. But there is no limit except in the greatness of the divine power to tiie activity of evil dispositions. The sway of Jehoahaz was terminated in three months, When Pharaoh Necho, on his victorious return from the Euphrates, thinking it politic to reject a king not nominated by himself, removed him from the throne, and set thereon his brother Jehoia- JEHOIACHIN. 73 kim. Tills reign was the shortest in the kingdom of Judah, although in that of Israel there were several shorter. The deposed king was at first taken as a prisoner to Riblah in Syria ; but was eventually carried to Egypt, where he died (2 Kings xxiii. 30-35 ; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 1-4 ; 1 Chron. iii. 15; Jer. xxii. 10-12). The anointing of this king has drawn attention to the defect of his title as the reason for the addi- tion of that solemn ceremony. It appears from 1 Chron. iii. 15 that Josiah had four sons, of whom Johanan is expressly said to have been ' the first-born.' But he seems to have died before his father, as.we nowhere find his name historically mentioned, while those of the other brothers are familiar to us. If, therefore, he died childless, and Jehoahaz were the next son, his claim would have been good. But he was not the next son. His name, as Shallum, occurs last of the four in 1 Chron. iii. 15 ; and from the historical notices in 2 Kings xxiii. and 1 Chron. xxxvi. we as- certain that when Josiah died the ages of the three surviving sons were, Eliakim (Jehoiakim) twenty-five years, Jehoahaz (Shallum) twenty- three years, Mattaniah (Zedekiah) ten years ; consequently Jehoahaz was preferred by the popular favour above his elder brother Jehoiakim, and the anointing, therefore, was doubtless intended to give to his imperfect claim the weight of that solemn ceremony. It was also probably suspected that, as actually took place, the Egyptian king would seek to annul a popular election unsanc- tioned by himself; but as the Egyptians anointed their own kings, and attached much importance to the ceremony, the possibility that he would hesitate more to remove an anointed than an un- anointed king might afford a further reason for the anointing of Jehoahaz [Anointing]. Jehoahaz is supposed to be the person who is designated under the emblem of a young lion carried in chains to Egypt (Ezek. xix. 3, 4). JEHOASH. [Joash.] JEHOIACHIN (r^in:\ God-appointed; Sept. 'Icoaxiju), by contraction Jeconiah and Co- niaii, nineteenth king of Judah, and son of Je- hoiakim. When his father was slain, b.c. 599, the King of Babylon allowed him, as the rightful heir, to succeed. He was then eighteen years of age according to 2 Kings xxiv. S ; but only eight according to 2 Chron. xxxvi. 9. Many attempts have been made to reconcile these dates, the most usual solution being that he had reigned ten years in conjunction with his father, so that he was eight when he began his joint reign, but eighteen when he began to reign alone. There are, how- ever, difficulties in this view, which, perhaps, leave it the safest course to conclude that ' eight' in 2 Cluon. xxxvi. 9, is a corruption of the text, such as might easily occur from the relation of the numbers eight and eighteen. Jehoiachin followed the evil courses which had already brought so much disaster upon the royal house of David, and upon the people under its sway. He seems to have very speedily indicated a political bias adverse to the interests of tha Chaldaean empire; for in three months after his accession we find the generals of Nebuchadnezzar again laying siege to Jerusalem, according to the predictions of Jeremiah (xxii. IS — xxiv. 30). Con- vinced of the futility of resistance, Jehoiachin 74 JEHOIADA. went out and surrendered as soon as Nebuchad- nezzar arrived in person before the city. He was sent away as a captive to Babylon, with his mother, his generals, and his troops, together with the artificers and other inhabitants of Jerusalem, to the number of ten thousand. Few were left but the poorer sortof people and the unskilled labourers, few, indeed, whose presence could be useful in Babylon or dangerous in Palestine. Neither did the Babylonian king neglect to remove the trea- sures which could yet be gleaned from the palace or the temple ; and he now made spoil of those sacred vessels of gold which had been spared on former occasions. These were cut up for present use of the metal or for more convenient transport ; whereas those formerly taken had been sent to Babylon entire, and there laid up as trophies of victory. Thus ended an unhappy reign of three months and ten days. If the Chaldaean king had then put an end to the show of a monarchy and annexed the country to his own dominions, the event would probably have been less unhappy for the nation. But still adhering to his former policy, he placed on the throne Mattaniah, the only surviving son of Josiah, whose name he changed to Zedekiah (2 Kings xxiv. 1-16 ; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 9, 10 ; Jer. xxix. 2 ; xxxvii. 1). Jehoiachin remained in prison at Babylon during the lifetime of Nebuchadnezzar; but when that prince died, his son, Evil-merodach, not only released him, but gave him an honour- able seat at his own table, with precedence over all the other dethroned kings who were kept at Babylon, and an allowance for the support of his rank (2 Kings xxv. 27-30 ; Jer. lii. 31-34). To what he owed this favour we are not told ; but the Jewish commentators allege that Evil-merodach had himself been put into prison by his father during the last year of his reign, and had there contracted an intimate friendship with the de- posed king of Judah. The name of Jechoniah re-appears to fix the epoch of several of the prophecies of Ezekiel (Ezek. i. 2), and of the deportation which ter- minated his reign (Esth. ii. vi). In the genealogy of Christ (Matt. i. 11) he is named as the 'son of Josias1 his uncle - JEHOIADA (jn^.\ God-knoicn; Sept. 'IcoSae), high-priest in the times of Ahaziah and Athaliah. He is only known from the part which he took in recovering the throne of Judah for the young Joash, who had been saved by his wife Jehoshehah from the massacre by which Athaliah sought to exterminate the royal line of David. The particulars of this transaction are related under other heads [Athaliah ; Joash j . Je- hoiada manifested mucli decision and forecast on this occasion ; and he used for good the great power which devolved upon him during the mi- nority of the young king, and the influence which he continued to enjoy as long as he lived. The value of this influence is shown by the misconduct and the disorders of the kingdom after his death. He died in B.C. 834, at the age of 130, and his remains were honoured with a place in the sepul- chre of the kings at Jerusalem (2 Kings xi. 12; 2 Chron. xxiii. xxiv.). JEHOIAKIM ffi*j?*l*, God-established; Sept. Iwaniy.), originally ELIAKIM, second son of JEHOIAKIM. Josiah, and eighteenth king of Judah. On the death of his father the people raised to the throne his younger brother Jehoahaz ; but three months after, when the Egyptian king returned from the Euphrates, he removed Jehoahaz, and gave the crown to the rightful heir, Eliakim, whose name he changed to Jehoiakim. This change of name often took place in similar circumstances ; and the altered name was in fact the badge of a tributary prince. Jehoiakim began to reign in b.c. 608, and reigned eleven years. He of course occupied the position of a vassal of the Egyptian empire, and in that capacity had to lay upon the people heavy imposts to pay the appointed tribute, in addition to the ordinary expenses of government. But, as if this were not enough, it would seem from va- rious passages in Jeremiah (Jer. xxii. 13, &c.) that Jehoiakim aggravated the public charges, and consequently the public calamities, by a de- gree of luxury and magnificence in his establish- ments and structures very ill-suited to the con- dition of his kingdom and the position which he occupied. Hence much extortion and wrong- doing, much privation and deceit ; and when we add to this a general forgetfulness of God and proneness to idolatry, we have the outlines of that picture which the prophet Jeremiah has drawn in the most sombre hues. However heavy may have been the Egyptian yoke, Jehoiakim was destined to pass under one heavier still. In his time the empire of Western Asia was disputed between the kings of Egypt and Babylon; and the kingdom of Judah, pressed between these mighty rivals, and neces- sarily either the tributary or very feeble enemy of the one or the other, could not but suffer nearly equally, whichever proved the conqueror. The kings of Judah were therefore placed in a posi- tion of peculiar difficulty, out of which they could only escape with safety by the exercise of great discretion, and through the special mercies of the God of Israel, who had bjr his high covenant engaged to protect them so long as they walked uprightly. This they did not, and were in con- sequence abandoned to their doom. In the third year of his reign Jehoiakim, being besieged in Jerusalem, was forced to submit to Nebuchadnezzar, and was by his order laden with chains, with the intention of sending him captive to Babylon (1 Chron. xxxvi. 6) ; but eventually the conqueror changed his mind and restored the crown to him. Many persons, how- ever, of high family, and some even of the royal blood, were sent away to Babylon. Among these was Daniel, then a mere youth. A large proportion of the treasures and sacred vessels of the temple were also taken away and deposited in the idol-temple at Babylon (Dan. i. 1, 2). The year following the Egyptians were defeated upon the Euphrates (Jer. xlvi. 2), and Jehoiakim, when he. saw the remains of the defeated army pass by his territory, could not but perceive how vain had been that reliance upon Egypt against which he had been constantly cautioned by Jere- miah (Jer. xxxi. 1 ; xlv. 1). In the same yeai the prophet caused a collection of his prophecies to be written out by his faithful Baruch, and to be read publicly by him in the court of the temple. This coming to the knowledge of the king, he sent for it and had it read before him. But lie heard not much of the bitter denunciations JEHORAM. with which it was charged, before he took the roll from the reader, and after cutting it in pieces threw it into the brasier which, it being winter, was burning before him in the ball. The coun- sel of God against him, however, stood sure ; a fresh roll was written, with the _ addition of a further and most awful denunciation against the king, occasioned by this foolish and sacrilegious act. < He shall have none to sit upon the throne of David : and his dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat and in the night to the frost' (Jer. xxxvi.)- All this, however, appears to have made little impression upon Jehoiakim, who still walked in his old paths. The condition of the kingdom as tributary to the Chaldaeans probably differed little from that in which it stood as tributary to the Egyptians, except that its resources were more exhausted by the course of time, and that its gold went to the east instead of the south. But at length, after three years of subjection, Jehoiakim, finding the king of Babylon fully engaged elsewhere, and deluded by the Egyptian party in his court, ven- tured to withhold his tribute, and thereby to throw off the Chaldaeau yo|e. This step, taken contrary to the earnest remonstrances of Jeremiah, was the ruin of Jehoiakim. It might seem suc- cessful for a little, from the Chaldaeans not then having leisure to attend to the affairs of this quarter. In due time, however, the land was invaded by their armies, accompanied by a vast number of auxiliaries from the neighbouring countries, the Edomites, Moabites, and others, who were for the most part actuated by a fierce hatred against the Jewish name and nation. The events of the war are not related. Jerusalem was taken, or rather surrendered on terms, which Josephus alleges were little heeded by Nebu- chadnezzar. It is certain that Jehoiakim was slain, but whether in one of the actions, or, as Josephus says, after the surrender, we cannot de- termine. His body remained exposed and unla- mented without the city, under the circumstances foretold by the prophet—' They shall not lament for him, saying, Ah, my brother! or, Ah, sister! They shall not lament for him, saying, Ah, lord ! or, Ah, his glory ! He shall be buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth beyond the gates of Jerusalem' (Jer. xxii. 18, 19 ; 1 Chron. iii. 15; 2 Kings xxiii. 34-37; xxiv. 1-7; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 4-8). It was not the object of Nebuchadnezzar to destroy altogether a power which, as tributary to him, formed a serviceable outpost towards Egypt, which seems to have been the great final object of all his designs in this quarter. He therefore still maintained the throne of Judah, and placed on it Jehoiachin, the son of the late king. He, however, sent away another body, a second corps of the nobles and chief persons of the nation, three thousand in number, among whom was Ezekiel, afterwards called to prophesy in the land of his exile. JEHONADAB. [Jonadab.] JEHORAM (D'TirT'., God-exalted; Sept. 'I«- pdj.i), eldest son and successor of Jehoshaphat, and fifth king of Judah, who began to reign (se- parately) in B.C. 889, at the age of thirty-five years, and reigned five years. It is indeed said in the general account that he began to reign JEHOSHAPHAT. 75 at the age of thirty-two, and that he reigned eight years ; but the conclusions deducible from the fact that his reign began in the seventh year of Joram, king of Israel, show that the reign thus stated dates back three years into the reign of his father, who from this is seen to have associated his eldest son with him in the later years of his reign. Jehoram profited little by this association. He had unhappily been married to Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel ; and her influence seems to have neutralized all the good he might have derived from the example of his fafher. One of the first acts of his reign was to put his brothers to death and seize the valuable appanages which their father had in his lifetime bestowed upon them. After this we are not surprised to find him giving way to the gross idolatries of that new and strange kind — the Phoenician — which had been brought into Israel by Jezebel, and into Judah by her daughter Athaliah. For these atrocities the Lord let forth his anger against Jehoram and his kingdom. The Edom- ites revolted, and, according to old prophecies (Gen. xxvii. 40), shook off the yoke of Judah. The Philistines on one side, and the Arabians and Cushites on the other, also grew bold against a king forsaken of God, and in repeated invasions spoiled the land of all its substance ; they even ravaged the royal palaces, and took away the wives and children of the king, leaving him only one son, Ahaziah. Nor was this all; Jehoram was in his last days afflicted with a frightful disease in his bowels, which, from the terms employed in describing it, appears to have been malignant dysentery in its most shocking and tormenting form. After a disgraceful reign, and a most painful death, public opinion inflicted the posthumous dishonour of refusing him a place in the sepulchre of the kings. Jehoram was by far the most impious and cruel tyrant that had as yet occupied the throne of Judah, though he was rivalled or surpassed by some of his suc- sessors (2 Kings viii. 16-24; 2 Chron. xxi.). 2. JEHORAM, King of Israel [JoramJ. JEHOSHAPHAT (BE^in?, God-judged; Sept. 'loocratpdv), fourteenth king of Judah, and son of Asa, whom he succeeded in b. c. 914, at the age of thirty-five, and reigned twenty- five years. He commenced his reign by forti- fying his kingdom against Israel; and having thus secured himself against surprise from the quarter which gave most disturbance to him, he proceeded to, purge the land from the idolatries and idola- trous monuments by which it was still tainted. Even the high places and groves, which former well- disposed kings had suffered to remain, were by the zeal of Jehoshaphat in a great measure destroyed. The chiefs, with priests and Levites, proceeded from town to town, with the book of the law in their hands, instructing the people, and calling back their wandering affections to the religion of their fathers. This was a beautiful and interest- ing circumstance in the operations of the young king. Other good princes had been content to smite down the outward show of idolatry by force of hand ; but Jehoshaphat saw that this was not of itself sufficient, and that the basis of a solid reformation must be laid by providing for the better instruction of the people in their reli- gious duties and privileges. 76 JEHOSHAPHAT. Jehoshaphat was too well instructed in the great principles of the theocracy not to know that his faithful conduct had entitled him to expect the divine protection. Of that protection he soon had manifest proofs. At home he enjoyed peace and abundance, and abroad security and honour. His treasuries were filled with the ' presents ' which the blessing of God upon the people, ' in their basket and their store,' enabled them to bring. His renown extended into the neighbouring nations, and the Philistines, as well as the adjoining Arabian tribes, paid him rich tributes in silver and in cattle. He was thus enabled to put all his towns in good condition, to erect fortresses, to organize a powerful army, and to raise his kingdom to a degree of import- ance and splendour whicli it had not enjoyed since the revolt of the ten tribes. The weak and impious Ahab at that time oc- cupied the throne of Israel ; and Jehoshaphat, having nothing to fear from his power, sought, or at least did not repel, an alliance with him. This is alleged to have been the grand mistake of his reign ; and that it was such is proved by the consequences. Ahab might be benefited by the connection, but under no circumstance could it be of service to Jehoshaphat or his kingdom, and it might, as it actually did, involve him in much disgrace and disaster, and bring bloodshed and trouble into his house. His fault seems to have been the result of that easiness of temper and overflowing amiability of disposition, which the careful student may trace in his character ; and which, although very engaging attributes in pri- vate life, are not always among the safest or most valuable qualities which a king in his public capacity might possess. After a few years we find Jehoshaphat on a visit to Ahab, in Samaria, being the first time any of the kings of Israel and Judah had met in peace. He here experienced a reception worthy of his great- ness ; but Ahab failed not to take advantage of the. occasion, and so worked upon the weak points of his character as to prevail upon him to take arms with him against the Syrians, with whom, hitherto, the kingdom of Judah never had had any war or oc- casion of quarrel. However, Jehoshaphat was not so far infatuated as to proceed to the war without consulting God, who, according to the principles of the theocratic government, was the final arbiter of war and peace. The false prophets of Ahab poured forth ample promises of success, and one of them, named Zedekiah, resorting to material symbols, made him horns of iron, saying, 'Thus saith the Lord, with these shalt thou smite the Syrians till they be consumed.' Still Jehoshaphat was not satisfied ; and the answer to his further inquiries extorted from him a rebuke of the reluctance which Ahab manifested to call Micah, ' the pro- phet of the Lord.' The fearless words of this prophet did not make the impression upon the king of Judah which might have been expected ; or, probably, he then felt himself too deeply bound in honour to recede. He went to the fatal battle of Ramofh-Gilead, and there nearly became the victim of a plan whch Ahab had laid for his own safety at the expense of his too-confiding ally. He persuaded Jehoshaphat to appear as king, while he himself went disguised to the battle. This brought the heat of the contest around him, as the Syrians took him for Ahab ; and if they had not in time JEHOSHAPHAT. discovered their mistake, he would certainly have been slain. Ahab was killed, and the battle lost [Ahab] ; but Jehoshaphat escaped, and re- turned to Jerusalem. On his return from this imprudent expedition he was met by the just reproaches of the prophet Jehu. The best atonement he could make for this error was by the course he actually took. He resumed his labours in the further extirpation of idolatry, in the instruction of the people, and the improvement of his realm. He now made a tour of his kingdom in person, that he might see the ordinances of God duly established, and witness the due execution of his intentions respect- ing the instruction of the people in the divine law. This tour enabled him to discern many defects in the local administration of justice, which he then applied himself to remedy. He appointed magistrates in every city, for the de- termination of causes civil and ecclesiastical ; and the nature of the abuses to which the administra- tion of justice was in those days exposed, may be gathered from his excellent charge to them : — ' Take heed what ye do, for ye judge not for man, but for the Lord, who is with you in the judgment. Wherefore now let the fear of the Lord be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity with the Lord our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts.' Then he established a supreme council of justice at Jeru- salem, composed of priests, Levites, and ' the chiefs of the fathers;' to which difficult cases were referred, and appeals brought from the pro- vincial tribunals. This tribunal also was in- ducted by a weighty but short charge from the king, whose conduct in this and other matters places him at the very head of the monarchs who reigned over Judah as a separate kingdom. The activity of Jehoshaphat's mind was then turned towards the revival of that maritime com- merce which had been established by Solomon. The land of Edorn and the ports of the Elanitic Gulf were still under the power of Judah ; and in them the king prepared a fleet for the voyage to Ophir. Unhappily, however, he yielded to the wish of the king of Israel, and allowed him to take part in the enterprise. For this the expe- dition was doomed of God, and the vessels were wrecked almost as soon as they quitted port. Instructed by Eliezer, the prophet, as to the cause of this disaster, Jehoshaphat equipped a new fleet, and having this time declined the co-operation of the king of Israel, the voyage prospered. The trade was not, however, prosecuted with any zeal, and was soon abandoned [Commerce], In accounting for the disposition of Jehosha- phat to contract alliances with the king of Israel, we are to remember that there existed a powerful tie between the two courts in the marriage of Jehoshaphat's eldest son with Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab ; and, when we advert to the part in public affairs which that princess after- wards took, it may well be conceived that even thus early she possessed an influence for evil in the court of Judah. After the death of Ahaziab, king of Israel, Joram, his successor, persuaded Jehoshaphat to join him in an expedition against Moab. This alliance was, however, on political grounds, more excusable than the two former, as the Moabites, who were under tribute to Israel, might draw into JEHOSHAPHAT. their cause the Edomites, who were tributary to Judah. Besides, Moab could be invaded with most advantage from the south, rounn by the end of the Dead Sea; and the king of Israel could not gain access to them in that quarter but by marching through the territories of Jehoshaphat. The latter not only joined Joram with his own army, but required his tributary, the king of Edom, to bring his forces into the field. During seven days' inarch through the wilderness of Edom, the army suffered much from want of water ; and by the time the allies came in sight of the army of Moab, they were ready to perish from thirst. In this emergency the pious Jehoshaphat thought, as usual, of consulting the Lord ; and hearing that the prophet Elisha was in the camp, the three kings proceeded to his tent. For the sake of Jehoshaphat, and for his sake only, deliverance was promised ; and it came during the ensuing night, in the shape of an abundant supply of water, which rolled down the exhausted wadys, and filled the pools and hollow grounds. After- wards Jehoshaphat took his full part in the ope- rations of the campaign, till the armies were induced to withdraw in horror, by witnessing the dreadful act of Mesha, king of Moab, in offering up his eldest son in sacrifice upon the wall of the town in which he was shut up. This war kindled another much more dangerous to Jehoshaphat. The Moabites. being highly ex- asperated at the part he had taken against them, turned all their wrath upon him. They induced their kindred, the Ammonites, to join them, ob- tained auxiliaries from the Syrians, and even drew over the Edomites ; so that the strength of all the neighbouring nations may be said to have been united for this great enterprise. The allied forces entered the land of Judah and encamped at En- gedi, near the western border of the Dead Sea. In this extremity Jehoshaphat felt that all his defence lay with God. A solemn fast was held, and the people repaired from the towns to Jerusalem to seek help of the Lord. In the presence of the assembled multitude the king, in the court of the temple, offered up a fervent prayer to God, con- cluding with — ' 0 our God, wilt thou not judge them, for toe have no might against this great company that cometh against us, neither know we what to do ; but our eyes are upon thee.' He ceased ; and in the midst of the silence which ensued, a voice was raised pronouncing deliverance in the name of the Lord, and telling them to go out on the morrow to the cliffs over- looking the camp of the enemy, and see them all overthrown without a blow from them. The voice was that of Jahaziel, one of the Levites. His words came to pass. The allies quarrelled among themselves and destroyed each other ; so that when the Judahites came the next day they found their dreaded enemies all dead, and nothing was left for them but to take the rich spoils of the slain. This done, they returned with triumphal songs to Jerusalem. This great event was recog- nised even by the neighbouring nations as the act of God ; and so strong was the impression which it made upon them, that the remainder of the good king's reign was altogether undisturbed. His death, however, took place not very long after this, at the age of sixty, after having reigned twenty-five years, b.c. 896. .He left the king- dom in a prosperous condition to his eldest son JEHU. 77 Jehoram, whom he had in the last years of his life associated with him in the government. ' Jehoshaphat, who sought the Lord with all his heart,' was the character given to this king by Jehu, when, on that account, he gave to his grandsire an honourable grave (2 Chron. xxii. 9). And this, in fact, was the sum and substance of his character. The Hebrew annals offer the ex- ample of no king who more carefully squared all his conduct by the principles of the theocracy. He kept the Lord always before his eyes, and was in all things obedient to his will when made known to him by the prophets. Few of the kings of Judah manifested so much zeal for the real welfare of his people, or took measures so judi- cious to promote it. His good talents, the bene- volence of his disposition, and his generally sound judgment are shown not only in the great mea- sures of domestic policy which distinguished his reign, but by the manner in which they were executed. No trace can be found in him of that pride which dishonoured some and ruined others of the kings who preceded and followed him. Most of his errors arose from that dangerous fa- cility of temper which sometimes led him to act against the dictates of his naturally sound judg- ment, or prevented that judgment from being fairly exercised. The kingdom of Judah was never happier or more prosperous than under his reign; and this, perhaps, is the highest praise that can be given to any king. JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF, the name now given to the valley which bounds Jerusalem on the east, and separates it from the Mount of Olives [Jerusalem]. In Joel iii. 2, 12, we read, 'the Lord will gather all nations in the valley of Jehoshaphat, and plead with them there.' Many interpreters, Jewish and Christian, conclude from this that the last judgment is to take place in the above- mentioned valley. But there is no reason fo sup- pose that the valley then bore any such name; and more discreet interpreters understand the text to denote a valley in which some great victory was to be won, most probably by Nebuchad- nezzar, which should utterly discomfit the ancient enemies of Israel, and resemble the victory which Jehoshaphat obtained over the Ammonites, Moab- ites, and Edomites (2 Chron. xx. 22-26). Others translate the name Jehoshaphat into God's fUda- 7nent, and thus read, ' the valley of God's judg- ment,' which is doubtless symbolical, like ' the valley of decision,' i. e. of punishment, in the same chapter. JEHOSHEBA, daughter of Jehoram, sister of Ahaziah, and aunt of Joash, kings of Judah. The last of these owed his life to her, and his crown fo her husband, the high-priest Jehoiada [Jehoiada]. JEHOVAH (n)i"p), or rather perhaps Jahveh C'^.I'T'^? according to the reading suggested by Ewald, Havernick, and others — the name by which God was pleased to make himself known, under the covenant, to the ancient Hebrews (Exod. vi. 2, 3). The import of this name has been considered under the head God. JEHU (N'-in*, God is; Sept. 'IoD; Cod. Alex. 'Eitjov), tenth king of Israel, and founder of ita 78 JEHU. fourth dynasty, who began to reign in B.C. 884, and reigned twenty-eight years. Jehu held a command in the Israelite army posted at Ramoth Gilead to hold in check the Syrians, who of late years had made strenuous efforts to extend their frontier to the Jordan, and had possessed themselves of much of the territory of the Israelites east of that river. The contest was in fact still carried on which had begun many years before in the reign of Ahab, the present king's father, who had lost his life in battle before this very Ramoth Gilead. Ahaziah, king of Judah, had taken part with Joram, king of Israel, in this war ; and as the latter had been severely wounded in a recent action, and had gone to Jezreel to be healed of his wounds, Ahaziah had also gone thither on a visit of sym- pathy to him. In this state of affairs a council of war was held among the military commanders in camp, when very unexpectedly one of the disciples of the prophets, known for such by his garb, appeared at the door of the tent, and called forth Jehu, de- claring that he had a message to deliver to him. He had been sent by Elisha the prophet, in dis- charge of a duty which long before had been confided by the Lord to Elijah (1 Kings xix. 16), and from him had devolved on his successor. When they were alone the young man drew forth a horn of oil and poured it upon Jehu's head, with the words, ' Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I have anointed thee king over the people of the Lord, even over Israel. And thou shalt smite the house of Ahab thy master, that I may avenge the blood of my servants the prophets, and the blood of all the servants of the Lord, at the hand of Jezebel' (2 Kings ix. 7, 8). Surprising- as this message must have been, and awful the duty which it imposed, Jehu was fully equal to the task and the occasion. He returned to the coun- cil, probably with an altered air, for he was asked what had been the communication of the young prophet to him. He told them plainly ; and they were obviously ripe for defection from the house of Ahab, for they were all delighted at the news, and taking him in triumph to ' the top of the stairs,' they spread their mantles beneath his feet, and proclaimed him king by sound of trumpet in the presence of all the troops. Jehu was not a man to lose any advantage through remissness. He immediately entered his chariot, in order that his presence at Jezreel should be the first announcement which Joram could receive of this revolution. As soon as the advance of Jehu and his party was seen in the distance by the watchmen upon the palace-tower in Jezreel, two messengers were successively sent forth to meet him, and were commanded by Jehu to follow in his rear. But when the watchman reported that he could now recognise the furious driving of Jehu, Joram went forth himself to meet him, and was accom- panied by the king of Judah. They met in the field of Naboth, so fatal to the house of Ahab. The king saluted him with 'Is it peace, Jehu?' and received the answer, ' What peace, so long as the whoredoms (idolatries) of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many V This com- pletely opened the eyes of Joram, who exclaimed to the king of Judah, 'There is treachery, O Ahaziah !' and turned to flee. But Jehu felt no JEHU. infirmity of purpose, and knew that the slightest wavering might be fatal to him. He therefore drew a bow with his full strength and sent forth an arrow which passed through the king's heart. Jehu caused the body to be thrown back into the field of Naboth, out of which he had passed in his attempt at flight, and grimly remarked to Bidkar his captain, ' Remember how that, when I and thou rode together after Ahab his father, the Lord laid this burden upon him.' The king of Judah contrived to escape, but not without a wound, of which he afterwards died at Megiddo [Ahaziah]. Jehu then entered the city, whither the news of this transaction had already preceded him. As he passed under the walls of the palace Jezebel herself, studiously arrayed for effect, appeared at one of the windows, and saluted him with a question such as might have shaken a man of weaker nerves, ' Had Zimri peace, who slew his master?' But Jehu was unmoved, and instead of answering her, called out, ' Who is on my side, who ?' when several eunuchs made their appear- ance at the window, to whom he cried, ' Throw her down!' and immediately this proud and guilty woman lay a blood-stained corpse in the road, and was trodden under foot by the horses [Jezebel], Jehu then went in and took pos- session of the palace. He was now master of Jezreel, which was, next to Samaria, the chief town of the kingdom ; but he could not feel secure while the capital itself was in the hands of the royal family, and of those who might be supjDosed to feel strong at- tachment to the house of Ahab. The force of the blow which he had struck was, however, fel; even in Samaria. When therefore he wrote to the persons in authority there the somewhat ironical but designedly intimidating counsel, to set up one of the young princes in Samaria as king and fight out the matter which lay between them, they sent a very submissive answer, giving in their adhesion, and professing their readiness to obey in all things his commands. A second letter from Jehu tested this profession in a truly horrid and exceedingly Oriental manner, requiring them to appear before him on the morrow, bringing with them the heads of all the royal princes in Samaria. A fallen house meets with little pity in the East ; and when the new king left his palaca the next morning, he found seventy human head* piled up in two heaps at his gate. There, in the sight of these heaps, Jehu took occasion to explain his conduct, declaring that he must be regarded as the appointed minister of the divine decrees, pronounced long since against the house of Ahab by the prophets, not one of whose words should fall to the ground. He then continued his pro- scriptions by exterminating in Jezreel not only all in whose veins the blood of the condemned race flowed, but also — by a considerable stretch of his commission — those officers, ministers, and crea- tures of the late government, who, if suffered to live, would most likely be disturbers of his own reign. He then proceeded to Samaria. So rapid had been these proceedings that he met some of the nephews of the king of Judah, who were going to join their uncle at Jezreel, and had as yet heard nothing of the revolution which had taken place. These also perished under Jehu's now fully- awakened thirst for blood, to the number of forty- two persons. JEHU. JEPHTHAH. On the way he took up into his chariot the pious Jehonadab the Rechabite, whose austere virtue and respected character would, as he felt, go far to hallow his proceedings in the eyes of the multitude. At Samaria he continued the extirpation of the persons more intimately con- nected with the late government. This, far from being in any way singular, is a common circum- stance in eastern revolutions. But the great object of Jehu was to exterminate the ministers and more devoted adherents of Baal, who had been much encouraged by Jezebel. There was even a temple to this idol in Samaria ; and Jehu, never scrupulous about the means of reaching objects which he believed to be good, laid a snare by which he hoped to cut off the main body of Baal's ministers at one blow. He professed to be a more zealous servant of Baal than Ahab had been, and proclaimed a great festival in his honour, at which none but his true servants were to be present. The prophets, priests, and officers of Baal assembled from all parts for this great sacrifice, and sacerdotal vestments were given to them, that none of Jehovah's worshippers might be taken for them. When the temple was full, soldiers were posted so that none might escape ; and so soon as the sacrifice had been offered, the word was given by the king, the soldiers entered the temple, and put all the worshippers to the sword. The temple itself was then demolished, the images overthrown, and the site turned into a common jakes. Notwithstanding this zeal of Jehu in extermi- nating the grosser idolatries which had grown up under his immediate predecessors, he was not prepared to subvert the policy which had led Jeroboam and his successors to maintain the schismatic establishment of the golden calves in Dan and Beth-el. The grounds of this policy are explained in the avticle Jeroboam, a reference to which will show fee grounds of Jehu's hesita- tion in this matter. This was, however, a crime in him — the worship rendered to the golden calves being plainly contrary to the law ; and lie should have felt that. He who had appointed him to the throne would have maintained him in it, notwith- standing the apparent dangers which might seem likely to ensue from permitting his subjects to repair at the great festivals to the metropolis of the rival kingdom, which was the centre of the theocratical worship and of sacerdotal service. Here Jehu fell short ! and this very policy, ap- parently so prudent and far-sighted, by which he hoped to secure the stability and independence of his kingdom, was that on account of which the term of rule granted to his dynasty was shortened. For this, it was foretold that his dynasty should extend only to four generations; and for this, the divine aid was withheld from him in his wars with the Syrians under Hazael on the eastern frontier. Hence the war was disastrous to him, and the Syrians were able to maintain themselves in the possession of a great part of his territories beyond the Jordan. He died in n.c. 856, and was buried in Samaria, leaving the throne to his son Jehoahaz. There is nothing difficult to understand in the character of Jehu. He was one of those decisive, terrible, and ambitious, yet prudent, calculating, and passionless men, whom God from time to time raises up to change the fate of empires and execute his judgments on the earth. He boasted of bis zeal — ' come and see my zeal for the Lord ' — but al tne bottom it was zeal for Jehu. His zeal was great so long as it led to acts which squared with his own interests, but it cooled marvellously when required to take a direction in his judgment less favourable to them. Even his zeal in extirpating the idolatry of Baal is not free from suspicion. The altar of Baal was that which Ahab had associated with his throne, and in overturning the latter he could not prudently let the former stand, surrounded as it was by attached adherents of the house which he had extirpated (2 Kings ix.-x.). 2. JEHU, son of Hanani, a prophet, who was sent to pronounce upon Baasha, king of Israel, and his house, the same awful doom which had been already executed upon the house of Jeroboam (1 Kings xvi. 1-7). The same prophet was, many years after, commissioned to reprove Jehosbaphat for his dangerous connection with the house of Ahab (2 Chron. xix. 2). JEPHTHAH {T\T\p1, opener; Sept. 'Iec^e), ninth judge of Israel, of the tribe of Manasseh. He was the son of a person named Gilead by a concubine. After the death of his father he was expelled from his home by the envy of his brothers, who refused him any share of the heritage, and he withdrew to the land of Tob, beyond the frontier of the Hebrew territories. It is clear that he had before this distinguished himself by his daring character and skill in arms ; for no sooner was his withdrawment known than a great number of men of desperate fortunes repaired to him, and he became their chief. His position was now very similar to that of David when he withdrew from the court of Saul. To maintain the people who had thus linked their fortunes with his, there was no other resource than that sort of brigandage which is accounted ho- nourable in the East, so long as it is exercised against public or private enemies, and is not marked by needless cruelty or outrage. Even our different climate and manners afford some parallel in the. Robin Hoods of former days ; in the border forays, when England and Scotland were ostensibly at peace; and — in principle, however great the formal difference — in the au- thorized and popular piracies of Drake, Raleigh, and the other naval heroes of the Elizabethan era. So Jephthah confined his aggressions to the borders of the small neighbouring nations, who were in some sort regarded as the natural enemies of Israel, even when there was no actual war be- tween them. Jephthah led this kind of life for some years, during which his dashing exploits and successful enterprises procured him a higher military reputa- tion than any other man of his time enjoyed. The qualities required to ensure success in such opera- tions were little different from those required in actual warfare, as warfare was conducted in the East before fire-arms came into general use : and hence the reputation which might be thus ac- quired was more truly military than is easily conceivable by modern and occidental readers. After the death of .lair the Israelites gradually fell into their favourite idolatries, and were punished by subjection to the Philistines on the west, of the Jordan, and to the Ammonites on the east of that river. The oppression which they 80 JEPHTHAH. sustained for eighteen years became at length so heavy that they recovered their senses and re- turned to the God of their fathers with humilia- tion and tears ; and lie was appeased, and promised them deliverance from their affliction (b.c. 1143). The tribes beyond the Jordan having resolved to oppose the Ammonites, Jephthah seems to occur to every one as the most fitting leader. A deputation was accordingly sent' to invite him to take the command. After some demur, on ac- count of the treatment he had formerly received, he consented. The rude hero commenced his operations with a degree of diplomatic considera- tion and dignity for which we are not prepared. The Ammonites being assembled in force for one of those raVaging incursions by which they had re- peatedly desolated the land, he sent to their camp a formal complaint of the invasion, and a demand of the ground of their proceeding. This is highly interesting, because it shows that even in that age a cause for war was judged necessary — no one being supposed to war without provocation ; and in this case Jephthah demanded what cause the Ammonites alleged to justify their aggressive operations. Their answer was, that the land of the Israelites beyond the Jordan was theirs. It had originally belonged to them, from whom it had been taken by the Amorites, who had been dispossessed by the Israelites : and on this ground they claimed the restitution of these lands. Jephthah "s reply laid down the just principle which has been followed out in the practice of civilized nations, and is maintained by all the great writers on the law of nations. The land belonged to the Israelites by right of conquest from the actual possessors ; and they could not be expected to recognise any antecedent claim of former possessors, for whom they had not acted, who had rendered them no assistance, and who had themselves displayed hostility against the Israel- ites. It was not to be expected that they would conquer the country from the powerful kings who had it in possession, for the mere purpose of re- storing it to the ancient occupants, of whom they had no favourable knowledge, and of whose pre- vious claims they were scarcely cognizant. But the Ammonites re-asserted their former views, and on this issue they took the field. When Jephthah set forth against the Ammon- ites he solemnly vowed to the Lord, 'If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into my hands, then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peaqe from the children of Am- mon, shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering.' He was victorious. The Ammonites sustained a terrible overthrow. He did return in peace to his house in Mizpeh. As he drew nigh his house, the one that came forth to meet him was his own daughter, his only child, in whom his heart was bound up. She, with her fair companions, came to greet the tri- umphant hero 'with timbrels and with dances.' But he no sooner saw her than he rent his robes, and cried, ' Alas, my daughter ! thou hast brought me very low ; . . . for I have opened my mouth unto the Lord, and cannot go back.' Nor did she ask it. She replied, ' My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth unto the Lord, do to me ac- cording to that which has proceeded out of thy mouth ; forasmuch as the Lord hath taken ven- JEPHTHAH. geance for thee of thine enemies, the children of Ammon.' But after a pause she added, ' Let this thing be done for me: let me alone two months, that I may go up and down upon the mountains, and • bewail my virginity, I and my fellows.' Her father of course assented ; and when the time expired she returned, and, we are told, ' he did with her according to his vow.' It is then added that it became ' a custom in Israel, that the daughters of Israel went yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah the Gileadite three days in the year.' The victory over the Ammonites was followed by a quarrel with the proud and powerful Ephraimites on the west of the Jordan. This tribe was displeased at having had no share in the glory of the recent victory, and a large body of men belonging to it, who had crossed the river to share in the action, used very high and threatening language when they found their services were not required. Jephthah, finding his remonstrances had no effect, re-assembled some of his disbanded troops and gave the Ephraimites battle, when they were defeated with much loss. The victors seized the fords of the Jordan, and when any one came to pass over, they made him pronounce the word Shibboleth [an ear of corn], but if he' could not give the aspiration, and pronounced the word as Sibboleth, they knew him for an Ephraimite, and slew him on the spot. This is a remarkable instance of the dialectical differences, answering to the varieties in our provincialisms, which had already sprung up among the tribes, and of which other instances occur in Scripture. Jephthah judged Israel six years, during which we have reason to conclude that the exercise of his authority was almost if not altogether con- fined to the country east of the Jordan. Volumes have been written on the subject of ' Jephthah's rash vow ; ' the question being whether, in doing to his daughter ' according to his vow,' he really did offer her in sacrifice or not. The negative has been stoutly maintained by many able pens, from a natural anxiety to clear the character of one of the heroes in Israel from so dark a stain. But the more the plain rules of common sense have been exercised in our view of biblical transactions ; and the better we have suc- ceeded in realizing a distinct idea of the times in which Jephthah lived and of the position which he occupied, the less reluctance there has been to admit the interpretation which the first view of the passage suggests to every reader, which is, that he really did offer her in sacrifice. The expla- nation which denies this maintains that she was rather doomed to perpetual celibacy ; and this, as it appears to us, on the strength of phrases which, to one who really understands the character of the Hebrew people and their language, suggest no- thing more than that it was considered a lament- able thing for any daughter of Israel to die childless. To live unmarried was required by no law, custom, or devot.ement among the Jews : no one had a right to impose so odious a condition on another, nor is any such condition implied or expressed in the vow which Jephthah uttered. To get rid of a difficulty which has no place in the text, but arises from our reluctance to receive that, text in its obvious meaning — we invent a new thing in Israel, a thing never heard of among the Hebrews in ancient or modern times, and more entirely JEPHTHAH. opposed to their peculiar notions than any thing which the wit of man ever devised — such as that a damsel should be consecrated to perpetual vir- ginity in consequence of a vow of her father, which vow itself says nothing of the kind. If people allow themselves to be influenced in their interpretations of Scripture by dislike to take the words in their obvious meaning, we might at least expect that the explanations they would have us receive should be in accordance with the notions of the Hebrew people, instead of being en- tirely and obviously opposed to them. The Jewish commentators themselves generally admit that Jephtliah really sacrificed his daughter ; and even go so far as to allege that the change in the pon- tifical dynasty from the house of Eleazar to that of Ithamar was caused by the high-priest of the time having suffered this transaction to take place. It is very true that human sacrifices were for- bidden by the law. But in the rude and un- settled age in which the judges lived, when the Israelites had adopted a vast number of errone- ous notions and practices from their heathen neighbours, many things were done, even by good men, which the law forbade quite as posi- tively as human sacrifice. Such, for instance, was the setting up of the altar by Gideon at his native Ophrah, in direct but undesigned opposi- tion to one of the most stringent enactments of the Mosaical code. It is certain that human sacrifice was deemed meritorious and propitiatory by the neighbouring nations [Sacrifice] ; and,considering the manner of life the hero had led, the recent idolatries in which the people had been plunged, and the peculiarly vague notions of the tribes beyond the Jordan, it is highly probable that he contemplated from the first a human sacrifice, as the most costly offering to God known to him. It is difficult to con- ceive that he could expect any other creature than a human being to come forth out of the door of his house to meet him on his return. His house was surely not a place for flocks and herds, nor could any animal be expected to come forth * to meet him,' i. e. with the purpose of meeting him, on his return. We think it likely that he even con- templated the possibility that his daughter might be the person to come forth, and that he took merit to himself for not expressly withholding even his only child from the operation of a vow which he deemed likely to promote the success of his arms. His affliction when his daughter actually came forth is quite compatible with this notion ; and the depth of thai; affliction is scarcely reconcil- able with any other alternative than the actual sacrifice. If we again look at the text, Jephtliah vows that whatsoever came forth from the door of his house to meet him ' shall surely be the Lord's, and I will oiler it up for a burnt-offering,' which, in fact, was the regular way of making a thing wholly the Lord's. Afterwards we are told that * he did with her according to his vow,' that is, according to the plain meaning of plain words, offered her for a burnt-offering. Then follows the intimation that the daughters of Israel lamented her four days every year. People lament the dead, not the living. The whole story is consistent and intelligible, while the sacrifice is understood to have actually taken place ; but becomes per- plexed and difficult as soon as we begin to turn VOL. II. JEREMIAH. 51 aside from this obvious meaning in search of re- condite explanations. The circumstances of thus immolation we can never know. It probably took, place at some one of the altars beyond the Jordan. That it took place at the altar of the tabernacle, and that the high-priest was the sacrificer, as painters usually represent the scene, and even as some Jewish writers believe, is outrageously contrary to all the probabilities of the case. Professor Bush, in his elaborate note on the text, maintains with us that a human sacrifice was all along contemplated. But he suggests that during the two months, Jephtliah might have ob- tained better information respecting the nature of vows, by which he would have learned that his daughter could not be legally offered, but might be redeemed at a valuation (Lev. xxvii. 2-12). This is possible, and is much more likely than the popular alternative of perpetual celibacy ; but we have serious doubts whether even this meets the conclusion that ' he did with her according to his vow.' Besides, in this case, where was the ground for the annual ' lamentations' of the daughters of Israel, or even for the ' celebrations' which some understand the word to mean ? See the Notes of the Pictorial Bible and Bush's Notes on Judges ; comp. Calmet's Dissertation sur le Vceu de Jephte, in Comment. Litter al, torn. ii. ; Dresde, Votum Jephthce ex Aniiq. Judaica illustr. 1778 ; Randolf, ErMiir. d. Gelubdes Jephtha, in Eichhorn'si?ej»erfe»7«»&,viii. 13; Lightfoot'siTa?'- mony, under Judges xL, Erubhin, cap. xvi., Ser~ mon on Judges xi. 39 ; Bp. Russell's Connection of Sacred and Profane History, i. 479-492. JEREMIAH (-lil n?T. and tlW, raised up or appointed by God; Sept. 'lepe/xlas) was the son of Hilkiah, a priest of Anatlioth, in the land of Benjamin [Anathoth]. Many have sup posed that his father was the high-priest of the same name (2 Kings xxii. 8), who found the book of the law in the eighteenth year of Josiah (Umbreit, Praktischer Commentar ilber den Jeremia, p. x. ; see Carpzov, Introd. part iii. p. 130). This, however, seems improbable on several grounds : — first, there is nothing in the writings of Jeremiah to lead us to think that his father was more than an ordinary priest (' Hilkiah [one] of the priests,' Jer. i. 1); — again, the name Hilkiah was common amongst the Jews (see 2 Kings xviii. 13; 1 Chron. vi. 45, xxvi. 11; Neh. viii. 4; Jer. xxix. 3) ; — and lastly, bis residence at Ana- thoth is evidence tliat he belonged to the line of Abiathar (1 Kings ii. 26-35), who was dejiosed from the high-priest's office by Solomon : after which time the office appears to have remained in the line of Zadok. Jeremiah was very young when the word of the Lord first came to him (ch. i. C). This event took place in the thirteenth year of Josiah (b.c. C29), whilst the youthful prophet still lived at Anathoth. It would seem that lie remained in his native city several years, but at length, in order to escape the peise- cution of his fellow townsmen (ch. xi. 21), and even of his own family (ch. xii. 6), as well as to have a wider field for his exertions, he left Anathoth and took up his residence at Jerusalem. The finding of the book of the law, five years after the commencement of his predictions, must have produced a powerful influence on the mind 82 JEREMIAH. of Jeremiah, and king Josiah no doubt found him a powerful ally in carrying into effect the reformation of religious worship (2 Kings xxiii. 1-25). During the reign of this monarch, we may readily believe that Jeremiah would be in no way molested in his work ; and that from the time of his quitting Anatboth to the eighteenth year of his ministry, he probably uttered his warnings without interruption, though with little success (see ch. xi.). Indeed, the refor- mation itself was nothing more than the forcible repression of idolatrous and heathen rites, and the re-establishment of the external service of God, by the command of the king. No sooner, therefore, wa3 the influence of the court on behalf of the 'rue religion withdrawn, than it was evident that no real improvement had taken place in the minds of the people. Jeremiah, who hitherto was at least protected by the influence of the pious king Josiah, soon became the object of attack, as he must doubtless have long been the object of dislike, to those whose interests were identified with the corruptions of religion. We hear nothing of the prophet during the three months which constituted the short reign of Jehoahaz ; but ' in the beginning of the reign of Jehoiakim ' the prophet was interrupted in his ministry by ' the priests and the prophets,' who with the populace brought him before the civil authorities, urging that capital punishment should be inflicted on him for his threatenings of evil on the city unless the people amended their ways (ch. xxvi). The princes seem to have been in some degree aware of the results which the general corruption was bringing on the state, and if they did not them- selves yield to the exhortations of the prophet. they acknowledged that he spoke in the name of the Lord, and were quite averse from so openly renouncing His authority as to put His messenger to death. It appears, however, that it was rather owing to the personal influence of one or two, especially Ahikam, than to any general feeling favourable to Jeremiah, that his life was preserved ; and it would seem that he was then either placed under restraint, or else was in so much danger from the animosity of bis adversaries as to make it prudent, for him not to appear in public. In the fourth year of Jehoiakim (b.c. 606) he was com- manded to write the predictions which had been given through him, and to read them to the people. From the cause, probably, which we have inti- mated above, he was, as he says, 'shut up,' and could not himself go into the house of the Lord (ch. xxxvi. 5). He therefore deputed Baruch to write the predictions after him, and to read them publicly on the fast-day. These threatenings being thus anew made public, Baruch was sum- moned before the princes to give an account of the manner in which the roll containing them had come into his possession. The princes, who, without strength of principle to oppose the wicked- ness of the king, had sufficient respect for religion, as well as sagacity enough to discern the importance of listening to the voice of God's prophet, advised both Baruch and Jeremiah to conceal themselves, whilst they endeavoured to influence the mind of the king by reading the roll to him. The result showed that their precautions were not needless. The bold self-will and reckless daring of the monarch refused to listen to any advice, even though coming with the professed sanction of the JEREMIAH. Most High. Having read three or four leaves ' ris cut the roll with the penknife and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed,' and gave immediate orders for the apprehension of Jeremiah and Baruch, who, how- ever, were both preserved from the vindictive monarch. Of the history of Jeremiah during the eight or nine remaining years of the reign of Jehoiakim we have no certain account At the command of God he procured another roll, ii» which he wrote all that was in the roll de- stroyed by the king, ' and added besides unto them many like words' (ch. xxxvi. 32). In the short reign, of his successor Jehoiachin or Jeconiah, we find him still uttering his voice of warning (see ch. xiii. 18 ; comp. 2 Kings xxiv. 12, and ch. xxii. 24-30), though without effect. It was probably either during this reign, or at the commencement of the reign of Zedekiah, that he was put in confinement by Pashur, the ' chief governor of the house of the Lord.' " He seems, however, soon to have been liberated, as we find that ' they had not put him into prison' when the army of Nebuchadnezzar commenced the siege of Jerusalem. The Chalda^ans drew off their army for a time, on the report of help coming from Egypt to the besieged city ; and now feeling the danger to be imminent, and yet a ray of hope brightening their prospects, the king entreated Jeremiah to pray to the Lord for them. The hopes of the king were not responded to in the message which Jeremiah received from God. He was assured that the Egyptian army should return to their own land, that the Chaldsans should come again, and that they should take the city and burn it with fire (ch. xxxvii. 7, 8). The princes, apparently irritated by a message so con- trary to their wishes, made the departure of Jere- miah from the city, during the short respite, the pretext for accusing him of deserting to the Chaldsans, and he was forthwith cast into prison. The king seems to have been throughout inclined to favour the prophet, and sought to know from him the word of the Lord ; but he was wholly under the influence of the princes, and dared not communicate with him except in secret (ch.xxxviii. 1-1, 28) ; much less could he follow advice so obnoxious to their views as that which the prophet gave. Jeremiah, therefore, more from the hos- tility of the princes than the inclination of the king, was still in confinement when the city was taken. Nebuchadnezzar formed a more just esti- mate of bis character and of the value of his counsels, and gave a special charge to his captain Nebuzar-adan, not only top'ovide for him but to follow his advice(ch. xxxix. 12), He was accord- ingly taken from the prison and allowed free choice either to go to Babylon, where doubtless he would have been held in honour in the royal court, or to remain with his own people. We need scarcely be told that he who had devoted more than forty years of unrequited service to the welfare of his falling country, should choose to remain with the remnant of his people rather than seek the precarious fame which might await him at the court of the King of Babylon. Ac- cordingly he went to Mizpah with Gedaliah, whom the Babylonian monarch had appointed governor of Judsa ; and after his murder, sought to persuade Johanan, who was then the recognised leader of the people, to remain in the land, assur- JEREMIAH. ing him and the people, by a message from God in answer to their inquiries, that if they did so the Lord would build them up, but if they went to Egypt the evils which they sought to escape should come upon them there (ch. xlii.). The people refused to attend to the divine message, and under the command of Johanan went into Egypt, taking Jeremiah and Baruch along with them (ch. xliii.6). In Egypt the prophet still sought to turn the people to the Lord, from whom they had so long and so deeply revolted (ch. xliv.) ; but his writings give us no subsequent information re- specting his personal history. Ancient traditions assert tiiat he spent the remainder of his life in Egypt. According to the pseudo-Epiphanius he was stoned by the people at Taphnse (eV To.TTis, and calls a passage which he quotes from Jer g2 84 JEREMIAH. iii. 4, an oracle, XPV0'^ (Eichhorn, Einleitung, vol. i p. 95). Josephus refers to him by name as the prophet who predicted the evils which were coming on the city, and speaks of him as the author of Lamentations Qjl4\os Qpf\vt]riK6v) which are still existing (Antiq., lib. x. 5. 1). His writings are included in the list of canonical books given by Melito, Origen (whose words are remarkable, 'lepefilas ffvv 6pi]vois Kal rrj kTnaToXrj ei> kv'C), Jerome, and the Talmud (Eichhorn, Ein- leitung, vol. iii. p. 184). In the New Testament Jeremiah is referred to by name in Matt ii. 17, where a passage is quoted from Jer. xxxi. 15, and in Matt. xvi. 14 ; in Heb. viii. 8-12, a pas- sage is quoted from Jer. xxxi. 31-34. There is one other place in which the name of Jeremiah occurs, Matt, xxvii. 9, which has occasioned con- siderable difficulty, because the passage there, quoted is not found in the extant writings of the prophet. Jerome affirms that he found the exact passage in a Hebrew apocryphal book (Fa- bricius, Cod. Pseudep. i. 1103); but there is no proof that that book was in existence before the time of Christ. It is probable that the passage intended by Matthew is Zech. xi. 12, 13, which in part corresponds with the quotation lie gives, and that the name is a gloss which has found its way into the text (see Olshausen, Commentar iiber N. T., vol. ii. p. 493). Much difficulty has arisen in reference to the writings of Jeremiah from the apparent disorder in which they stand in our present copies, and from the many disagreements between the Hebrew text and that found in the Septuagint version ; and many conjectures have been hazarded respecting the occasion of this disorder. The following are the principal diversities between the two texts : — 1. The prophecies against foreign nations, which in the Hebrew occupy chs. xlvi.-li. at the close of the book, are in the Greek placed after ch. xxv. 14, forming chs. xxvi.-xxxi. ; the remainder of ch. xxv. of the Heb. is ch. xxxii. of the Sept. The following chapters proceed in the same order in both chs. xliv. and xlv. of the Heb. forming ch.li. of the Sept. ; and the historical appendix, ch. Iii. is placed at the close in both. 2. The prophecies against the heathen nations stand in a different order in the two editions, as is shown in the fol- lowing table : — Hebrew. Sept. Egypt. Elam. Philistines. Egypt. Moab. Babylon. Ammon. Philistines. Edom. Edom. ' Damascus. Ammon. Kedar. Kedar. Elam. Damascus. Babylon. Moab. 3. Various passages which exist in the Hebrew are not found in the Greek copies (e. g. ch. xxvii. 19-22 ; xxxiii. 14-26 ; xxxix. 4-14 ; xlviii. 45- 47). Besides these discrepancies, there are numerous omissions and frequent variations of single words and phrases (Movers, De utriusque Vaticiniorum Jeremice recensionis indole et origine, pp. 8-32). To explain these diversities recourse has been had to the hypothesis of a double recension, an hypo- thesis which, with various modifications, is held by most modern critics (Movers, ut supra ; De JEREMIAH. Wette, Lehrbuch der Hist.-Crit. Einleitung in A.T., p. 303 ; Ewald, Propheten des Alt. Bund. vol. ii. p. 23). The genuineness of some portions of .the book has been of late disputed by German critics. Movers, whose views have been adopted by De Wette and Hitzig, attributes ch. x. 1-16, and chs. xxx., xxxi., and xxxiii. to the author of the concluding portion of the book of Isaiah. His fundamental argument against the last-named portion is, that the prophet Zechariah (ch. viii. 7, 8) quotes from Jer. xxxi. 7, 8, 33, and in ver. 9 speaks of the author as one who lived ' in the day that the foundation of the house of the Lord of hosts was laid.' He must, therefore, have been contemporary with Zechariah himself. This view obliges him, of course, to consider ch. xxx. 1, with which he joins the three following verses, as a later addition. By an elaborate comparison of the peculiarities of style he endeavours to show that the author of these chapters was the so-called pseudo-Isaiah. He acknowledges, however, that there are many expressions peculiar to Jeremiah, and supposes that it was in consequence of these that the prediction was placed among his writings. These similarities he accounts for by a'ssuming that the later unknown prophet Accommodated the writings of the earlier to his own use. Every one will see how slight is the external ground on which Movers' argument rests ; for there is nothing in ver. 7, 8, of Zechariah to prove that it is intended to be a quotation from any written prophecy, much less from this portion of Jeremiah. The quotation, if it be such, is made up by joining together phrases of frequent recurrence in the prophets picked out from amongst many others. Then, again, the mention of prophets is evidence that Zechariah was not referring to the writings of one individual ; and, lastly, the necessity of re- jecting the exordium, without any positive ground for suspecting its integrity, is a strong argument against the position of Movers. Hitzig (Jeremia, p. 230) is induced, by the force of these considera- tions, to give up the external evidence on which Movers had relied. The internal evidence arising from the examination of particular words and phrases — a species of proof which, when standing alone, is always to be received with great caution — is rendered of still less weight by the evidence of an opposite kind, the existence of which Movers himself acknowledges, ' quumque indicia usus loquendi tantummodo Jeremise peculiaris baud raro inveniantur ' (p. 42). And this evidence becomes absolutely nothing, if the authenticity of the latter portion of Isaiah is maintained ;!* for it is quite likely that prophecies of Jeremiah would, when relating to the same subjects, bear marks of similarity to those of his illustrious predecessor. We may mention also that Ewald, who is by no means accustomed to acquiesce in received opi- nions as such, agrees that the chapters in question, as well as the other passage mentioned ch. x. 1-16, are the work of Jeremiah. The authenticity of this latter portion is denied solely on internal grounds, and the remarks we have already made will, in substance, apply also to these verses. It * For a proof of its authenticity, see Hengsten- berg's Christologie, vol. i. c. 2, pp. 168-206, translated in the Am. Biblical Repository, vol. i. pp. 700-733 ; see also the article I&aiah. JEREMIAH. JERICHO. 85 seems, however, not improbable that the Chaldee of ver. 11 is a gloss which has crept into the text — both because it is (apparently without reason) in another language, and because it seems to inter- rupt the progress of thought. The predictions against Babylon in chs. 1. and li. are objected to by Movers, be Wette, and others, on the ground that they contain many interpolations. Ewald attributes them to some unknown prophet who imitated the style of Jeremiah. Their authen- ticity is maintained by Hitzig (p. 391), and by Umbreit (pp. 290-293), to whom we must refer for an answer to the objections made against them. The last chapter is generally regarded as an appendix added by some later author. It is almost verbally the same as the account in 2 Kings xxiv. 18; xxv. 30, and it carries the history down to a later period probably than that of the death of Jeremiah : that it is not his work seems to be indicated in the last verse of ch. li. It is impossible, within the limits assigned to this article, even to notice all the attempts which have been made to account for the apparent dis- order of Jeremiah's prophecies. Blayney speaks of their present disposition as a 'preposterous jumbling together of the prophecies of the reigns of Jehoiakim and Zedekiah,' and concludes that ' the original order has, most probably, by some accident or other been disturbed' (Notes, p. 3). Eichhorn says that no other explanation can be given than that the prophet wrote his oracles on single rolls, larger or smaller as they came to his hand, and that, as he was desirous to give his coun- trymen a copy of them when they went into cap- tivity, he dictated them to an amanuensis from the separate rolls without attending to the order of time, and then preserved -the rolls in the same order {Einl. iii. 134). Later critics have attempted in different ways to trace some plan in the present arrangement. Thus Movers supposes the whole collection to have consisted of six books — the longest being that written by Baruch ( Jer. xxxvi. 2, 32), which was taken by the collector as his foundation, into which he inserted the other books in such places as seemed, on a very slight glance at their contents, to be suitable. All such theo- ries, however, proceed on the presumption that the present arrangement is the work of a compiler, which, therefore, we are at liberty to alter at pleasure ; and though they offer boundless scope for ingenuity in suggesting a better arrangement, they serve us very little in respect to the explana- tion of the book itself. Ewald adopts another principle, which, if it be found valid, cannot fail to throw much light on the connection and meaning of the predictions. He maintains that the book, in its present form, is, from ch. i. to ch. xlix., substantially the same as it came from the hand of the prophet, or his amanuensis, and seeks to discover in the present arrangement some plan according to which it is disposed. He finds that various portions are prefaced by the same formula, * The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord ' (vii. 1 ; xi. 1 ; xviii. 1 ; xxi. 1 ; xxv. 1 ; xxx. 1 ; xxxii. 1; xxxiv. 1, 8; xxxv. 1; xl. 1 ; xliv. 1), or by the very similar expression, ' The word of the Lord which came to Jeremiah' (xiv. I ; xlvi. 1 ; xlvii. 1 ; xlix. 34). The notices of time distinctly mark some other divisions which are more or less historical (xxvi. 1 ; xxvii. 1 ; xxxvi. 1 ; xxxvii. 1). Two other portions are in themselves sufficiently distinct without such indication (xxix. 1 ; xlv. 1), whilst the general introduction to the book serves for the section contained in ch. i. There are left two sec- tions (ch. ii., iii.), the former of which has only the shorter introduction, which generally de- signates the commencement of a strophe ; while the latter, as it now stands, seems to be imperfect, having as an introduction merely the word ' say- ing.' Thus the book is divided into twenty-three separate and independent sections, which, in the poetical parts, are again divided into strophes of from seven to nine verses, frequently distinguished by such a phrase as 'The Lord said also unto me.' These separate sections are arranged by Ewald so as to form five distinct books : — I. The introduction, ch. i. ; — II. Reproofs of the sins of the Jews, ch. ii.-xxiv., consisting of seven sections, viz. 1. ch. ii.; 2. ch. iii.-vi., 3. vii.-x, 4. ch. xi.-xiii., 5. ch. xiv.-xvii. 18, 6. ch. xvii. 19*-xx., 7. ch. xxi.-xxiv. ; — III. A general review of all nations, the heathen as well as the people of Israel, con- sisting of two sections, 1. ch. xlvi.-xlix. (which he thinks have been transposed), 2. ch. xxv., and an historical appendix of three sections, 1. ch. xxvi., 2. ch. xxvii., and 3. ch. xxviii. xxix. ; — IV. Two sections picturing the hopes of brighter times, 1. ch. xxx. xxxi., and 2. ch. xxxii. xxxiii., to which, as in the last book, is added an his- torical appendix in three sections, 1. ch. xxxiv. 1-7, 2. ch. xxxiv. 8-22, 3. ch. xxxv. ;— V. The conclusion, in two sections, 1. ch. xxxvi., 2. ch. xlv. All this, he supposes, was arranged in' Palestine, during the short interval of rest between the taking of the city and the departure of Jere- miah with the remnant of the Jews, to Egypt. In Egypt, after some interval, Jeremiah added three sections, viz. ch. xxxvii.- xxxix., xl.-xliii. and xliv. At the same time, probably, he added ch. xlvi. 13-26 to the previous prophecy respecting Egyjjt, and, perhaps, made some additions to other parts previously written. We do not pro- fess to agree with Ewald in all the details of this arrangement, but we certainly prefer the principle he adopts to that of any former critic. We may add that Umbreit (Praktischer Comm. iib. d. Je- remia, p. xxvii.) states, that he has found himself more nearly in agreement with Ewald, as to arrangement, than with any one else. The principal predictions relating to the Mes- siah are found in ch. xxiii. 1-8; xxx. 31-40; xxxiii. 14-26 (Kengstenberg's Christologie, vol. iii. pp. 495-619). Besides the commentaries which have been re- ferred to in the course of the article, we may add Venema, Com?nentarius ad Librurn Jemmies ; Dahler, Jeremie ; Schnurrer, Observationes ad Vaticin. Jerem., in Yeltbusen's Commentationes Theolor/.,vo]. iii. ; Spohn, Jeremias Yates e Vers. Alex, emend. ; Rosenmiiller. Scholia in V. T., part viii. — F. W. G. JERICHO (Wy. and T]^")] ; Sept. 'UPlX" i Josephus, 'lepixovs), a town in the plain of the same name, not far from the river Jordan, at the point where it enters the Dead Sea. It lay before the Israelites when they crossed the river, on first entering the Promised Land ; and the * Ewald supposes that the proper place of the introductory formula to ch. xviii. 1, is ch. xvii. 19. 86 JERICHO. account which the spies who were sent by them into the city received from their hostess Rahab, tended much to encourage their subsequent operations, as it showed that the inhabitants of the country were greatly alarmed at their advance, and the signal miracles which had marked their course from the Nile to the Jordan. The strange manner in which Jericho itself was taken must have strengthened this impression in the country, and appears, indeed, to have been designed for that effect. The town was utterly destroyed by the Israelites, who pronounced an awful curse upon whoever should rebuild it ; and all the inhabitants were put to the sword, except Rahab and her family (Josh. ii. vi.). In these accounts Jericho is repeatedly called ' the city of palm-trees;' which shows that the hot and dry plain, so similar to the land of Egypt, was noted JERICHO. beyond other parts of Palestine for the tree which abounds in that country, but which was and is less common in the land of Canaan than general readers and painters suppose. It has r^ow almost disappeared even from the plain of Jericho, al- though specimens remain in the plain of the Mediterranean coast. Notwithstanding the curse, Jericho was soon rebuilt [Hiel], and became a school of the pro- phets (Judg. iii. 13 ; 1 Kings xvi. 34 ; 2 Kings ii. 4, 5). Its inhabitants returned after the exile, and it was eventually fortified by the Syrian general Bacchides (Ezra ii. 34 ; Neb. iii. 2 ; 1 Mace. ix. 50). Pompey marched from Scytho- polis, along the valley of the Jordan, to Jericho, and thence to Jerusalem ; and Strabo speaks of the castles Thrax and Taurus, in or near Jericho, as having been destroyed by him (Joseph. Antiq- 362. [Jericho.] xiv. 4. 1 ; Strabo, xvi. 2. 40). Herod the Great, in the beginning of his career, captured and sacked Jericho, but afterwards strengthened and adorned it, when he had redeemed its revenues from Cleopatra, on whom the plain had been be- stowed by Antony (Joseph. Antiq. xv. 4. 1, 2). He appears to have often resided here, probably in winter : he built over the city a fortress called Cypros, between which and the former palace he erected other palaces, and called them by the names of his friends (Joseph. Antiq. xvi. 5. 2; Be Bell. Jud. i. 21. 4, 9). Here also was a hippodrome or circus, in which the same tyrant, when lying at Jericho on his death-bed, caused the nobles of the land to be shut up, for massacre after his death. He died here ; but his bloody intention was not executed (Joseph. Antiq. xvii. 6. 5 ; De Bell. Jud. i. 33. 6-8). The palace at this place was afterwards rebuilt more magni- ficently by Archelaus (Antiq. xvii. 31). By this it will be seen that the Jericho which existed in the time of our Saviour was a great and important city — probably more so than it bad ever been since its foundation. It was once visited by him, when he lodged wi.th Zaccheus, and healed the blind man (Luke xviii. 35-43; xix. 1-7; Matt. xx. 29-34 ; Mark x. 46-52). Jericho was after- wards made the head of one of the toparchies, and was visited by Vespasian before he left the country, who stationed there the tenth legion in garrison (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. iii. 3. 5 ; iv. 8. 1 ; v. 2. 3). Eusebius and Jerome describe Jericho as having been destroyed during the siege of Jerusalem, on account of the perfidy of the in- habitants, but add that it was afterwards re- built ; but, as Josephus is silent respecting this event, Dr. Robinson regards it as doubtful. That the town continued to exist as a place of import- ance, appears from the names of five bishops of Jericho which have been collected (Oriens Christ. JERICHO. ill. 654). The emperor Justinian built here a Xenodochium, apparently for pilgrims, and also a church, dedicated to the Virgin 5 and the mo- nastery of St. John, near the Jordan, was already in existence (Procop. De JEdific, Justiniani, v. 9). The town, however, appears to have been over- thrown during the Mohammedan conquest ; for Adamnanus, at the close of the seventh century, describes the site as without human habitations, and covered with corn and vines. The celebrated palm-groves still existed. In the next century a church is mentioned ; and in the ninth century several monasteries appear. About the same time the plain of Jericho is again noticed for its fertility and peculiar products; and it appears to have been brought under cultivation by the Saracens, for the sake of the sugar and other pro- ducts for which the soil and climate were more suitable than any other in Palestine. Ruins of extensive aqueducts, with pointed Saracenic arches, remain in evidence of the elaborate irri- gation and culture of this fine plain — which is aothing without water, and everything with it — at a period long subsequent to the occupation of the country by the Jews. It is to this age that we enay probably refer the origin of the castle and village, which have since been regarded as repre- senting Jericho. The place has been mentioned by travellers and pilgrims down to the present time as a poor hamlet consisting of a few houses. In the fifteenth century the square castle or tower began to pass among pilgrims as the house of Zaccheus, a title which it bears to the present day. The village thus identified with Jericho now ■bears the name of Rihah, and is situated about the middle of the plain, six miles west from the Jordan, in N. lat. 31° 57', and E. long. 35° 33'. Dr. Olin describes the present village as ' the meanest and foulest of Palestine.' It may per- haps contain forty dwellings, formed of small loose stones. The walls, which threaten to tumble down at a touch, are covered with flat roofs, com- posed of reed or straw plastered over with mud. Around most of these dwellings a little yard is inclosed with dry thorn-bushes. The village has a similar bulwark, which, insufficient as it appears to offer resistance to an invader, is quite effectual against the marauding Bedouins, with their hare feet and legs, or any other enemy in too great haste to burn it. The most important object is the castle or tower already mentioned, which Dr. Robinson supposes to have been con- structed to protect the cultivation of the plain under the Saracens. It is thirty or forty feet square, and about the same height, and is now in a dilapidated condition. The pilgrims, as we have seen, regard it as the house of Zaccheus ; and they also point to a solitary palm-tree, the only survivor of the groves which once gave the town one of its distinguishing names, as the iden- tical sycamore which was climbed by the same personage to view the Saviour as he passed. Rihah may contain about two hundred in- habitants, who have a sickly aspect, and are reckoned vicious and indolent. They keep a few cattle and sheep, and till a little land for grain as well as for gardens. A small degree of in- dustry and skill bestowed on this prolific soil, favoured as it is with abundant water for irri- gation, would amply reward the labour. But JERICHO. S7 this is wanting ; and everything bears the mark of abject, and, which is unusual in the East, of squalid poverty. There are some fine fig-trees near the village, and some vines in the gardens. But the most distinguishing feature of the whole plain is a noble grove of trees which borders the village on the west, and stretches away north- ward to the distance of two miles or more. This grove owes its existence to the waters of one of the fountains, the careful distribution of which over the plain by canals and aqueducts did once, and might still, cover it with abund- ance. One of these fountains is called by the natives Ain es-Sultan, but by pilgrims the Fountain of Elias, being supposed to be the same whose bitter waters were cured by that prophet. Dr. Robinson thinks there is reason for this conclusion. It lies almost two miles N.W. from the village. It bursts forth at the foot of a high double mound, situated a mile or more in front of the mountain Quarantana. It is a large and beautiful fountain of sweet and pleasant water. The principal stream runs to- wards the village, and the rest of the water finds its way at random in various streams down the plain. Beyond the fountain rises up the bold perpendicular face of the mountain Quarantana (Kuruntul), from the foot of which a line of low hills runs out N.N.E. in front of the mountains, and forms the ascent to a narrow tract of table- land along their base. On this tract, at the foot of the mountains, about two and a half miles N.N.W. from the Ain es-Sultan, is the still larger fountain of Duk, the waters of which are brought along the base of Quarantana in a canal to the top of the declivity at the back of Ain es-Sultan, whence they were formerly distributed to several mills, and scattered over the upper part of the plain (Robinson's Bib. Researches, ii. 284, 285). Under the mountains on the western confine of the plain, about two miles west of Rihah, and just where the road from Jerusalem comes down into the plain, are considerable ruins, extending both on the north and south side of the road. There is nothing massive or imposing in these remains, although they doubtless mark the site of an important ancient town. The stones are small and unwrought, and have llie appearance of being merely the refuse, which was left as worthless by those who bore away the more valu- able materials to be employed in the erection of new buildings. Mr. Buckingham was the first to suspect that these were the ruins of the ancient Jericho. He shows that the situation agrees bet- ter with the ancient intimations than does that of the modern village, near which no trace of ancient ruins can be found (Travels in Pales- tine, p. 293). Since this idea was started the matter has been examined by other travellers; and the conclusion seems to be that Rihah is certainly not the ancient Jericho, and that there is no site of ancient ruins on the plain which so well answers to the intimations as that now de- scribed; although even here some drawback to a satisfactory conclusion is felt, in the absence of any traces of those great buildings which be- longed to the Jericho of king Herod. We should like to examine this matter more in detail than would be satisfactory to any but an antiquarian reader ; but shall be content to introduce the concise and clear view of the question which haa 88 JERICHO. been given by Dr. Olin in his very useful Tra- vels in the East. ' Travellers concur in calling this wretched place (Rihah) Jericho, though I am not aware that any reason exis-fs for believing that it occupies the site of the ancient city of that name. Here are no ruins to indicate the former presence of a considerable town ; nothing but the tower to induce a suspicion that anything much better than the present filthy village ever existed upon the spot. The situation does not agree with that of the ancient eity, which, according to Joseplras, was close to the mountain, and nearer, by several miles, to Jerusalem. The ruins already described, at the foot of the mountain, where the Jerusalem road enters the plain, not improbably mark the site of ancient Jericho. Their distance from the Jordan and from Jerusalem agrees well with that of the Jericho of the age of Josephus, which he states to have been sixty furlongs from the river, and one hundred and fifty from the. capital. This site also satisfies his description in being situated " in the plain, while a naked and barren mountain hangs over it." The exact position of the ancient city is not definitely stated in the Bible, though it is always spoken of as at a con- siderable distance from the Jordan. The position at the foot of the mountain was in accordance with the customs of that early age, and of Pa- lestine especially, where nearly all the cities of which mention is made in its early history occu- pied strong positions, either embracing or adjacent to a mountain elevation, on which a citadel was erected for defence. The language of Josephus seems, indeed, to imply that Jericho, in his day, did not occupy the same ground as the city de- stroyed by Joshua, and that the description quoted above refers to the later city. He says, in de- scribing the fountain healed by Elisba, that it r arises near the old city, which Joshua, the son of Nun, took ;" language which must, perhaps, be understood to imply that the later town occu- pied a different site. It was highly probable, after the terrible malediction pronounced against those who should rebuild the accursed place, that some change should be made in the location, though not so great as to lose the peculiar advan- tages of the ancient site. Hiel, the Bethelite, as we know, braved the prophetic curse, and rebuilt the city upon its old foundations ; but the same cause might still operate, and with additional effect, after his punishment, to induce more pious or scrupulous men to prefer a place less obnoxious to the divine displeasure. Both sites, that near the fountain and the one upon the Jerusalem road, give evidence of having been anciently covered with buildings. They were probably occupied successively, or both may have been embraced at once within the compass of a large city and its suburbs. In order to render the several notices of Jericho contained in the Bible consistent with each other, and witli the descrip- tion in Josephus, it seems necessary to suppose more than one change of situation. Joshua " burned the city with fire, and all that was therein," and said, " Cursed be the man before the Lord that riseth up and buildeth this city Je- richo : he shall lay the foundation thereof in his first-born, and in his youngest son shall he set up the gates thereof." It was about 520 years after this, in the impious reign of Ahab, that Hiel re- built the city, and suffered the fearful penalty JEROBOAM. that had been denounced against such an act oft daring impiety. "He laid the foundation thereof in Abiram his first-born, and set up the gates thereof in his youngest son Segub, according to the word of the Lord which he spake by Joshua, the son of Nun" (1 Kings xvi. 34). Previous to this, how- ever, and almost immediately after the death of Joshua, reference is made to the city of palm- trees, which was captured by Eglon, king of Moab (Judg. iii. 13), and it was nearly 10O years before the rebuilding by Hiel that David's ambassadors, who had been so grievously insulted by the king of Ammon, were directed " to tarry at Jericho until their beards were grown" (2 Sam. x. 5). We are to infer, from these several state- ments, that Jericho was rebuilt soon after its de- struction by Joshua, but not upon its ancient foundations — a change by which the penalty was avoided. The malediction had probably fallen into oblivion, or, if remembered, was likely to.be treated with contempt in the infidel and idola- trous age when Hiel restored the original city. It was, according to the common chronology, about thirty years subsequent to this restoration that Elisha healed the fountain from which the city derived its supply of water. It is probable that the accursed site had been again abandoned, upon the catastrophe that followed the impious attempt of Hiel, for the existing city seems to have been at some distance from " the spring of the waters," which produced sterility and disease (2 Kings ii. 21). It may have occupied, at the era of Elisha's miracle, the same site as it did when visited by our Saviour, and described by Jo- sephus.' JEROBOAM (Ct^T! ; Sept. 'Ispcc/loa/.*.), son of Nebat, and first king of Israel, who became king b.c. 975, and reigned 22 years. He was of the tribe of Ephraim, the son of a widow named Zeruiah, when he was no- ticed by Solomon as a clever and active young man, and was appointed one of the superin- tendents of the works which that magnificent king was carrying on at Jerusalem. This appointment, the reward of his merits, might have satisfied his ambition had not the declaration of the prophet Ahijah given him higher hopes. When informed that, by the divine appointment, he was to become king over the ten tribes about to be rent from the house of David, he was not content to wait pa- tiently for the death of Solomon, but began to form plots and conspiracies, the discovery of which constrained him to flee to Egypt to escape condign punishment. The king of that country was but too ready to encourage one whose success must necessarily weaken the kingdom which had become great and formidable under David and Solomon, and which had already pushed its fron- tier to the Red Sea (1 Kings xi. 20-40). When Solomon died, the ten tribes sent to call Jeroboam from Egypt ; and he appears to have headed the deputation which came before the son of Solomon with a demand of new securities for the rights which the measures of the late king had com- promised. It ma}r somewhat excuse the harsh an- swer of Rehoboam, that the demand was urged by a body of men headed by one whose pretensions were so well known and so odious to the house of David. It cannot be denied, that in making their applications thus offensively, they struck the first 1 ChurcJi of the 3t*(i/ Sepulchre 3 Coptic Convent 4 Latin. Convent 5 Fool of the Bath , (H&zekuih ? ) 6 RuhiniJ Fo.lM.i- "i HuxfritaHers 7 FFii-rpital of Beleno, ;< QjUcge of Dervishes S Church- of Si Anne 10 Fool of Fethesda, 11 English Oaavh 12 Syrian. Convent Z? Church of S* James 14 ^Armenian. Convent lb Jews plows ofwujliiuj 10 Mbsqu£ es-SaJcknSL 17 Mosque. el~j4Jwa a Tower of Psephirws c Tower of Phasaelus e The. JXfstus to ancient sites , &c. •arse ufllu- First. Wall d? S,',;mdWallj 'sou-hiding Hie Church aftlieSoli/Mpubhn-. rr,f fJi-t l cLH . of the ._'•'&< T is I Will (iiielu.liji.j tlu; above At<- ) !' lo.ffeii>s ts kvvfj.ws, £k rrjs (Ta>T7)pi- Ssos Idcreais %x®v TV Tpoerryyopiav (Catech. Ilium, x.).* There can be no doubt that Jesus is the Greek form of a Hebrew name, which had been borne by two illustrious individuals in former periods of the Jewish history, — the successor of Moses and introducer of Israel into the promised land (Exod. xxiv. 13), and the high-priest who, along with Zerubbabel (Zech. iii. 1), took so active a part in the re-establishment of the civil and religious polity of the Jews on their return from the Baby- lonish captivity. Its original and full form is Jehoshua (Num. xiii. 1(5). By contraction it became Joshua, or Jeshua ; and when transferred into Greek, by taking the termination charac- teristic of that language, it assumed the form Jesus. It is thus the names of the illustrious individuals referred to are uniformly written in the Sept. ; and the first of them is twice mentioned in the New Testament by this name (Acts vii. 45 ; Heb. iv. S). The conferring of this name on our Lord was not the result of accident, or of the ordinary course of things, there being ' none of his kindred,' so far as we can trace from the two genealogies, ' called by that name' (Luke i. 61). It was the consequence of a twofold miraculous interposition. The angel who announced to his virgin mother that she was to be f the most honoured of women,.' in giving birth to the Son of God and the Saviour of men, intimated also to her the name by which the holy child was to be called : ' Thou shalt call his name Jesus ' (Luke i. 31). And it was probably the same heavenly messenger who ap- peared to Joseph, and, to remove his suspicions and quiet his fears, said to him, ' That which is conceived in thy wife Mary is of the Holy Ghost, and she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus ' (Matt. i. 20, 21). The pious pair were 'not disobedient to the heavenly vision.' ' When eight days were accomplished for the cir- cumcising of the child, his name was called Jesus, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb ' (Luke ii. 21). The name Jesus, like most of Jewish proper names, was significant ; and, as might well be expected, when we consider who imposed it, its meaning is at once important and appropriate. The precise import of the word has been a subject of doubt and debate among interpreters. As to its general meaning there is all but an unanimous concurrence. It was intended to denote that he who bore it was to be a Deliverer or Saviour. This, whatever more, is indicated in the original word ; and the reason given by the angel for the imposition of this name on the Virgin's son was * Some of the Patristic etymologies are really very odd. lldcrxa. is traced to ita ; Aev'irris is derived from the Latin levis ; and Aid@o\os from dvo and fico\os, because he who bears that name swallows man at two bites, first the soul, and then the body. JESUS CHRIST. 'because he shall gave his people from their sins ' (Matt. i. 21). But while some interpreters hold that it is just a part of the verb signifying to save, in the form Hiphil, slightly modified, and that it signifies ' he shall save,' others hold that it is a compound word formed by the addition of two letters of the incommunicable name of the divinity, !T)i"P, to that verb, and that it is equivalent to ' The Salvation of the Lord,' or ' The Lord the Saviour.' It is not a matter of vital importance. The following circumstances seem to give proba- bility to the latter opinion It does not appear likely that Moses would have changed the name of his destined successor from Oshea, which signi- fies 'saviour,' into Jehoshua (Num. xiii. 16), if the latler signified merely he shall save ; whereas, if the word be a compound term, embodying in it the name Jehovah, we see an adequate reason for the change. In the first chapter of the Gospel by Matthew (Matt. i. 22, 23), the most natural in- terpretation of the words (thougli they admit' o another exegesis) seems to imply that the predic- tion of Isaiah, that the Virgin's son should be called Immanuel, was fulfilled in the imposition of the name Jesus on the Son of Mary.- This would be the case only on the supposition that Immanuel and Jesus are equivalent terms, a sup- position which cannot be sustained unless Jesus can be fairly rendered ' Jehovah will save,' or ' Jehovah the Saviour.' In that case, Jesus and Immanuel — God loith us, i.e. on our side — express, the same ideas. It is right, however, to remark, that the merely bearing such a name as either Immanuel or Jesus, even by divine appointment, is not of itself evi- dence of the divinity of him who bears it. The Hebrews were in the habit of giving names, both to persons and places, which were intended not to describe their distinctive properties, but to express some important general truth. Jacob called an altar built by him El-Elohe-Israel (Gen. xxxiii. 20), 'God the God of Israel,' i. e. God is the God of Israel. Moses called an altar he built Jehovah Nissi (Exod. xvii. 15), ' Jehovah my banner,' i. e. Jehovah is my banner. The name Jehoshua, as borne by him who brought the people of the Lord into the heritage of the Gentiles, means no more than that by him Jehovah would deliver his people. In many of the proper names in the Old Testament, the name El, or Jehovah, forms a part. Yet when, as in the case before us, he who bears such a name, by express divine appointment, is shown ' by many infallible proofs ' to be indeed an incarnation of divinity, we cannot but perceive a peculiar propriety in this divine appointment, and find in it, if not a new argument, a corro- boration of the host of arguments which lead us to the conclusion that He who ' according to the flesh ' was the Son of David, ' according to the Spirit of Holiness ' was ' the Son of God,' ' God over all, blessed for ever ' (Rom. i. 3, 4 ; ix. 5). The above are the only probable etymologies of the word. Others, however, have been suggested, and supported with considerable learning and in- genuity. The Valentinians, according to Irenseus (lib. ii. c. 41), were in the habit of writing the name IB'*, and explained it as meaning ' Him who pos- sesses heaven and earth,' making each letter, according to the cabbalistic art called notarikon, expressive of a word or clause; thus, * for HliT, JESUS CHRIST. JESUS CHRIST. 109 W for B W, and 1 for pN1, ' Jehovah of heaven and earth.' The learned but fanciful Osiander insists that Jesus is not the Greek form of Joshua, but the ineffable name, the Shem-hamphorash, rendered utterable by the insertion of the , letter EJ>. The reader who wishes to see the arguments by which he supports this wild hypothesis may consult his Harmonia Evangelica, lib. i. c, 6, Basil, 1561. And a satisfactory reply may be found in Chem- nitius' dissertation, De nomine Jesu, in Thes. Theol. Philol. torn. ii. p. 62, Amst. 1702; and in Ca- ninii Disquis. in loc. aliq. N. T. c. i. ; apud Crit. Sac. torn. ix. Castalio maintains an equally whimsical notion as to (he etymology of the word, deriving it from run1' and K^N, as if it were equivalent to Jehova- homo, God-man. The 'name of Jesus ' (Phil. ii. 10) is not the name Jesus, but ' the name above every name,' ovo/Accrb vTrep irav uvop.a, ver. 9. ; i. e. the supreme dignity and authority with which the Father has invested Jesus Christ, as the reward of his disin- terested exertions in the cause of the divine glory and human happiness ; and the bowing iv rq> bv6jxari 'Irjffov is obviously not an external mark of homage when the name Jesus is pronounced, but the inward sense of awe and submission to him who is raised to a station so exalted. Christ ; Gr. Xpurr6s ; Heb. fT'B'ID. This is not, strictly speaking, a proper name, but an official title. Jesus Christ, or rather, as it gene- rally ought to be rendered, Jesus the Christ, is a mode of expression of the same kind as John the Baptist, or Baptiser. In consequence of not ad- verting to this, the force and even the meaning of many passages of Scripture are misapprehended. When it is stated that Paul asserted, ' This Jesus whom I preach unto you is Christ ' (Act's xvii. 3), on our 6s icrnv 6 Xpiarbs 'Itjctovs, &c, that he ' testi- fied to the Jews that Jesus was Christ ' (Acts xviii. 5), the meaning is, that he proclaimed and proved that Jesus was the Christ, rbv Xpiffrbv 'lyo-ovis, or Messiah — the rightful owner of a title descriptive of a high official station which had been the sub- ject of ancient, prediction. When Jesus himself says that ' it is life eternal to know the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom he has sent ' (John xvii. 3), he represents the knowledge of himself as the Christ, the Messiah, as at once necessary and sufficient to make men truly and permanently happy. When he says, ' What think ye of Christ ?' irepl rod Xparrov : ' whose son is he ?' (Matt. xxii. 42), lie does not mean, What think ye of me, or of my descent? but, What think ye of the Christ— i he Messiah — and especially of his pa- ternity. There can be no doubt that the word, though originally an appellative, and intended to bring before the mind a particular official cha- racter possessed by him to whom it is applied, came at last, like many other terms of the same kind, to be often used very much as a proper name, to distinguish our Lord from other persons bearing the name Jesus. This is a sense, however, of comparatively rare occurrence in the New Tes- tament. Proceeding, then, on the principle that Christ is an appellative, let us inquire into its origin and signification as applied to our Lord. Christ is the English form of a Greek word, Xpicrr6s, corresponding in meaning to the Hebrew word Messiah, and the English word Anointed. The Christ is just equivalent to the Anointed One. The important question, however, remains behind, What is meant when the Saviour is represented as the Anointed One ? To reply to this question satisfactorily, it will be necessary to go somewhat into detail. Unction, from a very early age, seems to have been the emblem of consecration, or setting apart to a particular, and especially to a religious, pur- pose. Thus Jacob is said to have anointed the pillar of stone, which he erected and set apart as a monument of his supernatural dream at Beth-el (Gen. xxviii. 18; xxxi. 13; xxxv. 14). Under the Old Testament economy high-priests and kings were regularly set apart to their offices, both of which were, strictly speaking, sacred ones, by the ceremony of anointing, and the prophets were occasionally designated by the same rite. This rite seems to have been intended as a public intimation of a divine appointment to office. Thus Saul is termed 'the Lord's anointed' (1 Sam. xxiv. 6) ; David, ' the anointed of the God of Israel ' (2 Sam. xxiii. 1) ; and Zedekiah, ' the anointed of the Lord ' (Lam. iv. 20). The high- priest is called 'the anointed priest' (Lev. iv. 3). From the origin and design of the rite, iris not wonderful that the term should have, in a secon- dary and analogical sense, been applied to persons set apart by God for important purposes, though not actually anointed. Thus Cyrus, the King of Persia, is termed ' the Lord's anointed ' (Isa. xly. 1) ; the Hebrew patriarchs, when sojourning in Canaan, are termed ' God's anointed ones ' (Ps. cv. 15) ; and the Israelitish people receive the same appellation from the prophet Habakkuk (Hab. iii. 13). It is probably with reference to this use of the expression that Moses is said by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, to have 'counted the reproach of Christ ' (Heb. xi. 26), rod Xpiffrov (Aaou), the same class who in the parallel clause are termed the ' people of God,' ' greater riches than the treasures of Egypt.' In the prophetic Scriptures we find this appel- lation given to an illustrious personage, who, under various designations, is so often spoken of as destined to appear in a distant age as a great deliverer. The royal prophet David seems to have been the first who spoke of the great deliverer under this appellation. He represents the heathen (the Gentile nations) raging, and the people (the Jewish people) imagining a vain thing, ' against Jehovah, and against his anointed' (Ps. ii. 2). He says, ' Now know I that the Lord saveth his anointed'' (Ps. xx. 6). ' Thou hast loved righte- ousness and hated iniquity ' says he, addressing himself to ' Him who was to come,' ' therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with (he oil of gladness above thy fellows ' (Ps. xlv. 7). In all the passages in which the great deliverer is spoken of as ' the anointed one," by David, he is plainly viewed as sustaining the character of a king. The prophet Isaiah also uses the appellation, ' the anointed one,' with reference to the promised deliverer, but, when he does so, he speaks of him as a prophet or great teacher. He introduces him as saying, ' The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord God hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to iiroclaim liberty to 110 JESUS CHRIST. the captives, and the opening of the prison to them who are bound, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God, to comfort all that mourn,' &c. (Isa. lxi. 1, &c). Daniel is the only other of the prophets who uses the appellation ' the anointed one ' in refer- ence to the great deliverer, and he plainly repre- sents him as not only a prince, but also a high- priest, au expiator of guilt. ' Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to punish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for ini- quity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up> the vision and the prophecy, and to anoint the most holy. Know therefore and under- stand that from the going forth of the command- ment to restore Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks and threescore and two weeks ; the city shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times ; and after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for him- self (Dan. ix. 24-26). During the period which elapsed from the close of the prophetic canon till the birth of Jesus, no appellation of the expected deliverer seems to have been so common as the Messiah or Anointed One, and this is still the name which the unbelieving Jews ordinarily employ when speaking of him whom they still look for to avenge their wrongs and restore them to more than their former honours. Messiah, Christ, Anointed, is, then, a term equivalent to consecrated, sacred, set apart; and as the record of divine revelation is called, by way of eminence, The Bible, or book, so is the Great Deliverer called The Messiah, or Anointed One, much in the same way as he is termed The Man, The Son of Man. The import of this designation as given to Jesus of Nazareth may now readily be apprehended. — (1.) When he is termed the Christ it is plainly indicated that He is the great deliverer promised under that appellation, and many others in the Old Testament Scriptures, and that all that is said of this deliverer under this or any other ap- pellation is true of Him. No attentive reader of the Old Testament can help noticing that in every part of the prophecies there is ever and anon pre- sented to our view an illustrious personage destined to appear at some future distant period, and, how- ever varied may be the figurative representations given of him, no reasonable doubt can be enter- tained as to the identity of the individual. It is quite obvious that the Messiah is the same person as ' the seed of the woman ' who was to ' bruise the head of the serpent ' (Gen. iii. 15) ; ' the seed of Abraham, in whom all the nations of the earth were to be blessed ' (Gen. xxii. 18) ; the great ' prophet to be raised up like unto Moses,' whom all were to be required to hear and obey (Deut. xviii. 15); the ' priest after the order of Melchizedek ;' ' the rod out of the stem of Jesse, which should stand for an ensign of the people to which the Gentiles should seek' (Isa. xi. 1, 10); the virgin's son whose n;ime was to be Immanuel (Isa. vii. 14); ' the branch of Jehovah ' (Isa. iv. 2) ; ' the Angel of the Covenant ' (Mai. iii. 1) ; ' the Lord of the Temple,' &c. &c. (ib.). When we say, then, that Jesus is the Christ, we in effect say, ' This is He of whom Moses, in the law, and the prophets did write ' (John i. 45) ; and all that they say of Him ?b true of Jesus. JESUS CHRIST. Now what is the sum of the prophetic testimony respecting him ? It is this — that he should belong to the very highest order of being, the incommuni- cable name Jehovah being- represented as right- fully belonging to him ; that ' his goings forth have been from old, from everlasting ' (Mic. v. 2) ; that his appropriate appellations should be ' Won- derful, Counsellor, the Mighty God ' (Isa. ix. 6) ; that he should assume human nature, and become ' a child born ' of the Israelitish nation of the tribe of Judah (Gen. xlix. 10), of the family cf David (Isa. xi. 1) ; that the object of his appearance should be the salvation of mankind, both Jews and Gentiles (Isa. xlix. 6) ; that he should be ' despised and rejected ' of his countrymen ; that he should be ' cut off, but not for himself;' that he should be ' wounded for men's transgressions, bruised for their iniquities, and undergo the chas- tisement of their peace ;' that ' by his stripes men should be healed ;' that ' the Lord should lay on him the iniquity ' of men ; that ' exaction should be made and he should answer it ;' that he should ' make his soul an offering for sin ;' that after these sufferings he should be ' exalted and extolled and made very high ;' that he should ' see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied, and by his knowledge justify many ' (Isa. I'm. passim); that Jehovah should say to him, ' Sit at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool ' (Ps. ex. 1) ; that he should be brought near to the Ancient of Days, and that to him should be given ' domi- nion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, and nations, and languages should serve him — an everlasting dominion which shall not pass away, — a kingdom that shall not be destroyed ' (Dan. vii. 13, 14). All this is implied in saying Jesus is the Christ. In the plainer language of the New Testament ' Jesus is the Christ ' is equivalent to Jesus is 'God manifest in flesh ' (1 Tim. iii. 16), ■ — the Son of God, who, in human nature, by his obedience, and sufferings, and death in the room of the guilty, has obtained salvation for them, and all power in heaven and earth for himself, that he may give eternal life to all coming to the Father through him. (2.) While the statement ' Jesus is the Christ ' is thus materially equivalent to the statement ' all that is said of the Great Deliverer in the Old Testament Scriptures is true of Him,' it brings more directly before our mind those truths respect- ing him which the appellation 'the Anointed One ' naturally suggests. He is a prophet, a priest, and a king. He is the great revealer of divine truth ; the only expiator of human guilt, and reconciler of man to God ; the supreme and sole legitimate ruler over the understandings, consciences, and affections of men. In his per- son, and work, and word, by his spirit and provi- dence, he unfolds the truth with respect to the divine character and will, and so conveys it into the mind as to make it the effectual means of conforming man's will to God's will, man's cha- racter to God's character. He has by his spotless, all-perfect obedience, amid the severest sufferings, ' obedience unto death even the death of the cross,' so illustrated the excellence of the divine law and the wickedness and danger of violating it. as to make it a righteous thing in 'the just God' to 'justify the ungodly,' thus propitiating the offended majesty of heaven ; while the manifesta- tion of the divine love in appointing and accepting JESUS CHRIST. . this atonement, when apprehended by the mind tinder the influence of the Holy Spirit, becomes the effectual means of reconciling man to God and to his law, ' transforming him by the renew- ing of his mind.1 And now, possessed of 'all power in heaven and earth,' ' all power over all flesh,' ' He is Lord of All.' All external events and all spiritual influences are equally under his control, and as a king he exerts his authority in carrying into full effect the great purposes wnich his revelations as a prophet, and his great atoning sacrifice as a high-priest, were intended to accom- plish. (3.) But the full import of the appellation the Christ is not yet brought out. It indicates that He to whom it belongs is the anointed prophet, priest, and king — not that he was anointed by material oil, but that he was divinely appointed, qualified, commissioned, and accredited to be the Saviour of men. These are the ideas which the term anointed seems specially intended to con- vey. Jesus was divinely appointed to the offices he filled. He did not ultroneously assume them, ' he was called of God as was Aaion ' (Heb. v. 4), ' Behold mine Elect, in whom my soul de- lighteth.' He was divinely qualified : ' God gave to him the Spirit not by measure.' ' The Spirit of the Lord was upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord, and they made him of quick under- standing in the fear of the Lord, so that he does not judge after the sight of his eyes, nor reprove after the hearing of his ears, but he smites the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he slays the wicked ; and right- eousness is the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins ' (Isa. xi. 2-4). He was divinely commissioned : ' The Father sent him.' Jehovah said to him, ' Thou art my servant, in thee will I be glorified. It is a light thing that thou shouldst be my servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved of Israel ; I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayst be my salvation to the ends of the earth' (Isa. xlix. 6). 'Behold,' says Jehovah, ' 1 have given Him for a witness to the people — a leader and commander to the people.' He is divinely accredited: ' Jesus of. Nazareth,' says the Apostle Peter, was ' a man approved of God among you by miracles, and wonders, and signs which God did by him in the midst of you ' (Acts ii. 22). ' The Father who hath sent me,' says Jesus himself, ' hath borne witness of me ' (John v. 37). This he did again and again by a voice from heaven, as well as by the miracles which he performed by that divine power which was equally his and his Father's. Such is the import of the appellation Christ. If these observations are clearly apprehended there will be little difficulty in giving a satisfac- tory answer to the question which has sometimes been proposed — when did Jesus become Christ? when was he anointed of God? We have seen that the expression is a figurative or analogical one, and therefore we need not wonder that its references are various. The appointment of the Saviour, like all the other divine purposes, was, of course, from eternity. ' He was set up from everlasting ' (Prov. viii. 23) ; he ' was fore-ordained before the foundation of the world.' (1 Pet. i. 20). His qua- JEW, 111 lifications, such of them as were conferred, were bestowed in, or during his incarnation, when ' God anointed him with the Holy Ghost and with power ' (Acts x. 38). His commission may be considered as given him when called to enter on the functions of his. office. He himself, after quoting, in the synagogue of Nazareth, in the com- mencement of his ministry, the passage from the prophecies of Isaiah in which his unction to the prophetical office is predicted, declared ' This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears.' And in his resurrection and ascension, God, as the reward of his loving righteousness and hating iniquity, ' anointed him with the oil of gladness above his fellows ' (Ps. xlv. 7), i. e. conferred on him a regal power, fruitful in blessings to himself and others, far superior to that which any king had ever possessed, making him, as the Apostle Peter expresses it, ' both Lord and Christ ' (Acts ii. 36). As to his being accredited, every miraculous event performed in reference to him or by him may be viewed as included in this species of anointing — especially the visible descent of the Spirit on him in his baptism. These statements, with regard to the import of the appellation ' the Christ,' show us how we are to understand the statement of the Apostle John, 'Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is bom of God ' (1 John v. 1), i. e. is 'a child of God,' 'born again,' ' a new creature ;' and the similar declaration of the Apostle Paul, ' No man can say that Jesus is the Lord,' i. e. the Christ, the Messiah, ' but by the Holy Ghost ' (1 Cor. xii. 3). It is plain that the proposition, ' Jesus is the Christ,' when understood in the lati- tude of meaning which we have shown belongs to it, contains a complete summary of the truth respecting the divine method of salvation. To believe that principle rightly understood is to be- lieve the Gospel — the saving truth, by the faith of which a man is, and by the faith of which only a man can be, brought into the relation or formed to the character of a child of God ; and though a man may, without divine influence, be brought to acknowledge that ' Jesus is the Lord,' ' Messiah the Prince,' and even firmly to believe that these words embody a truth, yet no man can be brought really to believe and cordially to acknowledge the truth contained in these words, as we have at- tempted to unfold it, without, a peculiar divine intiuence. That Jesus is 6 eKOusv, 6 XpicrT6s, is the testimony of God, the faith of which constitutes a Christian, rh eV, the one thing to which the Spirit, the water and the blood, unite in bearing witness (1 John v. 6, 8, 9).— J. B. JESUS, surnamed Justus. [Justus.] JETHRO. [Hobab.] JEW (**1-inj Jehudi ; Sept. 'IouSaTos), a name formed from that of the patriarch Judah, and applied in its first use to one belonging to the tribe or country of Judah, or rather perhaps to a subject of the separate kingdom of Judah (2 Kings xvi. C ; xxv. 5). During the Captivity the term seems to have been extended to all the people of the Hebrew language and country, without dis- tinction (Esth. iii. (i, 9 ; Dan. iii. 8, 12) ; and this loose application of the name was preserved after the restoration to Palestine, when it came to denote not only every descendant of Abraham in the largest possible sense, but even proselytes who 112 JEZEBEL. had nc blood-relation to the Hebrews (Acts ii. 5 ; comp. 10). See the articles Hebrew Lan- guage ; Israel ; Judah. JEZEBEL (?2r^, not-inhabited, comp. Isa- bella; Sept. 'Ie£ix;8e\), daughter of Ethbaal, king of Tyre and Sidon, and consort of Ahab, king of Israel (b.c. 918). This unsuitable alliance proved most disastrous to the kingdom of Israel ; for Jezebel induced her weak husband not only to connive at her introducing the worship of her native idols, but eventually to become himself a worshipper of (hem, and to use all the means in his power to establish them in the room of the God of Israel. This was a great enormity. The worship of the golden calves which previously existed was, however mistakenly, intended in honour of Jehovah ; but this was an open alienation from him, and a turning aside to foreign and strange gods, which, indeed, were no gods. Most of the particulars of this bad but apparently highly-gifted woman's conduct have been related in the notices of Ahab and Elijah. From the course of her proceedings it would appear that she grew to hate the Jewish system of law and religion, on account of what must have seemed to her its intolerance and its anti-social tendencies. She hence sought to put it down by all the means she could command ; and the imbecility of her husband seems to have made all the powers of the state subservient to her designs. The manner in which she acquired and used her power over Ahab is strikingly shown in the matter of Naboth, which, perhaps, more than all the other affairs in which she was engaged, brings out her true character, and dis- plays the nature of her influence. When she found him puling, like a spoiled child, on account of the refusal of Naboth to gratify him by selling him his patrimonial vineyard for a ' garden of herbs/ she teaches him to look to her, to rely upon her for the accomplishment of his wishes ; and for the sake of this impression, more perhaps than from savageness of temper, she scrupled not at murder under the abused forms of law and religion. She had the reward of her unscru- pulous decisiveness of character in the triumph of her policy in Israel, where, at last, there were but 7000 people who had not bowed the knee to Baal, nor kissed their hand to his image. Nor was her success confined to Israel, for through Afha- liah — a daughter after her own heart — who was married to the son and successor of Jehoshaphat, the same policy prevailed for a time in Judah, after Jezebel herself had perished and the house of Ahab had met its doom. It seems that after the death of her husband, Jezebel maintained con- siderable ascendancy over her son Joram; and her measures and misconduct formed the principal charge which Jehu cast in the teeth of that un- happy monarch, before he sent forth the arrow which slew him. The last effort of Jezebel was to intimidate Jehu as he passed the palace, by warning him of the eventual rewards of even successful treason. It is eminently characteristic of the woman, that even in this terrible moment, when she knew that her son was slain, and must have felt that her power had departed, she dis- played herself not with rent veil and dishevelled hair, ' but tired her head and painted her eyes ' before she looked out at the window. The eunuchs, at a word from Jehu, having cast her down, she JEZREEL met her death beneath the wall [Jehu] ; and when afterwards the new monarch bethought him that, as ' a king's daughter,' her corpse should not be treated with disrespect, nothing was found of her but the palms of her hands and the soles of her feet. The dogs had eaten all the rest. b.c. 884 (1 Kings xvi. 31; xviii. 4, 13, 19; xxi. 5-25 ; 2 Kings ix. 7, 22, 30-37). JEZREEL (tajnp. ; Sept. Ie&aeA), a town in the tribe of Issachar (Josh. xix. 18), where the kings of Israel had a palace, and where the court often resided, although Samaria was the metro- polis of the kingdom. It is most frequently men- tioned in the history of the house of Ahab. Here was the vineyard of Naboth, which Ahab coveted to enlarge the palace-grounds (1 Kings xviii. 45, 46 ; xxi.), and here Jehu executed his dread- ful commission against the house of Ahab, when Jezebel, Joram, and all who were connected with that wretched dynasty perished (2 Kings ix. 14- 37; x. 1-11). These horrid scenes appear to have given the kings of Israel a distaste to this residence, as it is not again mentioned in their history. It is, however, named by Hosea (i. 4 , comp. i. 11 ; ii. 22) ; and in Judith (i. 8* iv. 3; vii. 3) it occurs under the name of Esdraelon. In the days of Eusebius and Jerome it was still a large village, called Esdraela ( Onomast. s. v. ' Jezrael ') ; and in the same age it again occurs as Stradela (Bin. Hieros. p. 586). Nothing more is heard of it till the time of the crusades, when it was called by the Franks Parvum Ge- rinum, and by the Arabs Zerin ; and it is de- scribed as commanding a wide prospect — on the east to the mountains of Gilead, and on the west to Mount Carmel (Will. Tyr. xxii. 26). But this line of identification- seems to have been afterwards lost sight of, and Jezreel came to be identified with Jenin. Indeed, the village of Zerin ceased to be mentioned by travellers till Turner, Buckingham, and others after them again brought it into notice ; and it is still more lately that the identification of Zerin and Jezreel has been restored (Raumer, Pal'dst. p. 155 ; Schubert, iii. 164 ; Elliot, ii. 379 ; Robinson, iii. 164). If any further proof of the fact were necessary, the identity of the names Jezreel and Zerin, or Jerin, might be adduced. This does not at first sight ajrpear ; but the first feeble letter of the Hebrew being dropped, and the last syllable el becoming in, as is not unusual in Arabic (as Beitm for BetheZ), the two words are seen to have been originally the same. Zerin is seated on the brow of a rock)' and very steep descent into the great and fertile valley of Jezreel, which runs down between the mountains of Gilboa and Hermon. Lying comparatively high, it commands a wide and noble view, ex- fending down the broad valley on the east to Beisan (Bethshean), and on the west quite across the great plain to the mountains of Carmel. It is described by Dr. Robinson (Researches, iii. 163) as a most magnificent site for a city, which, being itself a conspicuous object in every part, would naturally give its name to the whole region. In the valley directly under Zerin, is a consi- derable fountain, and another still larger some- what further to the east, under the northern side of Gilboa, called Ain Jalud. There can, therefore, be little question that as in Zerin we have Jezreel, JOAB. bo ]Q (he valley and the fountain we have the ' valley of Jezreel,' and the fountain of Jezreel, of Scripture. Zerin has at present little more than twenty humble dwellings, mostly in ruins, aud with few inhabitants. JOAB (3Nfl'», God-fathered; Sept. 'IaxJjS), one of the three sons of Zeruiah, the sister of David, and ' captain of the host ' (generalissimo) of the army during nearly the whole of David's reign. He first appears associated with his two bro- thers, Abishai and Asahel, in the command of David's troops against Abner, who had set up the claims of a son of Saul in opposition to those of David, who then reigned in Hebron. The armies having met at the pool of Gibeon, a general action was brought on, in which Aimer was worsted. In his flight he had the misfortune to hill Joab's bro- ther, the "swift-footed Asahel, by whom he was pur- sued (2 Sam. ii. 13-32). The consequences of this deed have been explained elsewhere [Abner ; Asahel]. Joab smothered for a time his resent- ment against, the shedder of his brother's blood ; but being whetted by the natural rivalry of posi- tion between him and Abner, he afterwards made it the instrument of his policy by treacherously, in the act of friendly communication, slaying Abner, at the very time when the services of the latter to David, to whom he had then turned, had rendered him a most dangerous rival to him in power and influence (2 Sam. iii. 22-27). That Abner had at first suspected that Joab would take the position jof blood-avenger [Blood- Revenge] is clear, from the apprehension which he expressed (2 Sam. ii. 22); but that he thought (hat Joab had, under all the circumstances, aban- doned this position, is shown by the unsuspecting readiness with which he went aside with him (2 Sam. iii. 26, 27) ; and that Joab placed his murderous act on the footing of vengeance for his brother's blood, is plainly stated in 2 Sam. iii. 30 ; by which, it also appears that the other brother, Abishai, shared in some way in the deed and its responsibilities. At the same time, as Abner was perfectly justified in slaying Asahel to save his own life, it is very doubtful if Joab would ever have asserted his right of blood-revenge, if Abner had not appeared likely to endanger his influence with David. The king, much as he reprobated (lie act, knew that it had a sort of ex- cuse in the old customs of blood-revenge, and he stood habitually too much in awe of his impetu- ous and able nephew to bring him to punishment, or even to displace him from his command. ' I am this day weak,' he said, 'though anointed king, and these men, the sons of Zeruiah, be too hard for me ' (2 Sam. iii. 39). Desirous probably of making some atonement before David and the public for (his atrocity, in a way which at the same time was most likely to prove effectual— namely, by some daring exploit, he was the iirst to mount to (he assault at the storming of (lie fortress on Mount Zion, which had remained so long in the hands of the Jebusites. By this service lie acquired the chief command of the army of all Israel, of which David was by this time king (2 Sam. v. 6-10). It is not necessary to trace the subsequent acts of Joab, seeing that they are in fact the public acts of the king he served. And he served him VOL. II. JOAB. 113 faithfully ; for although he knew his power over David, and often treated him with little cere- mony, there can be no doubt that he was most truly devoted to his interests, and sometimes ren- dered him good service even against his own will, as in the affair at Mahanaim (2 Sam. xix. 5-8). But Joab had no principles apart from what he deemed his duty to the king and the people, and was quite as ready to serve his master's vices as his virtues, so long as they did not interfere with his own interests, or tended to promote them by enabling him to make himself useful to the king. His ready apprehension of the king's meaning in the matter of Uriah, and the facility with which he made himself the instrument of the murder, and of the hypocrisy by which it was covered, are proofs of this, and form as deep a stain upon his character as his own murders (2 Sam. xi. 14-25). As Joab was on good terms with Absalom, and had taken pains to bring about a reconciliation between him and his father, we may set the higher value upon his firm adhe- sion to David when Absalom revolted, and upon his stern sense of duty to the king — from whom he expected no thanks, — displayed in putting an end to the war by the slaughter of his favourite son, when all others shrunk from the responsibility of doing the hing a service against his own will (2 Sam. xviii. 1-14). In like manner, when David unhappily resolved to number the people, Joab discerned the evil and remonstrated against it ; and although he did not venture to disobey, he performed the duty tardily and reluctantly, to afford the king an opportunity of reconsidering the matter, and took no pains to conceal how odious the measure was to him (2 Sam. xxiv. 1-4). David was certainly ungrateful for the services of Joab, when, in order to conciliate the powerful party which had supported Absalom, he offered the command of the host to Amasa, who had commanded the army of Absalom (2 Sam. xix. 13). But the inefficiency of the new commander, in the emergency which the revolt of Bichri's son produced, arising perhaps from the reluctance of the troops to follow their new leader, gave Joab an opportunity of displaying his superior resources ; and also of removing his rival by a murder very similar to, and in some respects less excusable and more foul than that of Abner [Amasa]. Besides, Amasa was his own cousin, being the son of his mother's sister (2 Sam. xx. 1-13). When David lay on his death-bed, and a de- monstration was made in favour of the succession of the eldest surviving son, Adonijah, whose inte- rests had been compromised by the preference of the young Solomon, Joab joined the party of die natural heir. It would be unjust to regard this as a defection from David. It was nothing more or less than a demonstration in favour of the na- tural heir, which, if not. then made, could not be made at all. But an act which would have been justifiable, had the preference of Solomon been a mere caprice of the old king, became criminal as an act of contumacy to the Divine king, the real head of the government, who had called the house of David to the throne, and had the sole right of determining which of its members should reign. When the prompt measures taken tinder the direction of the king rendered this demonstration abortive (1 Kings i. 7), Joab withdrew into private life till some time alter the death ol' David, when 114 JOANNA. the fate of Adonijah, and of Abiathar — whose life was only spared in consequence of his sacerdotal character — warned Joab that he had little mercy to expect from the new king. He fled for refuge to the altar ; but when Solomon heard this, he sent Benaiah to put him to death ; and, as he refused to come forth, gave orders that he should be slain even at the altar. Thus died one of the most accomplished warriors and unscrupulous men that Israel ever produced. His corpse was re- moved to his domain in the wilderness of Judah, and buried there, b.c. 1015 (1 Kings ii. 5, 28-34). JOANNA Qlwdwa), wife of Chuza, the steward of Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee. She was one of those women who followed Christ, and ministered to the wants of him and his disciples out of their abundance. They had all been cured of grievous diseases by the Saviour, or had received material benefits from him ; and the customs of the country allowed them to testify in this way their gratitude and devotedness with- out reproach. It is usually supposed that Joanna was at this time a widow (Luke viii. 3; xxiv. 10). 1. JOASH (EW, God-given; Sept. 'lads), a contraction of Jehoash (KW)!"P), son of Ahaziah and eighth king of Judah, who began to reign in b.c. 878, at the age of seven, and reigned forty-one years. Joash, when an infant, was secretly saved by his aunt Jehoshebah, who was married to the high- priest Jehoiada, from the general massacre of the family by Athaliah, who had usurped the throne [Athaliah ; Jehoiada]. By the high-priest and his wife the child was privily brought up in the chambers connected with the temple till he had attained his eighth year, when Jehoiada deemed that the state of affairs required him to produce the youthful heir of the throne to the people, and claim for him the crown which his grandmother had so unrighteously usurped. Finding the influential persons whom he consulted favourable to the design, everything was secretly, but admirably, arranged for producing Joash. aud investing him with the regalia, in such a manner that Athaliah could have no suspicion of the event till it actually occurred. On the day ap- pointed, the sole surviving scion of David's illus trious house appeared in the place of the kings, by a particular pillar in the temple-court, and was crowned and anointed with the usual cere- monies. The high-wrought enthusiasm of the spectators then found vent in clapping of hands and exulting shouts of ' Long live the king !' The joyful uproar was heard even in the palace, and brought Athaliah to the temple, from which, at a word from Jehoiada, she was led to her death. Joash behaved well during his non-age, and so long after as he remained under the influence of the high-priest. But when he died the king seems to have felt himself relieved from a yoke ; and to manifest his freedom, began to take the contrary course (o that which he had followed while imder pupilage. Gradually the persons who had pos- sessed influence formerly, when the house of David was contaminated by its alliance with the house of Ahab, insinuated themselves into his councils, and ere long the worship of Jehovah and the observances of the law were neglected, and the JOASH. land was defiled with idolatries and idolatrcTua usages. The prophets then uttered their warnings, but were not heard ; and the infatuated king had the atrocious ingratitude to put to death Zechariah, the son and successor of his benefactor Jehoiada. For these deeds Joash was made an example of the divine judgments. He saw his realm devastated by the Syrians under Hazael; his armies were cut in pieces by an enemy of inferior numbers ; and he was even besieged in Jerusalem, and only preserved his capital and his crown by giving up the treasures of the temple. Besides this, a pain- ful malady embittered all his latter days, and at length he became so odious that his own servants conspired against him, and slew him on his bed. They are said to have done this to avenge the blood of Zechariah, who at his death had cried,_ ' The Lord look upon it and require it ;' and it is hence probable that public opinion ascribed all the calamities of his life and reign to that infamous deed. Joash was buried in the city of David ; but a place in the sepulchre of the kings was denied to his remains (2 Kings xi. ; xii. ; 2 Chron. xxiv.). 2. JOASH, son and successor of Jehoahaz on the throne of Israel, of which he was the" twelfth king. He began to reign in b.c. 840, and reigned sixteen incomplete years. He followed the ex- ample of his predecessors in the policy of keeping up the worship of the golden calves ; but, apart from this, he bears a fair character, and had in- tervals, at least, of sincere piety and true devo- tion to the God of his fathers. Indeed, custom and long habit had so established the views of political expediency on which the schismatical establishments at Dan and Bethel were founded, that at length the reprehension which regularly recurs in the record of .each king's reign, seems rather to apply to it as a mark of the continuance of a public crime, than as indicative of the cha- racter or disposition of the reigning prince, which is to be sought in the more detailed accounts of his own conduct. These accounts are favourable with respect to Joash. He held the pmphet Elisha in high honour, looking up to him as a father. When he heard of his last ill- ness he repaired to the bed-side of the dying pro- phet, and was favoured with promises of victories over the Syrians, by whom his dominions were then harassed. These promises were accomplished after the prophet's death. In three signal and successive victories Joash overcame the Syrians, and retook from them the towns which Hazael had rent from Israel. These advantages rendered the kingdom of Israel more potent than that of Judah. He, how- ever, sought no quarrel with that kingdom ; but when he received a defiance from Amaziab, king of Judah, he answered with becoming spirit in a parable, which by its images calls to mind that of Jotham [Parabi.es] : the cool disdain of the answer must have been, and in fact was, ex- ceedingly galling to Amaziah. ' The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife ; and there came by a wild beast that was in Lebanon and trod down the thistle.' Tin's was admirable ; nor was the aj>plication less so : 'Thou hast, indeed, smitten Edom, and thine heart hath lifted thee up : glory of this, and tarry at home ; for why shouldest thou meddle to thy JOB, THE BOOK OF. hurt, that thou shouldest fall, even thou and Judah with thee.' In the war, or rather action, which followed, Joash was victorious. Having defeated Amaziah at Beth-shemesh, in Judah, he advanced to Jerusalem, broke down the wall to the extent of 400 cubits, and carried away the treasures both of the temple and the palace, together with hostages for the future good be- haviour of the crest-fallen Amaziah. Joash himself did not long survive this victory; lie died in peace, and was buried in Samaria (2 Kings xiii. y-25; xiv. 1-17). JOB, THE BOOK OF. We shall consider, ■first, the contents of this book ; secondly, its ob- ject ; thirdly, its composition ; and, lastly, the ■country, descent, and age of its author. I. Contents. In the land of Uz, belonging to the northern part of Arabia Deserta, lived an honest, pious man, called Job. For his sincere arid perfect devotedness, God had amply blessed him with worldly property and children; but on Satan obtaining leave to tempt him, he suddenly lost the fortune of his life. Ultimately he is smitten with a severe and painful disease ; but though his wife moves him to forsake God, he still continues true and stanch to the Lord. Three friends. Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, hear of his calamities, and come to console him. His distressed state excites their heartfelt compassion ; but the view which they take of its origin pre- vents them from at once assisting him, and they remain silent, though they are sensible that by so doing they further wound his feelings. Seven days thus pass, until Job, suspecting the cause of their conduct, becomes discomposed and breaks silence. His first observations are based on the assertion — not, indeed, broadly expressed — that God acts harshly and arbitrarily in inflicting calamity on men. This causes a discussion between him and his friends, which is divided into three main parts, each with subdivisions, and embraces the speeches of the three friends of Job, and his answers : the last part, however, consists of only two subdivisions, the third friend, Zophar, having nothing to rejoin. By this silence the author of the book generally designates the defeat of Job's friends, who are defending a common cause. Taking a general view- of the argument which they urge against him, (hey may be considered as asserting the following positions : — 1. No man being free from sin, we need not wonder that we are liable to calamities, for which we must account by a reference, not to God, but to ourselves. From the misery of the distressed, others are enabled to infer their guilt; and they must take this view in order to vindicate divine justice. 2. The distress of a man proves not only that he has sinned, but shows also the degree and mea- sure of his. sin; and thus, from the extent of cala- mity sustained, may be inferred the extent of sins committed; and from this the measure of impend- ing misfortune. 3't A distressed man may recover his former happiness, and even attain to greater fortune than he ever enjoyed before, if In- takes a warning from his afflictions, repents of his sins, reforms his life, and raises himself to a higher degree of moral rec- titude. Impatience and irreverent expostulation with God serve but to prolong and increase puuish- JOB, THE BOOK OF. 115 rnent ; for, by accusing God of injustice, a fresh sin is added to former transgressions. 4. Though the wicked man is capable of pro- sperity, still it is never lasting. The most awful retribution soon overtakes him ; and his transient felicity must itself be considered as punishment, since it renders him heedless, and makes him feel misfortune more keenly. In opposition to them, Job maintains : — 1. The most upright man may be highly unfor- tunate— more so than the inevitable faults and shortcomings of human nature would seem to imply. There is a savage cruelty, deserving the severities of the divine resentment, in inferring the guilt of a man from his distresses. In distributing: good and evil, God regards neither merit nor guilt, but acts according to His sovereign pleasure. His omnipotence is apparent in every part of the creation ; but His justice cannot be seen in the government of the world ; the afflictions of the righteous, as well as the prosperity of the wicked, are evidence against it. There are innumerable cases, and Job considers his own to be one of them, in which a sufferer has a right to justify himself before God, and to repine at His decrees. Of this supposed right Job freely avails himself, and main- tains it against his friends. 2. In a state of composure and calmer reflec- tion, Job retracts, chiefly in his concluding speech, all his former rather extravagant assertions, and says that, although God generally afflicts the wicked and blesses the righteous, still there are ex1- ceptions to this rule, single cases in which the pious undergo severe trials ; the inference, therefore, of a man's guilt from his misfortunes is by no means warranted. For the exceptions established by ex- perience prove that God does not always distribute prosperity and adversity after this rule; but that lie sometimes acts on a different principle, or as an ab- solute lord, according to his mere will and pleasure. 3. Humbly to adore God is our duty, even when we are subject to calamities not at all deserved ; but we should abstain from harshly judging of those who, when distressed, send forth complaints against God. Both parties not only explain their principles generally, but apply them to the case which had caused the discussion. At first the friends of Job only hint, but in the course of the discussion, they broadly assert, that his very great afflictions must have been caused by equally great sins ; and they tax him with crimes of which they suspect him to have been guilty. They also admonish him to con- fess and repent of the guilt of which, by the divine punishments inflicted on him, lie stood already convicted. If he should follow this counsel, they promise him a return of prosperity; but if he proved refractory, they threaten him with divine punishments even more severe. Job, on the con- trary, represents himself, venial frailties excepted, as altogether upright and innocent, thinks himself unjustly dealt with by God, and reproaches' Ma friends with heaping on him unfounded crimina- tions, with a view of ingratiating themselves with the Almighty, who, however, would visit with condign punishment such busy, meddling, offi- cious \ indicators of the divine government. The interest of the narrative is kept up with considerable skill, by progressively rising and highly passionate language. At first, Job's friends charge him, and he defends himself, in hidd i2 11G JOB, THE BOOK OF. terms ; but gradually they are all betrayed into warmth of temper, which goes on increasing until the friends have nothing more to object, and Job remains in possession of the field. The discussion, then seems to be at an end, when a fresh dis- putant, Klihu, appears. Trusting in his just cause, Job had proudly opposed God, with whom he expostulated, and whom he charged with injus- tice, when the sense of his calamities should have led him to acknowledge the sinfulness of human nature, and humbly to submit to the divine dis- pensations. Making every allowance for his pain- ful situation, and putting the mildest construction on his expressions, lie is still substantially wrong, and could not therefore be suffered to remain the vanquisher in this high argument. He had silenced his friends, but the general issue remained to be settled. Elihu had waited till Job and his friends had spoken, because they were older than he ; but when he saw that the three visitors ceased to answer, he offers himself to reason with Job, and shows that God is just in his ways. He does this, 1. From the nature of inflictions. — He begins by urging that Job was very wrong in boasting of his integrity, and making it appear that rewards were due to him from God. How righteous soever he was, he still had no claim to reward ; on the contrary, all men are sinners in God's eyes ; and nobody can complain that he suffers unjustly, for the very greatest sufferings equal not his immense guilt. Then Elihu explains a leading point on which he differs from the friends of Job : he asserts that from greater sufferings inflicted on a person it was not to be inferred that he had sinned more than others afflicted with a less amount of calamity. Calamities were, indeed, under all cir- cumstances, punishments for sins committed, but at the same time they were correctives also ; and therefore they might be inflicted on the compara- tively most righteous in preference to others, For he who was most loved by God, was also most in danger of forgetting the sinfulness inherent in all men, and, consequently, also in himself: the rather because sin would in him less strongly manifest itself. If the object of afflictions was attained, and the distressed acknowledged his sinfulness, he would humble himself before God, who would bless him with greater happiness than he ever be- fore enjoyed. But he who took not this view, and did not amend his ways, would be ruined, and the blame would rest wholly with himself. Conse- quently, if Job made the best of his misfortune, God would render him most happy ; but if he continued refractory, punishment would follow his offences. According to this view, the truly righteous cannot be always miserable ; and their calamities, which God not only from His justice, as the friends of Job stated, but also from His love, inflicts temporarily on them, are only the means employed to raise them to higher moral rectitude and worldly happiness. The end shows the distinction between the perverse sinner, and the righteous man subject to sinfulness. 2. From a clear conception of the nature of God. — 'How darest thou,7 says Elihu, ' instead of humbling thyself before God, del'y Him, and offer to reason with Him ? The whole creation shows forth His majesty, and evinces His justice. For a man to stand up against Him and to assert that he suffers innocently, is the greatest anthropomor- phism, because it goes to deny the Divine majesty, evident in all the facts of the created world, and JOB, THE BOOK OF. including God's justice. His nature being one and indivisible, it cannot on one side exhibit infinite perfection, and on the other imperfection : each example, then, of God's grandeur in the creatioa of the world is evidence against the rash accusers of God's justice. Thus it appears that, from the outset, there must have been a mistake in thy calculation, and thou must the rather acknow- ledge the correctness of my solution of the ques- tion. God must be just — this is certain from the outset ; and how His justice is not impaired by calamities inflicted on the righteous and on thy- self, I have already explained.' Job had, in a stirring manner, several times, chal- lenged God to decide the contest. Elihu suspect3 the approach of the Lord, when, towards the end of his speech, a violent thunder-storm arises, and God answers Job out of the whirlwind, showing how foolishly the latter had acted in offering to reason with Him, when His works proved his in- finite Majesty, and, consequently, His absolute justice. Job now submits to God, and humbly repents of his offence. Hereupon God addresses Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, declaring unto them His displeasure at their unmerciful dealing with their friend, the consequences of which could only be avoided by Job offering a propitiatory sacri- fice. This is done, and the Lord grants unto Job ample compensation for his sufferings. II. Design 01* the book. We here assume the integrity of the book of Job, or that it has been preserved in its genuine, unadulterated state ; and we may do so the rather, because those who would eliminate single portions, must still allow the difficulty of showing in the remainder a fixed plan and leading idea, which again argues againstthem. Moreover, by determining the design of the book the best foundation is laid for proving its integrity. All agree that the object of the book is the solution of the question, how the afflictions of the righteous and the prosperity of the wicked can be consistent with God's justice. But it should be observed that the direct problem exclusively refers to the first point, the second being only incidentally discussed on occasion of the leading theme. If this is overlooked, the author would appear to have solved only one half of his problem : the case from which the whole discussion proceeds, has reference merely to the leading problem. There is another fundamental error which has led nearly all modern interpreters to a mistaken idea of the design of this book. Pareau (De Immor- talitatis not. in libro Jobi, Deventer, 1S07, p. 207) is the only one who saw the error ad- verted to, and partially combated it with success. They assume that the problem could be satis- factorily solved only when the doctrines of im- mortality and retribution had been first established, which had not been done by the author of the book of Job : a perfect solution of the question was therefore not to be expected from him. Some assert that his solution is erroneous, since retri- bution, to be expected in a future world, is transferred by him to this life ; others say that ho cut the knot which he could not unloose, and has been satisfied to ask for implicit submission and devotedness, showing at the same time that every attempt at a solution must lead to dangerous positions : blind resignation, therefore, was the short meaning of the lengthened discussion.. On nearer examination, however, it appears that JOB, THE BOOK OF. trie doctrine of retribution after death is not of itself alone calculated to lead to a solution of the pro- blem. In contemplating the lives of the righteous, who were perfectly embued with this doctrine, it v/ill appear that they also, struggled with doubts ; that a satisfactory solution of the question is to be derived only from the fundamental doctrine on which the faith in retribution rests ; and that this faith is shaken where it has not the necessary basis. The belief in a final judgment is firm and rational only when it rests on the belief in God's continued providential government of the world, and in his acting as sovereign Lord in all the ■events of human life. If God is holy and just, He must also have the will to manifest these qualities in our present life by His bearing towards those who represent His image on earth, as well a-: towards those who renounce it. If He is om- nipotent, nothing can in this life prevent Kim from exhibiting His justice; but if this is not manifested, and if no reason can be given for which He at times defers His judgments, the belief in retribution after death would be flimsy and shallow. Woe to him who expects in a future world to be supplied with everything he missed here, and with redress for all injuries sustained! He deceives himself. His God was, during his life on earth, inactive, shutting Himself up in heaven: is he sure that his God will hereafter be better disposed or more able to protect him ? As His essence remains the same, and the nature of sin and virtue is unchanged, how should He then in a future life punish the former and reward the latter, if He does not do so in this life ! Tem- porary injustice is still injustice, and destroys the idea of a holy and just God. A God who has something to redress is no God at all. Lucian, the satirist, composed a dialogue entitled Zeus 'EAeyxo/xej/os, with the view of subverting the belief in Divine Providence ; in which he justly finds fault with that God, who allows the wicked to lead a happy and pleasant life in order that, at a distant time, they may be tortured according to their deserts, and who, on the contrary, exposes the righteous to infinite misery, that in remote futurity they may receive the reward of their vir- tue. Some men of sense among the heathens dis- played deep penetration on this subject. Claudian, in the commencement of his poem against the wicked Rufinus, hints that doubts had been often entertained of Divine Providence, but that they had been now removed by the downfall of Rufinus : — ' Abstulit hunc tandem Rufini poena tumultum Absolvirque deos. Jam non ad culmina rerum Injustos crevisse queror. Tolluntur in altum Ut lapsu graviore ruant.' This worldly retribution leads him to a firm belief in that after death. He represents Rufinus de- scended to the nether world, doing penance and enduring the keenest pains. See the rich collection by fiarth (in his Notes to Claudian, 107S, s.s.) of those passages in the works of heathen writers in which doubts of future retribution are raised on the ground of disbelief in present requitals. Scripture knows nothing of a God whose power admits of increase, or who is active only in the life to come: its God is always full ol strength and vigour, constantly engaged in action. God's just retribution in this world is extolled throughout the Old Testament. The notion of return accommo- dated to actions, is its substance and centre. It JOB, THE BOOK OF. 117 is partit alarly urged in the Pentateuch, and it is only whan it had been deeply rooted in the public mind, and the belief in future requital had ac- quired a firm and solid basis, that the latter doctrine, which in the books of Moses is but dimly hinted at, is clearly and explicitly pro- mulgated. The New Testament holds out to the righteous promises of a future life, as well as of the present ; and our Saviour himself, in setting forth the rewards of those who, for His sake, forsook everything, begins with this life (Matt. xix. 29). A nearer examination of the benedictions contained in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt, v.), shows that none of them exclusively refer to future blessings ; the judgment of the wicked is in His view pro- ceeding without interruption, and therefore His examples of the distribution of Divine justice hi this world, are mingled with those of requital in a future order of things. The Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their own sacri- fices (Luke xiii. 1), were in Christ's opinion not accidentally killed ; and he threatens those who would not repent, that they should in like manner perish. That sickness is to be considered as a punishment for sin, we are clearly taught (John v. 14 ; Luke, v. 20, 24) : in the former passage it is threatened as punishment for sins committed ; in the latter it is healed in consequence of punish- ment remitted. Nay, every patient restored by Christ, who acted not as a superior kind of Hip- pocrates, but as the Saviour of men, is by that very act declared to be a sinner. The passage in John ix. 2, 3, which is often appealed to, in proof that our Lord did not consider sickness as a punishment for sin, does not prove this, but only opposes the Jewish position— founded on the mistaken doc- trine of retribution— that all severe sicknesses and infirmities were Consequences of crimes. But what is, from this point of view, the solution of the problem regarding the sufferings of the righte- ous ? It rests on two positions. 1. Calamity is the only way that leads to the kingdom of God. Even the comparatively righteous are not without sin, which can be eradi- cated only by afflictions. Via cruris est via salutis. He who repents will attain to a clearer insight into the otherwise obscure ways of God. The afflictions of the pious issue at once from God's justice and love. To him who entertains a proper sense of the sinfulness of man, no ca- lamity appears so great as not to be deserved as a punishment, or useful as a corrective. 2. Calamity, as the veiled grace of God, is with the pious never alone, but manifest proofs of Div.vie favour accompany or follow it. Though sunk in misery, they still are happier than the wicked, and when it has attained its object, it is terminated by the Lord. The nature of acts of grace differs according to the quality of those on whom they are conferred. The consolations offered in the Old Testament are, agreeably to the weaker judgment of its professors, derived chiefly from external circumstances ; while in the New Testament they are mainly spiritual, without, however, excluding the leading external helps. This difference is not essential, nor is any other, the restitutio in integrum being in the Old Testa- ment principally confined to this life, while in the New Testament the eye is directed beyond the limits of this world. It is this exclusively correct solution of the 118 JOB, THE BOOK OF. problem which occurs in the book of Job. All interpreters allow that it is set forth in Elihu's speeches, and, from the following observations, it. will appear that they contain the opinion of the author : — 1. The solution cannot, be looked for in Job's speeches ; for God proves himself gracious towards him only after he has repented and humbled himself. The author of the book says (i. 22 ; ii. 10; comp. iii. 1) that Job had charged God foolishly, and sinned with his lips ; and the irpS>Tov \pevdos, the materia peccans, in his speeches, is clearly pointed out to be, that • he was righteous in his own eyes, and justified him- self rather than God' (xxxii. 1, 2). To gather from Job's speeches a consistent view of the subject, and a satisfactory solution of the question mooted, is impossible also on account of the many contra- dictions in them ; as, for instance, when he says at one time, that God's justice never appears in the government of the world, and at another, that it generally does appear, but that there are evident exceptions to the general rule, not liable to objections. Sound principles are mixed up by him with wrong ones ; his views want sifting, and the correct ideas must be completed, which, even in his concluding address, is not done by him- self, nor is it performed by his three friends. Job continues to be embarrassed for the solution, and he is only certain of this, that the solution of his friends cannot be satisfactory. Job erred chiefly in not acknowledging the sin inherent in him ; notwithstanding his integrity and sincere piety, which prevented him from apprehending the ob- ject of the calamity inflicted on him, led him to consider God's punishments as arbitrary, and made him despair of the return of better days. The greatness of his sufferings was in some mea- sure the cause of his misconception, by exciting his feelings, and preventing him from calmly con- sidering his case. He was in the state of a man tempted, and deserving God's ind ulgence. He had received considerable provocation from his friends, and often endeavoured to soften his harsh asser- tions ; which, particularly in ch. xxvii., leads him into such contradictions, as must have occurred in the life of the tempted ; he is loud in acknow- ledging the wisdom of God (ch. xxviii.), and raises himself at times to cheering hopes (comp. ch. xix.). But this can only excuse, not justify him, and therefore it is in the highest degree honourable to him, that he remains silent, when in Elihu's speeches the correct solution of the question is given, and that he ultimately acknowledges his fundamental error of doing jnstice to himself only. 2. The solution of the question mooted can- not be contained in the speeches of Job's friends. Their demeanour is reproved by God, and repre- sented as a great sin, so much so, indeed,, that to obtain pardon for them Job was directed to offer a propitiatory sacrifice. Their error proceeded from a crude notion of sin in its external appearance ; and, inferring its existence from calamity, they were thus led to condemn the afflicted Job as guilty of heinous crimes (ch. xxxii.). The moral use of sufferings was unknown to them ; which evidently proved that they themselves were not yet purged and cleared from guilt. If they had been sensible of the nature of man, if they had understood themselves, they' would, on seeing the misery of Job, have exclaimed, ' God be merciful to vss sinners ! ' There is, indeed, an important JOB, THE BOOK OK correct principle in their speeches, whose centre ii forms, so much so, that they mostly err only in the application of the general truth. It consists in the perception of the invariable connection between sin and misery, which is indelibly engrafted on the heart of man, and to which many ancient authors allude. The saying, male parta male dilabitnfoir, is to be found in every language. The problem of the book is then solved by pro- perly uniting the correct positions of the speeches both of Job and his friends, by maintaining his comparative innocence, and by tracing the errors of both parties to a common source, the want of a sound insight into the nature of sin. Job con- siders himself righteous, and not deserving of such inflictions, because be had not committed any heinous crime; and his friends fancy they must assume that he was highly criminal, in order to- justify his misery. 3. The solution of the question at issue 5s not exclusively given in the addresses of God, which contain only the basis of the solution, not the solution itself. In setting forth his majesty, and in showing that imputing to him injustice is repug- nant to a correct conception of his nature, these addresses establish that there must be a 'solution which does not impair divine justice. This is not, indeed, the solution itself, but everything is thus prepared for the solution. We apprehend that God must be just, but it remains further to be shown how he can be just, and still the righteous be miserable. Unless, then, we are disposed to question the general result, we are, by the arrangements of the book, led to the speeches of Elihu as containing the solution of the problem, which the author, moreover, has indicated with sufficient clearness by making the commencement and end of the narrative agree perfectly with those speeches. The leading principle in Elihu's statement is, that calamity in the shape of trial was inflicted even on the comparatively best men, but that God al- lowed a favourable turn to take place as soon as it had attained its object. Now this is the key to the events of Job's life. Though a pious and righteous man, he is tried by severe afflictions. He knows not for what purpose he is smitten, and his calamity continues ; but when he learns it from the addresses of Elihu and God, and humbles himself, he is relieved from the burden which oppresses him, and ample prosperity atones for the afflictions he has sustained. Add to this, that the remaining portion of Elihu's speeches, in which he points to God's infinite majesty as including his justice, is continued in the ad- dresses of God ; that Elihu foretells God's ap- pearance ; that he is not punished by God as are the friends of Job ; in fine, that Job by his very silence acknowledges the problem to have been solved by Elihu ; and his silence is the more sig- nificant because Elihu had urged him to defend himself (xxxiii. 32), and because Job had re- peatedly declared he would ' hold his peace,' if it was shown to him wherein he had erred (vi. 24, 25 ; xix. 4). This view of the book of Job has among modern authors been supported chiefly by Staudlin (Beitrage zur Religions und Sitten- lehre, vol. ii. p. 133) and Stickel (Das Buck Hiob, Leipzig, 1842), though in both it is mixed up with much erroneous matter ; and it is further confirmed by the whole Old Testament giving JOB, THE BOOK OF. the same answer to the question mooted which the speeches of Elihu offer : in its concentrated form it is presented in Ps. xxxvii. xlix. lxxiii. From these considerations it appears, that those interpreters who, with Bernstein, De Wette, and Umbreit, assume that the book of Job was of a sceptical nature, and intended to dispute the doc- trine of retribution as laid down in the other books of the Old Testament, have entirely misunderstood it. The doctrine of divine retribution is here not disputed, but strengthened, as the case under con- sideration required that it should be. The object of the book would also be too much narrowed, if it was restricted to proving that the doctrine of retribution, as expounded by the friends of Elihu, was erroneous. The speeches of Elihu evidently oppose the discourses of Job in stronger terms than those of his friends. The object of the book is rather to explain generally the nature arid ten- dency of afflictions, and thereby to contribute towards the attainment of their design, to console the mind, and to cheer the drooping spirits. It is difficult for men to understand that their suffer- ings, however great, are still under that degree which they deserve. To consider afflictions as proofs of divine favour, we must first learn to bring them into unison with divine justice. Upon the doctrine of retribution after death our author does not enter ; but that he knew it, may be in- ferred from several passages with great probability; as, for instance, ch. xiv. 14, ' if a man die shall lie live again? All the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.' The «yhere shows that the writer had been before engaged in considering the subject of life after death ; and when such is the case, a pious mind will neces- sarily indulge the hope, or will, at least, have an obscure presentiment of immortality. The truth, also, of God's unbounded grace, on which the doctrine of immortality is based, will be found clearly laid down in ch. xix.. Still the author does not recur to this hope for the purpose of solving his problem ; he would not ground it on something in itself wanting support and a founda- tion, namely, that which is presented in this book. The doctrine of future retribution, if not. sus- tained by the belief in retribution during this life, is truly a castle in the air. The author did not intend in his discussion to exceed the limits of what God had clearly revealed, and this was in his time confined to the vague notion of life continued after death, but not con- nected with rewards and punishments. Explicitly expressed, then, we have here only the doctrine of a Sheol (see the collection of passages, p. 123 sqq. of Pareau's work above quoted), which, indeed, is not erroneous in itself, but which still keeps the background veiled. Having thus established the design of the book of Job, it remains to consider the view taken by Ewald. He justly rejects the common, super- ficial view of its design, which has recently been revived and defended by Hirzel (see his Com- mentar, Leipzig, 1839), and which represents the author as intending to show that man cannot ap- prehend the plans of God, and does best to submit in ignorance without repining at afflictions. The author would thus be rendered liable to the charge of having cut the knot which he could not loose. When this view was first set up, the solution of one W the most important religious problems was very JOB, THE BOOK OF. 119 unsettled, and the public mind generally remained in suspense ; in accordance with which state of feeling this opinion is framed relating to the design of the book of Job. The alleged theme occurs in no passage, not even incidentally. The writers in question chiefly base it on the discourses of God ; and so, latterly, does Stickel, who, although ac- knowledging that the solution of the problem was afforded by Elihu, still thinks that in the sentiments uttered by God the sufferer was ultimately referred to human short-sightedness and directed to be silent, the author of the book distrusting the correctness of his solution, and intending at all events to vin- dicate God's justice. Thus they entirely misun- derstand the main point in the discourses of God, which set forth his infinite majesty with a view, not of censuring Job's inquisitiveness and of tax- ing him with indiscretion, but of showing that it was foolish to divest God of justice, which is inseparable from his essence. His searching is not itself blamed, but only the manner of it. Nowhere in the whole book is simple resignation crudely enjoined, and nowhere does Job say that he submits to such an injunction. The prologue represents his sufferings as trials, and the epilogue declares that the end had proved this ; conse- quently the author was competent to give a theodicee with reference to the calamity of Job, and if such is the case he cannot have intended simply to recommend resignation. The biblical writers, when engaged on this problem, know how to justify God with reference to the afflictions of the righteous, and have no intention of evading the difficulty when they recommend resignation (see the Psalms quoted above, and, in the New Testament, the Epistle to the Hebrews, ch. xii.). The view of the book of Job alluded to would isolate it, and take it out of its natural connection. Thus far, then, we agree with Ewald, but we cannot approve of his own view of the design of the book of Job. According to his system, ' calamity is never a punishment for sins committed, but always a mere phantom, an imaginary show, above which we must raise ourselves by the consciousness of the eternal nature of the human mind, to which, by external prosperity, nothing can be added, and from which, by external misfortune, nothing can be taken away. It was (says Ewald) the merit of the book of Job to have prepared these sounder views of worldly evil and of the immortality of mind, transmitting them as fruitful buds to posterity.' Now from the outset we may be sure that this view is not to be found in our book. Credit has always been given to Scripture for knowing how to console the distressed — which Ewald's system must i'ail to do. Let it be offered to those who are afflicted with severe and painful illness, and it will prove abortive. Fictitious sufferings may be soothed in this manner, real pains certainly not. Consciousness of the eternal nature of our mind is wanted to do all, but how is it possible when the mind itself is depressed? Turn to the Psalms : do we find in them shadowed out this cold consolation — the doctrine of the Stoics, which has been always considered to be opposed to that of Scripture? Read especially Psalms xxxvii., xli., and lxxiii., which profess to treat our problem : take, in the New Testament, the passage in Heb. xii. 6, and you will find afflictions considered at once as punishments inflicted by divine justice, and as means which God's love employs to Lead us to 120 JOB, THE BOOK OF. higher happiness. ' Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every one whom he receiveth.' If suffering and happiness are as nothing, and have no reality, why promises our Sa- viour rewards to his followers, and why threatens he the wicked with punishment (Matt. xix. 16- 30) ? Why blesses lie the meek, ' for they shall inherit the earth ' (Matt. v. 5) ? Why says he, ' seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righte- ousness, and all these things shall be added unto you' (Matt. vi. 33) 1 If righteousness already pos- sesses everything and lacks nothing, why says St. Paul, to righteousness are held out the promise both of this life and of-thelifeto come? Being thus im- pressed against Ewald's view, from the Scriptures themselves, we also find, on closer inspection, that it does not apply to the book of Job. To make it appear that it does, lie excludes the speeches of Elihu — which seems rather suspicious ; but what he objects against them is of little importance, and has been proved by Stickel to be erroneous. Taking, however, what remains of the book, it is evident that the epilogue is decidedly contrary to Ewald's view. Why is it that Job receives the double of all that he had lost, when, judged by Ewald's principles, he had lost nothing ? If in any place, it is in the epilogue that the leading idea of the author must appear ; and here we have not speeches, whose drift might admit of doubt, but acts, divine acts, the solution of the question by facts. Equally irreconcilable is Ewald's view with the prologue. The opening scene is in heaven ; Satan appears before God, and obtains leave to tempt Job. This enables the reader from the outset to see clearer into the case under consideration than did Job and his friends, who judged only according to what passed on earth. He suspects from the outset what will be the end of the narrative. If it is by way of temptation only that Job is subjected to misery, this cannot be lasting ; but if it can- not and must not be lasting, it must be also more than an imaginary phantom — it must be reality. We might easily show further that the view referred to is also incompatible with the speeches of Job, who never renounces happiness ; he is always either disconsolate and complains, or expresses cheering hopes of a return of better days ; he either despairs of God's justice, or expects him to prove it at least partially by his rehabilitation. We might likewise, with little trouble, prove that 'the view of Ewald is not in accordance with the speeches of God, who does not address Job in exhortations to the effect, 'Be insensible of thy calamity;' but, 'Humble thyself before me; ac- knowledge in thy severe sufferings my justice, and my love, and thy own sinfulness, and procure release by repentance.' But what we have stated on this head may be deemed sufficient. III. Character of the composition ov the Book. — On this subject there are three different opinions : — 1. Some contend that the book con- tains an entirely true history. 2. Others assert that it is founded on a true history, which has been recast, modified, and enlarged by the author. 3. The third opinion is, that the book contains a narrative entirely imaginary, and constructed by the author to teach a great moral truth. The first view, taken by numerous ancient in- terpreters, is now abandoned by nearly all inter- preters. It seems, however, to have been adopted JOB, THE BOOK OF. by Josephus, for he places Job in the list of the his- torical books ; and it was prevalent with all the fathers of the church. In its support four reasons are adduced, of which the third and fourth are quite untenable; the first and second are out- weighed by other considerations, which render it impossible to consider the book of Job as an entirely true history, but which may be used in defence of the second view alluded to. It is said, 1. That Job is (Ezek. xiv. 14-20) mentioned as a public character, together with Noah and Daniel, and represented as an example of piety. 2. In the Epistle of James (v. II), patience in sufferings is recommended by a reference to Job. 3. In the Greek translation of the Septuagint a notice is appended to Gen. xxxvi. 33, which states that Job was the King Jobab of Edom. This statement is too late to be relied on, and originates in an etymological combination ; and that it must be erroneous is to a certain extent evident from the contents of the book, in which Job is not repre- sented as a king. 4. Job's tomb continues to be shown to Oriental tourists. Now the fact of a Job having lived somewhere would not of itself prove that the hero of our narrative was that per- son, and that this book contained a purely histo- rical account. Moreover, his tomb is shown not in one place, but in six, and, along with it, the dunghill on which Job is reported to have sat ! Against this view it must be remarked gene- rally, that the whole work is arranged on a well- considered plan, proving the author's power of independent invention; that the speeches are, in their general structure and in their details, so ela- borate, that they could not have been brought out in the ordinary course of a conversation or dis- putation ; that it would be unnatural to suppose Job in his distressed state to have delivered such speeches, finished with the utmost care ; and that they exhibit uniformity in their design, fulness, propriety, and colouring, though the author, with considerable skill, represents each speaker whom he introduces arguing according to his character. Moreover, in the prologue and epilogue, as well as in the arrangement of the speeches, the figures 3 and 7 constantly occur, with the decimal num- ber formed by their addition. The transactions between God and Satan in the p-ologue absolutely require that we should distinguish between the subject matter forming the foundation of the work, and its enlargement; which can be only done when a poetical principle is acknowledged in its com- position. God's speaking out of the clouds would be a miracle, without an object corresponding to its magnitude, and having a merely personal refer- ence, while all the other miracles of the Old Tes- tament are in connection with the theocratical government, and occur in the midst and for the benefit of the people of God. This argument, which might be further extended without much difficulty, proves the first view above stated of the book of Job to be erroneous, and is meant to support the second ; but it does not bear on the third, which contends that the narrative is an entire fiction, with- out any admixture of real facts. The latter opinion is, indeed, already stated in the Talmud, which says that Job never existed ; and in modern times it has been defended chiefly by Bernstein ; but is contrary to the practice which anciently prevailed, when writers rarely invented the subject of a nar- rative and rather took the materials furnished by JOB, THE BOOK OF. tradition, digesting, enlarging, and modifying them, so as to make them harmonize with the leading theme. Taking the second view, we must still abstain from undertaking to determine what the poet derived from tradition and what he added himself, since we know not how far tradition had already embellished the original fact. The separa- tion of the historical groundwork from the poetical embellishments could only succeed, if the same history had been, although in a poetical dress, transmitted to us by several narrators. Would any person, if lie was not assisted by other authorities, undertake to determine what is history, and what is fiction, in an historical romance of Walter Scott, or in an historical drama of Shakspeare or Schil- ler? Ewald, indeed, had the courage to under- take vindicating for history certain parts of our narrative, but his efforts were abortive, as we shall presently show. It will appear, indeed, that exactly those particulars which Ewald considers historical may possibly have been invented, though we do not contend that they really were so, which would be equally presumptuous. He asserts, 1. That 'the name Job is not invented by the author of our book.' This would have some semblance of truth, if the name had no meaning connecting it with the contents of the narrative. But Job means in Hebrew ' the assailed,' and may be traced in the form of I}?*, bom, or Tl3&>, intoxicated, from H1^, to attack; whence also ^lN, the enemy, and fQ^N, enmity, are derived. Ewald observes, in- deed, that the import of the word- is not very ap- parent, and is not easily discoverable ; but when it strikes us at once, must it not have much more readily occurred to Hebrew readers ? The sense in which the hero of the book is called ' the assailed,' appears at once in the prologue, where Satan ob- tains leave to tempt him. 2. ' The names of the friends of Job are historical.' As to the name Eliphaz, it occurs in Gen. xxxvi. 4, 10, 12, and seems to be taken from thence. Adopting names in this manner amounts to inventing them. 3. ' It is a fact that Job lived in the land of Uz, which, in Hebrew history, is distinguished, neither in itself nor its inhabitants, and it is difficult to under- stand why the au-thor selected this country, if he was not led to it by history.' We shall see below that the plan of the author required him to lay the scene without Palestine, but still in its immediate neighbourhood ; which led him to Uz, a country already mentioned in Genesis. This observa- tion applies also to the place of abode of Job's friends, which could not be Canaan, but must be in its vicinity ; wherefore the country named ill the book is assigned to them. 4. ' The sickness of Job is an historical fact; he was afflicted with elephantiasis, and it is inconceivable why the - author chose this disease, which is of rare occur- rence, if lie had not drawn this particular fact from real history.' Now the reason of this se- lection was, that elephantiasis is a most awful disease, and that the author probably knew none more so; and persons labouring under elephan- tiasis were generally considered as smitten by God (Deut. xxiv. 8, 9) [Jon's Disease]. These are all the particulars which Ewald points out as historical, and from our examina- tion of them it will be clear, that we must confine ourselves to contending for an historical foundation of the book, but must not undertake to determine JOB, THE BOOK OF. 121 the exact nature of the groundwork : we infer the character of the composition from analogy, but cannot prove it from the book itself. That its historical framework was poetically enlarged by the author, has been already observed by Luther (see his Tischreden, or Table Talk, p. 318). As for the rest, the subtility displayed in explaining opposite views, the carefully drawn characters of the persons introduced, and their animated dis- courses, lead us to suppose that the question at issue had previously been the subject of various discussions in presence of the author, who, perhaps, took part in them. Thus there would be an histo- rical foundation, not only for the facts related in the book, but to a -certain extent also for the speeches. IV. Descent, country, and age of the author. — Qpinions'differed in ancient times as to the nation to which the author belonged; some considering him to have been an Arab, others an Israelite; but the latter supposition is undoubtedly preferable. For, 1st, we tind in our book many ideas of genuine Israelite growth : the creation of the world is described, in accordance with the prevailing notions of the Israelites, as the imme- diate effect of divine omnipotence ; man is formed of clay ; the spirit of man is God's breath ; God em- ploys the angels for the performance of his orders ; Satan, the enemy of the chosen children of God, is his instrument for tempting them ; men are weak and sinful ; nobody is pure in the sight of God ; moral corruption is propagated. There is pro- mulgated to men the law of God, which they must not infringe, and the transgressions of which are visited on offenders with punishments. Moreover, the nether world, or Sheol, is depicted in hues en- tirely Hebrew. To these particulars might, with- out much trouble, be added many more ; but the deep-searching inquirer will particularly weigh, 2ndly, the fact, that the book displays a strength and fervour of religious faith, such as could only be expected within the domain of revelation. Monotheism, if the assertions of ancient Arabian authors may be trusted, prevailed, indeed, for a long period among the Arabs ; and it held its ground at least, among a portion of the nation till the age of Mohammed, who obtained for it a complete triumph over polytheism, which was spreading from Syria. Still the god of the Arabs was, as those of the heathens generally were, a retired god, dwelling far apart, while the people of the Old Covenant enjoyed the privilege of a vital communion with God ; and the warmth with which our author enters into this view, in- controvertibly proves that he was an Israelite. 3dly . As regards the language of our book, several ancient writers asserted that it was originally writ- ten in the Aram jean or Arabic tongue, and after- wards translated intw Hebrew by Moses, David, Solomon, or some unknown writer. Of this opi- nion was the author of the Appendix in the Scp- tuagint, and the compiler of the tract on Job added to the works of Origen and Jerome : in modem times it has been chiefly defended by Spanheim, in his llisloria Jobi. But for a trans- lation there is too much propriety and precision in the use of words and phrases ; the sentences are too compact, and free from redundant expressions and members; and too much care is bestowed on their harmony and easy flow. The parallelism also is too accurate and perfect for a translation, 122 JOB, THE BOOK OF. and the whole breathes a freshness that could be expected from an original work only. Sensible of the weight of this argument, others, as Eichhorn, took a medium course, and assumed that the author was a Hebrew, though he did not live among his countrymen, but in Arabia. ' The earlier Hebrew history,' they say, ' is un- known to the author, who is ignorant of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In portraying nature, also, he proves himself always familiar with Arabia, while he is silent respecting the characteristics of Palestine. With Egypt he must have been well acquainted ; which can be accounted for better by supposing him to have lived in Arabia than in Palestine.' These reasons are, however, not cogent. The cause why the author did not enter into the history of the Hebrews, and the nature of Palestine, appears from his design. In deciding the question at issue he waves the instruction given by divine revelation, and undertakes to perform the task by appealing only to religious consciousness and experience. On the plan of the author of Ecclesiastes, he treats the question as one of natural theology, in order that the human mind might arrive at its solution spon- taneously, and be more deeply impressed. He would not, by referring to a few passages of Scrip- ture, overturn errors which might afterwards spring up again ; but they should be exposed and demol ished separately, and the truth then be found by uniting the correct ingredients of opposite views. In following this plan the author in- tended to support Scripture : in a similar manner Pascal, in his Pensees, explains the nature ot man first from experience only, and next from Scripture. This plan is indicated by the scene being laid not in Palestine, but among a people quite unconnected with its inhabitants; at the same time he will not go farther than his object required, and he therefore chooses the immediate neighbourhood of Palestine. Thus the placing of the scene in a foreign country is not historical, but proceeds from the free choice of the author. The scene being laid in a foreign country, the portraying of life and nature must of course agree with that country, and not with Palestine (see ch. xl. 23). It may no doubt be said, that the re- markable vigour and sprightliness of the author's descriptions of the scenery and people, justify us in assuming that he was actually acquainted with them ; but this cannot be asserted as quite cer- tain, since it would impair the high idea entertained of the powers of poetry. The correctness of this view is eminently strengthened by the manner in which the author designedly uses the names of God. The Old Testament distinguishes between Elohim, the abstract God, the Deity, on the one hand, and Jehovah, the concrete God, with whom the Israelites had made a covenant, on the other (Gen. vi. 3, 4). Now the latter name occurs in Job generally, where the author himself appears, not only in the pro- logue and epilogue, but in the short sentences in- troducing the speakers, as in xxxviii. 1 ; xl. 1, 3, 6. In the body of the work, however, we have only the names Elohim, Eloah, and similar terms, with the exception of xii. 9, where Jehovah occurs. This very passage argues against those who, from the distinct names of God, would infer that the prologue and epilogue are not genuine. Eich- horn (see Einleitung, § 644, a.) assumes that the JOB, THE BOOK OF. God, intended to represent himself as younger than the other interlocutors ; but the notion of the name Jehovah having come later into general use, is con- trary to history, and we must then arrive at this re- sult, that the author by his selection of the names of God, which he lends to the interlocutors, intended to express his design of waving all theocratic principles. The few passages in which he seems to abandon this design, namely, in addition to that quoted, ch. i. 21, where Job, in speaking of God, uses the name Jehovah, make it appear even clearer. By thus forgetting himself, he betrays the fact that his general use of the names of God proceeds from designedly forsaking the usage of the language. The context, moreover, of the two passages in which he seems to forget him- self and uses the name Jehovah, proves that this change is judiciously made, the deep and awful sense of his subject prompting him to an elevated, solemn style, to which the name Eloah was not suitable. And if there is design in .the selection of the names of God, why not also in the selection of the country in which the scene is laid? This may be assumed the rather, because history says nothing of Israelites having permanently taken up their residence in the land of Uz, and be- cause other circumstances already detailed oblige us to admit that the author was not only an Israelite by descent, but lived also in the midst of his people, and enjoyed the advantage of a religious communion with them, It should also be remembered, that the author, without directly mentioning the Pentateuch, frequently alludes to portions of it, as in ch. iii. 4, to Gen. i. 3; in ch. iv. 19, and xxxiii. 6, to Moses' account of the creation of man ; in ch. v. 14, to Deut. xxxii. 32 ; in ch. xxiv. 1 1, to Deut. xxv. 4. That the name of Eliphaz the Temanite, one of the three friends of Job, seems also to have been taken from the Pentateuch, was mentioned above. In addi- tion to these allusions there are several more to other books of the Old Testament, as the Psalms and Proverbs — which proves that the author must not be severed from the Israelite communion. From what we have stated against the hypothesis that our book was composed in Arabia, a judg- ment may be formed of the opinion of Hitzig and Hirzel,who assume that it was written in Egypt; the sole foundation for which is, that the author shows himself perfectly acquainted with that coun- try, which proves him to have been a long observer of it. Most particulars adduced in support of this view cannot stand a close examination. Thus it is a mistake to sujipose that the description of the working of mines in ch. xxviii. must necessarily have reference to Egypt : Phoenicia, Arabia, and Edom afforded much better materials. That the ^author must have known the Egyptian mausolea rests on an erroneous interpretation of ch. iii. 14, which may also be said of the assertion that ch. xxix. 18 refers to the Egyptian mythus of the Phoenix. Casting aside these arbitrarily assumed Egyptian references, we have only the following : — Our author knows the Egyptian vessels of bul- rushes, ix. 26 ; the Nile-grass, viii. 12 ; the Nile-horse (Behemoth), and the crocodile (Levia- than), xi. 15, xli. 1. Now, as these things belong to the more prominent peculiarities of a neigh- bouring country, they must have been known to every educated Israelite : the vessels of bulrushes are mentioned also in Isa. xviii. 2. Neither are JOB, THE BOOK OF. • we disposed to adopt the compromising view of Stickel, who assumes that the author wrote his book in the Israelite territory, indeed, but dose to the frontier, in the far south-east of Palestine. That the author had there the materials for his descriptions, comparisons, and imagery, set better before his eyes, than anywhere else, is true; for there he had an opportunity of observing mines, caravans, drying up of brooks, &c. But this is not sufficient proof of the author having lived permanently in that remote part of Palestine, and of having there written his book : he was not a mere copyist of nature, but a poet of considerable eminence, endowed with the power of vividly representing things absent from him. That he lived and wrote in the midst of his nation, is proved by all ana- logy and by the general character of the book. It looks not like a writing composed in some remote corner of the world, where the question at issue could not have been so fully discussed, nor have created such a deep interest. Jerusalem was the metropolis of the Jews in a sense quite dif- ferent from that which belongs to any other capi- tal : it was, by order of God, the religious centre of the nation, where all general and leading mea- sures of the nation originated, and to which all pretending to distinction and superiority resorted. Proceeding to the inquiry as to the age of the author of this book, we meet with three opi- nions : — 1. That he lived before Moses, or was, at least, his contemporary. 2. That he lived in the time of Solomon, or in the centuries next follow- ing. 3. That he lived shortly before, or during, or even after the Babylonian exile. The view of those who assert the book to have been written long aftei the Babylonian exile, can be supported, as Hirzel justly observes, neither by the nature of its language nor by reasons derived from its historical groundwork, and is therefore now generally re- jected ; but, apart from this opinion, there is, in those remaining, a difference as to the date of no less than 1000 years. We must, first, declare ourselves decidedly against the view of those who— as Le Clerc among earlier interpreters ; and among recent expositors, Bernstein, Gesenius, Umbreit, and De Wette — place our book in the time of the Chaldeean exile. They were led to this conclusion by their precon- ceived opinion that the doctrine of Satan, who is ■ introduced in the prologue, was of Chaldasan origin ; which has also induced others, while con- tending for a higher antiquity of the book, to pro- nounce the prologue, at least the scene in ch. i. 6-12, to be spurious ; or losing sight of the poetical character of the prologue as well as of the speeches, to assert that the Satan of this book was different from the Satan of later times ; or finally, to assume with Stickel, that the author had lived in a place where he could be impressed with Babylonian opinions before they had spread among the great body of his nation. But the assertion, that the doctrine of Satan originated among the Jews during the Babylonian exile, and was derived generally from Babylonian suggestions, has been shown by several interpreters to be erroneous, and very recently, by Hengstenberg {JEgypten unci die Sucker Mosis, p. 1C4, sq.). This opinion was, how- ever, suited to and supported by those who, headed by Bernstein, asserted that Job was a symbolic per- sonage— a personification of the Jews suffering in the Exile —and who thus gave to our book a national JOB, THE BOOK OF. 123 reference and meaning; in like manner as some had before introduced a preposterous system of inter- preting psalms containing personal lamentations, by converting them into national lamentations, and applying to them the principle of symbolization. Now, in the book of Job there is certainly no trace of national reference ; and it would be absurd to assume an allegory running through an entire work, and still nowhere manifesting its presence. It is said by other interpreters, that, in the times of trouble, during the Babylonian exile, first originated the disheaitening view of human life, and that then the problem of our book first en- grossed the public mind; by which observation they, by way of compromise, refer its composition to that period, without contending for a symbolic exposition. But the sense of misery and of the nothingness of human life, is found among all nations, ancient and modern, cultivated and un- cultivated : Noah, Jacob, Moses, complain, and as old as suffering must be the question of the seeming disparity in the distribution of good and evil, and how this disparity can be reconciled with God's justice. It is frequently under considera- tion in the Psalms. Against those who refer the composition of Job to the time of the Babylonian exile, militate, first, the references to it in. the Old Testament, which prove that it was before this period a gene- rally known writing. Thus, in Ezek. xiv. 14-20, are mentioned ' three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job,' as examples of righteousness. Mr. Bernstein, in- deed, in defending his hypothesis, rejects this passage as spurious, but it bears every mark of genuineness. Further, in Jeremiah xx. 14, we find evidently imitated Job's cursing of the day of his birth (ch. iii.). Not only the sentiments but the words are often the same ; and that this coincidence is not accidental, or that the author did not imitate Jeremiah, appears from the lite- rary character of each. Jeremiah shows him- self throughout dependent on ancient writings, whereas our author is quite original and inde- pendent, as proved by Ki.iper (see Jeremias libro- rum, sacrorum interpres atque vindex, p. 164, sq.). There are also in the Lamentations of Jere- miah, many passages clearly alluding to our book, which must have eminently suited his taste and interested him (comp. xvi. 13 with Lam. ii. 16; and xix. 8, with Lam. iii. 7, 9). In Isaiah the peculiar use of fcOS (xl. 2) refers us to Job i. (comp. x. 17; xiv. 14); and the double received from God"s hand alludes to the end of the history of Job, who is there considered as typi- fying the future fate of the church. Isaiah lxi. 7. ' In their land they shall have the double,' al- ludes to the same point ; ch. Ii. 9 depends on Job xxvi. 13 ; and ch. xix. 5, almost literally agrees with Job xiv. 11 (see Kiiper, p. 1G6). Another example of words borrowed from Job occurs in Psalm evil. 42, where the second part of the verse agrees literally with Job v. 16. 2. A most de- cisive reason against assigning the composition of Job to the period of the Exile is derived from the . language, since it is free from those Chaldaisms which occur in the books written about that time. Eichhorn justly observes, ' Let him who is fit for such researches, only read, first, a writing, tainted with Aramaiisms, and next the book of Job : they will be found diverging as east, and west. There is no example of an independent, original work, 124 JOB, THE BOOK OF. composed in pure language, after the Exile. Ze- chariah indeed, though writing after the Exile, has few Chaldaisms; but a closer inspection shows that this case is not analogous to that of our book. The comparative purity of Zechariah's lan- guage can be accounted for by his constant occu- pation with the sacred writings of the period before the Exile, on which he proves himself entirely dependent. 3. Equally conclusive is the poetical character of the book. The Exile might produce a soft, moving poem, but could not give birth to such a rich, compact, animated, and warm composition as ours, breathing youthful freshness throughout. Ewald, in acknowledging this, says justly, ' The high skill displayed in this book cannot be well expected from later centuries, when poetry had by degrees generally declined, and particularly ia the higher art required by large compositions ; and language so concise and expressive as that of our author, is not found in writings of later times.' To the view which places the age of the book of Job in the time of the Babylonian exile, is most opposed that which assigns the composition of it to a period prior to Moses. In support of this latter view, only two arguments having a semblance of force can be adduced, and they will not bear the test of strict inquiry. It is said, 1. ' There is in the book of Job no direct reference to the Mosaic legislation ; and its descriptions and other statements are suited to the period of the patriarchs ; as, for instance, the great au- thority held by old men, the high age of Job, and fathers offering sacrifices for their families — which leads to the supposition that when our book was written no sacerdotal order yet existed.' These points, however, are quite intelligible, if the design of the book, as stated above, is kept in view. The author intended not to rest the decision of the question at issue on particular passages of Scripture, but on religious consciousness and experience. This at once explains why he places the scene without Palestine, why he places it in the patriarchal age, and why he avoids the use of the name Jehovah ; of these three items the first sufficiently accounts for no reference being made to the Mosaic legislation. It is indeed said, that for an author of a later period, who undertook to portray earlier times, it would hardly have been possible to perform his task, without occasionally forgetting his roll. But it is not easy to determine what, in such a case, is possible. What might be expected from our author in this respect may be inferred from his skill in the intentional use of the names of God — from the steadiness with which, among foreign scenery, he proceeds to develop his subject — from the able disposition of the speeches, and the nicely drawing of the characters of the interlocu- tors, who are always represented speaking and act- ing in conformity with the part assigned to them. In the proper execution of his work he may have been assisted by witnessing abroad the pa- triarchal life of nomades, which, in its essential fea- tures, is always the same. This supposition is ren- dered in some degree probable, from the descrip-* tions of Arabia being exactly agreeable to its natural condition, and being even more specific than those of Egypt, though Hirzel is pleased to select the latter country, in determining where the author of our book lived and composed it. 2. ' The language of the book of Job seems JOB, THE BOOK OF. strongly to support the opinion of its having been written, before Moses.' It has been often said, that no writing of the Old Testament may be more frequently illustrated from the Arabic than this book. Jerome observes (JPrcefat. in Dan.*), ' Jobum' cum Arabica lingua plurimam habere societatem ;' and Schultens proved this so incontrovertibly that Gesenius was rather too late in denying the fact (see his Gcschichte der He- br'dischen Sprache, p. 33). Now, from this character of its language we might be induced to infer, that the work was written in the re- motest times, when the separation of the dialects had only begun, but had not yet been completed. This inference would, however, be safe only if the book were written in prose. It is solely from works of this class, that the general usage of the language prevailing at the time of the author can be seen. On the contrary, the selection of obsolete and rare words and forms, with the Hebrews, was a peculiar feature of the poetieal style, and served to distinguish it from the usual, habitual way of writing. This peculiarity belongs to our book more than to any other; which may be explained from its elevated character and general plan ; it rises above commonplace ideas more than any other Hebrew writing, and the plan of the author made it incumbent on him to impress on the language, as much as possible, an antique and foreign character. The most complete statement of the reasons in support of the opinion that the book of Job was written after the age of Moses, may be found in Richter's essay, De JEtate Jobi definienda, re- printed in Rosenmiiller's edition of Lowth's Prce- lectiones De Poesi Sacra Hebrceorum : in which he maintains that it was written in the age of Solomon. Most of these reasons, indeed, are either not conclusive at all, or not quite cogent. Thus it is an arbitrary assumption, proved by modern researches to be erroneous, that the art of writing was unknown previous to the age of Moses. The assertion too, that the marks of cultivation and refinement observable in our book belonged to a later age, rests on no historical ground. Further, it cannot be said, that for such an early time the language is too smooth and neat, since in no Semitic dialect is it possible to trace a progressive improvement. The evident corre- spondence also between our book and the Proverbs and Psalms is not a point proving with resistless force that they were all written at the same time. It is, indeed, sometimes of such a kind, that the authors of the Proverbs and Psalms cannot be exactly said to have copied our book ; but it may be accounted for by their all belonging to the same class of writings, by the very great uni- formity and accordance of religious conceptions and sentiments expressed in the Old Testament, and by the stability of its religious character. Still the argument derived from the correspond- ence between our book and the Psalms is not devoid of force ; for the accordance of ideas, sentiments, and colouring in them is such that the circum- stances referred to cannot be considered as com- pletely accounting for it. There are passages in which the author of our book clearly alludes to the Psalms and Proverbs. A striking example of this kind occurs in Ps. xxxix. 13. All the words of this verse, which, as they conclude the psalm, may have been deeply impressed on the JOB, THE BOOK OF. public mind, are again found in various passages of the book of Job, whose author must have been acquainted with that psalm (comp. ch. vii. 19; xiv. 6 ; x. 20, 21 ; vii. 8, 21, in the Hebrew Bible). The whole psalm is a text-book for the speeches of Job. The argument, also, derived from the skilful plan of our book and its able exposition, must be allowed its weight in deciding that its composition is not to be assigned to an age prior to Moses ; though we must not forget that what to us appears to be art, because it is done according to established rules, may also be the product of a creative genius. But a conclusive argument against assigning so early a date to the composition of our book is its reflecting and inquiring character. A didactic poem could never have been written in the time of the patri- archs ; but our book presents a strong contrast to those immature conceptions and those statements which strike the senses but do not appeal to reason, which are of so frequent occurrence in Genesis. The notion which our author entertains of God, of his omnipotence and omnipresence, is undoubt- edly more refined than that presented in the books of Moses. In addition to this it should be observed, that from many indications the problem treated in our book was at the time of its com- position frequently discussed and variously solved. We have observed, indeed, above, that it is as old as the cause which originated it ; but it must be allowed that the Mosaic revelation, with its lead- ing doctrine concerning retribution, was calcu- lated to direct the attention more forcibly towards it than had been previously the case, and thus to induce God, through an instrument appointed by him, to promulgate the true solution. There are, moreover, indirect allusions to the Pentateuch, as stated above. Summing up the whole of our investigations, we take it to be a settled point that the book of Job does not belong to the time of the Baby- lonian exile ; and it is nearly equally certain that it was not composed prior to the time of Moses. Could it then have been written in some age preceding Samuel and David? It is only with them that a new period of sacred literature began ; and our book is related to products of that period, or enlarges on them. But it cannot have been composed later than Isaiah, who alludes to it. Thus we come to this general determination of the age of our book, that it was written, not before Samuel and David, but not later than the era of Isaiah. With this result we must rest satisfied, unless we would go beyond the indica- tions presented. The intermediate period oilers no ground on which we can safely fix the compo- sition of the bonk of Job. There remains then un- certainty, but it does not concern an important point of religion. The significancy of our book for the church rests on the evidence of our Lord and his apostles in support of the inspiration of the whole collection of the Old Testament, and on the confirmation whicli this external evidence has at. all times received, and continues to receive, from the internal testimony, among the true be- lieve/s of all ages. — E. W. H. [There is perhaps no single book of Scripture of which so many versions and commentaries have been published as on that of Job, or respecting which a greater number of treatises and disserta- tionshave been written. The following are only JOCHEBED. 125 the principal examples : — Mercer, Comment, in Jobum, 1573 ; Drusius, Nova Versio et Scholia in Jobum, 1C36 ; Abbott's Paraphrase of the Book of Job, 1640 ; Spanheim, Historia Jobi, 1672; Schtnid, Comment, in Librum Jobi, 1670 ; Caryl's Exposition of the Book of Job, 1669; Leigh's Annotations on Job, 1656 ; Wesley, Dis- sertatt. Hn Jobum, 1736 : Costard, Observations on the Book of Job, 1742; Schultens, Liber Jobi, 1737 ; Chappelow's Commentary on Job, 1752 ; Heath's Essay on the Book of Job, 1756 ; Scott's Book of Job in English Verse, 1773 ; Reiske, Conjectures in Jobum, 1779; Dathe in Jobum, 1789 ; Garden's Improved Version of the Book of Job, 1796; Eichhorn, Das Bitch * Blob, 1800 ; Gaab, Das Buch Hiob, 1809 ; Eliza Smith's Book of Job, 1810; Good's Book of Job, 1812; Bridel, Le Livre de Job, J 818; Umbreit, Das Buch Hiob, 1824 (translated in the Bibl. Cabinet, vols, xvi., xix.) ; Fry's Neio Transla- tion and Exposition, 1827; Lange, Das Buch Hiob, 1831; Knobel, De Carminis Jobi, 1S35; Ewald, Das ]$uch Hiob erkldrt, 1836 ; Fackens, Comment, de Jobeide, 1S36; Lee's Book of Job, 1837; Wemyss, Job and his Times, 1839.] JOB'S DISEASE. The opinion that the malady under which Job suffered was e^han- tiasis, or black leprosy, is so ancient, that it is found, according to Origen's Hexapla, in tfhe rendering which one of the Greek versions has made of ch. ii. 7. It was also entertained by Abulfeda (Hist. Anteisl. p. 26) ; and, in modern times, by the best scholars generally. The pas- sages which are considered to indicate this disease are found in the description of his skin burning from head to i'oot, so that he took a potsherd to scrape himself (ii. 7, 8); in its being covered with putrefaction and crusts of earth, and being at one time still' and hard, while at another it cracked and discharged fluid (vii. 5) ; in the offensive breath which drove away the kindness of attendants (xix. 17) ; in the restless nights, which were either sleepless or scared with frightful dreams (vii. 13, 14; xxx. 17); in general emaciation (xvi. 8) ; and in so intense a loathing of the burden of life, that strangling and death were preferable to it (vii. 15). In this picture of Job's sufferings, the state of the skin is not so distinctly described as to enable us to identify the disease with elephan- tiasis in a rigorous sense. 'The difficulty is also increased by the tact that JTIl^ shechin is generally rendered ' boils.' But that word, according to its radical sense, only means burning, inflammation — a hot sense of pain, which, although it attends boils and abscesses, is common to other cutaneous irritations. Moreover, the fact that Job scraped himself with a potsherd is irreconcilable with the notion that his body was covered with boils or open sores, but agrees very well with the thickened state of the skin winch characterizes this disease. In this, as in most other Biblical diseases, there is too little distinct description of symptoms to enable us to determine the precise malady in- tended. But the general character of the com- plaint under which Job suffered, bears a greater resemblance to elephantiasis than to any other disease [LeprosI]. — W. A. N. JOCHEBED 05?V, God-glorified; Sept. 'lwXafi(S), wife of Amram and mother of Miriam, 126 JOEL. and Aaron. In Exod. vi. 20, Joohebed is expressly declared to have been the sister of Am- ram's father, and consequently the aunt of her hus- band. As marriage between persons thus related was afterwards forbidden by the law (Lev. xviii. 12), various attempts have been made to show that, the relationship was more distant than the text in its literal meaning indicates. We see no necessity for this. The mere mention of the relationship implies that there was something remarkable in the case ; but if we show that nothing is remarkable, we do away the occasion for the relationship being at all noticed. The fact seems to be, that where this marriage was • contracted, there was no law forbidding such alliances, but they must in any case have been unusual, although not forbidden; and this, with the writer's knowledge that they were subse- quently interdicted, sufficiently accounts for this one being so pointedly mentioned. The candour of the historian in declaring himself to be sprung from a marriage, afterwards forbidden by the law, delivered through himself, deserves Special notice. JOEL (7W ; Sept. 'IanjA ; Gesenius, Cui Je- kova est Deus, i. e. cultor Jehovcs), one of the twelve minor prophets, the son of Pethuel. Of his birth-place nothing is known with certainty ; the pseudo-Epiphanius affirms that he was a native of Betha, in the tribe of Reuben (De Vit. Propk. c. 14). From the local allusions in his prophecy, we may infer that he discharged his office in the kingdom of Judah. But the references to the temple, its priests and sacrifices, are rather slender grounds for conjecturing that he belonged to the sacerdotal order. Various opinions have been held respecting the period in which he lived. It ap- pears most probable that he was contemporary with Amos and Isaiah, and delivered his predic- tions in the reign of Uzziah, between 800 and 780 B.C. This is the opinion maintained by Abarbanel, Vitringa, Rosenmiiller, De Wette, Holzhausen, and others. Credner and Winer place him in the time of Joash ; Bertholdt, in that of Hezekiah ; Cramer and Eckevniaun, in Josiah's reign; Jahn in Manasseh's ; and Schroder still later. This prophet opens his commission by an- nouncing an extraordinary plague of locusts, accompanied with extreme drought, which he de- picts in a strain of animated and sublime poetry under the image of an invading army. The fidelity of his highly-wrought description is corro- borated and illustrated by the testimonies of Shaw, Volney, Forbes, and other eminent tra- vellers, who have been eye-witnesses of the ra- vages committed by this most terrible of the insect tribe. Their accounts tend strongly, we think, to free the literal interpretation from the charge of being ' the greatest exaggeration.' It is also to be observed that locusts are named by Moses as instruments of the divine justice (Deut. xxviii. 38, 39), and by Solomon in his prayer at the dedication of the temple (1 Kings viii. 37). In the second chapter, the formidable aspect of the locusts — their rapid progress — their sweeping de- vastation^— the awful murmur of their countless throngs — their instinctive marshalling — the irre- sistible perseverance with which they make their way over every obstacle and through every aper- ture— are delineated with the utmost graphic force. Dr. Hengstenberg calls in question the JOEL. mention of their flight, but, as it appears to us, without adequate reason. He considers the ex- pression ' before them,' in ch. ii., as equivalent to ' before they rise :' but in the third verse the same word (1*037) occurs twice, evidently in the sense of ' in the presence of,' ' in their front.' The emi- nent critic just named lays great stress on the alleged omission of this particular, which he con- siders inexplicable, unless on the supposition that the reality presented nothing corresponding to it. But whether this characteristic be alluded to or not, the argument for or against the literal inter- pretation will not be materially affected. Other particulars are mentioned which literally can apply only to locusts, and which, on the suppo- sition that the language is allegorical, are expli- cable only as being accessory traits for filling up the picture (Davison's Sacred Hermeneutics, p. 310). The figurative interpretation has, it must be allowed, the support of antiquity. It was adopted by the Chaldee paraphrast, Ephrem the Syrian (a.d. 350), and the Jews in the time of Jerome (a.d. 400). Ephrem supposes that by the four different denominations of the locusts were intended Tiglath-pileser, Shalmanaser, Sennache- rib, and Nebuchadnezzar. The Jews, in the time of Jerome, understood by the first term the Assy- rians and Chaldeans ; by the second, the Medes and Persians ; by the third, Alexander the Great and fiis successors ; and by the fourth, the Romans. By others, however, the prophecy was interpreted literally ; and Jerome himself appears to have fluctuated between the two opinions, though more inclined to the allegorical view. Grotius applies the description to the invasions by Pul and Shal- maneser. Holzhausen attempts to unite both modes of interpretation, and applies the language literally to the locusts, and metaphorically to the Assyrians. It is singular, however, that, if a hostile invasion be intended, not the least hint is given of personal injury sustained by the inha- bitants ; the immediate effects are confined en- tirely to the vegetable productions and the cattle. Dr. Hengstenberg, while strongly averse from the literal sense, is not disposed to limit the meta- phorical meaning to any one event or class of invaders. ' The enemy,' he remarks, ' are de- signated only as north countries. From the north, however, from Syria, all the principal invasions of Palestine proceeded. We have therefore no rea- son to think exclusively of any one of them. Nor ought we to limit the prophecy to the people of the old covenant. Throughout all centuries there is but one church of God existing in unbroken connection. That this church, during the first period of its existence, was concentrated in a land into which hostile irruptions were made from the north was purely accidental. To make this cir- cumstance the boundary-stone of the fulfilment of prophecy were just as absurd as if one were to assert that the threatening of Amos, " by the sword shall all sinners of my people die," has not been fulfilled in those who perished after another manner' (Christology, Keith's transl. iii. 104). The prophet, after describing the approaching judgments, calls on his countrymen to repent, assuring them of the divine placability and readi- ness to forgive (ii. 12-17). He foretels the re- storation of the land to its former fertility, and declares that Jehovah would still be their God JOHANAN. (ii. 18-26). He then announces the spiritual blessings which would be poured forth in the Messianic age (iii. 1-5, Heb. text ; ii. 28-32, Auth. Vers.). This remarkable prediction is applied by the Apostle Peter to the events that transpired on the day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 16-21). In the last chapter (iv. Heb. tex*; iii. Auth. Vers.), the divine vengeance is denounced against the enemies and oppressors of the chosen people, of whom the Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Edomites are especially named. A minute exa- mination of these predictions would exceed our limits ; we must refer the reader for further in- formation to the works named at the close of this article. The style of Joel, it has been remarked, unites the strength of Micah with the tenderness of Jere- miah. In vividness of description he rivals Nahum, and in sublimity and majesty is scarcely inferior to Isaiah and Habakkuk. ' Imprimis est elegans, clarus, fusus, fluensque ; valde etiam sublimis acer, fervidus ' (Lowth, De Sacra Poesi Hebr. Prasl. xxi.). The canonicity of this book has never been called in question. A Paraphrase and Critical Commentary on the Prophecy of Joel, by Samuel Chandler, 4to. London, 1745 ; Die Weissagung des Propheten Joel, iihersetzt und erkldrt, von F. A. Holzhau- sen, Gottingen, 1829 ; Characteristik der Bibel, von Dr. A. H. Niemeyer, Halle, 1831, vol. v. pp. 295-302 ; Dr. Hengstenberg's Christology of the Old Testament, §c, transl. by Dr. Ii. Keith, Washington, 1839, vol. iii. pp. 100-141. The following works are also mentioned by De Wette in his Lehrbuch, &c, Berlin, 1840, p. 324 : — Joel Explicatus, in quo Textus Ebr. per paraph. Chald. masoram magn. et parv. perque trium prcestantiss. Rabb. R. Sal. Jarchi, R. Aben-Esra>, et R. Dav. Kimchi Comm., necnon per notas philol. illustratur, §c, auct. Job.. Leus- den, Ultraj. 1657 : Interpret. Joelis in Turretini Tract, de S. Script. Interpret., ed. a G. A. Teller, pp. 307-343 ; G. T. Baumgartens Ausleg. el. Proph. Joel, Hal. 1756 ; C. F. Cramer, Scyth. Denhnaler in Palcestina, Kiel, 1777, s. 143-215 ; C.'P. Conz, Diss, de Charactere Poet. Joelis, he, Tub. 1783; Joel Lot. versus et notis philol. illustratus, ab A. Scanborg, in sex Dissert., Upsal, 1806; Ueberss. m. Erklt., von Eckermann, 1786; Justi, 1792; Credner, 1831.— J. E. R. JOHANAN (}3Pfn, God - bestowed ; Sept. 'luvdv), one of the officers who came and recog- nised Gedaliah as governor of Judaea after the de- struction of Jerusalem, and who appears to have been the chief in authority and iniluence among them. He penetrated the designs of Ishmael against the governor, whom he endeavoured, with- out success, to put upon his guard. When Ish- mael had accomplished his design by the murder of Gedaliah, and was carrying away the principal persons at the seat of government as captives to the Ammonites, Johanan pursued him, and re- leased them. Being fearful, however, that the Chaldaeans might misunderstand the affair, and make him and those who were with him respon- sible for it, he resolved to withdraw fur safety into Egypt, with the principal persons of the rem- nant left iu the land. Jeremiah remonstrated against this decision ; but Johanan would not be JOHN THE BAPTIST. 127 moved, and even constrained the prophet himself to go with them. They proceeded to Taphanes. but nothing further is recorded of Johanan. B.C. 588 (2 Kings xxv. 23; Jer. xl. 8-16.; xli. ; xlii.; xliii.). JOHN THE BAPTIST (Gr. 'laxkwns o pair- riffTTis, or simply 'IwdvvTjs, when the reference is clear, as in Matt. iii. 4; iv. 12; Lat. Joannes, Tacit. Hist.v. 12 ; Hebrew pHT', denoting 'grace' or 'favour'). In the church John commonly bears the honourable title of 'forerunner of the Lord ' — antecursor et jjreeparator viarum Domini (Tertull. adv. Marc. iv. 33) ; in Greek-, -rrpoSpo/xos, vpodyye\os Kvpiov. The accounts of him which the gospels present are fragmentary and imper- fect : they involve, too, some difficulties which the learned have found i't hard to remove ; yet enough is given to show that he was a man of a lofty character, and that the relation in which he stood to Christianity was one of great importance. His parents were Zacharias and Elisabeth, the latter ' a cousin of Mary,' the mother of Jesus, whose senior John was by a period of six months (Luke i.). The exact spot where John was born is not determined. The rabbins fix on Hebron, in the hill-country of Judaea; Paulus, Kuinoel, and Meyer, after Reland, are iu favour of Jutta, ' a city of Judah.' According to the account con- tained in the first chapter of Luke, his father, while engaged in burning incense, was visited by the angel Gabriel, who informed him that in com- pliance with his prayers liis wife should bear a son, whose name he should call John — in allusion to the grace thus accorded. A description of the manner of his son's life is given, which in effect states that he was to be a Nazarite, abstaining from bodily indulgences, was to receive special favour and aid of God, was to prove a great reli- gious and social reformer, and so prepare the way for the long-expected Messiah. Zacharias is slow to believe these tidings and seeks some token in evidence of their truth. Accordingly a sign is given which acts also as a punishment of his want of faitli — his tongue is sealed till the prediction is fulfilled by the event. Six months after Eli- sabeth had conceived she received a visit from Mary, the future mother of Jesus. On being saluted by her relation, Elisabeth felt her babe leap in her womb, and, being filled with the holy spirit, she broke forth into a poetic congratulation to Mary, as the destined mother of her Lord. At length Elisabeth brought forth a son, whom the relatives were disposed to name Zacharias, after his father — but Elisabeth was in some way led to wish that he should be called John. The matter was referred to the father, who signified in writing that his name was to be John. This agreement with Elisabeth caused all to marvel. Zacharias now had his tongue loosed, and he first employed his restored power in praising God. These sin- gular events caused universal surprise, and led people to expect that the child would prove a disl inguished man. The parents of John were not only of a priestly order, but righteous and devout. Their iniluence, in consequence, in the training of their son, would be not only benign bul suitable to the holy otliee which he was designed to till. More than this — the special aids of God's Spirit were with him (Luke i. G6). How thoroughly Zacharias was penetrated with his parental responsibility and the 128 JOHN THI APTIST. future dignity of his son, appears from the ' divine song ' to which he gives utterance ; the following words deserve notice — 'And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest ; for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; to give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, through the tender mercy of our God, whereby the day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness and the shadow of death, to guide our feet in the way of peace.' As a consequence of the lofty influences under which he was nurtured, the child waxed strong in spirit. The sacred writer adds that ' he was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel ' (Luke i. 80). The apocryphal Protev. Jac. ch. xxii, states that his mother, in order to rescue her son from the murder of the children at Bethlehem, which Herod commanded, fled with him into the desert. She found no place of refuge ; the mountain opened at her request, and gave the needed shelter in its bosom. Zacharias, being questioned by Herod as to where his son was to be found, and refusing to answer, was slain by the tyrant. At a later period Elisabeth died, when angels took the youth under their care (Fabricius, Cod. Apocryph. p. 117, sq. ; comp. Kuhn, Leben Jesu, i. 163, re- mark 4). In the fifteenth year of the Emperor Tiberius, John made his public appearance, exhibiting the austerity, the costume, and the manner of life of the ancient Jewish prophets (Luke iii. ; Matt. iv.). His raiment was camel's hair ; he wore a plain leathern girdle about his loins ; his food was what the desert spontaneously offered — locusts and wild honey from the rock. Desert though the place is.-. designated, the country where he began his mis- sion— the wild mountainous tract of Juda — lying between Jerusalem and the Dead Sea, along which it stretches, was not entirely destitute of means for supporting human existence (Matt. iii. 1-12; Mark i. 1-8; Luke iii. 1-20; John x. 28; Justin Martyr, Dial, cum Tryph. c. 88). Jo- sephus, in his Life (ii. 2), gives an account of one of his instructors, Banus, which throws light on John's condition in the desert : — ' he lived in the desert, and had no other food than what grew of its own accord, and bathed himself in cold water frequently, both by night and by day. I imitated him in these things, and continued with him three, years.' The burden of John's preaching bore no slight resemblance to the old prophetic exhortations, whose last echo had now died away for centuries. He called upon the Jewish people to repent (^eTCH/ceiTe), to change their minds, their dispo- sitions and affections, and thus prepared the way for the great doctrine promulgated by his Lord, of the necessity of a spiritual regeneration. That the change which John had in view was by no. means of so great or so elevated a kind as that which Jesus required, is very probable ; but the particulars into which he enters when he proceeds to address classes or individuals (Matt. iii. 7, sq. ; Luke iii. 7, sq.), serve fully to show that the re- novation at which he aimed was not merely of a material or organic, but chiefly of a moral nature. In a very emphatic manner did he warn the eccle- siastical and philosophical authorities of the land of the necessity under which they lay of an entire change of view, of aim, and of desire; declaring JOHN THE BAPTIST. in explicit and awful terms that their pride of nationality would avail them nothing against the coming wrathful visitation, 'and that they were utterly mistaken in the notion that Divine Provi- dence had any need of them for completing its own wise purposes (Luke iii. 8, 9). The first reason assigned by John for entering on his most weigHy and perilous office was announced in these words — ' the kingdom of heaven is at hand.' It was his great work to prepare the mind of the nation, so that when Jesus himself came they might be a people made ready for the Lord. What was the exact idea which John intended to convey by the term ' kingdom of heaven ' it is not easy, at least in the space before us, to de- termine with satisfaction. We feel ourselves, however, justified in protesting against the prac- tice of those who take the vulgar Jewish notion, and ascribe it to John, while some go so far as to deny that our Lord himself, at the first, pos- sessed any other. The reference which we have made to John's addreses to his auditors suffices to show that there was an ample and predominant moral element in his conception of this kingdom; while, if he entertained the vulgar notion of the Messiah, why his urgency in behalf of /xerdvoia — an entire, internal change? Besides, does the fact need enforcement, that all superior minds — especially those that are enlightened by the Divine Spirit — have both correcter and nobler views than the bulk of their contemporaries, and that it is the power which, under God's aid, these views give them, that sustains them in their duty and makes their efforts successful ? If John really came in the spirit and power of Elias — if he reproduced the old ardour and quickening foresight of the prophets, he must have gone far beyond the vulgar conception of the kingdom cf God. And indeed the whole tenor of his teaching seems to our mind intended and fitted to refine, exalt, and ex- pand the ordinary Jewish mind and so to prepare the way for the perfect day of Christ. Had we space to develope the moral character of John, we could show that this fine, stern, high- minded teacher possessed many eminent qualities; but his personal and official modesty in keeping, in all circumstances, in the lower rank assigned him by God, must not pass without special men- tion. The doctrine and manner of life of John appear to have roused the entire of the south of Palestine, and people flocked from all parts to the spot where, on the banks of the Jordan, he bap- tized thousands unto repentance. Such, indeed, was the fame which he had gained, that 'people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ or not' (Luke iii. 15). Had he chosen, John might without doubt have assumed to himself the higher office, and risen to "great worldly7 power. But he was faithful to his trust, and never failed to de- clare in the fullest and clearest manner, that he was not the Christ but merely his harbinger, and that the sole work he had to do was to usher in the day-spring from on high. The more than prophetic fame of the Baptist reached the ears of Jesus in his Nazarene dwell- ing, far distant from the locality of John (Matt. ii. 9, 1 1 ). The nature of the report — namely, that his divinely-predicted forerunner had appeared in Judaea — showed our Lord that the time was new- come for his being made manifest to Israel. Ac- JOHN THE BAPTIST. cordingly he comes to the place where John is lo be baptized of him, in order that thus he might fulfil all that was required under the dispensation which was about to disappear (Matt iii. 14). John's sense of inferiority inclines him to ask rather than to give baptism in the case of Jesus, who, however, wills to have it so, and is accord- ingly baptized of John. Immediately on the termination of this symbolical act, a divine at1 testation is given from the opened vault of heaven, declaring Jesus to be in truth the long looked-for Messiah — ' This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased ' (Matt. iii. 17). The events which are found recorded in John i. 19, sq_. seem to have happened after the baptism of Jesus by John. This appears to us to be implied in the past character of the narrative. John is obviously speaking of something over and gone : for in- stance, ' This is he of whom I said ' (not I say), 4 after me cometh a man,' &c. ; John's testimony had already been borne when he gave his reply to the Sanhedrim. It was therefore prior to his bap- tism that John ' knew him not' — knew not his person, though, of course, he knew that the Mes- siah was on the point of coming ; and though John and Jesus were relatives, yet, considering the distance at which they dwelt from each other, and the habits of retirement and solitude in which both indulged, there is no difficulty what- ever in the statement. But it may be asked, if John was ignorant of the person of Jesus, how he could acknowledge his superiority, as he does when he intimates that, it was more meet he should receive than give baptism. This difficulty has excited much attention. The reader may with advantage consult the very learned and, for the most part, impartial commentary of Liicke, on the passage. Our view is this : the relation in which John and Jesus stood to each other must have been well known to botli. When, therefore, Jesus came to John, he would naturally declare himself to be the intended Messiah. Such a de- claration— thus pointing out the person — would, of course, conciliate belief in John's mind, and might naturally prompt the self-abasing language which he employs when requested by Jesus to give him baptism. No other fact than such an assertion would communicate to John's mind could justify the language which the Baptist uses, since, as the forerunner of the Messiah, he was second to him only. Still the divinely-promised evidence remained to be given — ' upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remain- ing on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost' (John i. 33). That evidence was at length vouchsafed after the baptism, and then the divine and human testimony concurred in giving such satisfaction to John's mind as he had been led of God to expect, and which the im- portant interests at stake seemed to demand. In the testimony which John bears to Jesus, as recorded by the Evangelist John, Winer, in his Eealwnrterbuch, finds some difficulty, and thinks that there is a variation, in fact a contrariety, be- tween the view which John presents of the person and work of our Lord and that which the other evangelists afford — a view, indeed, of which the Baptist could have known nothing, but which came from the Gnosticizing colours of John's mind. We again refer the reader to Lueke's valu- able work. But what has already been remarked VOL. II. JOHN THE BAPTIST. 129 will have shown that Winer and others are in error in the supposition which lies at the bottom of these alleged difficulties and variations — namely, that John the Baptist had no idea of the kingdom of God, higher or more far-reaching than that which was prevalent in the common mind of Judsea. It is in the words 'Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world' (John i. 29, 36), that the difficulty is thought to be found. What, it is asked, could John the Baptist have known of this assumed function — the remission of sins? Liicke has, we think, satisfactorily shown that such a function did enter into the prophetic idea of the Messiah (Isa. iiii.), or at least into that concep- tion of him which the authoritative expounders of religious truth had drawn from the peculiar lan- guage of prophecy. And this is unquestionably certain, that ' the remission of our sins, through the tender mercy of our God' (Luke i. 77), did form a part of the conception of the coming Mes- siah which Zacharias, John's father, entertained and expressed immediately on the birth of his son ; while in the account given by the syn- optical evangelists (Matthew, Mark, Luke), to the effect that John preached ■* the baptism of repentance^ for the remission of sins ' (Luke iii.. 3), adding that the Christ would 'baptize with the Holy Ghost, and with fire ' (Luke iii. 15), may surely be found the essence of the idea conveyed by the words ' Behold the Lamb of God,' &c. The relation which subsisted between John and Jesus, after the emphatic testimony above recorded had been borne, we have not the materials to de- scribe with full certainty. It seems but natural to think, when their hitherto relative position is taken into account, that. John would forthwith lay down his office of harbinger, which, now that the Sun of Righteousness himself had appeared, was entirely fulfilled and terminated. Such a step he does not appear to have taken. On the contrary, the language of Scripture seems to im- ply that the Baptist church continued side by side with the Messianic (Matt. xi. 3 ; Luke vii. 19 ; Matt. ix. 14 ; Luke xi. 1 ; John xiv. 25), and re- mained long after John's execution (Acts xix. 3). Indeed, a sect which bears the name of ' John's dis- ciples,' exists to the present day in the East, whose sacred books are said to be pervaded by a Gnostic leaven. Tiiey are hostile alike to Judaism and Christianity, and their John and Jesus are alto- gether different from the characters bearing these names in our evangelists. Still, though it has been generally assumed that John did not lay down his office, we are not satisfied that the New Tes- tament establishes this alleged fact. John may have ceased to execute his own peculiar work, as the forerunner, but may justifiably have conti- nued to bear his most important testimony to the Messiahship, of Christ; or he may even have alto- gether given up the duties of active life some time, at least, before his death ; and yet his disciples, both before and after that event, may have main- tained their individuality as a religious commu- nion. Nor will the student of the New Testament and of ecclesiastical history, who knows how grossly a teacher far greater than John, was. both during his life and after his crucifixion, misun- derstood and misrepresented, think it impossible that some misconception or some sinister motive may have had weight in preventing the Baptist 130 JOHN THE BAPTIST. church from dissolving and passing into that of Christ. It was, not improbably, with a view to remove some error of this kind that John sent the embassy of his disciples to Jesus which is recorded in Matt, xi. 3; Luke vii. 19. The spiritual course which the teachings of Jesus were more and more taking, and the apparent failure, or at least uneasy post- ponement of the promised kingdom in the popular sense, especially the fact that their esteemed mas- ter lay in prison, and was in imminent danger of losing his life, may well have led John's disciples to doubt if Jesus were in truth the expected Mes- siah. Appearances, to them, were purely adverse. What step so fit on the part of their master, as that he should send them to Jesus himself? No intimation is found in the record that John re- quired evidence to give him satisfaction ; and all the language that is used is proper and pertinent if we suppose that the doubt lay only in the minds of his disciples. That the terms employed ad- mit the interpretation that John was not without some misgivings (Luke vii. 23; Matt. xi. 6), we are free to allow. And if any doubt had grown up in the Baptist's mind it was most probably owing to the defective spirituality of his views ; for even of him Jesus has declared, ' he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he ' (Matt. xi. 1 1). Were this the case it would of itself account not only for the embassy sent by John to Jesus, but also for the continuance and perpetuation of John's separate influence as the founder of a sect. The manner of John's death is too well known to require to be detailed here (Matt. iv. 12 ; xiv. 3; Luke iii. 19; Mark vi. 17; Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 5. 2). He reproved a tyrant for a heinous crime, and received his reward in decapitation. Josephus, however, assigns a somewhat different cause for this execution from that given in the gospels. The passage bears forcible evidence to the general truth of the evangelical narrative re- specting John, and therefore we transcribe it : — ' Now some of the Jews thought that the destruc- tion of Heiod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John that was called the Baptist ; for Herod slew him, although lie was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness one towards another and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism. Now when others came in crowds about him — for they were greatly moved by hearing his words — Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise), thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring him- self into difficulties by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Machserus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death.' There is no contrariety between this account and that which is given in the New Testament. Both may be true : John was condemned in the mind of Heipd on political grounds, as endan- gering his' position, and executed on private and ostensible grounds, in order to gratify a mali- cious but powerful woman. The Scriptural JOHN THE APOSTLE. reason was but the pretext for carrying into effec? the determinations of Herod's cabinet. That the fear of Herod was not without some ground may be seen in the popularity which John had gained (Mark xi. 32 ; Lardner, Works, vi. 483). The castle of Machserus, where John was im- prisoned and beheaded, was- a fortress lying on the southern extremity of Persea, at the top of the lake Asphaltites, between the dominions of Herod and Aretas, king of Arabia Petrsea, and at the time of our history appears to have belonged to the former (Lardner, vi. 483). According to the Scripture account, the daughter of Herodias obtained the Baptist's head at an entertainment, without delay. How could this be, when Ma- chorus lay at a distance from Jerusalem? The feast seems to have been made at Machasrus, which, besides being a stronghold, was also a palace, built by Herod the Great, and Herod himself was now on his route towards the terri- tories of Aretas, with whom he was at war. Bishop Marsh {Lecture xxvi.) remarks, that the soldiers who, in Luke iii. 14, are said to have come to John while baptizing in the Jordan, are designated by a term {rrrparevSfj.ei'oc, not y, living water. These terms are even by Strauss (vol. i. p. 176) considered to be parts of the original speeches of Christ, and he asserts that the evan- gelist only developed them in the style of the Alexandrian writers. It must be granted that the peculiarities of John's Gospel more especially consist in the four following doctrines. 1 . That of the mystical relation of the Son to the Father. 2. That of the mystical relation of the Redeemer to believers. 3. The announcement of the Holy Ghost as the Comforter. 4. The peculiar importance ascribed to Love. Although there can be shown in the writings of the other evangelists some isolated dicta of the Lord, which seem to bear the impress of John, it can also be shown that they contain thoughts not originating with that disciple, but with the Lord himself. Matthew (xi. 27) speaks of the relation of the Son to the Father so entirely in the style of John that persons not sufficiently versed in Holy Writ are apt to search for this passage in the Gospel of John. The mystical union of the Son with believers is expressed in Matt, xxviii. 20. The promise of the effusion of the Holy Ghost in order to perfect the disciples is found in Luke xxiv. 49. The doctrine of Paul with respect to JOHN THE APOSTLE. love, in 1 Cor. xiii., entirely resembles what, ac- cording to John, Christ taught on the same subject. Paul here deserves our particular attention. In the writings of Paul are found Christian truths which have their points of coalescence only in John, viz., that Christ is 'EIkou' tov Qeov rod aopdrov, the image of the invisible God, by whom ali things are created (Col. i. 15, 16). Paul considers the Spirit of God in the church, the spiritual Christ, as Jesus himself does (John xiv. 16), frequently using the words iivai Iv XpicrrS. That the speeches of Christ have been faithfully reported may be seen by a comparison of the speeches of the Baptist in the Gospel of John. The Baptist's speeches bear an entirely Old Test- ament character : they are full of gnomes, allu- sions to the Old Testament, and sententious expressions (John iii. 27-30 ; i. 26-36). b. The purport and plan of the Gospel of John. — We have already given our own opinion on this subject. Most of the earlier critics considered the Gospel of John to have had a polemico-dogmatical purport. According to Ire- na3us {Adv. Hcer. iii. 12), John wrote with the intention of combating the errors of Cerinthus the Gnostic. Grotius, Herder, and others sup- pose that the polemics of the evangelist were directed against the Zabii, or disciples of John the Baptist. Michaelis, Storr, and Hug assert that they were directed against both the Zabii and the Gnostics. It is not improbable that the evan- gelist had in view, both in his Prologus and also in ch. xix, 34, 35, some heretical opinions of those times, but it cannot be maintained that this is the case throughout the whole of the Gospel. He himself states (xx. 31) that his work had a more general object. One of the peculiarities of John is that, in speaking of the adversaries of Jesus, he always calls them ol 'lovSaioi. This observation has, in modern times, given rise to a peculiar opinion concerning the plan of John's Gospel ; namely, that the evangelist, has, from the very beginning of the Gospel, the following theme before his eyes : — THE ETERNAL COMBAT BETWEEN DIVINE LIGHT AND THE' CORRUPTION OF MANKIND, EXEM- PLIFIED BY THE MUTUAL OPPOSITION SUB- SISTING BETWEEN THE HOSTILE JlJWISH PARTY AND THE MANIFESTATION OF THE SON OF GoD, WHICH COMBAT TERMINATES IN THE VICTORY OF LIGHT. The Prologus of the Gospel of John expresses this theme in speaking of the opposition of the world to the incarnate Logos. This theme is here expressed in the same manner as the lead- ing idea of a musical composition is expressed in the overture. As the leading idea of the whole epistle to the Romans is contained in ch. i. 17, so the theme of the Gospel of John is con- tained in ch. i. 11-13. The Gospel is divided into two principal sections. The first extends to ch. xii. It comprehends the public functions of Jesus, and terminates with a brief summary (ver. 44-50). The second section contains the history of the Passion and of the Resurrection. The -eader is prepared for this section by ch. xii. 23- 32. The leading idea of this speech is, that Destruction is necessary, because without it there can be no Resurrection. With ch. xiii. begins the history of our Lord's Passion. In the third verse the apostle directs at- JOHN THE APOSTLE. 133 tention to the fact that the suffering would finally lead to glory. In the first section is described how the oppo- sition of the influential men among the Jews was gradually increased until the decisive fact of the resurrection of Lazarus led to a public outburst of their hatred. This description terminates with the official decree of Caiaphas (xi. 49, 50). c. The place, tune, and language in which John's Gospelioas written. — The Fathers supposed that the Gospel of John was written at Ephesus. The author of a synopsis annexed to the works of Athanasius makes an observation which deserves to be noticed on account of the assurance with which it is advanced. It is, that John wrote the Gospel which bears his name in Patmos, but that it was edited by the same Gaius whom Paul in the epistle to the Romans calls 6 |eVos fj.ov, mine Aos£(Athanasii Opera, vol.ii.p. 155, Venet). One might be inclined to explain by this circumstance the postscript contained in John xxi. 24, 25. There is some internal evidence in favour of the statement that this Gospel was written at Ephesus — namely, that the author sometimes alludes to the tenets of Hellenistic theosophy, and that he has in view readers who do not live in Palestine (John ii. 6, 13 ; iv. 9 ; v. 1, 2). In addition to this must be mentioned the command of the Hellenistic Greek evinced by the writer. It is, however, not unlikely that John acquired his knowledge of Greek in his native country. The researches of Dr. Paulus, Hug, and Credner, have rendered it highly jwobable that the knowledge of Greek was then widely spread in Palestine. Even James, the brother of our Lord, although he never left his native country, writes in his epistle tolerably good Greek. The language of Johns Gospel is not very periodic, but moves uniformly on between the particles 5e and oZv. For instance, in chapter xix. the particle oiv occurs at the commencement of verses 20, 21, 23, 24 twice, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 38, 40, 42. Quite as frequent is the simple connec- tion by the conjunction iced (iii. 14; v. 27; viii. 21, 49; xvii. 11). This defect of style may, however, be explained by the mental charac- teristics of the disciple. John's mind was defi- cient in the dialectic element; he wanted the logical acuteness of Paul. Even where he reports the speeches of Christ, we often find a want of precision in his representation. The simplicity of John's character is also evinced by the repe- tition of certain leading thoughts, reproduced in the same words both in the Gospel and in the Epistles ; such as fiaprvpla, testimony ; 86£a, glory ; a\-rjdeia, truth ; 7] alcovtos, eternal lije ; ixiveiv, to abide. Although (he language of the Gospels and of the Epistles is not. so excellent as Eusebius asserts, we find only such impurities as belong to the Alex- andrine Greek in general. For instance, the barbarism tyvcoKav in xvii. 7 ; and according to the codex ad., also kwpaicav in verse 6; and according to some manuscripts eixaxrcu', instead of elxov ', and in xvi. 20, 22, ■xapi'iaof.i.a.i, instead of xapu- d. The interpreters of the Gospel of John. — Among the ancient commentators upon John's Gospel, Chrysostom deserves the first place. The two compilers, Theopbylact, who died a.d. 1107, and Euthymius Zigabenus, who died after a.d. 134 JOHN THE APOSTLE. HIS, are also worthy of notice. Among the Ro- man Catholic interpreters, Maklonatus, who died in 15-S3, is distinguished by originality and ac- curacy. Calvin is distinguished above the other Reformers for the originality and ease of his in- terpretation, but his commentary on the Epistles is more carefully worked out than that on the Gospel. Beza is characterized by philological and critical learning. The most complete com- mentary on the Gospel of John is ihat of Lampe, ,Commentarius Exegetico-Analyticns in.Evange- lium Johannis, Amstelodami, 1637, 3 vols. 4to. The style of this commentary is tasteless and stiff, but in learning the author has not been sur- passed by any other interpreter. Liicke (3rd ed. 1840) is the most comprehensive of the modern commentators. Shorter commentaries have been written by Tholuck* (5th ed.), by Olshausen (3rd ed. 1832), and by De Wette (2nd ed. 1839). As introductions to the study of the writings of John, we may mention Frommann's Johan- neischer Lehrbegriff, 1831, and Neander's Abriss der Johanneischen Lehre in his Geschichte der Pfianzung der Christlichen Kirche (3rd ed. 1841, p. 757, sq.). III. The Epistles of John. — For the authen- ticity of the first epistle very ancient testimony may be adduced. Papias, the disciple of John, quotes some passages from it. Polycarp, also, another disciple of John, quotes a passage from this epistle (ad Philipp., c. 7). So, also, Irenaeus (Adv. Hcer. iii. 16; v. S). The author of the first epistle describes him- self, at its commencement, as an eye-witness of the life of our Lord. The style and language manifestly harmonize with those of the author of the Gospel of John. The polemics, also, which in ch. ii. 18-26, are directed against the Docetic Gnostics, in ch. iv. 1-3, agree with the sphere of action in Asia Minor in which the Evangelist John was placed. We may, therefore, suppose that the epistle was written to Christian congrega- tions in Asia Minor, which were placed under the spiritual care of the apostle. It is general ly admitted that ch. i. 2 refers to the Gospel. If this is correct, the apostle wrote this epistle at a very advanced age. after he had written his gospel. The epistle breathes love and devotion, but also zeal for moral strictness (iii. 6-8; v. 16). There is a remarkable absence of logical con- nection in the form of separate expressions, and in the transitions from one thought to another. Some writers have been inclined to find a reason for this in the advanced age of the writer. Old age may, perhaps, have contributed to this charac- teristic, but it is chiefly attributable to the mental peculiarity of the apostle. Eusebius places the second and third epistles of John among the avri\eyofj.ej'a (Hist. Eccles. iii. 25). These two epistles were originally wanting in the ancient Syriac translation. From their nature, it may easily be explained how it happened that they were less generally known in ancient Christian congregations, and that the fathers do not quote them so often as other parts of Scripture, since they are very short, and treat of private affairs. The private nature of their con- * Of this admirable commentary there exists an English translation in the United States, of which two editions have been published. — Ed. JOHN THE APOSTLE. tents removes also the suspicion that they could have been forged, since it would be difficult to discover any purpose which could have led to such a forgery. The passage in the second epistle, verse 1 1, which might seem to have some doctrinal importance, is several times quoted by the fathers ; for instance, by Irenaeus (Adv. Hcer. i. 16. 3). Cle- mens Alexandrinus, who, according to Eusebius and Photius, wrote a commentary on all the seven Catholic epistles, mentions several genuine epistles of John. Origen speaks doubtingly about the authenticity of the second and third epistles, and states that they were not generally admitted to be genuine. The second epistle is addressed to a lady, called Kvpia, which name frequently occurs in ancient writers as that of a woman (comp. Liicke's G'ommentar, p. 351). The third epistle is addressed to Gaius, a person otherwise unknown. It is remarkable that the writer of this epistle calls himself 6 TTpecrfivTepos. If this means the same as pre- sident, as in 1 Pet. v. 1. it is surprising that John should make use of this official designation in a private letter, and not in the first epistle, which is addressed to the congregation. If irpecrfivTepos is here used in the signification of old man, as Paul calls himself in the Epistle to Philemon, verse 9, one is surprised that John should not have chosen the clearer expression, 6 yepcav or 6 7rpscr/3uT7)s. Some writers have been inclined to ascribe these letters to the presbyter John, who is sometimes spoken of in the ancient church, and to whom even the Apocalypse has been attributed ; but if the presbyter John wrote these epistles, John's Gospel also must be ascribed to the same person, of whom otherwise so little is known. This, however, is inadmissible. The omission of the title, at the commencement of the first epistle, cannot be received as proof that 7rpecrjSuT6pos, in the second and third epistles, is not to be taken as an official designation ; since, in the first epistle, there is no inscription at all, which in itself is a rather startling circumstance. We may suppose that the term irpecrflvTepos expressed in the epistles of John a degree of friendliness, and was chosen on account of the advanced age of the writer. The apostle Paul, also, in his friendly letter to Philemon, abstains from the title Apostle. The circumstances and events in the church, to which the second ejjistle alludes, coincide with those which are otherwise known to have happened in John's congregation. Here, also, are allusions to the dangers arising from the Gnostic heresy. The admonition, in verse 10, not to receive such heretics as Christian brethren, agrees with the ancient tradition, that John made haste to quit a public bath after Ce- rinthus the Gnostic entered it, declaring he was afraid the building would fall down. Bickii's Johannis erster Brief erkiart und an- geioendet mit historischem vorbericht und er- kldrenden Anmerkungen (Lucerne, 1S2S); and Liicke's Auslegung (2nd ed. 1836), will assist in interpreting the first Epistle of John. — A. T. [In the English language there are several works on separate portions of St. John's Gospel ; but the only one on the whole of it is in the Rev. Dr. Shepherd's Notes on the Gospels and Epistles of St. John, 4to. 1796; and the only separate work on the Epistles is Hawkins' Commentary JOHN, EPISTLES OF. on the Epistles of St. John, 1808. A translation of Lucke's Commentary on the Epistles of St. •John exists in the Biblical Cabinet, vol. xv.] JOHN, EPISTLES OF. In the canon of the New Testament, as at present received in the •universal church, there are three Epistles ascribed to the Apostle St. John, although none of them bears his name. The first of these ranks among the homologoumena, respecting which no doubts ever existed ; the two latter form part of the antilegomena, or controverted books. All three aTe included in the catholic Epistles [Epistles] . The First Epistle was known to Papias, bishop of Hieropolis in the second century, who was contemporary with the followers of the Apostles, and who, as we are informed by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 39), ' made use of testimonies from the First Epistle of St. John.' Polycarp also, in his Epistle to the Philippians (ch. vii.), a work which, as Liicke justly observes, cannot be proved to be either spurious or Interpolated, has the following remarkable passage, which seems evidently to refer to 1 John iv. 3 : ' Every one who does not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is antichrist.' Irena?us also, the disciple of Poly- carp, is stated by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. v. 8), to have extracted many testimonies from it (comp. IveiiEeus, Adv. Hcer. iii. 15. 5, 8, with 1 John ii. 18 ; iv. 1, 3 ; v. 1). Clement of Alexandria also (Stromata, ii. 389) observes that John in his larger Epistle uses the words, i If any man see his brother sin a sin,' &c. (1 John v. 16). Ter- tullian expressly cites John as the author of the passage, ' Which we have heard,' &c. (1 John i. 1); and Origen (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi. 25) observes, ' He [John] has also left us an Epistle containing a very few p, zeal aTpia. El rr)v, k. t. A. ' And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because Christ is truth. For there are three which bear witness in heaven, Father, Word, and Holy Spirit, and these three are one : and there are three which bear wit- ness in earth, Spirit, Water, and Blood. If we receive, &c.' (without the final clause.} The Dublin manuscript thus differs from the text of Erasmus's third edition in its remarkable omis- sion of the final clause, as well as in its omission of Kal before vSuip, while it differs still more from the text of the supposed Codex Britannicus, as described by Erasmus himself, when he observes (Annot. p. 697, ed. 4) : — ' Veruntamen, ne quid dissimulem, repertus est apud Anglos Graecus codex unus, in quo habetur quod in Vulgaris deest ; scriptum est enim in hunc modum :' — '6ti rpeis elo'tv ol p.aprvpovvres ev t$ ovpavtS, 7rar7ip, x6yos, Kal irvevpta, Kal ovroi ol rpeis ev elo'tv Kal rpeis elo'tv ptaprvpovvres ev rfj yfj, irvevpta, vSwp, Kal aTpta e i s *■ rr\v ptaprvpiav rwv avdpunrtov, k. t. A. ' And that I may not dis- semble, there has been discovered one manuscript in England, in which the clause is found which is wanting in the vulgar text of the Greek manu- scripts ; for it is thus written : " For there are three which bear witness in heaven, Father, Word, and Spirit, and these three are one ; and there are three bearing witness on earth, Spirit, Water, and Blood, into * the testimony of men," ' &c. ; while on another occasion he observes that e the British MS. had ovroi ol rpeis (these three), while the Spanish edition had only Kal ol rpeis (and the three), which was also the case in the Spirit, Water, and Blood ; that the British had 'iv eiffi (are one), the Spanish els rb 'iv elo'tv (agree in one), and finally that the British added to the earthly witnesses Kal ol rpeis els rb 'iv elcrt (and the three agree in one), which was not here added in the Spanish edition.' The Dublin manuscript is generally ascribed to the fifteenth or sixteenth century, and cannot possibly be older than the thirteenth, inasmuch as it con- tains the Latin chapters, which belong to this century. It is also the only Greek manuscript which follows the Vulgate in reading XpiarSs for irvevp.a. in the 6th, and Siptev for eo-ptev in the 20th verse of this chapter. It reads, however, Oeos, where the Vulgate reads quod (1 Tim. iii. 16); which shows that it is not a servile imitation of that version, as some have supposed. The clause has been also found, although in a form still more corrupt, in a manuscript in the Vatican (Cod. Ottobon. 298), of the fifteenth century, first col- lated by Dr. Scholz, of Bonn, as follows : — "On rpeis elo'tv ol p.aprvpovvres airb rov ovpavov, irarTjp, A6yos, Kal irvevpta aytov, Kal ol rpeis els rb ev elcriv Kal rpeis elo'tv ol ptaprvpovvres airb rr/s yrjs, rb irvevpta, Kal rb vSa>p, Kal rb alpa. El ri]v p.aprvp'tav, K.r. A. ' For there are three which bear witness from heaven, Father, Word, and Holy Spirit, and the three agree in one ; and there are three which * This is probably a misprint. JOHN, EPISTLES OF. bear witness from earth, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood. If we receive, &c.' The Latin Vulgate, which is annexed, also omits the final clause of the 8th verse in this copy. The above is the amount of Greek manuscript authority for this celebrated clause ; for although all the libraries in existence have been examined, no other copy has been found which contains a vestige of it.* Nor has it been once cited by a single Greek father, although abundant opportu- nities presented themselves for introducing it, which they could not have failed to avail them- selves of, had it existed in their copies ; but they have invariably cited the passage as it has been preserved in all the ancient manuscripts. It found its way, however, into the received text of (he Greek Testament, having been copied from. Erasmus's third, fourth, and fifth editions (1522, 1527, and 1535), with more or less of variation, into all Stephens's editions, from the third or folio edition of which it was adopted by Beza in all his editions, the first of which was published in 1565, and again by Elzevir, in his edition of 1624, to which his anonymous editor gave the name of Textus undique receptus. The follow- ing is the form which it finally assumed in these editions : — '-'On rpe?s elo'tv ol ptaprvpovvres ev T&3 ovpavcp, 6 7raT?/p, 5 \6yos, Kal rb aytov irvevp-a.' Kal ovroi ol rpeis ev elcrt' 8. Kal rpeis elo'tv ol ptap- rvpovvres ev rfj yrj, rb irvevpta, Kal rb vSwp, Kal rb atua' Kal ol rpeis els rb 'iv elo'tv. ' For there are three which bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one ; and there are three which bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and the three agree in one.' The earliest Greek form in which the disputed clause is found is contained in the Latin transla- tion of the Acts of the Council of Lateral), held in 1215, viz. : — "Ort rpeis elo'tv ol ptaprvpovvres ev ovpo.vw, 6 irar-qp, \6yos, Kal irvevpta aytov' Kal r out o t ol rpeis 'iv elo'tv, KaOcbs Se irpoo~r'tQ-r\o'i * '"' "": KaQibs ev rial Kc&d'q£tv evpiaKerai, ' For there are three which bear witness in heaven, the Father, Word, and Holy Spirit, and these three are one ; and it is immediately added 5? * * -.:= ag j(. js f0linci jn some copies.' The omitted passages, represented by the asterisks, are thus supplied in the original : — Statimque sub- jungitur, Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus, aqua, et sanguis ; et tres unum sunt ; sicut in coclicibus quibusdam invenitur. ' And it is immediately added, and there are three which bear witness in earth, the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood ; and these three are one, as is found in some copies ;' meaning that the final clause. et hi tres unum stmt (and these three are one), is found in some copies of the Latin Vulgate. The first Greek writer who absolutely cites any part of it is Manuel Calecas, a Dominican monk of the fourteenth century, who has the words — rpeis elo'tv ol ptaprvpovvres, 6 irarijp, 6 \6yos, Kal rb irvevpta rb aytov. ' There are three which bear witness, the Father, the Word, and the Holy * There are above one hundred and eighty Greek manuscripts of this Epistle, known to exist in various libraries, written between the fifth and fifteenth centuries, not one of which contains a vestige of the disputed clause. JOHN, EPISTLES OF. Spirit ;' and in the next century it is thus cited by Joseph Bryennius, a Greek monk : — Kal rb TTVZVfXa. icTTL fiapTVpOVV, OTL O X p LO~T 6 S i(TTLV 7} a\^d€ia. otl rpels elaiv ol /j.a.pTvpovvres iv Tcp ovpavS, 6 7rccTrjp, o Xoyos, Kal rb Ttvev/xa to wyiov Kal ovtol ol Tpe?s 'iv elevfj.d effTL rb jxapTvpovv, otl to tt v e v [/. a ko~TLV T) aXrj- Belcl. otl Tpets zlffLV ol jxapTvpovvTss, iv T<£ ovpavcp, 6 iraTTjp, /cat 5 Aoyos, Kal rb 'ay lov irvsvpca' k al ot Tpeis els to %v eicri. Kal Tpels elcTLV oi fxapTV- povvTes iirl tt}s yr/s, rb Trvev fj.a, Kal to vdiop, Kal to aT/xa. Ei t^v fxapTvplav, k. t. A. ' And it is the Spirit which beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three which bear witness in heaven, the Father, and the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and the three agree in one (as in Cod. Ottob.) ; and there are three which bear witness on earth, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood. If we receive, &c.' These editors have thus also omitted the final clause of the 8th verse, as well in the Greek as in their edition of the Latin Vulgate. For this latter omission they had the authority of several modern manuscripts of the Vulgate, and of the Council of Lateran, to which they add in a note that of Thomas Aqui- nas, who had charged the Arians with having forged this final clause, which had been inter- preted by the Abbot Joachim to have implied a unity of love and consent only, and not of essence. This final clause of the 8th verse, however, exists in all manuscripts of the Vulgate written before the thirteenth century, and in the printed editions published by authority of the Roman See since the Council of Trent, which have hi tres unum sunt. The clause of the three heavenly witnesses is also absent from all existing manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate, written between the eighth and tenth centuries, anterior to which date there is no manuscript of this version now in existence, con- taining the Catholic Epistles. Nor has any writer of the western church cited the passage before Cassiodorus at the close of the sixth century, although even the fact of Lis having done so is doubted by Porson (lit infra). There is, indeed, a preface to the canonical Epistles, bearing the name of St. Jerome, in which the omission of this clause is ascribed to ' false translators ;' but this, as we shall hereafter see, is a forgery. The clause is also wanting in all the manuscripts of the Syriac, Armenian, and other ancient versions. From the circumstance, however, of the clause in question having been cited by two north-west JOHN, EPISTLES OF. 189 African writers of the fifth century — Vigilius, Bishop of Thapsus (the supposed author of the Athanasian Creed), and Victor Vitensis, the his- torian of the Vandal persecution — it has been fairly presumed that it existed in their time in some of the African copies of the old Latin version, from whence, or from the citations of these writers, it may have found its way into the later manuscripts of the Vulgate. It is thus cited by Victor, as contained in the Confession of Faith drawn up by Eugenius, Bishop of Carthage :— Tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in ccelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus, et hi tres unum sunt. ' There are three which furnish testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.' Vigilius, however, cites it in so many various ways, that little reliance can be placed on his authority ; he transposes the clauses thus: — 'Johannes Evangelista ad Parthos : tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in terra, aqua, sanguis, et caro, et tres in nobis sunt, et tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in coelo, Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus, et hi tres unum sunt ' (John the Evan- gelist to the Parthians : There are three which furnish testimony in earth, the Water, the Blood, and the Flesh, and the three are in us ; and there are three which offer testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one). Contra Varimadum. And again, ' Tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in caelo, Pater, et Verbum, et Spiritus, et in Christo Jesu unum sunt ' (There are three which speak testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and the three are one in Christ Jesus). After this it is cited by St. Fulgentius, Bishop of Rusopa, in the beginning of the sixth century, but omitted in the same century by Facundus, Bishop of Hermione, from which it is at least evident that the copies in that age and country varied. But, at a much earlier period, the whole clause is thus cited by St. Augustine of Hippo : — Tres sunt testes, Spi- ritus, aqua, et sanguis, et tres unum sunt. ' There are three witnesses, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three are one.' Ter- tullian and Cyprian have been supposed, indeed, to have referred to the clause, but the proof of this depends on the proof of the previous fact, whether the clause existed or not in their copies. The citation of Cyprian, ' Qui tres unum sunt' (which three are one), and of Tertullian, ' et hi tres unum sunt ' (and these three are one), belong equally to the eighth as well as the seventh verse ; and there is nothing surprising in these fathers mystically applying the spirit, the water, and the blood, to signify the three persons of the Trinity, as was evidently done by Augustine at a later period (Cont. Maximin. iii. 22; and by Euche- rius, in the 5th century). It has been maintained that, although no an- cient Greek manuscripts now extant contain the clause, it must have existed in some of those which were used by the original editors, especially Robert Stephens. In his beautiful folio edition (1550) Stephens cites seven Greek manuscripts in the Catholic Epistles, of which he had three from the King's library. When any words are omitted in any of his manuscripts lie places in his text an obelus before the first word, and a small semicircle or crotchet after the last. In the passage in question the obelus is placed before iv Tip ovpavto, and the crotchet immediately alter 140 JOHN, EPISTLES OF. these words ; from which it has been inferred that these words only, and not the whole passage, were absent from his seven MSS. Subsequent in- quiries, however, undertaken by Lucas Brugensis, Father Simon, and the late Bishop Marsh, seem to leave no doubt that the crotchet was inserted in the wrong place ; for not one of the manuscripts now in the King's library contains the passage ; and one of Stephens's manuscripts, now in the university of Cambridge, is equally without it. Archdeacon Travis, indeed, denies the identity of this manuscript ; but Bishop Marsh (Letters to Travis) shows that the probability of their iden- tity is as two nonillions to a unity. Bishop Marsh's Letters to Travis have been in other respects truly designated as ' a mass of recondite and useful biblical erudition.' We have men- tioned this circumstance in order that the reader may fully understand the assertion of Mr. Gibbon, which we shall presently refer to : ' The three witnesses have been established in our Greek Testament, by the prudence of Erasmus, the honest bigotry of the Complutensian editors, the typographical fraud or error of Robert Stephens, in the placing of a crotchet, or the deliberate fraud or strange misapprehension of Theodore Beza.' The following are some of the principal literary controversies to which this famous clause has given rise, of which a more complete account will be found in Mr. Charles Butler's Horce Biblicce. The earliest was the dispute between Erasmus and Lee, afterwards Archbishop of York, and be- tween Erasmus and Stunica, one of the Complu- tensian editors. Erasmus was the first to suspect the genuineness of the preface to the Canonical Epistles above referred to, which ascribes the omission of the clause to false translators or transcribers. The genuineness of this preface, which led Sir Isaac Newton to charge St. Jerome with being the fabricator of the disputed clause (whereas it is certain that that learned Father was totally unacquainted with its existence) of the text, is now given up. It is considered in the Benedictine edition of Jerome's works to be a forgery of the 9th century (Burigni, Vie d"E- rasme, Paris, 1757, i. 372-381; ii. 163-175; Crit. Sac. vii. 1229). It was afterwards attacked by Sandius the Arian (Nucleus Hist. Ecclesiast. Cosmopoli 1669 ; and Interpret. Paradox, in Johan.). It was de- fended by Selden (De Syncdricis Ebrceor.) and ably attacked by the Roman Catholic Father Simon (Hist. Critique du Texte, 1680, &c. &c). It was defended again by Martin (pastor of the Re- formed church in Utrecht, 1717), who was replied to by Thomas Emlyn, the celebrated and much persecuted English Presbyterian (A full Inquiry, &c. 1715-1720), and by Caesar de Missy, French preacher in the Savoy. There are other able treatises on the same side by Dr. Benson, Sir Isaac Newton, and the learned printer Mr. Bowyer ; and in its favour by Smith (1690), Kettner, Calamy (1722), as well as by Bossuet (16 — ), and by Calmet (1720) in France, and Semler in Germany (1751). In Germany it was also attacked by Schmidt (Hist. Antiqua, 1774), and Michaelis, in his Introduction ; but found an able defender in the excellent Bengel (Gnomon, 1773), who conceived that the passage contained a divine internal evidence, but at the same time maintained that its genuineness depended on the transposition JOHN, EPISTLES OF. of the two verses so as to make the earthly witnesses precede the heavenly, according to the citation (supra) of Vigilius of Thapsus. (See Christian Remembrancer, vol. iv. p. 43, note.) The third and most important stage of the controversy may be said to commence with the note of Gibbon, above referred to, and which was attacked by Archdeacon Travis in three letters, 1784-1786. This publication gave rise to the most celebrated work wliich had yet appeared on the subject, Professor Porson's Letters (1788) : ' an eternal monument of his uncommon erudition, sagacity, and tact' (Horce Biblicce). Mr. Butler concludes his enumeration with the Observations of Dr. Adam Clarke on the text of the heavenly witnesses (1805). Our space will not allow us to enter into detail in regard to the principal publications which have appeared on the subject since this period. We shall only refer to a few of the principal. Gries- bach's Diatribe, at the close of the second volume ' of his celebrated critical edition of the Greek Tes- tament (1806), contains a complete and masterly view of the evidence on both sides ; but as this eminent critic had completely rejected the passage from the text, he met with an indefatigable adver- sary in this country in the late Bishop Burgess. See his Vindication (1821), and Introduction (1833). The writings of this prelate drew down many learned replies, but his most able and suc- cessful opponent was Dr. Turton, Regius Professor at Cambridge, and now Dean of Westminster (see especially Dean Turton's Vindication of the Literary Character of Professor Porson from the Animadversions of the Bight Rev. Thomas Burgess, D.D., Sfc, published under the name of Crito-Cantabrigiensis, 1827). A temperate vindi- cation of the genuineness of the passage had been published by the late Bishop Middleton (1808), in his work on the Greek article, which was also replied to by Dr. Turton (ut supi-a). The Memoir of the Controversy respecting the Heavenly Wit- nesses (1830), by the Rev. W. Orme, contains interesting critical notices of the principal writers on both sides of this much agitated question. In the year 1834, Dr. Wiseman renewed the controversy in favour of the clause, in Two Letters in the Catholic Magazine, vol. ii. and iii., reprinted at Rome, 1835. Dr. Wiseman's principal argu- ments are founded on the citations in African writers. He supposes that there were two ancient recensions of the Vulgate, the Italian, from which, as well as from theGreek MSS., the clause had been lost at an early period, and the African. He Sup- poses that this recension contained the clause which existed in the Greek MSS. from which it was made, and that these were of greater antiquity than any we can now inspect. He further maintains, after Eichhom, that, as the Greek language was suffi- ciently known in Italy to preclude the necessity of an early translation of the Latin in that country, Africa was most probably the birth- place of the primary Latin translation, and that consequently the African recension of this version is far superior in authority to the Italian. He therefore draws the inference that ' the existence of an African recension containing the verse gives us a right to consider as quotations passages of African writers (such as those of Cyprian and Tertullian) which in the works of Italian authors might be considered doubtful.' As, however, JOHN, EPISTLES OF. Augustine's acknowledged writings all evince his ignorance of the existence of this passage, Dr. Wiseman supposes that Augustine ordinarily made use of the Italian recension, which did not contain it. However he adduces the authority of a manuscript of the Speculum of Augustine preserved at Rome, in the monastery of the Holy Cross of Jerusalem, to prove that Augustine occa- sionally used the African recension, and that he has cited the identical passage as follows : — Item Johannis in jEpistola Item illic Tres sunt qui testimonium dicunt in coelo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus Sanctus, et hi tres Uiium sunt (cap. ii. fol. 19, De Distinct. Personarum). Dr. Wiseman supposes this manuscript, which is mentioned by Blanchini, to have been written in the seventh century. It has not, however, been proved to be a genuine work of Augustine. (See Wright's Appendix to his Translation of Seller's Hermeneutics, which contains some account of the state of the controversy respecting this clause to the year 1835; also Home's Introduction, 8th edition, vol. ii. pt. ii. p. 185, vol. iv. p. 44S-471). The most remarkable circumstance connected with the literary history of the clause, since this period, properly belongs to the history of editions of the New Testament. The clause appears in the principal printed editions of the New Testament before the time of Griesbach. These were the editions of Mill (1707), Bengel (1734), and Wetstein (1751) ; the two former of whom held it to be genuine. Since the time of Griesbach it has been generally omitted in all critical editions, and especially in that of the learned Roman Catholic Professor Scholz, of Bonn (1836), who, though following a different system of recensions from that of Griesbach, has altogether rejected the passage from the text as decidedly spurious, and as opposed to the authority of all authentic Greek MSS., of all ancient MSS., of the Latin Vulgate, and of the Greek, Latin, and Oriental Fathers. The venerable Bishop Burgess replied to Scholz three weeks before his death, in 1836. Various have been the opinions respecting the internal evidence for and against the genuineness of the passage. The advocates of the clause have generally maintained that the context re- quires its insertion, while its adversaries maintain that the whole force of the argument is destroyed by it. Liicke, one of the ablest modern com- mentators on St. John's writings, maintains that internal evidence alone would be sufficient to reject the passage, inasmuch (besides other rea- sons) as St. John never uses 6 war-lip and 6 \6yos as correlates, but ordinarily, like St. Paul, and every other writer of the New Testament, asso- ciates 6 vios with 6 TrarJip (ii. 22, 23 ; iv. 14 ; v. 9, 11, 20, &c), and always refers the Aa'yos in Christ to 6 deos, and not to 6 Trarfy. He unites with those critics who look upon the re- jected passage as an allegorical gloss, which found its way into the Latin text, where it has, 'ever since the fourth century, firmly maintained its place as a welcome and protective passage,' &c. He adds, however, that exegetical conscience will, in our age, forbid the most orthodox to apply this passage, even if it were genuine, for such a pur- pose, as kv eluai has quite a different sense from that which is required by the doctrine of the Trinity. Here Liicke fully coincides with the late Bishop Middleton (Greek Article). Liicke'a JOKTHEEL. 141 conclusion is a strong one. ' Either these words are genuine, and the Epistle, in this case, a pro- duction of the third or fourth century,- or the Epistle is a genuine work of St. John's, and then these words spurious.' The latest attempt to vindicate the genuineness of the passage is that of M. Gaussen of Geneva, in his Theopneustio, (1839). But his reasonings are founded on a palpable error — the interpolation of the words iu rfj yrj (in the earth) in the eighth verse, which he absolutely cites upon the authority of Griesbach's text, where they do not exist! The corresponding words in terra are, indeed, found in Hie present text of some MSS. of the Vulgate, and of some ancient writers, although wanting in the seventh verse. Luther uniformly rejected this clause from all his translations. It is absent from his last edi- tion (1546), published after his death, and was first inserted in the Frankfort edition of 1574, but again omitted in 1583, and in subsequent edi- tions. Since the beginning of the seventeenth cen- tury, with the exception of the Wittemberg edition of 1607, its insertion has been general. This was, however, in opposition to Luther's injunction. It is inserted in all the early English printed versions, commencing with Coverdale's in 1536, but is generally printed either in brackets or in smaller letters. It was, however, printed in the editions of 1536, 1552, and in the Geneva Bible (1557), without any marks of doubt. It found it3 way perhaps from Beza's Greek Testarrient into the then authorized English version. The fol- lowing is probably the oldest form extant, in which they appear in the English language, in a translation from the Vulgate earlier than the time of Wicliff: — ' For three ben that geven witness- ing in heven, the Fadir, the Word or Sone, and the Holy Ghoost, and these three ben oon ; and three ben that geven witnessing in erthe, the Spirit, Water, and Blood, and these three ben oon' [Scriptures, Holy]. — W. W. JOHN, EPISTLES, II. and III. [Antile- gomena, see John]. JOHN MARK. [Mark.] JOHN HYRCANUS. [Maccabees.] JOIADA (y^T1\ contraction of Jehoiaba, which see), a high-priest of the Jews, successor to Eliashib, or Joashib, who lived under Nehemiab, about b.c. 434 (Neh. xiii. 28). JOKSHAN Qfflfc, foicler; Sept. 'U@v), se- cond son of Abraham and Keturah, whose sons Sheba and Dedan appear to have been the ancestors of the Sabaeans and Dedanites, who peopled a part of Arabia Felix (Gen. xxv. 2, 3) [Arabia]. JOKTAN (}Bj£, small ; Sept. 'leKrdv), one of the sons of Eber, a descendant from Shem (Gen. x. 25, 26), and the supposed progenitor of many tribes in Southern Arabia. The Arabians call him Kahtan, and recognise him as one of the principal founders of their nation. See Schultens, Hist. Imperii Joctandin. in Arabia Felice; Pocock, Spec. Hist. Arab. pp. 3, 38; Bochart's Phaleg. iii. 15 [Arabia]. JOKTHEEL (^Kflj?!, God-subdued; Sept. 'I€0ot)A). 1. A name given by King Azariah to the city Sela, or Petra, the capital of Arabia Petraea, 142 JONADAB. when he took it from the Edomites (2 Kings xiv. 7) [Petra]. 2. There was also a city of this name in the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv. 38). JONADAB pW, contraction of ^liT, God-impelled ; Sept. 'IcopaSajS). 1. A nephew of David, a crafty person, whose counsel suggested to his cousin Amnon the means by which he accomplished his abominable design upon his half-sister Tamar (2 Sam. xiii. 4, 5). 2. A son or descendant of Rechab, the pro- genitor of those nomadic Rechabites, who held themselves bound by a vow to abstain from wine, and never to relinquish the nomadic life. The principle on which the tribe acted may be considered elsewhere [Rechabites]. Jonadab was at the head of this tribe at the time when Jehu received his commission to exterminate the house of Ahab, and is supposed to have added to its ancient austerities the inhibition of wine. He was held in great respect among the Israelites generally: and Jehu, alive to the importance of obtaining the countenance and sanction of such a man to his proceedings, took him up in his chariot, when on his road to Samaria to complete the work he had begun at Jezreel. The terms of the colloquy which took place on this occasion are rather remarkable. Perceiving Jonadab, he saluted him, and called out, ' Is thine heart right, as my heart is with thy heart ?' Jonadab answered, ' It is.' Then said Jehu, ' If it be, give me thine hand.' And he gave him his hand, and was taken up into the chariot, Jehu inviting him to ' Come and see my zeal for the Lord' (2 Kings x. 15-17 ; Jer. xxxv. 6-10). It would seem that the Rechab- ites were a branch of the Kenites, over another branch of whom Heber was chief in the time of Deborah and Barak (Judg. iv. 11, 17) : and as it is expressly said that Jonadab went out to meet Jehu, it seems probable that the people of Samaria, alarmed at the menacing letter which they had received from Jehu, had induced Jonadab to go to meet and appease him on the road. His vene- rated character, his rank as the head of a tribe, and his neutral position, well qualified him for this mission ; and it was quite as much the in- terest of Jonadab to conciliate the new dynasty, in whose founder he beheld the minister of the divine decrees, as it was that of Jehu to obtain his concurrence and support in proceedings which he could not but know were likely to render him odious to the people. JONAH (ft? V ; Sept. 'Iccvas), the fifth in order of the minor prophets. No era is assigned to him in the book of his prophecy, yet there is little doubt of his being the same person who is spoken of in 2 Kings xiv. 25.' The Jewish doctors, with their usual puerility, have supposed him to be the son of the widow of Sarepta : ' Now by this I know,' said she to Elijah, ' that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the Lord in thy mouth is truth "' flDX (1 Kings xv ii. 24). The restored child was thenceforward named ""flON'p, a title which was to preserve the memory of his miraculous resus- citation (Hieron. Prcefat. in Jonani). His birth- place was Gath-hepher, in the tribe of Zebulon. Jonah flourished in or before the reign of Jero- boam II., and predicted the successful conquests, enlarged territory, and brief prosperity of the Israelitish kingdom under that monarch's sway. The oracle itself is not extant, though Hitzig has, JONAH. by a novel process of criticism, amused himself with a fancied discovery of it in. chaps, xv. and xvi. of Isaiah. Hitzig, Des Proph. Jon. Orakel. ueber Moab Kritisch-vindicrit, §c, Heidelberg, 1831. The book of Jonah contains an account of the prophet's commission to denounce Nineveh, and of his refusal to undertake the embassy — of the method he employed to escape the unwelcome task [Tarshish], and the miraculous means which God used to curb his self-willed spirit, and subdue his petulant and querulous disposition. The third and fourth chapters briefly detail Jonah's fulfilment of the divine command, and present us with another exemplification of his refractory temper. ' His attempt to flee from the ■ presence of the Lord must have sprung from a partial insanity, produced by the excitement of distracting motives in an irascible and melan- choly heart. The temerity and folly of the fugi- tive could scarcely be credited, if they had not been equalled by future outbreaks of a similar peevish and morbid infatuation. The mind of Jonah was dark and moody, not unlike a lake which mirrors in the waters the gloomy thunder- clouds which overshadow it, and flash over its sullen waves a momentary gleam. The history of Jonah is certainly striking and extraordinary. Its characteristic prodigy does not resemble the other miraculous phenomena re- corded in Scripture ; yet we must believe in its literal occurrence, as the Bible affords no indi- cation of being a mythus, allegory, or parable. On the other hand, our Saviour's pointed and peculiar allusion to it is a presumption of its reality (Matt. xii. 40). The opinion of the earlier Jews (Tobit xiv. 4 ; Joseph. Antiq. ix. 10. 2) is also in favour of the literality of the adventure. It re- quires less faith to credit this simple excerpt from Jonah's biography, than to believe the numerous hypotheses that have been invented to deprive it of its supernatural character, the great majority of them being clumsy and far-fetched, doing vio- lence to the language, ar.d despite to the spirit of revelation ; distinguished, too, by tedious adjust- ments, laborious combinations, historical conjec- ture, and critical jugglery. In vindication of the reality of this striking narrative, it may be argued that the allusions of Christ to Old Testament event9 on similar occasions are to actual occurrences (John iii. 14; vi. 48); that the purpose which God had in view justified his miraculous interpo- sition; that this miracle must have had a salutary effect both on the minds of the Ninevites and on the people of Israel. Neither is the character of Jonah improbable. Many reasons might induce him to avoid the discharge of his prophetic duty — < fear of being thought a false prophet, scorn of a foreign and hostile race, desire for their utter de- struction, a false dignity which might reckon it beneath his prerogative to officiate among uncir- cumcised idolaters ( Verschuir. Ojmsc. p. 73, &c; Alber, Institid. Hermen. Vet. Test. iii. 399, 407 ; Jahn, Introduction to the Old Testament, translated by S. Turner, pp. 372, 373, trans- lator's notes ; Budleus, Hist. Eccles. V. T. ii. 589, sqq. ; Laberenz, De Vera. lib. Jonce Interp. Fulda, 1836). Some, who cannot altogether reject the reality of the narrative, suppose it to have had a historical basis, though its present form be fan- ciful or mythical. Such an opinion is the evident result of a mental struggle between receiving it as JONAH. a real transaction or regarding it as wholly a fic- tion (Goldhorn, Excurs. z. B. Jon. p. 28 ; Fried- rischsen, Krit. Ueberblick der Ausichten B. Jon. p. 219). Grimm, in his Uebersetz, p. 61, regards it as a dream produced in that sleep which fell upon Jonah as he lay on the sides of the ship. The opinion of the famous Herman von der Hordt, in his Jonas in luce, &c. a full abstract of which is given by Rosenmiiller (Prolegom. in Jonam. p. 19), was, that the book is a historical allegory, descriptive of the fate of Manasseh, and Josiah his grandson, kings of Judah. The fancy of this eccentric author has found ample gratification. Tarshish, according to him, represents the kingdom of Lydia ; the ship, the Jewish republic, whose captain was Zadok the high-priest ; while the cast- ing of Jonah into the sea symbolized the temporary captivity of Manasseh in Babylon. We cannot say, with Rosenmiiller, that this theory deserves even the praise of ingenious fiction. Others regard this book as an allegory, such as Bertholdt and Rosenmiiller, Gesenius, and Winer — an allegory based upon the Phoenician Mythus of Hercules and the Sea-monster. Less, in his tract, Von Historischen Styl der Urwelt, sup- posed that all difficulty might be removed by imagining that Jonah, when thrown into the sea, was taken up by a ship having a large fish for a figure-head — a theory somewhat more pleasing than the rancid hypothesis of Anton, who fancied that the prophet took refuge in the interior of a dead whale, floating near the spot where he was casr overboard (Rosen. Prolegom. in Jon. p. 328). Not unlike the opinion of Less is that of Charles Taylor, in his Fragments affixed to Calmet's Dic- tionary, No. cxlv., that yi signifies a life-pre- server, a notion which, as his manner is, he endea- vours to support by mythological metamorphoses founded on the form and names of the famous fish-god of Philistia; De Wette regards the story as not. a true history, yet not a mere fiction ; its materials being derived from popular legends, and wrought up with the design of making a didactic work. But many regard it as a mere fiction with a moral design — the grotesque coinage of a Hebrew imagination. This opinion, variously modified, seems to be that of Semler, Michaelis, Herder, Staudlin, Eichhorn, Augusti, Meyer, Pareau, and Maurer. The plain, literal import of the narrative, being set aside with misapplied ingenuity, the supposed design of it has been very variously interpreted. Michaelis (Vbersetz d. N. T. part xi. p. 101) and Semler (Apparat. ad Lib. Vet. Test. Interpret. p. 271) supposed the purpose of the narrative to be the. injustice of that arrogance and hatred cherished by the Jews towards other nations. Eichhorn (Einleit. \ 577), and Jahn (Introduct. § 127) think the design was to teach the Jews that other people with less privileges excelled them in pious obedience. Kegel (Bebel d. A. und N. Test. vol. vii. p. 129, sqcp) argues that this episode was meant to solace and excite the pro- phets under the discharge of difficult and danger- ous duties ; while Paulus {Memorabilia, vi. 32, sqq.) maintains that the object of the author of Jonah is to impress the fact that God remits pu- nishment on repentance and reformat ion. Similar is the idea of Kimchi and Pareau (Inteipretation of Old Testament, Biblical Cabinet, No. xxv. p. 263). Krahmer thinks that the theme of the JONAH. 143 writer is the Jewish colony in its relation to the Samaritans (Des B. Jon. Krit. untersucht, p. 65). Maurer {Comment, in Proph. Min.) adheres to the opinion which lies upon the surface, that it inculcates the sin of not obeying God, even in pro- nouncing severe threatenings on a heathen people; and lastly, Koester (Die Propheten des A. mid N. Test, Leipz. 1S39) favours the malignant in- sinuation that its chief end was to save the credit of the prophets among the people, though their predictions against foreign nations might not be fulfilled, as Nineveh was preserved after being menaced and doomed. These hypotheses are all vague and baseless, and do not merit a special refutation. Endea- vouring to free us from one difficulty they plunge us into others yet more intricate and perplexing. Much profane wit has been expended on the mira- culous means of Jonah's deliverance, very unne- cessarily and very absurdly ; it is simply said, ' The Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah.' Now the species of marine animal is not defined, and the Greek ktjtos is often used to specify, not the genus whale, but any large fish or sea-monster. All objections to its being a whale which lodged Jonah in its stomach from its straitness of throat, or rareness of haunt in the Mediterranean, are thus removed. Hesychius explains ktjtos as 6aXa, ' I form '), and may be fitly rendered by the English word 'artificer' or ' artizan,' signifying anyone that labours in the fabrication (faber in Latin) of articles of ordinary use, whatever the material may be out of which they are made. Accord- ingly, sometimes it denotes a smith as well as a carpenter or joiner, and in the Septuagint the addi- tional term ' iron ' (aiS-qpov) or ' wood ' (£uAo>v) is employed, in order to denote its specific appli- cation. If some doubt may exist whether 'car- penter ' is the necessary rendering of the word when applied to Josejjh, yet there is no impro- priety in that rendering, for not seldom the word, when used without any explanatory addition, has that signification. Schleusner (in voe.) asserts that the universal testimony of the ancient church represents our Lord as being a carpenter's son. This is, indeed, the statement of Justin Martyr (Dial, cum Try phone, § 88), for he explains the term t4kto)v, which be applies to Jesus, by saying that he made aporpa no\ Qvyd, ploughs and yokes ; but Origen, in replying to Celsus, who indulged in jokes against the humble employment of our Lord, expressly denied that Jesus was so termed in the Gospels (see the passage cited in Otho's Justin Martyr, torn. ii. p. 306, Jenas, 1843) — a declaration which suggests the idea that the copies which Origen read differed from our own ; while Hilarius, on Matthew (quoted in Simon's Dic- tionnaire de la Bible, i. 691), asserts, in terms which cannot be mistaken, that Jesus was a smith (ferrum igne vincentis, massamque formantis, etc.). Of the same opinion was the venerable Bede ; while others have held that our Lord was a mason, and Cardinal Cajetan, that he was a goldsmith. The last notion probably had its origin in those false associations of more modern times which disparage hand-labour. Among the ancient Jews all handicrafts were held in so much honour, that they were learned and pursued by the first men of the nation. Jewish tradition (Rieros. Schaph. s. 14) names the father of Jesus fcO'HIiQ, Phenedira, and repre- sents him (Orig. c. pels. i. 32) as a rough soldier, who became the father of Jesus, after Mary was betrothed to Joseph. Another form of the legend sets hirn forth ( Toled Jeschu, p. 3, ed. Wagenseil ; Epiphan. Hear. 78. 7) under the name of Pan- dira. Christian tradition makes Joseph an old man when first espoused to Mary (Epiphan. User. 78. 7), being no less than eighty years of age, and father of four sons and two daughters. ' Theophy- lact, on Matt. xiii. 55, says that Jesus Christ had brothers and sisters, all children of Joseph, whom he had by his sister-in-law, wife of his brother Cleophas, who having died without issue, Joseph was obliged by law to marry his widow. Of the JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA. sons, James, the brother of the Lord, was, he states, the first bishop of Jerusalem. Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. ii. 1) agrees in substance with Theophylact; so also does Epiphanius, eliding that Joseph was fourscore years old when he married Mary. Jerome, from whom it appears that the alleged mother's name was Eseha, op- poses this tradition, and is of opinion that what are termed the brothers of Jesus were really his cousins. The painters of Christian antiquity con- spire with the writers in representing Joseph as an old man at the period of the birth of our Lord — an evidence which is not to be lightly rejected, though the precise age mentioned may be but an approximation to fact. Another account (Niceph. ii. 3) gives the name of Salome as that of Joseph's first wife, who was related to the family of John the Baptist. It is not easy to determine when Joseph died. That event may have taken place before Jesus entered on his public ministry. This has been argued from the fact, that his mother only ap- peared at the feast at Cana in Galilee. The premises, however, hardly bear out the inference. With more force of argument, it has been .alleged (Simon, Diet, de la Bible") that Joseph must have been dead before the crucifixion of Jesus, else he would in all probability have appeared with Mary at the cross. Certainly the absence of Joseph from the public life of Christ, and the absence of reference to him in the discourses and history, while ' Mary ' and ' His brethren ' not unfrequently appear, afford evidence not only of Joseph's death, but of the inferior part which, as the legal father only of our Lord, Joseph might have been expected to sustain. So far as our scanty ma- terials enable us to form an opinion, Joseph appears to have been a good, kind, simple-minded man, who, ■while he afforded aid in protecting and sustaining the family, would leave Mary unrestrained to use all the impressive and formative influence of her gentle, affectionate, pious, and thoughtful soul. Those who may wish to pursue this subject in its details, we refer to the following works : — J. T. Meyer, Num Jos. tempore Nativ. C. faerit senex decrepitus ; Hist. Joseph, fabri lignar., Arab. ed. G. Wallin, a Latin translation of which may be found in Fabricii Pseudepigr. i. 309. The traditions respecting Joseph are collected in Act. Sanct. iii. p. 4, sq. ; there is a Life of Joseph written in Italian by Affaitati. — J. R. B. JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA. The name Arimathea denotes probably the place where Joseph was born, not that where he resided. We make this remark because Michaelis (Begrabniss- und auferstehungs gesch. Christi, p. 44, trans- lated into English) states it as his opinion that it was unlikely that Joseph possessed a burial- place in or near Jerusalem, since that city was not his ordinary abode. So easy is it to be led away by modern associations in interpreting the Scripture, that even a man of Michaelis' learn- ing could allow Germany to overpower Palestine, and modern days to give their colouring to an- cient ones, and thus hold that ' of Arimathea ' must of necessity denote the residence and not the birth-place of Joseph; whereas a little reflec- tion might have taught him that in a measure in bis own times, and fully so in the days of our Lord, such a form of speech indicated rather a man's birth-place than las customary abode. JOSEPH called BARSABAS. Arimatliea lay in the territory of Benjamin, on the mountain range of Ephraim, at no great distance south of Jerusalem (Josh, xviii. 25 ; Judg. iy. 5), not far from Gibeah (Judg. xix. 13 ; Isa. x. 29 ; Hos. v. S). Joseph was a secret disciple of Jesus — e an honourable counsel 'Jer (/SouAei/rijs), who waited for the kingdom of God-' (Mark xv. -13), and who, on learning the death of our Lord, ' came and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus.' Pilate having learned from the centurion, who commanded at the execution, that ' Jesus was actually dead,' gave the body to Joseph, who took it down and wrapped his deceased Lord in fine linen which he had purchased for the pur- pose ; after which lie laid the corpse in a sepul- chre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre (Mark xv. 43, sq.). From the parallel jmssages in Matthew (xxvii. 58, sq.), Luke (xxiii. 50, seq.), and John (xix. 38, seq.), it appears that the body was pre- viously embalmed at the cost of another secret disciple, Nicodemus, and that the sepulchre was new, ' wherein never man before was laid ;' also that it lay in a garden, and was the property of Joseph himself. This garden was ' in the place where Jesus was crucified.' Luke describes the character of Joseph as ' a good man and a just,' adding that ' lie had not consented to the counsel and deed of them,' i. e. of the Jewish authorities. From this remark it is clear that Joseph was a member of the Sanhedrim : a conclusion which is corroborated by the epithet 'counsellor,' applied to him by both Luke and Mark. Whether or not Joseph was a priest, as Lightfoot (Hor. Heb. p. 669) thought, there is not evidence to determine. Various opinions as to his social condition may be found in Thiess (Krit. Comment, ii. 149). Tradition represents Joseph as having been one of the Seventy, and as having first preached the Gospel in our own country (Ittig, Diss, cle Pat. Apostol. § 13 ; Assemani Biblioth. Orient, iii. 1. 319, sq.). For an attempt to fix the precise spot where Jesus died and was buried, see the article Golgotha. — J. R. B. JOSEPH called BARSABAS was one of the two persons whom the primitive church, im- mediately after the resurrection of Christ, nomi- nated, praying that the Holy Spirit would show which of them should enter the apostolic band in place of the wretched Judas. On the lots being cast, it proved that not Joseph, but Mat- thias, was chosen. Joseph bore the honourable surname of Justus, which was not improbably given him on account of his well-known probity. He was one of those who had 'companied with the Apostles all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out amongst them, beginning from the baptism of John,' until the ascension (Acts i. 15, sq.). Tradition also accounted him one of the Seventy (Euseb, Hist. Eccles. i. 12). The same historian relates (iii. 39), on the authority of Papias, that Joseph the Just 'drank deadly poison, and by the grace of God sustained no harm.' It has been main- tained that he is the same as Joses sumamed Barnabas, mentioned in Acts iv. 36; but the manner in which the latter is characterized seems to point to a different person ( Ileinrichs, On Acts i. 23 ; Ulimann, in the Theohij. Stud, unci Kriti/c, i. 377).— J. 11. B. JOSHUA. 153 1. JOSES ('Icotnjs), son of Mary and Cleopas, and brother of James the Less, of Simon and of Jude, and, consequently, one of those who are called the 'brethren' of our Lord (Matt. xiii. 55 ; xxvii. 56; Mark vi. 3; xv. 40, 47). [James; Jude]. He was the only one of these brethren who was not an apostle — a circumstance which has given occasion to some unsatisfactory conjecture. It is perhaps more remarkable that three of them were apostles than that the fourth was not. 2. JOSES [Barnabas]. JOSHUA. The' name J^inS gB>n», or J?-1K^, is rendered by Josephus, the Septuagint, and the New Testament, 'Itjctovs. In the same manner is spelt the name of the author of the apocryphal book Ecclesiasticus. This is the name of four persons in the Old Testament, and means lohose salvation is Jehovah (compare the German name Gotthilf). The most distinguished of the four persons, so called, who occur in the Old Testament, is Joshua the son of Nun, of the tribe of Ephraim, the assistant and successor of Moses. His name was originally yt^lH, salva- tion (Num. xiii. 8) ; and it seems that the subse- quent alteration of it by Moses (Num. xiii. 16) was significant, and proceeded on the same prin- ciple as that of Abram into Abraham (Gen. xvii. 5), and of Sarai into Sarah (Gen. xvii. 15). According to the Tsemach David, Joshua was born in Egypt, in the year of the Jewish era 2106 (b.c. 1037). In the Bible he is first men- tioned as being the victorious commander of the Israelites in their battle against the Amalek- ites at Rephidim (Exod. xvii. 8-16). He dis- tinguished himself by his courage and intel- ligence during and after the exploration of the laud of Canaan, on which occasion he repre- sented his tribe, which was that of Ephraim (Num. xiii., xiv\). Moses, with the divine sanc- tion, appointed him to command the Israelites, even during his own lifetime (Num. xxvii. 1^-23 ; Deut. iii. 28 ; xxxi. 23). After the death of Moses he led the Israelites over the Jordan, forti- fied a cam]) at Gilgal (Josh. ix. 6 ; x. 6-43), conquered the southern and middle portions of Canaan (vi.-x.), and also some of the northern districts (ix.). But the hostile nations, although subdued, were not entirely driven out and de- stroyed (xiii. ; xxiii. 13 ; Judg. i. 27-35). In the seventh year after entering the land, it was distributed among the various tribes, which then commenced individually to complete the con- quest by separate warfare (xv. 13, sq. ; xvi. 10; xvii. 12, sq.). Joshua died 110 years old (b.c. 1427), and was buried at Timnalh-serah (Josh, xxiv.), on Mount Ephraim. According to the Arclia-ologia or Antiquities of Josephus (v. 1. 29), Joshua commanded the Jews twenty-five years, but, according to other Jewish chronologers, twenty-seven years. The Tsemach David, on the years of the Jewish era 24S9 and 2196, remarks : — ' It is written in the Seder Glum that Joshua judged Israel twenty-live years, commencing from the year "2 i^S, immediately from the death of Moses, to the year 25X6. This, however, would not be known to us but for cabbalistic tradi- tion, but in some degree also by reasoning,' &c« Hottinger (Smegma, p. 469), says : — 'According to the Midrash^ Rabab was ten years old when the Israelites l«ft Egypt; she played the whore 154 JOSHUA. JOSHUA. during the forty years in which the Israelites were in the desert. She became the wife of Joshua, and eight prophets descended from her, viz. Jeremiah, Mahasia, Hanamael, Shallum, Baruch, Ezekiel. Some say also that Huldah the prophetess was her descendant.' Some chro- nologers have endeavoured to reduce the rule of Joshua to seventeen, asid others to twenty-one years. There occur some vestiges of the deeds of Joshua in other historians besides those of the Bible. Procopius mentions a Phoenician inscrip- tion near the city of Tingis in Mauritania, the sense of which in Greek was : — ' U/xeis ierfxev ol epvydvres airb irpocriintov 'lycrov rov Avcttov vlov Nan?) — ' We are those who fled before the face of Joshua the robber, the son of Nun ' (De Bell. Vandal, ii. 10). Suidas (sub voce Xavaw): — rjjji.e?s ifffiev Xamvcuoi ovs iSico^ev 'l-qcrovs o Atjct^s — ' We are the Canaanites whom Joshua the robber persecuted/ Compare Fabricii Codex Pseudepigraphus Veteris Testamenti, i. S89, sq., and the doubts respecting this statement in Dale, De Origine et Progressu Idolatries, p. 749, sq- A letter of Shaubech, "plE?, king of Armenia Minor, in the Samaritan book of Joshua (ch. xxvi.), styles Joshua 7int?p?K 3H/K, lupus percussor, ' the murderous wolf;' or, according to another reading in the book Juchasin (p. ] 54, f. 1), and in the Shalsheleth Rakkabbalah (p. 96), miny 3frU, lupus vespertinus, ' the evening wolf ' (comp. Hab. i. 8 ; Hottinger, Historic, Orientalis, Tiguri, 1651, p. 40, sq. ; Budder, Hist. Eccles. p. 964, sq.). A comparison of Hercules, according to the Phoenician and Greek mythology, with Joshua has been attempted by Hercklitz (Quod Hercules idem sit ac Josua, Lipsiee, 1706, 4to.) The book of Joshua is so called from the per- sonage who occupies the principal place in the nar- ration of events contained therein, and may be considered as a continuation of the Pentateuch. It commences with the word TV), which may be ren- dered thereupon it happened. Books beginning with what Dr. Samuel Lee calls the illative van, are to be regarded as continuations of earlier works. The Pentateuch, and especially Deute- ronomy, are repeatedly referred to in the book of Joshua, the narration of which begins with the death of Moses and extends to the death of Joshua, embracing a chronological period of some- what less than thirty years. The subject of the book is thus briefly stated in ch. i. 5, 6 : ' There shall not any man be able to stand before thee all the days of thy life. As I was with Moses, so I will be with thee : I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee. Be strong and of a good courage ; for unto this people shalt thou divide for an inheritance the land which I sware unto their fathers to give them.' In these two verses is also indicated the division of the book into two princi- pal portions, with reference to the conquest and the distribution of the land of Canaan. The conquest is narrated in the first twelve, and the distribution in the following ten chapters. In the last two chapters are subjoined the events subsequent to the distribution up to the death of Joshua. The history of the conquest of Canaan is a series of miracles, than which none more remarkable are recorded in any part of sacred history. The passage into the Promised Land, as well as' that out of Egypt, was through water. Jericho was taken not by might, but by the falling of the walls on the blast of the trumpets of seven priests ; and in the war against Gibeon the- day was prolonged to afford time fdr the completion of the victory. It is generally granted that the first twelve chapters form a continuous whole : although the author in ch. x. 13, refers to another work, he not merely transcribes but intimately combines the quotation with the tenor of his narration. It is certain that there sometimes occur episodes which seem to interrupt the chronological connection, as for instance the portion intervening between chs. i., ii., and iii. 1. Especially it has been asserted that the whole of the second chapter is an episode interposed between chapters i. and iii. ; but it belongs to the nature of detailed historical works to contain such episodes. It would not be diffi- cult to select analogous instances from profane works which are considered to be finished models of historiograph y. Even in writers who have most carefully digested their materials, such as Thucydides, Tacitus, Gibbon, Hume, Robertson, and others, we meet occasionally with surjh epi- sodes ; and it may be truly said that, from the nature of history in general, occasional digres- sions must occur ; consequently it is an indica- tion of thoughtless assertion when those which are found in the book of Joshua are declared to prove a variety of authorship, if anything is meant be- yond the truism, that no historical writer ori- ginates, but only communicates, historical truth. We return to our subject, and assert that if the facts contained in the second chapter were to be related at all, they stand very properly between those of the first and third chapters, and that it would be difficult to find for them a more fitting place. The whole tenor of the first twelve chapters bespeaks an eye-witness who bore some part in the transactions. Compare the expression "1312V, we passed over, in ch. v. 1, where the kri has D*")2y, Sept. o~iafioiveiv avrovs, Vulg. transirent. The Chaldee paraphrase in the Targum of Jona- than has also "|"Gjn *iy, until tiiex p>assed over, and so the Syriac and Arabic. On account of this kri and the various ancient renderings, which substitute the third for the first person, we must not lay too much stress on the usual reading, although we deem it correct, corresponding as it does to \y?, to us, in the sixth verse. But we rely less on such isolated expressions than on the circumstantial vividness of the narrative, which clearly indicates that the writer was an eye- witness. This feature is so striking that Van Herweden, who, in his Disputatio de libro Josuce, sive de diversis ex quibus constat Josuce liber monumentis, deque estate qua eorum vixerunt auctores, GroningsD, 1^26, has endeavoured to dissect the book of Joshua into ten different monumenta, or original documents, nevertheless, in page 123, says, in reference to Josh. vi. 25 : — ■ alterutrum esse verum oportet : aut impostor haec scripsit; asqualem se esse rerum gestarum prse se ferens, quem tamen non esset, aut reveua scripsit iEQUALis — ' This was written either by an impostor who falsely pretended that he was a contemporary of the events related, or a contemporary really wrote it.' JOSHUA. The authority ascribed to the book of Joshua by the Apostles, compels us to embrace the latter horn of this dilemma. Therefore we maintain that the first twelve chapters were written by a contemporary of the events recorded, and most probably by Joshua himself, towards the close of his life. The statement that, the monuments which he erected were extant to this day, indicates that he did not promulgate the book immediately after the events narrated (comp. iv- 9 ; vii. 26 ; viii. 28, 29 ; x. 27). The 'book could not have been written very long after the time of Joshua, be- ■ cause we find that Rahab was still alive when it was composed (vi. 29). The section from chapter xiii. to xxii. inclusive, which contains an account of the distribution of the land, seems to be based upon written documents, in which the pro- perty was accurately described. That this was the case is likely not merely on account of the peculiar nature of the diplomatic contents by which this ' Doomsday Book ' is distinguished from the preceding part of Joshua, but also on account of the statement in chapter xviii. 4, where Joshua says to the children of Israel, ' Give out from among you three men from each tribe : and I will send them, and they shall rise, and go through the land, and describe it (niYlK 13 71 3 '•l) according to the inheritance of them ; and they shall come again to me.' Compare verse 6, 1 Ye therefore shall describe the land (0030 ^"IXH ]"IX) into seven parts.' Compare also verses 8 and 9, ' And the men arose and went away ; and Joshua charged them that went to describe the land, saying, Go, and walk through the land, and describe it, and come again to me, that I may here cast lots for you before the Lord in Shiloh. And the men went and passed through the land, and described it by cities into seven parts in a book, and came again to Joshua to the host at Shiloh.' It seems that the author of this cection, following the ' Doomsday Book ' com- piled ky the body, to which each tribe sent three representatives, furnished a more accurate de- scription than was contained in the book com- piled under Joshua's direction. It may thus be explained how, when the various towns mentioned are summed up, they seem to be more than the towns introduced into the lists of the possessions of [he separate tribes, and vice versa. This circum- stance cannot be explained by supposing a corrup- tion of the Hebrew text, since the text in the book of Joshua is particularly correct. However Judah had more towns than are mentioned in chapter xv. Zabulon had more towns than are mentioned in chapter xix. 15. Naphtali had more towns than are mentioned in xix. 35-39. This discrepancy arose not merely from new towns springing up, but also from the fact, that it was unnecessary to specify in the ' Doomsday Book ' all the inferior localities of the various tribes, especially since the constant addition subjoined to the names of the more important towns (jrTHVm, literally and their inclosures, usually translated and their villages') obviates all quibbles. Although there is a degree of uniformity in the commencement and close of the descriptions of the various tribes, there is a considerable differ- ence in the contents. There is no little variety in (he arrangement and order of the notices con- cerning each tribe. The boundaries are stated sometimes with greater, sometimes with less pre- JOSHUA. 155 cision ; and in the description of the tribe of Issachar (xix. 17-23), they are omitted altogether. Such discrepancies in the mode of description will be found particularly striking on comparing chapters xiii. and xiv. with xviii. and xix. Hence we infer that the original documents from which these chapters were compiled differed considerably in form, and that the compiler did not feel au- thorized, in his manifest endeavour after unifor- mity, to introduce any changes in the contents. The list of towns granted to the Levites in Josh. xxi. differs from that in 1 Chron. vi. 39-66 so much that we must suppose the latter to con- tain abstracts from a source different from that in the book of Joshua. That a change of cir- cumstances might demand changes in such lists becomes evident, if we consider the fate of indi- vidual cities. For instance, Zikjag was given to the tribe of Simeon (Josh. xix. 5) ; nevertheless we read in 1 Sam. xxvii. 6, that Achish gave Ziklag to David, and therefore ' Ziklag pertaineth to the kings of Judah unto this day.' The town of Nob does not occur in the list of Levitical towns in the book of Joshua, but in the days of Saul it is styled O'OnDn *T% city of the priests. All this abund- antly proves that there took place changes in regard to particular places which required corre- sponding changes in the lists written at various periods. Since the book of Joshua contains also a de- scription of the territories of Reuben, Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh, situated on the left bank of the Jordan, which tribes entered into pos- session before the death of Moses, the Pentateuch itself may be considered as one of the sources from which the second part of the book of Joshua- has been compiled. That the author of the book of Joshua derived part of his information from the Pentateuch is evident, if we compare Deut. xviii. 1, 2, and Num. xviii. 20, with Josh. xiii. 14, 33 ; xiv. 4. Even the unusual form *£>&$ is repeated in Joshua. Compare also Num. xxxi. 8, with Josh. xiii. 21 and 22. The author of the book of Joshua frequently repeats the statements of the Pentateuch in a more detailed form, and mentions the changes which had taken place since the Pentateuch was written. Compare Num. xxxiv. 13 aud 14, with Josh. xiii. 7, sq. ; Num. xxxii. 37, with Josh. xiii. 17, sq. ; Num. xxxv. with Josh. xxi. There is also considerable similarity between the following passages in the books of Joshua and Judges: — Josh. xiii. 4, Judg. iii. 3; Josh. xv. 13, sq., Judg. i. 10, 20; Josh. xv. 15-19, Judg. i. 11-15; Josh. xv. 62, Judg. i. 21 ; Josh. xvi. 10, Judg. i. 29; Josh. xvii. 12, Judg. i. 27; Josh. xix. 47, Judg. xviii. The book of Joshua Seems to exp'lain the text of the book of Judges by brief notices ; as, for instance, the names Shesha, Achiman, and Talmai (Josh. xv. 14), by pJ^H *J3 and p3i?n '•Tl?'1 (comp. Judg. i. 13), and makes use of more regular grammatical forms, such as JTl vj? and nVfinn, instead of the more unusual foifms in the bonk of Judges, JYvJJ and IVDI"!!"!. For these and other equally inconclusive reasons, even H'avernick asserts that the second part Of the book of Joshua was written after the book of Judges. Hiivcrnick part ici daily urges that the fact mentioned in. Tosh. xix. 47, happened according to Judges xviii. 2, after the death of Joshua, and 156 JOSHUA. that the private expeditions of separate tribes against the inhabitants of the land of Canaan commenced, according to the express statement of the book of Judges, only after the death of Joshua. These assertions of Ha.vernick are not sufficiently supported by the sacred text. We certainly learn from the book of Judges that the private expedi- tions against the Canaanites were especially fre- quent subsequently to the death of Joshua, but it is nowhere stated that no such expedition hap- pened before the death of Joshua. On the con- trary, we read in Josh. xvii. 15, that Joshua- replied to the children of Joseph, who complained that their territory was not proportionate to their numbers, ' Get thee up to the wood-country, and cut down for thyself there in the land of the Perizzites and the giants.' The whole position of the tribes would render it likely that such expeditions were as frequent as the hostile incursions of the Dutch boors at the Cape of Good Hope are into the territories of the Bushmen, Hottentots, and Cafi'res ; which incur- sions, if they do not lead to permanent possession, are frequently repeated under similar circum- stances. If we take this into consideration it must appear very doubtful, whether the facts men- tioned in Josh. xix. 47, and Judg. xviii. 2, are one and the same ; and even if they are admitted to be so, the priority of the book of Judges does not necessarily follow. The discourses of Caleb, Joshua, and Phinehas, recorded in Josh. xiii. 1-6; xiv. 6-15; xvii. 14 ; xviii. 22, are not contained in the above- mentioned sources, and are either derived from written documents, or are the condensations of a witness present at their delivery. It seems to have been the intention of the author of chapters xiii.-xxii. to furnish authentic records concerning the arrangements made by Joshua after the conquest of Canaan. Since we do not find in the subsequent history that the tribes, after the death of Joshua, disagreed among themselves about the ownership of the land, it would appear that the object of the book of Joshua, as a ' Dooms- day Book,' was fully attained. The circumstance that the book of Joshua contains many Canaan- itish names of places to which the Hebrew names are added, seems also to indicate that the second part originated in an early age, when neither the Canaanitish name was entirely forgotten, nor the Hebrew name fully introduced; so that it was expedient to mention both. In the last two chapters occur two orations of Joshua, in which he bids farewell to the people whom he had commanded. In chapter xxiv. 26, we read, ' And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God.' The expression, these loords, seems to refer only to his last ad- dress, and the subsequent resolution of the people to follow his example. We are here, however, expressly informed that Joshua did write this much ; and consequently, we deem it the more likely that he also committed to writing the other memorable events connected with his career, such as the conquest and the distribution of the land. Viewing all the circumstances together, we consider it highly probable that the whole book of Joshua was composed by himself up to the twenty- eighth verse of the last chapter ; to which a friendly hand subjoined some brief notices, con- tained in verses 29-33, concerning the death, age, JOSHUA. and burial of Joshua ; the continuance of his in- fluence upon the people ; the interment, in Shechem, of the bones of Joseph, which the chil- dren of Israel had brought from Egypt ; and the death and burial of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, whom his son Phinehas interred in his allotment on Mount Ephraim. We wish, however, to imi- tate the modesty of Hermann Witsius, who, in the second edition of his Miscellanea Sacra (p. 209), thus sums up the argument on this head : — ' It seems to me that the argumentation of Huet has not the weight of a real demonstration, who, from the words just quoted — " Joshua wrote all these words in the book of the law of the Lord " — makes the following inference : — " This certainly proves that Joshua, like Moses, wrote an account of his own doings, and that he subjoined his book to the Mosaical law, which is still its place." But I say that every attentive reader will easily perceive that in Josh. xxiv. 26 there is not men- tioned the whole history of Joshua, but only the solemn renewal of the covenant, and that it is by no means stated there that another volume should be subjoined to the volume of the law, but only that the re]3etition of the covenant was inscribed in the volume of the law. But the opposite argu- ments also are mostly such as might easily be refuted. Therefore I beg leave to withhold my decision.' The authority of the book of Joshua mainly rests upon the manner in which it is treated in other parts of the Bible. Besides the above allusions in the book of Judges, we find Joshua referred to in 1 Kings xvi. 34: — 'In his days did Hiel the Bethelite build Jericho : he laid the foundation thereof in Abiram, his first-born, and set up the gates thereof in his youngest son Segub, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by Joshua the son of Nun.' (Comp. Josh. vi. 26.) The second and third verses of Psalm xliv. contain a brief summary of the whole book of Joshua : — ' Thou didst drive out the heathen with thy hand, and plantedst them : thou didst afflict the people, and cast them out. For they got not the land in possession by their own sword, neither did their own arm save them : but thy right hand and thine arm, and the light of thy countenance, because thou hadst a favour unto them.' (Comjiare Psalm lxviii. 12-14 ; lxxviii. 54, 55 ; cxiv. 3 and 5, which refer to the book of Joshua.) Also, Hab. iii. 11 : ' The sun and moon stood still in their habitation,' &c. Heb. xiii. 5 : ' For he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.' (Compare Josh. i. 5.) Heb. xi. 31 : 'By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace ;' and James ii. 2o : ' Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot jus- tified by works, when she had received the mes- sengers, and had sent them out another way ?' (Compare Josh. ii. and vi. 22-25.) Acts vii. 45 : ' Which (the tabernacle) also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the pos- session of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers.' (Compare Josh. iii. 14.) Heb. xi. 30 : ' By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, after they were compassed about seven days.' (Compare Josh. vi. 17-23.) Heb. iv. 8 : ' For if Jesus [Joshua] had given them rest, then would he not afterwards have spoken of another day.' JOSHUA. The value ascribed to the book of Joshua will be variously estimated according to the theo- logical and philosophical system of the divines who have ventured, and who venture, to express their opinion on this subject. It is evident that writers who proceed on the supposition that nothing miraculous ever has happened, must, in consis- tency, declare the contents of the book of Joshua to be fabulous, mythical, unhistorical, and even immoral and wicked; while those divines who are convinced that miracles are possible, and have actually happened, rind no difficulty in ad- mitting the authority ascribed to the book of Joshua in the New Testament, where it is repeat- edly quoted. The chief stumbling-block has been the quotation from the book of Jasher re- specting the standing still of the sun and moon at the command of Joshua : but this subject has been already considered in the article Jasher. The inquiry respecting the author of the book of Joshua, led Carpzov to a result which he thus expresses in his Introduction, p. 155 : ' It is likely that Joshua himself committed to writing most of the contents of this book, although it cannot be said that he composed the whole book ; and it cannot be made out clearly whether Samuel, or some other pious person, composed the whole book, or only augmented and completed it by adding the events which happened after the death of Joshua.' Our investigations have led us to a more definite result; namely, that the book was written before the death of Rahab (vi. 26), but not immediately after the erection of monuments by Joshua, be- cause it is said that they exist until this day — ■ an observation winch indicates that they had been standing for some time. As, however, various opinions concerning the author, and concerning the so-called apparent contradictions of the book of Joshua, have occupied the attention of biblical scholars, so much so as to become themselves sub- jects of history, it is becoming that we furnish our readers with a brief survey of these rather incon- clusive lucubrations. It has been urged especially that the conquest of the whole country is ascribed to Joshua in some passages of this book, while in others, and in the book of Judges, it is stated that some portions were still to be subdued. To this we reply that Joshua conquered the whole country, so far as to render it possible for individual tribes and families gradually to complete its occupa- tion by private warfare. We read in x. 40, ' Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south ; and in xi. 16, 'Joshua took all that land, the hills, and all the south country.' It is urged that these passages strikingly contradict xiii. 4, where it is read, ' There remainetb yet very much land to be possessed from the south, all the land of the Canaanites unto Mearah, that beside the Sidoriians," &c. Here it has been overlooked, that the south country beside the Sidonians differs from the southern regions of Palestine. In a similar manner the distribution of the country ascribed to Joshua, has been said to be contradicted by subsequent distributions in the book of Judges; but we reply that the later dis- tribution in detail is perfectly consistent with an earlier general distribution. When the destruction of all the Canaanites is ascribed to Joshua, it is meant that none could JOSHUA. 157 stand in battle before him, and that he destroyed those whom he overcame. But this is not contra- dicted by the fact that some Canaanites kept out of the way, having taken refuge in their fastnesses, and that these gathered strength again after the days of Joshua. It has also been urged that Jericho and Ai, which Joshua destroyed, were at a later period inhabited again ; but this argu- ment seems to have no weight, and therefore re- quires no answer, the purpose of Joshua being fulfilled by the demolition of their fortifications. It is also doubtful whether (he new cities stood on the sites which the old ones occupied [J» richo]. The quotation from the book of Jasher (Josh. :;. 13) is said to be contradicted by 2 Sam. i. 18, where it appears that this book was written in the days of David. But this is by no means clear from the passage referred to; andeven if it. were so, it would seem that the book of Jasher was an anthologia, augmented in the days of David. Others have based upon this quotation the infer- ence that the book of Joshua was written after the times of David. De Wette, in his Einleitung (Berlin, 1S33, p. 219), asserts that the book of Joshua was written after the Babylonian captivity. The mention of the book of Jasher has given rise to some spurious compilations under that name, as well in Hebrew as in English. See the article Jasiier. The Samaritans, who for dogmatical purposes endeavoured to depreciate the authority of per-t sons mentioned in the latter books of the Old Testament, such as Eli, Samuel, Zerubbabel, and others, had no such interest to attack the person of Joshua. Eulogius, according to Photii Codex, p. 230, states : 1S>v 'SafxapeiTOiy -rb irXrfios ol /J.ev 'liiffovv rbv Navrj id^a^ov eivai Trepi ou M.oovcrris elire, irpocp^Tvjv T)g2v avaarrjaei Kvpios, etc. — ' The Samaritan multitude believes that Joshua, the son of Nun, is the person concerning whom Moses said, " The Lord will raise us up a prophet," ' &c. (Compare Lampe, Comment, in Evangelium Johannis, vol. i. p. 74S.) The Sama- ritans even endeavoured to exalt the memory of Joshua by making him the nucleus of many strange legends which they embodied into their Arabic book of Joshua, a work which seems to have been compiled in the middle ages, and is quoted by the Rabbinical chroniclers of that period, Sepher Juchasin, R. Samuel, Schullam (f. 154), Sehal- scheleth {Nakabbalah, p. 96), Hottinger (His- toric Orientalis, p. 40, sq.), Zunz (Gottesdicnst- liche Gcbr'uische der Juden, p. 140). Reland supposed that this book was written at an earlier period, and augmenred in the middle ages : but it is more likely that the whole is a late compi- lation. (Compare Johannis Henrici Hottingeri Historia Orientalis, p. 40, sq. ; and Hottingeri Smegma, p. 468.) The so-called book of Joshua of the Samaritans consists of compilations from the Pentateuch, our book of Joshua, the books of Judges, and of Samuel, intermixed with many Jewish legends. Its compiler pretends that it is translated from the Hebrew into Arabic, but it was probably originally written in Arabic, and manifestly after the promulgation of the Koran, which exercised a perceptible inlluence upon it. Compare Reland De Samaritanis, Dissertationes Miscellanea, ii. pp. 12 and 68. The audior of this compilation 158 JOSHUA. endeavours to prove that the Samaritans are Israelites, and he claims for them the celebrity of the Jews. He attempts to turn the traditions of Jewish history in favour of the Samaritans. By his account Joshua built the temple on Mount Gerizim, and there established public worship ; the schism between Jews and Samaritans com- menced under Eli, who, as well as Samuel, was an apostate and sorcerer ; after the return from the Babylonian exile, the Samaritan form of worship was declared to be the legitimate form ; Zernbbabel and his sacred books, which were cor- rupted, were authoritatively rejected ; Alexander the Great expressed his veneration, not for the Jews, but for the Samaritans ; these were op- pressed under the Emperor Adrian, but again obtained permission to worship publicly on Mount Gerizim. The whole book consists of a mixture of biblical history and legends, the manifest aim being to falsify facts for dogmatical purposes. This book terminates with the history of the Jewish war under Adrian. The only known copy of this book is that of Jos. Scaliger, which is now in the library at Leyden. Although the language is Arabic, it is written in Samaritan characters. Even the Samaritans themselves seem to have lost it. Huntington, in his Epis- tolce, London, 1701, p. 48, mentions that he could not find it at Nabulus, nor have subsequent in- quiries led to its discovery there. Besides this adulterated version of the history of Joshua, there exists still another in the Sama- ritan chronicles of Abul Phetach. See Acta Eriiditorum Lips., anni 1691, p. 167 ; Sclmur- rers Samaritanischer Briefwechsel, in Eich- horn's Repertorium, ix. 51 ; a specimen by Schnurrer, in Paulus's Neuem Repertorium, i. 117, sq. For further information see, besides the Intro- ductions of Eichhorn, De Wette, and Hiivernick, the following works : Josuce Historia illustrate/, ab Andr. Masio, Antverpiae, 157-1, fol. ; Sebas- t-iani Schmidt Pralectiones in viii. priora capita libri Josuce ; Johannis Clerici Commentarius in Josuam ; Johannis Drusii Annotationes in loca difficiliora Josuce ; A. J. Osiandri Commentarius in Josuam, Tubingse, 1681 ; Jacobi Bonfrerii Commentarius in Josuam, Judices, et Ruth, Paris, 1631, fol. ; Nic. Serarii Co?nmeniarius in libi-os Josuce, Judicum, Ruth, Regum, et Para- lipomenon, Mog. 1609, x. 2 vols. fol. ; Exege- tisches Ilandbuch des Alten Testamentes ; Erstes und drittes Stiick; Paul us Bliche, In das Buch Josua, in his Theologisch-exegetisches Conserva~ torium, ii. 119, sq. ; T. J, V. D. Maurer, Com- mentar iiber das Buch Josua, Stuttgart, 1831 ; Rosenmiiller in Josuam, Lipsise, 1833; George Bush, Notes on Joshua and Judges, New York, 1838. The other persons of this name in the Bible are : Joshua, a Beth-shemite (1 Sam. vi. 14, 18), an Israelite, the owner of the field into which the cart came which bore the ark on its return from the land of the Philistines. Joshua (2 Kings xxiii. 8), the governor of the city of Jerusalem at the commencement of the reign of Josiah. Joshua, the son of Josedec (Hagg. i. 1, 12, 14 ; Zech. iii. 1, 3, 9 ; vi. 11), a high-priest in the time of Haggai and Zechariah [Jeshua]. JOSIAH On»fc>N\ God-healed; Sept. 'Was), seventeenth king of Judah, and son of Amon, whom he succeeded on the throne in b.c. 698, at the early age of eight years, and reigned thirty- one years. As Josiah thus early ascended the throne, we may the more admire the good qualities which he manifested, seeing, as Coquerel remarks, ' qu'il est difficile de recevoir une bonne educa- tion sur le trone' ( Biographic Sacree, p. 305). Avoiding the example of his immediate prede- cessors, he ' did that which was right in the sight of the Lord, and walked in all the ways of David his father, and turned not aside to the right hand or to the left'' (2 Kings xxii. 1, 2; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 1, 2). So early as the sixteenth year of his age he began to manifest that enmity to idol- atry in all its forms which distinguished his character and reign ; and he was not quite twenty years old when he proclaimed open war against it, although more or less favoured by many men of rank and influence in the court and kingdom. He then commenced a thorough purification of the land from all taint of idolatry, by going about and superintending in person the operations of the men who were employed in breaking down idolatrous altars and images, and cutting down the groves which had been consecrated to idol- worship. His detestation of idolatry could not have been more strongly expressed than by ran- sacking the sepulchres of the idolatrous priests of former days, and consuming their bones upon the idol altars before they were overturn*.!. Yet this operation, although unexampled in Jewish history, was foretold 326 years before Josiah was born, by the prophet who was commissioned to denounce to Jeroboam the future punishment of his sin. He even named Josiah as the person by whom this act was to be performed ; and said that it should be performed in Betb-el, which was then a part of the kingdom of Israel (1 Kings xiii. 2). All this seemed much beyond the range of human probabilities. But it was performed to the letter ; for Josiah did not confine his pro- ceedings to his own kingdom, but went over a considerable part of the neighbouring kingdom of Israel, which then lay comparatively desolate, with the same object in view ; and at Beih-eL, in particular, executed all that the prophet had fore- told (2 Kings xxiii. 1-19; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 3-7, 32). in these proceedings Josiah seems to have been actuated by an absolute hatred of idolatry, such as no other king since David had manifested, and which David had scarcely occasion to manifest in the same degree. In the eighteenth year of his reign and the twenty-sixth of his age, when the laud had been thoroughly purified from idolatry and all that be- longed to it, Josiah proceeded to repair and beautify the temple of the Lord. In the course of this pious labour, the high-priest Hilkiah dis- covered in the sanctuary a volume, which proved to contain the books of Moses, and which, from the terms employed, seems to have been considered the original of the law as written by Moses. On this point there has been much anxious discussion and some rash assertion. Some writers of the German school allege that there is no external evidence — that is, evidence beside the law itself — that the book of the law existed till it was thus produced by Hilkiah. This assertion it is the less JOSIAH. necessary to answer here, as it is duly noticed in the art. Pentateuch. But it may be observed that it is founded very much on the fact that the king was greatly astonished when some parts of the law were read to him. It is indeed perfectly manifest that he had previously been entirely ignorant of much that lie then heard ; and he rent his clothes in consternation when he found that, with the best intentions to serve the Lord, he and all his people had been living in the neglect of duties which the law declared to be of vital importance. It is certainly difficult to account for this ignorance. Some suppose that all the copies of the law had perished, and that the king had never seen one. But this is very unlikely ; but however scarce complete copies may have been, the pious king was likely to have been the possessor of one. The probability seems to be that the passages read were those awful denun- ciations against disobedience with which the book of Deuteronomy concludes, and which from some cause or other the king had never before read, or which had never before produced on his mind the same strong conviction of the imminent dangers under which the nation lay, as now when read to him from a volume invested with a character so venerable, and brought with such interesting cir- cumstances under his notice. The king in his alarm sent to Huldah ' the prophet ess,' for her counsel in this emergency [Huldah] : her answer assured him that, although the dread penalties threatened by the law had been incurred and would be indicted, he should be gathered in peace to his fathers before the da}rs of punishment and sorrow came. It was perhaps not without some hope of avert- ing this doom that the king immediately called the people together at Jerusalem, and engaged them in a solemn renewal of the ancient covenant with God. When this had been done, the Pass- over was celebrated with careful attention to the directions given in the law, and on a scale of unexampled magnificence. But all was too late ; the hour of mercy had passed ; for ' the Lord turned not from the fierceness of his great wrath, wherewith his anger was kindled against Judah ' (2 Kings xxii. 3-20; xxiii. 21-27; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 8-33 ; xxxv. 1-19). That removal from the world which had been promised to Josiah as a blessing, was not long delayed, and was brought about in a way which he had probably not expected. His kingdom was tributary to the Chalda?an empire ; and when Pharaoh-necho, king of Egypt, sought a passage through his territories, on an expedition against the Chaldamus, Josiah, with a very high sense of the obligations which his vassalage imposed, refused to allow the march of the Egyptian army through his dominions, and prepared to resist the attempt by force of arms. Nccho was very un- willing to engage in hostilities with Josiah : the appearance of the Hebrew army at Megiddo, however, brought on a battle, in which the king of Judah was so desperately wounded by arrows that his attendants removed him from the war- chariot, and placed him in another, in which he was taken to Jerusalem, where he died. No king that reigned in Israel was ever more deeply la- mented by all his subjects than Josiah : and we are told that the prophet composed on the occa- sion an elegiac ode, which was long preserved JUBILEE. 159 among the people, but which is not now in existence (2 Kings xxiii. 29-37 ; 2 Chron. xxxv. 20-27). 1. JOTHAM (Drf"l\ God is upright; Sept. 'IcodOafi), the youngest of Gideon's seventy legiti- mate sons ; and the only one who escaped when the rest were massacred by the order of Abimelech. When the fratricide was made king by the people of Shechem, the young Jotham was so daring as to make his appearance on Mount Gerizim for the purpose of lifting up a protesting voice, and of giving vent to his feelings. This he did in a beautiful parable, wherein the trees are represented as making choice of a king, and bestowing on the bramble the honour which the cedar, the olive, and the vine would not accept. The obvious ap- plication, which indeed Jotham failed not himself to point out, must have been highly exasperating to Abimelech and his friends ; but the speaker fled, as soon as he had delivered his parable, to the town of Beer, and remained there out of his brother's reach. We hear no more of him ; but three years after, if then living, he saw the ac- complishment of the malediction he had pro- nounced (Judg. ix. 5-21). 2. JOTHAM, tenth king of Judah, and son of Uzziah, whom he succeeded in B.C. 758, at the age of twenty-rive : he reigned sixteen years. His father having during his last years been excluded by leprosy from pubic life [Uzziah], the govern- ment was administered by his son. Jotham -pro- fited by the experience which the reign of his father, and of the kings who preceded him. afforded, ami he ruled in the fear of God, although he was unable to correct all the corrupt practices info which the people had fallen. His sincere inten- tions were rewarded with a prosperous reign. He was successful in his wars. The Ammonites, who had ' given gifts ' as a sort of tribute to Uzziah, but had ceised to do so after his leprosy had incapacitated him from governing, were con- strained by Jotham to pay for three years a heavy tribute in silver, wheat, and barley (2 Chron. xxvi. 8 ; xxvii. 5, 6). Many important public works were also undertaken and accomplished by Jotham. The principal gate of the temple W as rebuilt by him on a more magnificent scale ; the quarter of Ophel, in Jerusalem, was strengthened by new fortifications ; various towns were built or rebuilt in the mountains of Judah; and castles and towers of defence were erected in the wilder- ness. Jotham died greatly lamented by his people, and was buried in the sepulchre of the kings (2 Kings xv. 38 ; 2 Chrou. xvii. 3-9). JUBAL (?^'1\ jubilum, i. e. music; Sept. 'Iei;/3aA), one of Cain's descendants, son of Lamech and Adah. He is described as the in- ventor of the TlJD kiiinor, and the 331}/ wjab, rendered in our version ' the harp and the organ,' but perhaps more properly ' the lyre and m organ," or Pandean pipe (Gen. iv. 21) [Music]. JUBILEE (^aVn T\)f, or merely ^JV, as in Lev. xxv. 28 ; Sept. ihos r5js acp£creo:s. or simply & lead to the suspicion that the later chronology, where we lose the double series of kings, is less to be depended on. There is an apparent difficulty also- as to Ahaziah, found in 2 Chron. xxii. I, 2. That he was ' 42 years old' at his accession is an obvious error for 22 (2 Kings viii. 26) : that he should have been the youngest of many sons, and yet only 17 years younger than his father, is to be explained by his father already having many wives ; but still it is remarkable. Where polygamy prevails, the extermination of a royal house by the enmity of brothers is notori- ously to be dreaded, in spite of the number of pos- terity which single monarchs can sometimes count. That the bouse of David encountered this danger is not expressly mentioned in the Kings. Two massacres are therein found -r_ one of ' the brethren, of Ahaziah,' ' forty-two men,' the sons of Jehoram, by the hypocritical zeal of Jehu; and, almost simultaneously, ' all the seed-royal ' (the sons of Ahaziah?) hv Queen Athaliah (2 Kings x. 13, 14; xi. 1). Only an infant son of Ahaziah (all in fact must have been of tender age) was saved from this slaughter, who, 44 years afterwards, was assassinated by his own people (2 Kings xii. 20), as was his son Amaziah (xiv. 19s), and at a later period Amon (xxi. 23) ; but no massacre of the royal family accompanied either of these murders. In the Chronicles (2 Chron. xxi. 4) we read that Jehoram slew all his brethren, the sons of Jeho- shaphat, from jealousy of the power with which their father had invested them ; and Jehoram's own sons are said to have been all slain, but one, by the Philistines and Arabians ; so that Ahaziah had no brethren left for Jehu to slay; but ' brethren ' must be taken with some latitude to mean ' brothers' sons' (2 Chron. xxi. 4, 17; xxii. 1, 8). It must, however, be confessed that this is irreconcilable with the chronology ; for at this time the age of Jehoram, their supposed grand- father (had he been alive), would have been 38 years ; so that the eldest of these ' forty-two men * could barely have been 6 years old. Some error, therefore, must be admitted in the narrative of the Chronicler concerning Jehoram and his son ; and, in fact, this is not the only point in which it is inconsistent with that in the Kings. Jehoram is said to have received a letter from Elijah the prophet (2 Chron. xxi. 12). at a time when he had already ascended into heaven, according to the Kings : also, in 2 Kings viii. 24, he is stated to have been buried ' with his fathers,' which is directly contradicted by 2 Chron. xxi. 20. To finish the subject of chronology it may be ob- served : (1.) It is remarkable that Jehoshabeath, the daughter of Ahaziah, should have been wife of Jehoiada the priest (2 Chron. xxii. 11). For as Jehoiada lived to the age of 130 (xxiv. 15), and died many years before Jehoash, the priest must have been some 70 vears older than his wife. (2.) The date '36 years,' in 2 Chron. xvi. 1, is certainly wrong, since Baasha died in the twenty-sixth year of Asa. The number 16 instead of 36 would agree sufficiently well with the history ; but we cannot with propriety so cor- rect the text, because of the date 35 in the last verse of the preceding chapter; not to mention that the narrative in the Chronicles represents the JUDAH, KINGDOM OF. declension of the pious Asa as being only towards the end of his reign (xv. 17). Clinton overlooks this, and wishes (' with many commentators ') to interpret ' the thirty-sixth year of the reign of Asa ' to mean ' the thirty-sixth year of the divided monarchy ;' but this is not interpretation at all. When the kingdom of Solomon became rent with intestine war, it might have been foreseen that the Edomites, Moabites, and other surround- ing nations would at once refuse their accustomed tribute, and become again practically inde- pendent; and some irregular invasion of these tribes might have been dreaded. It was a mark of conscious weakness, and not a result of strength, that Eehoboam fortified 15 cities (2 Chron. xi. 5-11), in which his people might find defence against the irregular armies of his roving neigh- bours. But a more formidable enemy came in, Shishak king of Egypt, against whom the for- tresses were of no avail (xii. 4), and to whom Jerusalem was forced to open its gates ; and, from the despoiling of his treasures, Rehoboam pro- bably sustained a still greater shock in its moral effect on the Moabites and Edomites, than in the direct loss : nor is it easy to conceive that he any longer retained the commerce of the Red Sea, or any very lucrative trade. Judged of by the number of soldiers recounted in the Chronicles, die strength of the early kings of Judah must have been not only great, but rapidly increasing. The following are the armies there given : — Rehoboam gathered 180,000 chosen men (2 Chron. xi. 1). (Shishak attacked him with 60,000 horse, 1200 chariots, besides infantry.) Abijah set in array 400,000 valiant men (xiii. % 17), and slew 500,000 of Jeroboam's 800,000 in one battle. Asa had 300,000 heavy armed, rod 280,000 light armed men (xiv. 8). (Zerah auvaded him with 1,000,000 men and 300 cha- iots.) Jehoshaphat kept up : — 300,000 under Adnah, 280,000 under Jehonahan, 200,000 under Amasiah. 200,000 (light armed) under Eliadah, 180,000 under Jehozabad (xvii. 14-19), JUDAH, KINGDOM OF. 167 Total . 1,160,000 for field service. ' These waited on the king ;' besides the garrisons ' in the fenced cities.' After Jehoshaphat followed the calamitous affinity with the house of Ahab, and the mas- sacres of both families. Under Jehoiada the priest, and Jehoash his pupil, no martial efforts were made ; but Amaziah son of Jehoash, after hiring 100,000 Israelites to no purpose, made war on the Edomites, slew 10,000, and threw 10,000 more down from the top of their rock (xxv. 5, 6, 11, 12). His own force in Judah, from 20 years old and upwards, was numbered at only 300,000 choice men, able to handle spear and shield. His son Uzziah had 2600 military officers, and 307,500 men of war (xxvi. 12, 13). Ahaz lost, in a Bingle battle with Pekah, 120,000 valiant men (xxviii. 6), alter the severe slaughter he had received from Rezin king of Syria; after which no further military strength is ascribed to fche kings of Judah. As to all these numbers the Vatican Sept. agrees with the received Hebrew text. These figures have caused no small perplexity, and have suggested to some the need of conjec- tural emendation. But if they have been cor- rupted, it is by system, and on purpose ; for there is far too great uniformity in them to be the result of accident. It perhaps deserves remark, that in the book of Kings no numbers of such startling magnitude are found. The army ascribed to Rehoboam (1 Kings xii. 21) is, indeed, as in Chronicles, 180,000 men ; but if we explain it of those able to fight, the number, though certainly large, may be dealt with historically. See the article on Population. As the most important external relations of Israel were with Damascus, so were those of Judah with Edom and Egypt. Some revolution in the state of Egypt appears to have followed the reign of Shishak. Apparently the country must have fallen under the power of an Ethiopian dynasty ; for the name of the Lubim, who ac- companied Zerah in his attack on Asa, is gene- rally regarded as proving that Zerah was from Sennaar, the ancient Meroe. But as this inva- sion was signally repulsed, the attempt was not repeated ; and Judah enjoyed entire tranquillity from that quarter until the invasion of Pharaoh- necho. In fact it may seem that this success assisted the reaction, favourable to the power of Judah, which was already begun, in conse- quence of a change in the policy of Damascus. Whether Abijah had been in league with the father of Benhadad I. (as is generally inferred from 1 Kings xv. 19) may be doubted; for the address cannot be rendered, ' Let there be a league between me and thee, as there was between my father and thine ;' and it possibly is only a hyperbolical phrase of friendship for, ' Let us be in close alliance ; let us count our fathers to have been allies.' However this may be, Asa bought, by a costly sacrifice, the serviceable aid of the Damascene king. Israel was soon distressed, and Judah became once more formidable to her south- ern neighbours. Jehoshaphat appears to have re- asserted the Jewish authority over the Edomites without war, and to have set his own viceroy over them (1 Kings xxii. 47). Intending to resume the distant commerce which had been so profitable to Solomon, he built ships suitable for long voy- ages (.' ships of Tarshish1 as they are rightly called in 1 Kings xxii. 48 — a phrase which the Chronicler has misunderstood, and translated into ' ships to go to Tarshish,' 2 Chron. xx. 36) ; but not hav- ing the advantage of Tynan sailors, as Solomon had, he lost the vessels by violent weather before they had sailed. Upon this, Ahaziah, king of Judah, offered the service of his own mariners, pro- bably from the tribe of Asher and others accus- tomed to the Mediterranean ; but Jehoshaphat was too discouraged to accept his oiler, and the experiment was never renewed by any Hebrew kin;. The Edomites, who paid only a forced allegiance, soon after revolted from Jehoram, and elected their own king (2 Kings viii. 20, 22). At a later time they were severely defeated by Ama- ziah (2 Kings xiv. 7), whose son, Uzziah, fortified the tow" of Elath, intending, probably, to resume maritime enterprise; but it remained a barren possession, and was finally taken from them by Rezin, in the reign of Ahaz (2 Kings xvi. 6). The Philistines, in these times, seem to have fallen from their former greatness, their league having been so long dissolved. The most remarkable event in which they are concerned is the assault on Je- 168 JUDAH, KINGDOM OF. rusalem, in the reign of Jehoram (2 Chron. xxi. 16, 17). It is strikingly indicative of the stormy scenes through which the line of David passed, that the treasures of the king and of the Temple were so often plundered or bargained away. First, under Rehoboam, all the hoards of Solomon, consecrated and common alike, were carried off by Shishak (1 Kings xiv. 26). Two generations later, Asa emptied out to Benhadad all that had since accu- mulated ' in the house of Jehovah or in the king's house.' A third time, when Hazael had taken Gath, and was preparing to march- on Jerusalem, Jehoash, king of Judah, turned him away by sending to h,im all ' that Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Ahaziah and Jehoash himself had dedicated, and all the gold that was found in the treasures of the house of Jehovah and in the kiug's house' (2 Kings xii. 18). In the very next reign Jehoash, king of Israel, defeated and captured Amaziah, took Jerusalem, broke down the walls, carried off hostages, and plundered the gold and silver depo- sited in the temple and in the royal palace (2 Kings xiv. 11-14). A fifth sacrifice of the sacred and of the royal treasure was made by Ahaz to Tiglath- pileser (2 Kings xvi. 8). The act was repeated by his son Hezekiah to Sennacherib, who had de- manded ' 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold.' It is added, ' Hezekiah cut off the gold which he had overlaid, from the doors of the temple and from the pillars' (2 Kings xviii. 14-16). In the days of Josiah, as in those of Jehoash, the temple appears to have been greatly out of repair (xii. and xxii.) ; and when Pharaoh-necho, hav- ing slain Josiah,had reduced Judah to submission, the utmost tribute that could be exacted was 100 talents of silver and one talent of gold. Even this sum was obtained by direct taxation, and no allusion is made to any treasure at all, either in the temple or in the king's house. It is the more extraordinary to find expressions used when Ne- buchadnezzar took the city, which at first sight imply that Solomon's far-famed stores were still untouched. ' Nebuchadnezzar carried out all the treasures of the house of Jehovah and of the king's house, and cut in pieces all the vessels of gold which Solomon had made in the temple of Jehovah'' (2 Kings xxiv. 13). They must evi- dently have been tew in number, for in 1 Kings xiv. 26, ' all ' must, at least, mean ' nearly all :' ' Shishak took away the treasures of the house of Jehovah, and of the king's house; he even took away all.'' Yet the vessels of gold and silver taken away by Nebuchadnezzar and restored by Cyrus are reckoned 5400 in number (Ezra i. 11). The severest shock which the house of David received was the double massacre which it endured from Jehu and from Athaliah. After a long mi- nority, a youthful king, the sole surviving male descendant of his great-grandfather, and reared under the paternal rule of the priest Jehoiada, to whom he was indebted not only for his throne but even for his recognition as a son of Ahaziah, was not in a situation to uphold the royal authority. That Jehoash conceived the priests to have abused the power which they had gained, sufficiently appears in 2 Kings xii., where he complains that they had for twenty -three years appropriated the money, which they ought to have spent on the repairs of the temple. Jehoiada gave way ; but we see here the beginning of a feud (hitherto un- JUDAH, KINGDOM OF. known in the house of David) between the crows and the priestly order; which, after Jehoiada's death, led to the murder of his son Zachariah. The massacre of the priests of Baal, and of Atha- liah, grand-daughter of a king of Sidon, must also have destroyed cordiality between the Phoe- nicians and the kingdom of Judah ; and when the victorious Hazael had subjugated all Israel and showed himself near Jerusalem, Jehoash could look for no help from without, and had neither the faith of Hezekiah nor a prophet like Isaiah to support him. The assassination of Jehoash in his bed by ' his own servants' is described in the Chro- nicles as a revenge taken upon him by the priestly party for his murder of ' the sons' of Jehoiada ; and the same fate, from the same influence, fell upon his son Amaziah, if we may so interpret the words in 2 Chron. xxv. 27 : ' From the time that Amaziah turned away from following Jehovah they made a conspiracy against him,' &c. Thus the house of David appeared to be committing itself, like that of Saul, to permanent enmity with the priests. The wisdom of Uzziah, during a long reign, averted this collision, though a symptom of it returned towards its close. No further mischief from this cause followed, until the reign of his grandson, the weak and unfor- tunate Ahaz : after which the power of the king- dom rapidly mouldered away. On the whole it would appear that, from Jehoiada downward, the authority of the priests was growing stronger, and that of the crown weaker ; for the king could not rule successfully, except by submitting to (what we might call) ' the constitutional check' of the ]oriests ; and although it is reasonable to believe that the priests became less simple-minded, more worldly, and less religious, as their order ad- vanced in authorify (whence the keen rebukes of them by the prophets), it is not the less certain that it was desirable for Judah, both in a temporal and a spiritual sense, to have the despotic power of the king subjected to a strong priestly pressure. The struggle of the crown against this control was perhaps the most immediate cause of the ruin of Judah. Ahaz was probably less guided by policy than by superstition, or by architectural taste, in erecting his Damascene altar (2 Kings xvi. 10-18). But the far more outrageous pro- ceedings of Manasseh seem to have been a sys- tematic attempt to extirpate the national religion because of its supporting the priestly power; and the 'innocent blood very much,' which he is stig- matized for shedding (2 Kings xxi. 16), was undoubtedly a sanguinary attack on the party opposed to his impious and despotic innovations. The storm which he had raised did not burst in his lifetime; but, two years after, it fell on the head of his son Amon ; and the disorganization of the kingdom which his madness had wrought is commemorated as the cause of the Babylonish captivity (2 Kings xxiii. 26; xxiv. 3, 4). It is also credible that the long-continued despotism had greatly lessened patriotic spirit ; and that the Jewish people of the declining kingdom were less brave against foreign invaders than against kindred and neighbour tribes or civil opponents. Faction had become very fierce within Jerusalem itself (Ezek. xxii.), and civil bloodshed was com- mon. Wealth, where it existed, was generally a source of corruption, by introducing foreign luxury, tastes, manners, superstitions, immo- JUDAS. JUDAS ISCARIOT. 169 rality, or idolatry; and when consecrated to pious purposes, as by Hezekiah and Josiah, pro- duced little more than a formal and exterior re- ligion. Thoroughly to understand the political working of the monarchy, we ought to know, 1. What con- trol the king exercised over ecclesiastical appoint- ments ; 2. How the Levites were supported when ejected from Israel; 3. What proportion of them acted as judges, lawyers, and scribes, and how far they were independent of the lung. The na- ture of the case and the precedent of David may satisfy us that the king appointed the high- priest at his own pleasure out of the Aaronites ; but (as Henry II. of England and hundreds of monarchs besides have found) ecclesiastics once in office often disappoint the hopes of their patron, and to eject them again is a most dangerous exertion of the prerogative. The Jewish king would naturally avoid following the law of de- scent, in order to preserve his right of election unimpaired ; and it may be suspected that the line of Zadok was rather kept in the background by royal jealousy. Hilkiah belonged to that line ; and if any inference can be drawn from his genealogy, as given in 1 Chron. vi. 8-15, it is, that none of his ancestors between the reigns of Solomon and Josiah held the high-priesthood. Even Azariah, who is named in 2 Chron. xxxi. 10 as of the line of Zadok, is not found among Hilkiah's progenitors. Jehoiada, the celebrated priest, and Urijah, who was so complaisant to the innovating Ahaz (2 Kings xvi.), were of a dif- ferent family. It would seem that, too many high-priests gained a reputation for subservience (for it often bapipens in history that the eccle- siastical heads are more subservient to royalty than the mass of their order) ; so that, after Hil- kiah, the race of Zadok became celebrated for uprightness, in invidious contrast to the rest of the priests ; and even the Levites were regarded as more zealous than the generality of the Aaronites (2 Chron. xxix. 34). Hence in Ezekiel and other late writers the phrase ' the priests the sons of Zadok,1 or even ' the priests the Levites,' is a more honourable title than ' the priests the sons of Aaron.' Hilkiah's name seems to mark the era at which (by a reaction after the atrocities of Manasseh and Amon) the purer priestly senti- ment obtained its triumph over the crown. But the victory came too late. Society was corrupt and convulsed within, and the two great powers of Egypt and Babylon menaced it from without. True lovers of their God and of their country, like Jeremiah, saw that it. was a time rather for weeping than for action ; and that the faithful must resign themselves to the bitter lot which the sins of their nation had earned. — F. W. N. JUDAS is merely the Greek form of the Hebrew name Judah. The Septuagint, however, represents Judah by 'Iou5a, Juda. which we find also in Luke iii. 2(>, 30, as the name of two of lhc ancestors of Christ not. otherwise known. The persons named Judas were the following : — 1. JUDAS MACCAB/EUS. [Maccabees.] 2. JUDAS ISCARIOT. The object of this article is not to elucidate all the circumstances recorded respecting this person, but simply to investigate his motives in delivering up Jesus to the chief-priests. The evangelists relate his pro- ceedings, but give no opinion. The subject is consequent!}' open to inquiry. Our conclusions must be guided by the facts of the case, and the known feelings and principles of human nature. Some hypothesis is necessarily formed by every reader. That one of our Lord's immediate fol- lowers and delegates, the treasurer of his house- hold, who was admitted to his most secret coun- sels, and to the observation of his most private character, should at that particular juncture wait upon the Jewish rulers, and engage, for a pecuniary recompense, to lead their officers to his retiring-place, and, after time for reflection, should actually fulfil his engagement, and thus become the means of bringing his Master to the cross, is a fact too nearly connected with the honour of Christianity to allow us to remain un- concerned as to his motives. Even the credibility of this part of the narrative depends upon our being able to form a rational conception of them. There is no reason to doubt his sanity. We can neither ascribe his conduct to the mere love of evil, nor can we entertain the idea that it. resulted from an arbitrary decree or impulse of the Al- mighty. His conduct might have been foreseen (Acts i. 16), but surely it was not commanded. Even supposing him to have been perfectly obdu- rate, and judicially abandoned to fall by his own wickedness, we must still seek the proximate cause of his ruin in his own intelligible motives. But his well known confession and remorse clearly prove that he was not wholly obdurate. Had he been so, he would have persisted in his con- duct, or have attempted to calumniate Jesus and his disciples ; or, perhaps, under the auspices of the chief-priests, have headed a most powerful op- position to Christianity. The only conceivable motives for the conduct of Judas are, a sense of duty in bringing his Master to justice, resent- ment, avarice, dissatisfaction with the procedure of Jesus, and a consequent scheme for the accom- plishment of his own views. With regard to the first of these motives, if Judas had been actuated by a sense of duty in bringing his Master to justice for anything censurable in his intentions, words, or actions, he would certainly have alleged some charge against him in his first interview with the chief-priests, and they would have brought him forward as a witness against Jesus, especially when they were at so great, a loss for evidence : or they would have reminded him of his accusations when he appealed to them after our Loid's con- demnation, saying, ' I have sinned in that J have betrayed innocent blood' — a confession which amounts to an avowal that he had never seen anything to blame in his Master, but everything to approve. Moreover, the knowledge, of the slightest fault in Jesus would have served, at least for the present, to tranquillize his own feel- ings, and prevent his immediate despair. The chiet'-priesis would also most certainly have al- leged any charge he had made against Jesus, as a justification of their conduct, when they afterwards endeavoured to prevent his a] from preaching in his name (Acts iv. 15-23] v. 27, 2S-40). The second motive sup] namely, lhat of resentment, is rather move plau- sible. Jesus had certainly rebuked him for blaming the woman who had anointed him in the house of Simon the leper, at Bethany (conip. Matt. xxvi. 8-17; John xii. 4, 5); and Mat- thew's narrative seems to connect his going to the 170 JUDAS ISCARIOT. phief-priests with that rebuke (ver. 14)._ ' Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief-priests ;' but closer inspection will convince the reader that those words are more properly connected with ver. 3. Besides, the re- buke was general, ' Why trouble ye the woman V Nor was it nearly so harsh as that received by Peter, ' Get thee behind me, Satan' (Matt. xvi. 23), and certainly not so public (Mark viii. 32, 33). Even if Judas had felt ever so much re- sentment, it could scarcely have been his sole motive ; and as nearly two days elapsed between his contract with the chief-priests and its comple- tion, it would have subsided during the interval, and have yielded to that covetousness which we have every reason to believe was his ruling passion. St. John expressl y declares that Judas ' was a thief, and had the bag, and bare (that is, conveyed away from it, stole, ifido-Ta(ev) what was put therein ' (xii. 6; comp. xx. 15, in the original, and see a similar use of the word in Joseph, p. 402. 39, ed. Huds.). This rebuke, or rather certain circum- stances attending it, might have determined him to act as he did, but is insufficient, of itself, to account entirely for his conduct, by which he en- dangered all his expectations of worldly advance- ment from Jesus, at the very moment when they seemed upon the verge of beiug fulfilled. It is, indeed, a most important feature in the case, that the hopes entertained by Judas, and all the apos- tles, from their Master's expected elevation, as the Messiah, to the throne of Judaea, and, as they believed, to the empire of the whole world, were never more stedfast than at the time when he covenanted with the chief-priests to deliver him into their hands. Nor does the theory of mere resentment agree with the terms of censure in which the conduct and character of Judas are spoken of by our Lord and the evangelists. Since, then, this supposition is insufficient, we may consider another motive to which his conduct is more commonly ascribed, namely, covetousness. But if by covetousness be meant the eager de- sire to obtain ' the thirty pieces of silver,' with which the chief-priests ' covenanted with him' (Matt. xxvi. 15), it presents scarcely a less in- adequate motive. Can it be conceived that Judas would deliberately forego the prospect of immense wealth from his Master, by delivering him up for about four pounds ten shillings of our money, upon the highest computation, and not more than double in value, a sum which he might easily have purloined from the bag? Is it likely that he would have made such a sacrifice for any further sum, however large, which we may suppose ' they promisedhim (Mark xiv. 11), and of which the thirty pieces of silver might have been the mere earnest (Luke xxii. 5) ? Had covetousness been his motive, he would have ulti- mately applied to the chief-priests, not to bring again the thirty pieces of silver with the confession, ' I have sinned in that I have betrayed the inno- cent blood' (Matt, xxvii. 4), but to demand the completion of their agreement with him. We are now at liberty to consider the only remaining motive for the conduct of Judas, namely, dissatis- faction with the procedure of his Master, and a con- sequent scheme for the furtherance of his own views. It seems to us likely, that the impatience of Judas for the accomplishment of his worldly views, which we conceive to have ever actuated him in fol- JUDAS ISCARIOT. lowing Jesus, could no longer be restrained, and that our Lord's observations at Bethany served to mature a stratagem he had meditated long before. He had no doubt been greatly disap- pointed at seeing his Master avoid being made a king, after feeding the five thousand in Galilee. Many a favourable crisis had he seemed to lose, or had not dared to embrace, and now while at Bethany he talks of his burial (John xii. 7) ; and though none of his apostles, so firm were their worldly expectations from their Master, could clearly understand such ' sayings' (Luke xviii. 34) ; yet they had been made ' exceeding sorry' by them (Matt. xvii. 23). At the same time Judas had long ' been convinced by the miracles he had seen his Master perform that he was the Messiah (John vii. 31). He had even heard him accept this title from his apostles in private (Matt. xvi. 16). He had promised them that when he should ' sit upon the throne of his glory, they should sit upon twelve thrones judging. the twelve tribes of Israel' (Matt. xix. 28). Yet now, when everything seemed most favourable to the assumption of empire, he hesitates and de- sponds. In his daily public conferences, too, with the chief-priests and pharisees, he appears to offend them by his reproofs, rather than to conciliate their favour. Within a tew days, the people, .who had lateljr given him a triumphal entry into the city, having kept the passover, would be dispersed to their homes, and Judas and his fellow apostles be, perhaps, required to attend their Master on another tedious expedition through the country. Hence it seems most probable that Judas resolved upon the plan of delivering up his Master to the Jewish authorities, when he would be compelled, in self-defence, to prove his claims, by giving them the sign from heaven they had so often demanded ; they would, he believed, elect him in due form as the King Messiah, and thus enable him to reward his followers. He did, indeed, receive from Jesus many alarming admonitions against his design ; but the plainest warnings are lost upon a mind totally absorbed by a purpose, and agitated by many violent passions. The worst he would permit himself to expect, was a temporary displeasure for placing his Master in this dilemma ; but as he most likely believed, judging from himself, that Jesus anti- cipated worldly aggrandizement, he might cal- culate upon his forgiveness when the emergency should have been triumphantly surmounted. Nor was this calculation wholly unreasonable. Many an ambitious man would gladly be spared the responsibility of grasping at an empire, which he would willingly find forced upon him. Sextus Pompey is recorded to have rebuked his servant Menas, who offered to put him in possession of the empire by the treacherous seizure of the tri- umvirs, for not having, unknown to him, per- formed the service, which, when proposed to him, he felt bound in honour to reject (Suet. Octav.). In Shakspeare's version of his language — ' Ah, this thou shouldst have done, And not have spoke on't Being done unknown I should have found it afterwards well done. Ant. and Cleop. Judas could not doubt his master's ability to extricate himself from his enemies by miracle. He had known him do so more than once (Luke JUDAS. iv. 30 ; John viii. 59 ; x. 39). Hence his direc- tions to the officers to ' hold him fast,1 when lie was apprehended (Matt. xxvi. 48). With other Jews he believed the Messiah would never die (John ■xii. 31) ; accordingly, we regard his pecuniary- stipulation with the priests as a mere artful cover to his deeper and more comprehensive design; and so that he served their purpose in causing the apprehension of Jesus, they would little care to scrutinize his motive. All they felt was being 1 glad" at his proposal (Mark xiv. 11), and the plan appeared to hold good up to the very mo- ment of our Lord's condemnation ; for after his ap- prehension his miraculous power seemed unabated, from his healing Malchus. Judas heard him declare that he could even then ' ask, and his father would give him twelve legions of angels ' for his rescue. But when Judas, who awaited the issue of the trial with such different expectations, saw that though Jesus had avowed himself to be the Messiah, he had not convinced the Sanhedrim ; and, instead of extricating himself from their power by miracle, had submitted to be ' con- demned, buffeted, and spit upon' by his judges and accusers ; then it should seem he awoke to a full view of all the consequences of his conduct. The prophecies of the Old Testa- ment, ' that Christ should suffer,' and of Jesus, concerning his own rejection and death, flashed on his mind in their true sense and full force, and lie found himself the wretched instrument of their fulfilment. He made a last desperate effort to stay proceedings. He presented himself to the chief-priests, offered to return the money, con- fessed that he had sinned in that he had betrayed the innocent blood, and upon receiving their heartless answer was wrought into a phrenzy of despair, during which he committed suicide. There is much significancy in these words of Matt, xxvii. 3, 'Then Judas, token hesaiohewas condemned,'1 not expiring on the cross, ' repented himself,' &c. If such be the true hypothesis of his conduct, then, however culpable it may have been, as originating in the most inordinate covetous- ness, impatience of the procedure of Providence, crooked policy, or any other bad quality, he is certainly absolved from the direct intention of procuring his Master's death. ' The difference,' says Archbishop Wbately, ' between Iscariot and his fellow apostles was, that though they all had the same expectations and conjectures, he dared to act on his conjectures, departing from the plain course of his known duty to follow the calcula- tions of his worldly wisdom, and the schemes of his worldly ambition.' The reader is directed to the Primate's admirable Discourse on the Trea- son of Judas Iscariot, and Notes, annexed to Essays on some of the Dangers to Christian Faith, Lond. 1839; Whitby on Matt, xxvii. 3, for the opinions of Theophylact, and some of the Fathers ; Bishop Bull's Sermons, ii. and iii., On some Important Points, vol. i., Lond. 1713; Hales's New Analysis of Chronology, vol. ii. b. ii. pp. 877, 878 ; Macknight's Harmony of the Gospels, vol. ii. pp. 427-30, Lond. 1822; Rosen m till er, Kuinoel, in foe. — J. F. D. 3. JUDAS, or JUDE, surnamed Barsabas, a Christian teacher sent from Jerusalem to An- tioch along with Paul and Barnabas (Acts xv. 22, 27, 32). He is supposed to have been one of the seventy disciples, and brother of Joseph, also JUDE. 171 surnamed Barsabas (son of Sabas), who was proposed, with Matthias, to fill up the place of the traitor Judas (Acts i. 23). Judas and Silaa (who was also of the party) are mentioned to- gether as ' prophets ' and ' chief men among the brethren.' 4. JUDAS. [Jude.] 5. JUDAS, a Jew of Damascus with whom Paul lodged (Acts ix. 11). 6. JUDAS, surnamed the Galilean (o TaXi- hcuos, Acts v. 37) , so called also by Josephus {Antiq. xviii. 1. 6 ; xx. 5. 2 ; De Bell. Jud. ii. 8. 1), and likewise 'the Gaulonite' (6 Tav\oviTr\s ; Antiq. xviii. 1. 1). In company with one Sadoc he attempted to raise a sedition among the Jews, but was destroyed by Cyrenius (Quirinus), then proconsul of Syria and Judaea. JUDE, or JUDAS QloiSas). There were two of this name among the twelve Apostles — Judas, called also Lebbseus and Thaddasus (Matt. x. 4 ; Mark iii. 1 8, which see), and Judas Iscariot. Judas is the name of one of our Lord's brethren, but it is not agreed whether our Lord's brother is the same with the Apostle of this name [James]. Luke (Gospel, vi. 16; Acts i. 13) calls him 'Iot'Sas 'laKivfiov, which in the English Authorized Version is translated 'Judas, the brother of James.' The ellipsis, however, between 'lovSas and 'Ia,Kcc[3ov is supplied by the old Syriac trans- lator (who was unacquainted with the epistle of Jude, the writer of which calls himself 'IovSccs aSeArpbs 'laKwj3ov) with the word son, and not bro- ther. Among our Lord's brethren are named James, Joses, and Judas (Matt, xiii. 55 : Mark vi. 3). If, with Helvidius among the ancients (see Jerome, Contra Helvidium), and Kuinoel, Neander, and a few other modern commentators, we were to consider our Lord's brethren to be children of Jo- seph and the Blessed Virgin (an hypothesis which Kuinoel acknowledges to be incapable of proof from Scripture), we should be under the necessity of supposing that there was a James, a Joses, and a Judas, who were uterine brothers of our Lord, together with the Apostles James and Judas, who were children of Mary, the sister or cousin of the Virgin (see Pearson On (he Creed, art. iv.). If, however, the hypothesis of their being children of the Blessed Virgin be rejected, an hypothesis in- consistent widi the ancient and universal tradition of the perjjetual virginity of the Virgin, a tra- dition the truth of which is received even by Dr. Lardner (Hist, of the Apostles^), there remains lor us only a choice between the two opinions, that our Lord's brethren were children of Joseph by a for- mer wife (Eschaor Salome, according to an Apo- cryphal tradition), which was the sentiment of the majority of the fathers (still received in the Oriental church), and that adopted in the Western church, and first broached by St. Jerome (Cont. Ilelvid.), that the brethren of our Lord were his cousins, as being children of Mary, the wife of Cleophas, who must therefore be considered as the same with Alphaeus [see James]. It' we consider James, the brother of our Lord, to be a different person from James the son of AlphaeuSj and not one of the twelve, Jude, the brother of James, must Consequently be placed in the same cate- gory [James] ; but it' they are one and the same, Jude must be considered as the person who is numbered with our Lord's Apostles. We are not informed as to the time of the vocation of the 172 JUDE, EPISTLE OF. Apostle Jade to that dignity. Indeed, the only- circumstance relating to him which is recorded in the Gospels consists in the question put by aim to our Lord (John xiv. 22). ' Judas saith unto him (not Iscariot), Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself to us, and not unto the world V Nor have we any account given of his proceedings after our Lord's resurrection, for the traditionary notices which have been preserved of him rest on no very certain foundation. It has been asserted that he was sent to Edessa3 to Abgarus, king of Osroene (Jerome, Annot. in Matt), and that he preached in Syria, Arabia, Mesopotamia, and Persia ; in which latter country he suffered martyrdom (Lardner's Hist, of the Apostles'). Jude the Apostle is commemorated in the Western church, together with the Apostle Simon (the name, also, of one of our Lord's brethren) on the Sth of October. There is an interesting account preserved by Hegesippus (Eu- sebius, Hist. Eccles. iii. 20) concerning some of Jude's posterity : ' When Domitian,' he observes, ' inquired after David's posterity, some grandsons of Jude, called the Lord"s brother, were brought into his presence. Being asked concerning their possessions and mode of life, they assured him that they had thirty-nine acres of land, the value of which was nine thousand denarii, out of which they paid him taxes, and maintained themselves by the labour of their hands. The truth of this was confirmed by the hardness of their hands. Being asked concerning Christ and the nature of his king- dom, they replied that it was not a kingdom of this world, but of a heavenly and angelic nature ; that it would be manifested at the end of the world, when he would come in glory to judge the living and the dead, and render to every man according to his works. Having observed their humble condition and their harmless principles, he dismissed them with contempt, after which they ruled the churches, both as witnesses and relatives of the Lord.1 St. Luke (Acts xv. 22, 27-33) speaks of Judas, the son of Barsabas, in company with Silas, both of whom he styles ' prophets,' and ' chief men among the brethren.' Schott supposes that Bar- sabas means the son of Sabas, or Zabas, which he looks upon as an abridged form for Zebedee, and concludes that the Judas here mentioned was a brother of the elder James and of John. JUDE, EPISTLE OF [Antilegojiena], is placed by Eusebius among the controverted books (Hist. Eccles., vii. 25), having been rejected by many of the ancients. ' Jude, the brother of James,' says Jerome, ' has left us a short epistle, which is one of the seven called Catholic, and because it cites a testimony from the apocryphal book of Enoch it is rejected by most. It has, however, obtained such authority by antiquity and use that it is now reckoned among the Holy Scriptures.' It is cited by Clemens Alexandrinus (Strom, iii. 431), by Origen (Com. in Matt., &c. &c), and by Tertullian (De Habit. Fcem). It is also included among the books of the New Testament in the ancient catalogue discovered by Muratori, a work of the second century. It is found in the catalogues of the Councils of Lao- dicea, Hippo, and Carthage, and in the Apos- tolical canons, but is wanting in the Peshito, or ancient Syriac version. It is, however, cited as of authority by Ephrem. In modern times its JUDE, EPISTLE OF. apostolic source at least, if not its canonicity, was called in question by Luther (Walchised. vol. xiv. 150), Grotius, Bolten, Dahl, Berger, and Michaelis, but it is acknowledged by most to be genuine. Inde-ed, the doubts thrown upon its genuineness arose, as we have already seen, from the fact of the writer having cited two apocryphal books (Enoch and the Assumption of Moses). In reference to this subject Tertullian has a long statement, in which, from the fact that ' Enoch had some value as an authority with the apostle Jude,' he is disposed to uphold the authenticity of the book of Enoch. As, however, that book, which is still extant, is universally reckoned a spurious production, the circumstance of Jude's having employed a citation from it is one of the most difficult and embarrassing in sacred criti- cism, especially as Jude expressly calls Enoch the ' seventh from Adam' (ver. ] 4). That the ancients were acquainted with the Prophecy of Enoch is evident from the testimony of several of the fathers, and from the copious fragments of it pre- served by Syncellus in his Chronography (Fa- bricii Cod. Pseud.), which were discovered by George Scaliger. None of these, however, -con- tain the passage in Jude 14. It was not until the eighth century that the book of Enoch sunk into oblivion. Since the commencement of the seventeenth century, how- ever, it had been supposed that this long-lost book was still extant in an Ethiopic version in Abys- sinia, and this fact was fully established by Bruce, who first brought it into Europe [Enoch]. This work contains the words of the prophecy cited by Jude ; but whether Jude cited it from the book of Enoch, or from a Jewish tradition, is a point still in debate. The decision of this question is inseparably connected with that of the age of the present book of Enoch, a point on which critics are not quite agreed. Dr. Lau- rence (its learned translator) attributes the book of Enoch to an early period of the reign of Herod the Great, to which time Hoffmann (Das Buck Henoch) also assigns it ; while Liicke and others, who have subsequently investigated the subject, place it in the second half of the first century, and after the destruction of Jerusalem (see Liicke, Ver such einer vollstdndigen Einleitung in die Offenbarung Johannis). It was a well known book at the time of the writing of the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs at the close of the first or commencement of the second century* [Re- velations, Spurious]. The writer of the epistle is also supposed to have cited an apocryphal work (in ver. 9), where bespeaks of the dispute of the archangel Michael with the Devil respecting the body of Moses. Origen found this very relation in a Jewish Greek book called the Assumption of Moses QAvaKfjil^is Mcocre'ojs), and was so persuaded that this was the book which Jude had cited, that he quoted, the work itself as of authority (Marsh's Michaelis, vol. vi. p. 379). The work is also cited by CEcumenius (vol. ii. p. 629), where the passage actually refers to the dispute of Michael the archangel and the devil respecting the body ••'•= A writer in the Christian Observer (vol. xxx.) attempts to prove the book of Enoch a work which could not have been written earlier than the middle of the second century. JUDE, EPISTLE OF. of Moses. There is a work still extant in He- brew, entitled Phetirah Moshe, or ' The death of Moses :' of this two editions have been published, one at Constantinople in 1518, and the other at Venice in 15-14 and 1605. De la Rue and other critics have supposed that this is the same work which was known to Origen. But Michaelis has §hown that the present work is so unlike the former (besides containing quotations from the Talmud also, and even from Aben Ezra), that, although it contains similar relations, it is un- questionably a modern production. Others, embarrassed by the circumstance of Jude's citing an apocryphal book, not merely for illustration, as St. Paul cites Aratus, Menander, and Epimenides, but as of authority (as when he cites Enoch, the seventh from Adam), have en- deavoured to give a mystical explanation to Jude's assertion respecting the dispute about the body of Moses. Among these are Vitringa and Dr. Lardner. They think that by the body of Moses is meant the Jewish nation, and that Jude alludes to the vision in Zech. iii. 1 ; and Vitringa even proposes to alter the ' body of Moses' into the ' body of Joshua.'' For the details of this in- genious explanation we must refer the reader to Lardner's Hist, of the Apostles. Author, age, <5,-e. — Notwithstanding these diffi- culties, this epistle was treated by the ancients with the highest respect, and regarded as the genuine work of an inspired writer. Although Origen on one occasion speaks doubtfully, calling it the ' reputed epistle of Jude,' yet on another occasion, and in the same work {Com. in Matt.), he says, ' Jude wrote an epistle, of few lines in- deed, but full of the powerful words of heavenly grace, who at the beginning says, " Jude, the ser- vant of Jesus Christ and brother of James." ' The same writer {Com. in Rom. and De Princip. iii. 2, i. 138) calls it ihe writing of Jude the Apostle. The moderns are, however, divided in opinion between Jude the apostle and Jude the Lord's brother, if indeed they be different persons : Hug and De Wette ascribe it to the latter. The author simply calls himself Jude, the brother of James, and a servant of Jesus Christ. This form of ex- pression has given rise to various conjectures. Hug supposes that he intimates thereby a nearer degree of relationship than that of an apostle. This accords also with the sentiment of Clemens Alexandrhms (Adumb. ; Opp. ii. p. 1007, ed. Venet.): 'Jude, who wrote the Catholic epistle, one of the sons of Joseph, a pious man, although he well knew his relationshij) to Jesus, yet did not call himself his brother, but said, Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ (as the Lord), and the brother of James.' At the same time it must be acknowledged that the circumstance of his not naming himself an apostle is not of itself neces- sarily sufficient to militate against his being the apostle of that name, inasmuch as St. Paul does not upon all occasions (as in Philippians, Thessa- lonians, and Philemon) use this title. From his calling himself the brother of James, rather than the brother of the Lord, Michaelis deduces that he was the son of Joseph by a former wife, and not a full brother of our Lord's, as Herder contends [James, Jude], From the great coin- cidence both in sentiment and subject which exists between our epistle and the second of St. Peter, it has been thought by many critics that one JUDGES. 173 of these writers had seen the other's work ; but we shall reserve the discussion as to which was the earlier writing until we come to treat of St. Peter's Epistle. Dr. Lardner supposes that Jude's Epistle was written between the years 64 and 66, Beausobre and L'Enfant between 70 and 75 (from which Dodwell and Cave do not mate- rially differ), and Dr. Mill fixes it to the year 90. If Jude lias quoted the apocryphal book of Enoch, as seems to be agreed upon by most mo- dern critics, and if this book was written, as Liicke thinks, after the destruction of Jerusalem, the age of our epistle best accords with the date assigned to it by Mill. It is difficult to decide who the persons were to whom this epistle was addressed, some supposing that it was written to converted Jews, others to all Christians without distinction. Many of the arguments seem best adapted . to convince the Jewish Christians, as appeals are so strikingly made to their sacred books and traditions. The design of this epistle is to warn the Chris- tians against the false teachers who had insinuated themselves among them and disseminated dan- gerous tenets of insubordination and licentious- ness. The author reminds them, by the example of Sodom and Gomorrah, that God had punished the rebellious Jews ; and that even the disobedient angels had shared the same fate. The false teachers to whom he alludes ' speak evil of dignities,' while the archangel Michael did not even revile Satan. He compares them to Balaam and Korah, to clouds without water, and to raging waves. Enoch, he says, foretold their wickedness ; at the same time he consoles believers, and exhorts them to persevere in faith and love. The epistle is remarkable for the vehemence, fervour, and energy of its composition and style. — W. W. JUDGES. This name is applied to fifteen per- sons who at intervals presided over the affairs of the Israelites during the 450 years which elapsed from the death of Joshua to the accession of Saul. The term Judges, used in the English Bibles, does not exactly represent the original D^pSt^ shophetim, i. e. ' rulers of the people,' from 122^, which is not synonymous with P"! judicare, but signifies in its general acceptation, causam alicitjus agere, tueri (see Bertholdt, Theolog. Litt. Blatt. vii. 1, sq. ; comp. Gesenius s.v. DSl/>). The station and office of these shophetim are involved in great obscurity, partly from the want of clear intimations in the history in which their exploits and government are recorded, and partly from the absence of parallels in the history of other nations, by which our notions might be assisted. In fact the government of the judges forms the most singular part of the Hebrew institutions, and that which appears most difficul t to comprehend. The kings, the priests, the generals, the heads of tribes — all these offer some points of comparison with the same functionaries in other nations; but the judges stand alone in the history of the world : and when we think that we have found officers resembling them in other nations, the comparison soon breaks down in some point of importance, and we still find that no- thing remains but to collect and arrange the con- cise intimations of the sacred text, and draw our conclusions from the facts which it records. The splendid administrations of Moses and of Joshua so fill the mind of the reader of Scrip- 174 JUDGES. ture, that after their death a sense of vacancy is experienced, and we wonder how it happens that no successor to them was appointed, and how the machinery of the government was to be carried on without some similar leaders. But when we come lu examine the matter more closely, we perceive that the offices rilled by Moses and Joshua, whose presence was so essential for the time and the occasion, were not at all involved in the general machinery of the Hebrew government. These persons formed no part of the system : they were specially appointed for particular services, for the performance of which they were invested with extraordinary powers ; but when their mis- sion was accomplished, society reverted to its permanent institutions and its established forms of government. It is, therefore, in the working of these institutions, after the functions of the legislator and the military leader had ceased, that we must luok for the circumstances that gave rise to the extraordinary leaders which engage our present attention. Now we shall find that, apart from such offices as those of Moses and Joshua, a very excellent provision existed for the govern- ment of the chosen people, both as regarded the interests of the nation generally, as well as of the several tribes. To this latter branch of the government it is important to draw particular attention, because, as it existed before the law, and is assumed through- out as the basis of the theocratical constitution, we hear but little of it in the books of Moses, and are apt to lose sight of it altogether. This part of the subject belongs, however, to the art. Tribe ; and it suffices to mention in this place that every tribe had its own hereditary chief or ' prince,' who presided over its affairs, administered justice in all ordinary cases, and led the troops in time of war. His station resembled that of the Arabian emirs, or rather, perhaps, of the khans of the Tartar tribes inhabiting Persia and the countries further east. He was assisted in these important duties by the subordinate officers, the chiefs of families, who formed his council in such matters of policy as affected their particular district, supported his decisions in civil or criminal inquiries, and com- manded under him in the field of battle (Num. xxvi. xxvii. ; Josh. vii. 16-18). This was, in fact, the old patriarchal government, to which the Hebrews were greatly attached. It seems to have been sufficient for all the purposes of the separate government of the tribes : but, as we Grid in simi- lar cases, it was deficient in force of cohesion among the tribes, or in forming them into a com- pacted nation. In fact, it was an institution suited to the wants of men who live dispersed in loosely connected tribes, and not to the wants and exi- gencies of a nation. It was in principle segre- gative, not aggregative ; and although there are traces of united agreement through a congress of delegates, or rather of national chiefs and elders of the tribes, this was an inefficient in- strument of general government, seeing that it was only applicable or applied to great occasions, and could have no bearing on the numerous questions of an administrative nature which arise from day to day in every state, and which there should somewhere exist the power to arrange and deter- mine. This defect of the general government it was one of the objects of the theocratical institu- tions to remedy. JUDGES. Jehovah had taken upon himself the function of king of the chosen people, and he dwelt among them in his paiace-tabemacle. Here he was always ready, through his priest, to counsel them in matters of general interest, as well as in those having reference only to particular tribes ; and to his court they were all required by the law to repair three times every year. Here, then, was the principle of a general administration, calcu- lated and designed to unite the tribes into a nation, by giving them a common government in all the higher and more general branches of adminis- tration, and a common centre of interest for all the political and ecclesiastical relations of the community. It was on this footing that the law destined the government of the Hebrews to proceed, after the peculiar functions of the legislator and the con- queror had been fulfilled. The fact is, however, that, through the per- versity of the people, this settlement of the general government on theocratical principles was not carried out in its proper form and extent ; and it is in this neglect we are to seek the necessity for those officers called Judges, who were from time to time raised up to correct some of the evils which resulted from it. It is very evident, from the whole history of the judges, that after the death of Joshua the Israelites threw themselves back upon the segregative principles of their go- vernment by tribes, and all but utterly neglected, and for long periods did utterly neglect, the rules and usages on which the general government was established. There was, in fact, no human power- adequate to enforce them. They were good in themselves, they were gracious, they conferred high privileges ; but they were enforced by no sufficient authority. No one was amenable to any tribunal for neglecting the annual feasts, or for not referring the direction of public affairs fo the Divine King. Omissions on these points involved the absence of the divine protection and blessing, and were left to be punished by their consequences. The man who obeyed in this and other things, was blessed ; the man who did not, was not blessed ; and general obedience was rewarded with national blessing, and general disobedience with national punishment. The enormities and transgressions into which the people fell in consequence of such neglect, which left them an easy prey to idolatrous influences, are fully recorded in the book of Judges. The people could not grasp the idea of a Divine and Invisible King : they could not bring themselves to recur to him in all those cases in which the judgment of a human king would have determined the course of action, or in which his arm would have worked for their deliverance. Therefore it was that God allowed them judges, in the persons of faithful men, who acted for the most part as agents of the divine will, regents for the Invisible King ; and who, holding their com- mission directly from him, or with his sanction, would be more inclined to act as dependent vas- sals of Jehovah than kings, who, as members of royal dynasties, would come to reign with notions of independent rights and royal privileges, which would draw away their attention from their true place in the theocracy. In this greater depend- ence of the judges upon the Divine King we see the secret of their institution. The Israelites were disposed to rest upon their separate interests as JUDGES. tribes ; and having thus allowed the standing general government to remain inoperative through disuse, they would in cases of emergency have been disposed ' to make themselves a king like the nations,' had their attention not been directed to the appointment of officers whose authority could rest on no tangible right apart from character and services ; which, with the temporary nature of their power, rendered their functions more accordant, with the principles of the theocracy than those of any other public officers could be. And it is pro- bably in this adaptation to the peculiar circum- stances of the Hebrew theocracy that we shall discover the reason of our inability to find any similar office among other nations. In being thus peculiar it resembled the Dictatorship among the Romans ; to which office indeed that of the judges has been compared ; and perhaps this parallel is the nearest that can be found. But there is this great difference, that the dictator laid down his power as soon as the crisis which had called for its exercise had passed away, and in no case could this unwonted supremacy be retained beyond a limited time (Liv. ix. 34) ; but the Hebrew judge remained invested with his high authority during the whole period of his life ; and is therefore usually described by the sacred historian as pre- siding to the end of his days over the tribes of Israel, amid the peace and security which his military skill and counsels had, under the divine blessing, restored to the land. Having thus traced the origin of the office to the circumstances of the times and the condition of the people, it only remains to inquire into the nature of the office itself, and the powers and pri- vileges which were connected with it. This is by no means an easy task, as the nature of the record enables us to jjerceive better what they were not than what they were, what they could not than what the}' could accomplish. It is usual to consider them as commencing their career with military exploits to deliver Israel from foreign oppression ; but this is by no means invariably the case. Eli and Samuel were not military men; Deborah judged Israel before she planned the war against Jabin ; and of Juir, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon, it is at least uncertain whether they ever held any military command. The command of the army can therefore be scareelyconsidered rhedistinguishing characteristic of these men, or military exploits the necessary introduction to the office. In many cases it is true that military achievements were the means by which they elevated themselves to the rank of judges ; but in general the appointment may be said to have varied with the exigencies of the times, and with the particular circumstances which in times of trouble would draw the public attention to persons who appeared suited by their gifts or influence to advise in matters of general concernment, to decide in questions arising be- tween tribe and tribe, to administer public affairs, and to appear as their recognised head in their intercourse with their neighbours anil oppressors. As we find that many of these judges arose during times of oppression, it. seems to us that, this last circumstance, which has never been taken into account, must have had a remarkable influence in the appointment of the judge. Foreigners could not be expected to enter into the pecu- liarities of the Hebrew constitution, and would JUDGES. 175 expect to receive the proposals, remonstrances, or complaints of the people through some person re- presenting the whole nation, or that part of it to which their intercourse applied. The law pro- vided no such officer except in the high-priest; but as the Hebrews themselves did not recognise the true operation of their theocracy, much less were strangers likely to do so. On the officer they appointed to represent the body of the people, under circumstances which compelled them to deal with foreigners mightier than themselves, would naturally devolve the command, of the army in war, and the administration of justice in peace. This last was among ancient nations, as it is still in the East, regarded as the first and most important duty of a ruler, and the interfer- ence of the judges was probably confined to the cases arising between different tribes, for which the ordinary magistrates would find it difficult to secure due authority to their decisions. In nearly all the instances recorded the appoint- ment seems to have been by the free unsolicited choice of the people. The election of Jephthah, who was nominated as the fittest man for the exist- ing emergency, probably resembled that which was usually followed on such occasions; and pro- bably, as in his case, the judge, in accepting the office, took care to make such stipulations as he deemed necessary The only cases of direct divine apointment are those of Gideon and Samscn, and the last stood in the peculiar position of having been from before his birth ordained ' to begin to deliver Israel.' Deborah was called to deliver Israel, but was already a judge. Samuel was called by the Lord to be a prophet, but not a judge, which ensued from the high gifts which the people recognised as dwelling in him ; and as to Eli, the office of judge seems to have devolved naturally, or rather ex-officio, upon him ; and his case seems to be the only one in which the high-priest appears in the character which the theocratical institutions designed for him. The following clear summary of their duties and privileges is from Jahn (Biblisc/tes Archao- logie, th. ii. bd. 1, sect. 22 ; Stowe's translation, ii. SO) : — ' The office of judges or regents was held during life, but it was not hereditary, neither could they appoint their successors. Their au- thority was limited by the law alone; and in doubtful cases they were directed to consult the Divine King through the priest by Urim and Thummim (Num. xxvii. 21). They were not obliged in common cases to ask advice of the ordinary rulers ; it was sufficient if these did not remonstrate against the measures of the judge. In important emergencies, however, they con- voked a general assembly of the riders, over which they presided and exerted a powerful in- fluence. They cotdd issue orders, but not enact laws; they could neither levy taxes nor appoint officers, except perhaps in the army. Their au- thority extended only over those tribes by whom they had been elected or acknowledged : for it is clear that several of the judges presided ovje* separate tribes. There was no income attached to their olhce, nor was there any income appro- priated to them, unless it might be a larger share in the spoils, and those presents winch were made them as testimonials of respect (Judg. viii. 21). They bore no external marks of dignity, and maintained no retinue of cour- 176 JUDGES. tiers, though some of them were very opulent. They were not only simple in their manners, moderate in their desires, and free from avarice and ambition, but noble and magnanimous men, who felt that whatever they did for their country was above all reward, and could not be recom- pensed ; who desired merely to promote the public good, and who chose rather to deserve well of their country than to be enriched by its wealth. This exalted patriotism, like everything else connected with politics in the theocratical state of the He- brews, was partly of a religious character, and those regents always conducted themselves as the officers" of God ; in all their enterprises they relied upon Him, and their only care was, that their countrymen should acknowledge the authority of Jehovah, their invisible king (Judg. viii. 22, sq. ; comp. Heb. xi.). Still they were not without faults, neither are they so represented by their historians ; they relate, on the contrary, with the utmost frankness, the great sins of which some of them were guilty. They were not merely de- liverers of the state from a foreign yoke, but destroyers of idolatry, foes of pagan vices, pro- moters of the knowledge of God, of religion, and of morality ; restorers of theocracy in the minds of the Hebrews, and powerful instruments of Divine Providence in the promotion of the great design of preserving the Hebrew constitution, and, by that means, of rescuing the true religion from destruction.' The same writer, in the ensuing section, gives a clear view of the general condition of the Hebrews in the time of the judges. ' By comparing the periods during which the Hebrews were oppressed by their enemies, with those in which they were independent and governed by their own constitu- tion, it is apparent that the nation in general ex- perienced much more prosperity than adversity in the time of the judges. Their dominion con- tinued four hundred and fifty years ; but the whole time of foreign oppression amounts only to one hundred and eleven years, scarcely a fourth part of that period. Even during these one hundred and eleven years, the whole nation was seldom under the yoke at the same time, but for the most part separate tribes only were held in servitude ; nor were their oppressions always very severe ; and all the calamities terminated in the advantage and glory of the people, so soon as they abolished idolatry and returned to their King, Jehovah. Neither was the nation in such a state of anarchy at this time as had been generally supposed. t There were regular judicial tribunals at which justice could be obtained ; and when there was no supreme regent, the public welfare was pro- vided for by the ordinary rulers' (Ruth iv. 1-11 ; Judg. viii.*22; x. 17, 18; xi. 1-11; 1 Sam. iv. 1 ; vii. 1-2). ' These times would certainly not be considered so turbulent and barbarous, much less would they be taken, contrary to the clearest evidence and to the analogy of all history, for a heroic age, if they were viewed without the prejudices of a precon- ceived hypothesis. It must never be forgotten that the book of Judges is by no means a complete history. This no impartial inquirer can ever deny. It is, in a maimer, a mere register of diseases, from which, however, we have no right to conclude that there were no healthy men, much less that there were no healthy seasons ; since the book JUDGES. itself, for the most part, mentions only a few tribes in which the epidemic prevailed, and notices long periods during which it had universally ceased. Whatever may be the result of more accurate in- vestigation, it remains undeniable that the condi- tion of the Hebrews during this period perfectly corresponds throughout to the sanctions of the law ; and they were always prosperous when they com- plied with the conditions on which prosperity was promised them ; it remains undeniable that the government of God was clearly manifested, not only to the Hebrews, but to their heathen neigh- bours ; that the fulfilling of the promises and threatenings of the law were so many sensible proofs of the universal dominion of the Divine King of the Hebrews ; and, consequently, that all the various fortunes of that nation were so many means of preserving the knowledge of God on the earth. The Hebrews had no sufficient reason to desire a change in their constitution ; ail required was, that they should observe the conditions on which national prosperity was promised them.'- The chronology of ihe period in which the judges ruled is beset with great and perhaps in- superable difficulties. There are intervals of time the extent of which is not specified; .as, for instance, that from Joshua's death to the yoke of Cushan Risbafhaim (ii. 8) ; that of the rule of Shamgar (iii. 31); that between Gideon's death and Abimelech's accession (viii. 31, 32): and that of Israel's renewal of idolatry previous to their oppression by the Ammonites (x. 6, 7). Sometimes round numbers seem to have been given, as forty years for the rule of Othniel, forty years for that of Gideon, and forty years also for the duration of the oppression by the Philistines. Twenty years are given for the subjection to Jabin, and twenty years for the government of Samson ; yet the latter never completely con- quered the Philistines, who, on the contrary, succeeded in capturing him. Some judges, who are commonly considered to have been successive, were in all probability contemporaneous, and ruled over different districts. Under these cir- cumstances, it is impossible to fix the date of each particular event in the book of Judges ; but attempts have been made to settle its general chronology, of which we must in this place men- tion the most successful. The whole period of the judges, from Joshua to Eli, is usually estimatetl at 299 years, in order to meet the 480 years which (1 Kings vi. 1) are said to have elapsed from the departure of the Israelites from Egypt to the foundation of the temple by Solomon. But St. Paul says (Acts xiii. 20), 'God gave unto the people of Israel judges about the space of 450 years until Samuel, the prophet.' Again, if the number of years spe- cified by the author of our book, in stating facts, is summed up, we have 410 years, exclusive of those years not specified for certain intervals of time above mentioned. In order to reduce these 410 years and upwards to 299, events and reigns must, in computing their years of duration, either be entirely passed over, or, in a most arbitrary way, included in other periods preceding or sub- sequent. This has been done by Archbishop Usher, whose peculiarly faulty system has been adopted in the Authorized Version of the Scriptures. He excludes the repeated intervals during which the Hebrews were in subjection to their enemies, and JUDGES JUDGES, 177 reckons only the years of peace and rest Which were assigned to the successive judges. For example, be passes over the eight years of servitude in- flicted upon the Hebrews by Cushau-rishathaim, and, without any interruption, connects the peace obtained by the victories of Otliniel with that which had been conferred oil the land by the government of Joshua ; and although tbe sacred historian relates in the plainest terms possible that the children of Israel served the king of Mesopo- tamia eight years, and were afterwards delivered by Othniel, who gave the land rest forty years, the archbishop maintains that the forty years now mentioned began, not after the successes of this judge, but immediately after the demise of Joshua. Nothing certainly can be more obvious than that in this case the years of tranquillity and the years of oppression ought to be reckoned separately. Again, we are informed by the sacred writer, that after the death of Ehud tl>e children of Israel were under the oppression of Jabin king of Hazor for twenty years, and that afterwards, when their deliverance was effected by Deborah and Barak, the land had rest forty years. Nothing can be clearer than this ; yet Usher's system leads him to include tbe twenty years of oppression in tbe forty of peace, making both but forty years. All this arises from the obligation which Usher un- fortunately conceived himself under of following the scheme adopted by the Masoretic Jews, who, as Dr. Hales remarks, have by a curious inven- tion included the four first servitudes in the years of the judges who put an end to them, contrary to the express declarations of Scripture, which represents the administrations of the judges, not as synchronising with the servitudes, but as succeed- ing them. The Rabbins were indeed forced to allow the fifth servitude to have been distinct from the administration of Jephthah, because it was too long to be included in that administra- tion ; but they deducted a year from the Scrip- ture account of the servitude, making it only six instead of seven years. They sank entirely the .sixth servitude of forty years under the Philistines, because it was too long to be contained in Sam son's administration ; and, to crown all, they reduced Saul's reign of forty years to two years only. The necessity for all these tortuous operations has arisen from a desire to produce a conformity with tbe date in 1 Kings vi. 1, which, as already cited, gives a period of only 4S0 years from the Exode to the foundation of Solomon's temple. As this date is incompatible with the sum of the different numbers given in the book of Judges, and as it differs from the computation of Josephus and of all the ancient writers on the subject, whether Jewish or Christian, it is not unsatis- factory to find grounds which leave this text open to much doubt and suspicion. We cannot here enter into any lengthened proof; but that the text did not exist in the Hebrew and Greek copies of the Scripture till nearly three cen- turies after Christ, is evident from the absence of all reference to it in the works of the learned men who composed histories of the Jews from the materials supplied to them in the sacred books. This may be shown by reference to va- rious authors, who, if the number specitied in it had existed, could not fail to have adduced it. In particular, it is certain that it did not exist in VOL. II. the Hebrew or Greek Bible3 in tbe days of Jo- sephus ; for he alludes to the verse in which it is contained without making the slightest observa- tion in regard to it, although the period which he, at the same time, states as having elapsed between the exode and the foundation of the temple, is directly at variance witli it to the extent of not less than 112 years (Antiq. viii. 3). If the num- ber ' 480 years' had then existed in the text, he could not, while referring to the passage where it is now inserted, have dared to state a number so very different. Then we have the testimony of St. Paul (Acts xiii. 20), who makes the rule of ' the judges until Samuel' extend over 450 years, which, with the addition of ascertained num- bers, raises the amount for the whole period to 592 years. This evidence seems so conclusive that it is scarcely necessary to add any other; but it may be mentioned that Origen, in his Commentary on St. John, cites 1 Kings vi. 1, and even mentions the year of Solomon's reign, and the month in which he began to build t'ne temple, without the slightest notice of the number of years (as now stated in the text) which inter- vened between that event and the exode. It has consequently been inferred, with good reason, that in a.b. 230, when Origen wrote, the interpolation of the date in question had not yet taken place. Eusebius, however, in his Chronicon., written about a.d. 325, does use tbe date as the basis of a chronological hypothesis; whence it is inferred that the date was inserted about the beginning of the fourth century, and probably under the direc- tion of the Masoretic doctors of Tiberias. It is also to be remarked that Eusebius, in the Preep. Evangelica, a work written some years after tbe Chronicon, and in all his other works, uses the more common and ancient system of dates. It may also be remarked that even the ancient versions, as they at present exist, do not agree in the number. Tbe present copies of the Septuagint, for instance, liave 440, not 480 years ; on which and other grounds some scholars, who have hesi- tated to regard the text as an interlopation, have deemed themselves authorized to alter it to 592 years instead of 480, producing in this way the same result which would be obtained if. tbe text bad no existence. This, it has been already remarked, is the number given by Josephus (Antiq. viiL 3. 1), and is in agreement with the statement of St. Paul. The computation of the Jews in China has also been produced in support of it (see Isaac Voss, Dissert, de LXX. Inierp. eorumque translation/} et chronoloaia. Hagee Comit. 1664.4; Michaelis, Orientalische Bib- liot/tek, v. SI). There would then be for the period from Moses's death to Sauks accession 468 years, and the whole ]«riod of the judges from the death of Joshua to that of Samuel might be estimated at 450 years, agreeably to Acts xiii. 20. If we add to these 450 years forty years for the march in the desert, eighty-four years for the reign of Saul, David, and Solomon, until tho foundation of the temple, the amount would be 574 years. For the time when Joshua acted as an independent chieftain, eighteen years may be counted, which added to 574 would make up the above number of 592 years (comp. Michaelis, Orientalische Bibliothek, v. 228, whose arrange- ment of years differs in some points from the above). It must, however, be observed that the N 178 JUDGES. number of 450 years represents only the sum total of all chronologically specified facts of our book down to the death of Eli, and does not in- clude the intervals of time of which the years are not given. The statement of Josephus above re- ferred to rests only on his own individual computa- tion, and is contrary to another statement of the same author (Antiq. xx. 10 ; Cont. Apion. ii. 2). The latest attempt towards settling the chro- nology of the Judges is that of Dr. Keil, in his work Dwptsche Beitrage zu den Theolo- gischen Wissenschaften, or, ' Contributions to- wards the furtherance of the theological sciences,' by professors of the university of Dorpat. He supports the number of 480 years in 1 Kings vi. 1, and from the invasion of Cushan-rishathaim to Jair (Judg. iii.-x.) retains the chronological statements of our book for events which he con- siders successive. But the period of the domina- tion of the Philistines over the (western) Israelites until the death of Saul, a space of seventy-nine years, he considers contemporaneous with the time of oppression and deliverance of the eastern, and JUDGES. northern tribes, for which (Judg. x. 12) are recl> oned forty years. He next estimates the period' from the distribution of the land under Joshua to the invasion by the king of Mesopotamia at ten years, and the period from the time when the Philistines were conquered until the death oi Saul at thirty-nine years, thus making up the above number of 480 years. In this attempt at settling the chronology of the book of Judge3 Dr. Kiel evinces great ingenuity and learning ; but it appears that his computations rest on his- torical and chronological assumptions which can never be fully established. In order satisfactorily to settle the chronology we lack sufficient data, and the task has therefore been abandoned by the ablest modern critics, as Eichhom, De Wette, and others. Nothing beyond general views is attain- able on this subject. Having explained this matter, it only remains to arrange the different systems of the chronology of this period so as to exhibit them in one view to the eye of the reader. It has been deemed right, for the better apprehension of the differences, Hales. Jackson. 4 I s "3, ai "Si O 2 1 Usher. « 1 ^ W 1 .Yrs. B.C. Years. B.C. Yrs. Yrs. Yrs. Years. Years. B.C. Exode to death of Moses . . 40 1648 40 1593 40 40 40 40 40 1491 Joshua (and the) . . . } 26 1608J 25 25 27 27 •• 1451 Y'uii Division of Lands . . . 1602 V 27 1553 Second Division of Lands 1596 . . 6 4 m. 1444 Anarchy or Interregnum . 10 1582) 2 I. Servitude, Mesopotam. 8 1572 8 1526 8 18 S 40/ 40 ; 1413- 40 1561 40 1518 40 40 40 1405 II. Servitude, Moabit. , 18 1524 IS 1478 18 18 ) 1343- 2. Ehud (and) . . . 3. Shamgar .... } 80 1506 80 1460 80 (80 1 I 80 1 80 omitted. I 80 , 132a III. Servitude, Canaanit. 20 1426 20 1380 20 20 20 20 I 40 1285 4. Deborah and Barak 40 1406 40 1360 40 40 40 40 J 1265 IV. Servitude, Midian. , 7 1368 7 1320 7 7 7 7} 40 1252 5. Gideon 40 1359 40 1313 40 40 40 40 j 1245 3 1319 3 1273 3 3 3 3 9 2 m. 123G 23 1316 22 1270 22 22 22 23 7 22/ 48 1232 22 1293 22 1248 22 22 22 1210- V. Servitude, Ammon. m 18 1271 18 1226 18' 18 18 m 6 1206 9. Jephthah . . , » , 6 1253 6 1208 6 6 6 ' 118S 7 1247 7 1202 7 7 7 71 . 1182 11. Elon 10 1240 10 1195 % 10 10 10 [ 25 1175 8 1230 8 1185 s if 1165 VI. Servitude, Philist. 20 13. Samson ... 20 ) 40 1222 40 1177 40 40 20 40 20 40 -j 20 40 40 I 14. Eli 30) Samuel called as a prophet 10 j 40 1182 20* 1137 20f 40 20 40 J 1157 VII. Servitude or Anarchy 20 1142 20 1117 20| 12 1122 20 1097 12 12 , . • •• 21 1116 Samuel and Saul . . 18 I 40 1110 120 40 IS 1077 2 20 40 40 1095 40 1070 40 1057 40 40 40 40) 3/ 43 1055 Solomon to Found, of the Tern )le 3 1030 3 1017 3 3 3 1014 Exode to F. of Temple . 621 1027 579 1014 5911592 612 600 47«i 1012 * Samson and EH are supposed to have been judges simultaneously during 20 years of this period. f Besides the 20 years under the sixth servi- tude. JUDGES, BOOK OF. to make the table embrace the whole period from the exode to the building of Solomon's temple. The headings are taken from Hales, simply be- cause, from being the most copious, they afford a framework within which all the explanations may be inserted. The authorities for this table are : Josephus, Antiquities, v. 1-10 ; Theophilus, Bp. of Antioch (a.d. 330), Epist. ad Autolycum, iii. ; Euse- bius (a.d. 330), Prceparatio Evangelica, x. 14 ; Usher (1650), Chronologia Sacra, p. 71 ; Jackson, (1752), Chronological Antiquities, p. 145; Hales, (1811), Analysis of Chronology, i. 101 ; Russell (1827), Connection of Sacred and Profane His- tory, i. 147. In the last work the full tables, with others, are given ; and we have here com- bined them for the sake of comparison. Other authorities on the subject of this article are : Herzfeld, Chronologia Judicum, Berol. 1836; Moldenhauer, Gedanken iiber die Zeitrechnung im Buch der Richter, p. 15, sy. ; Ditmar, Ge- schichte der Israelitcn, p. 91 ; Hug, in the Freiburger Zeitschrift, i. p. 129, sq. ; Carpzov, Introduct. F. T., i- 169; Simon, Hist. Crit. de V. Test. ; Jahn, Bibl. Archdolog., ii. 1. 85 ; De Wette, Lehrbitch, p. 30. JUDGES, BOOK OF, the third in the list of the historical compositions of the Old Testament. It consists of two divisions, the first comprising chaps, i-xvii. ; the second, being an appendix, chaps, xvii.-xxi. I. Plan of the Book. — That the author, in composing this work, had a certain design in view, is evident from ch. ii. 11-23, where he states the leading features of his narrative. He introduces it by relating (ch. i.) the extent to which the wars against the Canaanites were continued after the death of Joshua, and what tribes had spared them in consideration of a tribute imposed ; also by al- luding (ch. ii. 1-10) to the beneiits which Jehovah had conferred on them, and the distinguished pro- tection with which he had honoured them. Next lie states his leading object, namely, to prove that the calamities to which the Hebrews had heen exposed since the death of Joshua were owing to (heir apostacy from Jehovah, and to their idolatry. ' They forsook the Lord, and served Baal and Ashfaroth' (ch. ii. 13) ; for which crimes they were deservedly punished and greatly distressed (ch. ii. 15). Nevertheless, when they repented and obeyed again the commandments of the Lord, he delivered them out of the hand of their enemies by the Shophetim whom he raised up, and made them prosper (ch. ii. 16-23). To illustrate this theme, the author collected several fragments of the Hebrew history during the period between Joshua and Eli. Some episodes occur : but in arguing his subject he never loses sight of his leading theme, to which, on the contrary, he frequently recurs while stating facts, and shows how it applied to them ; the moral evidently being, that the only way to happiness was to shun idolatry and obey the com- mandments of the Lord. The design of the author was not to give a connected and complete history of the Hebrews in the period between Joshua and the kings ; for if he had intended a plan of that kind, he would also have described the state of the domestic affairs and of the government in the several tribes, the relation in which they stood to each other, and the extent of power exercised by a judge ; he would have further stated the num- JUDGES, BOOK OF. r ber of tribes over whom a judge ruled, and the number of years during which the tribes were not oppressed by their heathen neighbours, but enjoyed rest and peace. The appendix, containing two narratives, further illustrates the lawlessness and anarchy prevailing in Israel after Joshua's death. In the first narrative (chaps, xvii.-xviii.), a rather wealthy man, Micah, duelling in Mount Ephraim, is introduced. He had ' a house of gods,' and molten and graven images in it, which he wor- shipped. After having, at an annual salary, engaged an itinerant Levite to act as his priest and to settle in his family, the Danites, not having as yet an inheritance, to dwell in, turn in thither, seize the images, and take the priest along with them. They then establish idolatry at Leshem, or Laish, in Ceele-Syria, which they conquered, smiting the quiet and secure inhabitants with the edge of the sword. The second narrative (chaps, xix.-xxi.) first gives an account of the brutal and criminal outrage committed by the Benjamites of Sibeah against the family of a Levite dwelling, in the age immediately subsequent to Joshua's death, on the side of Mount Ephraim ; and next relates its consequence, a bloody civil war, in which all the tribes joined against the tribe of Benjamin and nearly destroyed it. The appendix then does not continue the history of the first sixteen chap- ters, and may have an author different from him who composed the first division of the book, to which inquiry we now turn. II. Authos. — If the first and second divisions had been by the same author, the chronological indications would also have been the same. Now the autHor of the second division always describes the period of which he speaks thus : ' In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes"' (ch. xvii. 6; xviii. 1 ; xix. 1 ; xxi. 25) ; but this expression never once occurs in the first division. If one author had composed both divisions, instead of this chrono- logical formula, we should rather have expected, ' In the days of the Shophetim,' 'At a time when there was no Shophet,' &c, which would be con- sonant with the tenor of the first sixteen chapters; The style also in the two divisions is different, and it will be shown that the appendix was writ- ten much later than the first part. All modern critics, then, agree in this, that the author of the first sixteen chapters of our book is different from him who composed the appendix (see L. Bertholdt, Historisch-Krilische Einleitung in die siimmt- Kchen Schriften des A. und N. T., p. 876 ; Eichhom's Einleitung in das A. T., iii. § 457). The authorship of the first sixteen chapters has been assigned to Joshua, Samuel, and Ezra. That they were not written by Joshua appears from the difference of the method of relating sub- jects, as well as from the difference of the style. In the book of Joshua there is a continual refer- ence to the law of Moses, which is much le>s fre- quent in the book of Judges ; and in Joshua, again, there are no such inferences from history as are common in Judges (ch. iii. 1,4; viii. 27 ; ix. 56). The style of the book of Joshua i< neater than that of Judges ; the narration is more clear, and the arrangement is better (comp. eh. i. 10, 1 1, 20, with Josh. xiv. G-15, and xv. 13-19 ; also ch. ii. 7-10, with Josh. xxiv. 29-31). That the book of Judges was composed by Samuel is an invention of the Talmudists, unsupported by any evidence; nor n2 JUDGES, BOOK OF. 180 will the opinion that it was written by Ezra be en- tertained by any who attentively peruses the origi- nal. For it has a phraseology of its own, and cer- tain favourite ideas, to which it constantly reverts, but of which there is not a trace in Ezra. If Ezra had intended to continue the history of the Hebrews from Joshua down to Eli in a separate work, he would not have given a selection of incidents to prove a particular theme, but a complete history. The orthography of the book of Ezra, with many phrases characteristic of his age, do not appear in the book of Judges. The prefix & occurs, indeed (ch. v. 7} vi. 17 ; vii. 12; viii. 26) ; but this cannot be referred to in proof that the language is of the time of Ezra, for it belonged to the dialect of North Palestine, as Ewald and others have proved. HD, instead of "Wit, is found also in Deut. xxiii. 3. Forms like D^IODJ?, ver. 14, and 2T, ver. 28, p», ver.l 0, njn, ver.il, resemble Chaldaisms, but may be accounted for by the poetical style of the song of Deborah. The forms TIN (ch. xvii. 2), and fcWS (ch. xix. 1), belonging to a late age of the Hebrew language, may be considered as changes intro- duced by copyists (see Ottmar, in Henke's Ma- gazin, vol. iv. ; W. M. L. de Wette, Lehrbuch der Einleitung in die Bibel, Berlin, 1833-39, 2 vols. 8vo.). But though we cannot determine the author- ship of the book of Judges, still its age may be determined from internal evidence. The first sixteen chapters must have been written under Saul, whom the Israelites made their king in the hope of improving their condition. Phrases used in the period of the Judges may be traced in them, and the author must consequently have lived near the time when they were yet current. He says that in his time ' the Jebusites dwelt with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem ' (ch. i. 21) : now this was the case only before David, who conquered the town and drove out the Jebusites. Consequently, the author of the first division of the book of Judges must have lived and written before David, and under king'Saul. If he had lived under David, he would have mentioned the cap- ture of Jerusalem by that monarch, as the nature of his subject did not allow him to pass it over in silence. The omission, moreover, of the history, not only of Samuel but also of Eli, indicates an author who, living in an age very near that of Eli, considered his history as generally known, because so recent. The exact time when the appendix was added to the book of Judges cannot indeed be determined, but its author certainly lived in an age much later than that of the recorded events. In his time the period of the events which he relates had been long forgotten : which may be inferred from the frequent chronological for- mula, ' in those days there was no king in Israel ' (ch. xvii. 6); and certain particulars of his narrative could no longer be ascertained, which caused him to omit the name of the Levite whose history is given in ch, xix. In his time also the house of God was no longer in Shiloh (ch. xviii. 31) ; and it will be recollected that it was David who brought the ark to Jerusalem. The author knew also that the posterity of Jona- than were priests of the graven image in Dan, or Laish, ' until the day of the captivity of the land ' pNn. nibj nv np (ch. xviii. 3o> This latter circumstance proves, as already observed JUDGES, BOOK OF. by Le Clerc and others, that the appendix was not published until after the Babylonian cap- tivity, or at least until after that of Israel by Sbalmaneser and Esar-haddon. It cannot be un- derstood of the domination of the Philistines over the Israelites, which would very improperly be called Vl^n niP3, this expression always im- plying the deportation of the inhabitants of a country. The circumstance that the author, in mentioning Shiloh, adds, ' which is in the land of Canaan ' (ch. xxi. 12), and that the topogra- phical description of the site of Shiloh is given (ch. xxi. 19), has led some interpreters to assert that the author of the appendix must have been a foreigner, as to an Israelite such remarks would have appeared trivial (see Briefe einiger Ilol- landischen Gottesgelehrten uber JR. Simon's kritische Geschichte des A. T., edited by Le Clerc at Zurich, p. 490). The inference is cer- tainly specious, but to judge of it duly we must look at the context. The first passage runs thus : ' And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead, four hundred young virgins that had known no man, and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan."1 The second passage is : ' There is a feast of the Lord in Shiloh yearly, in a place which is on the north side of Bethel, on the east side of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and on the south of Lebonah.' It ap- pears that in the first passage Shiloh is opposed to Jabesh in Gilead, a town without the land of Canaan, and that this led the author to add to Shiloh that it was in Canaan. The second passage describes not the site of Shiloh, but of a place in its neighbourhood, where an annual feast was celebrated, when the daughters of Shiloh came out to dance, to sing, and to play on in- struments of music. The author thus enabled his readers, and all those who had never been at Shiloh, to form a distinct idea of the festival, and to find its scene without the employment of a guide ; his topographical observation was cal- culated to raise the interest of his narrative, and was consequently very proj-ier and judicious. It cannot, there ore, authorize us to infer that he was a foreigner. III. Character of the Book. — Parts of the work are undoubtedly taken from ancient records and genealogies, others from traditions and oral information. From ancient authentic documents are probably copied the song of Deborah (ch. v.), the beautiful parable'of Jorham (ch. ix. 8-15), and the beginning of Samson's epinician, or triumphal poem (ch. xv. 16). In their genealogies the Hebrews usually inserted also some historical accounts, and from this source may have been derived the narrative of the circumstances that preceded the conception of Samson, which were given as the parents related them to others (ch. xiii.). These genealogies were sometimes further illustrated by tradition, and several incidents in the history of Samson appear to have been derived from this kind of information. But on many points tradition offered nothing, or the author rejected its information as not genuine, and un- worthy of belief. Thus it is that of Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon, the author gives only the number of years that they governed and the number of their children, but relates none of their JUDGES, BOOK OF. transactions (ch. x. 1-5 ; xii. 8, 9, 11, 13). In some instances the very words of the ancient documents which the author used seem to have been pre- served ; and this proves the care with which he composed. Thus in the first division of our book, but nowhere else, rich and powerful men are described as men riding on ass-colts D^33"l On^ hv (ch. x. 4 ; xii. 14, &c.)._ It is remark- able that this phrase occurs also in the song of Deborah, which is supposed to have been written out in her time (ch. v. 9, 10) : ' My heart is towards the governors of Israel, that offered them- selves willingly among the people. Speak ye that ride on ivhite asses, ye that sit in judgment.' In the appendix also of this book, but nowhere else, a priest has the honorary title of father given him (ch. xvii. 10; xviii. 19). But though the author sometimes retained the words of his sources, still the whole of the composition is written in a particular style, distinguishing it from all other books of the Old Testament. The idea of the Israelites being overcome by their enemies, he expresses often in this way : ' The anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he sold them into the hands of their enemies,' nbT' f]N "ll"P1 pn»3*iK ti tra&) bvrwz (ch.ii.i4; iii.s; iv. 2 ; x. 7). A courageous and valiant warrior is described as a person upon whom rests the spirit of Jehovah, V^V PlnT HD 'ilfttj or as a person whom the spirit of Jehovah clothed, nil puna n« rm1? mrp (ch. vi. 34 ; ix. 29; xiv. 6, 19 ; xv. 14, &c). IV. Authority of the Book. — It was pub- lished at a time when the events related were generally known, and when the veracity of the author could be ascertained by a reference to the original documents. Several of its narratives are confirmed by the books of Samuel (comp. Judg. iv. 2; vi. 14 ; xv., with 1 Sam. xii. 9-12 : Judg. ix. 53 with 2 Sam. xi. 21). The Psalms not only allude to the book of Judges (comp. Ps. lxxxiii. 1], with Judg. vii. 25), but copy from it entire verses (comp. Ps. lxviii. 8, 9 ; xcvii. 5 ; with Judg. v. 4, 5). Philo and Josephus knew the book, and made use of it in their own compositions. The New Testament alludes to it in several places (comp. Matt. ii. 13-23 with Judg. xiii. 5 ; xvi. 17 ; Acts xiii. 20 ; Heb. xi. 32). This external evidence in support of the authority of the book of Judges is corro- borated by many internal proofs of its authen- ticity. All its narratives are in character with the age to which they belong, and agree with the natural order of things. We find here that shortly after the death of Joshua the Hebrew nation had, by several victories, gained courage and become valorous (ch. i. and xix.) ; but that it afterwards turned to agriculture, preferred a quiet life, and allowed the Canaanites to reside in its territory in consideration of a tribute imposed on them, when the original plan was that they should be expelled. This changed their character entirely : they became effeminate and indolent — a result which we find in the case of all nations who, from a nomadic and warlike life, turn to agri- culture. The intercourse with their heathen neighbours frequently led the uncultivated He- brews to idolatry ; and this, again, further pre- pared them for servitude. They were conse- JUDGES, BOOK OF. 181 quently overpowered and oppressed by their heathen neighbours. The first subjugation, in- deed, by a king of Mesopotamia, they endured but eight years ; but the second, more severe, by Eglon, lasted longer : it was the natural conse- quence of the public spirit having gradually more and more declined, and of Eglon having removed his residence to Jericho with a view of closely watching all their movements (Joseph. Antiq. v. 5). When Ehud soimded the trumpet of revolt, the whole nation no longer rose in arms, but only the inhabitants of Mount Ephrairn (ch. iii. 27) ; and when Barak called to arms against Sisera, many tribes remained quietly with their herds (ch. v. 14, 15, 26, 28). Of the 30,000 men who offered to follow Gideon, he could make use of no more than 300, this small number only being, as it would seem, filled with true patriotism and courage. Thus the people had sunk gradually, and deserved for forty years to bear the yoke of the Philistines, to whom they had the meanness to deliver Samson, who, however, loosed the cords with which he was tied, and killed a large number of them (ch. xv.). It is impossible to consider such an historical work, which perfectly agrees with the natural course of things, as a fiction : at that early period of authorship, no writer could have, from fancy, depicted the character of the Hebrews so conformably with nature and esta- blished facts. All in this book breathes the spirit of the ancient world. Martial law we find in it, as could not but be expected, hard and wild. The conquered people are subjected to rough treat- ment, as is the case in the wars of all uncivilized people ; the inhabitants of cities are destroyed wholesale (ch. viii. 16, 17; xx.). Hospitality and the protection of strangers received as guests is considered the highest virtue : a father will rather resign his daughter than allow violence to be done to a stranger who stops in his house for the night (ch. xix. ; comp. Gen. xix.). In the state of oppression in which the Hebrews often found themselves during the period from Joshua to Eli, it was to be expected that men, filled with heroism, should now and then rise up and call the people to arms in order to deliver them from their enemies. Such valiant men are introduced by our author, and he extols them, indeed, highly ; but on the other hand he is not silent respecting their faults, as may be seen in the instances of Ehud, whom he reports to have murdered a king- to recover liberty for his country (ch. iii. 16, sq.) ; of Gideon, who is recorded to have punished the inhabitants of Succoth and Penuel cruelly, for having refused bread to his weary troops (ch. viii. 16, 17) ; and of Jephthah, who vows a vow that if he should return home as a conqueror of the Ammonites, lie would offer as a burnt-offering whatever should first come out of the door of his house to meet, him : in conse- quence of this inconsiderate vow, his only daughter is sacrificed by a savage father, who thus becomes a gross offender against the Mosaic law, which expressly forbids human immolations (ch. xi. 34). This cannot be a fiction ; it is no panegyric on Israel to describe them in the manner the author has done. And this frank, impartial tone pervades the whole work. It begins with displaying the Israelites as a refractory and obstinate people, and the appendix ends with the statement of a crime committed by the licnjamites, which had the 182 JUDGES, BOOK OF. most disastrous consequences. At the same time due praise is bestowed on acts of generosity and justice, and valiant feats are carefully recorded. But are not the exploits of its heroes exag- gerated in our book, like those of Sesostris, Semi- ramis, and Hercules ? Their deeds are, no doubt, often splendid ; but they do not surpass belief, provided we do not add to the narrative anything which the original text does not sanction, nor give to particular words and phrases a meaning which does not belong to them. Thus, when we read that ' Shamgar slew of the Philistines 600 men' (ch. iii. 31), it would have been more correct if the Hebrew IJ"1"! had been rendered by 'put to flight;' and it should be further recollected, that Shamgar is not stated to have been alone and unassisted in repelling the enemy : he did it, no doubt, supported by those brave men whose leader he was. It frequently happens that to the leader is attributed what has been performed by his followers. We find (I Sam. xiii. 3) that Jonathan repulsed the Philistines, and no one doubts that it was done by the 1000 men men- tioned in the beginning of the chapter. We read also (1 Sam. xviii. 7) that 'Saul has slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands,' but of course with the assistance of troops ; and many more passages of the Old Testament are to be in- terpreted on the same principle, as 1 Sam. xviii. 27 ; 2 Sam. viii. 2. Nor can it offend when, in the passage quoted above, it is said that Shamgar repelled the Philistines with an ox-goad ; for this was exactly the weapon which an uncultivated Oriental warrior, who had been brought up to husbandry, would choose in preference to other instruments of oKence. From the description which travellers give of it, it appears to have been well suited to such a purpose [Agriculture]. It is, however, chiefly the prodigious strength of Samson which to very many readers seems exag- gerated, and surpassing all belief. He is, e. g., reported to have, unarmed, slain a lion. (ch. xiv. 5, 6); to have caught 300 jackals (VhyW), bound their tails to one another, put a firebrand between two tails, and let them go into the stand- ing com of the Philistines, which was thus burnt up (ch. xv. 4, 5, 8) ; to have broken, with perfect ease, the new cords with which his arms were bound, &c. (ch. xv. 14 ; xvi. 7-9, 1 1). Now, there is in these and other recorded feats of Samson no- thing which ought to create difficulty, for history affords many instances of men of extraordinary strength, of whom Goliath among the Philistines is not the least remarkable ; and for others we re- fer to T. Ludoif, Historia ^thiopice, i. 10 ; to the Acta Dei per Francos, i. 75, 314; and to Schil- linger, Missionsbericht, iv. 79. Lions were also slain by other persons unarmed, as by David (1 Sam. xvii. 36) and Benaiah (2 Sam. xxiii. 20). The explanation of Samson's other great exploits will be found under his name [Samson]. It will be easy to show that, when properly under- stood, they do not necessarily exceed the limits of human power. Extraordinary indeed they were ; but they are not alleged by the Scripture itself to have been supernatural. Those, however, who do hold them to have been supernatural cannot reason- ably take exception to them on the ground of their extraordinary character. A cautious reader may, perhaps, resolve on abstaining entirely from giving his views of Samson's feats ; but, at all events, JUDGMENT-HALL. he will not presume to say that they exceed human power, and are fabulous. He may say that they do not necessarily exceed human power, and are therefore neither supernatural on the one hand, nor fabulous on the other ; or if he believes them above human power, he must admit that they are supernatural, and will have no right to conclude that they are fabulous. Considering the very remote period at which our book was written — considering also the manner of viewing and describing events and persons which pre- vailed with the ancient Hebrews, and which very much differs from that of our age — taking, more- over, into account the brevity of the narratives, which consist of historical fragments, we may well wonder that there do not occur in it more difficulties, and that not more doubts have been raised as to its historical authority (see Herder, Geist der Hebraischen Poesie, ii. 250, 59 ; Eich- horn, Repertorium der Bibllschen und Moi-gen- landischen Litteratur, vii. 78). — J. y. H. JUDGMENT- HALL. UpaircLpiov occurs Matt, xxvii. 27; Mark xv. 16; John xviii. 28, 33 ; xix. 9 ; Acts xxiii. 35 ; Phil. i. 13 ; in all which places the Vulgate has prcetoritlm. The English version, however, uses prffitorium but once only, and then unavoidablj', Mark xv. 16, ' The hali called Preetorium.' In all the other instances it gives an explanation of the word rather than a translation : thus, Matt, xxvii. 27, ' the common-hall ;' margin, ' or governor's house :' John xviii. 28, 33, ' the judgment-hall ;' margin, ' or Pilate's house :' Philipp. i. 13, ' the palace ;' margin, ' or Caesar's court.' The object of the translators, probably, was to make their version intelligible to the mere English reader, and to exhibit the various senses in which they consi- dered the word to be used in the several passages. It is plainly one of the many Latin words to be found in the New Testament [Latinisms], being the word preetorium in a Greek dress, a deri- vative imm prcetor ; which latter, from prceeo, 'to go before,' was originally applied by the Romans to a military officer — the general. But because the Romans subdued many countries and reduced them to provinces, and governed them afterwards, at first by the generals who had subdued them, or by some other military commanders, the word praetor came ultimately to be used for any civil governor of a province, whether he had been en- gaged in war or not ; and who acted in the capacity of Chief Justice, having a council asso- ciated with him (Acts xxv. 12). Accordingly the word praetoriurn, also, which originally sig- nified the general's tent in a camp, came at length to be applied to the residence of the civil governor in provinces and cities (Cic. Verr. ii. v. 12) ; and being properly an adjective, as is also its Greek representative, it was used to signify whatever appertained to the praetor or governor ; for instance, his residence, either the whole or any part of it, as his dwelling-house, or the place where he administered justice, or even the large enclosed court at the entrance to the praetorian residence (Bynaeus, De Morte Jes. Christ, ii. 407, Amst. 1696). These observations serve to elucidate the several uses of the word in the New Testament, which have, however, much exercised the ingenuity and research of many eminent scholars, as may be seen upon referring to Pitisci Lex. Antiq. Roman., 3UDGMENT-HALL. ». v. ' Praetorium.' Upon comparing the instances in which the evangelists mention the prsetorium, it will be seen, first, that it was the residence of Pilate ; for that which John relates in ch. xviii. 28, ' Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas into the praetorium,' &c,, is most certainly the same incident which Luke relates in ch. xxiii. 1, ' And the whole multitude arose and led him to Pilate,' &c. A collation of the subsequent verses in each passage will place this point beyond doubt. Nonnus says, that leaving the house of Caiaphas, they took Jesus els d6fiov 7)j(:fx6vos, ' to the governor's house.' This residence of Pilate seems to have been the magnificent palace built by Herod, situated in the north part of the upper city, west of the temple (Joseph. Antiq. xv. 9. 3), and over- looking the temple (xx. 8. 11). The reasons for this opinion are, that the Roman procurators, whose ordinary residence was at Csesarea (Acts xxiii. 23, &c; xxv„ 1, &c), took up their resi- dence in this palace when they visited Jerusalem, their tribunal being erected in the open court or area before it. Thus Josephus states that Florus took up his quarters at the jjalace {eV toFs /3aen- Aelois av\i^erai) ; and on the next day he had his tribunal set up before it, and sat upon it (De Bell. Jud. ii. 14. 8). Philo expressly says that the palace, which had hitherto been Herod's, was now called r)]v olitlat' toiv iirirpdircav, ' the house of the praetors' (Legat. ad Caium, p. 1033, ed. Franc). Secondly, the word is applied in the New Testa- ment, by synecdoche, to a particular part of the praetorian residence. Thus, Matt, xxvii. 27, and Mark xv. 16, ' And the soldiers led Jesus away into the hall called Praetorium, and gathered unto them the whole band, and they clothed him with purple,' &c. ; where the word rather refers to the court or area in front of the praetorium, or some other court where the procurator's guards were stationed. In John xix. 9, the word seems applied, when all the circumstances are consi- dered, to Pilate's private examination room. In like manner, when Felix ' commanded Paul to be kept in Herod's ptaetorium' (Acts xxiii. 25), the words apply not only to the whole palace ori- ginally built at Caesarea by Herod, and now most likely inhabited by the praetor, but also to the keep or donjon, a prison for confining offenders, such as existed in our ancient royal palaces and grand baronial castles. Thirdly, in the remain- ing instance of the word, Phil. i. 3, ' So that my bonds in Christ are manifest in all the praetorium,' ' palace,' it is, in the opinion of the best commen- tators, used by hypallage to signify the praetorian camp at Rome, a select body of troops constituted by Augustus to guard his person and to have charge of the city, the ' cohortes praetorianae ' (Suet. Tib. 37 ; Claud. 10 ; Ner. 8 ; Tacitus, Annal. xii. 69); so that the words of the apostle really mean, ' My bonds in Christ are manifest to all the praetorians, and by their means to the public at large ' (Bloomfield's Reccnsio Synopt., in loc). The praefect of this camp was the (TTparoTTeSapxris to whose charge Paul was committed (Acts xxviii. 26), as the younger Agrippa was once imprisoned by this officer at the express command of the Emperor Tiberius (Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 6. 6; Olshausen, Topogr. des alt Jerusalem, § iii. 9 ; Perizonius, De Origine et Significatione et usu vocum Prcetoris et Pratorii, Frank. 1690 ; Perisonius, Disquisitio cum Ulrico Hubero, JUDITH. 183 Lugdun. Bat. 1696 ; Shorzius, De Prcstorio Pilati in Exercit. Phil. Hag. Com. 1774; Zor- nius, Opuscula Sacra, ii. 699 ; Winer, Bibl. Real- Wwterbuch, art. ' Richthaus'). — J. F. D. JUDITH ('lovdid; or'IovSrjdfJudeth, as in the English version, and in Origen) [Apocrypha], the name of one of the apocryphal or deutero- canonical books of the Old Testament, is placed in manuscripts of the Alexandrine version between the books of Tobit and Esther. In its external form this book bears the character of the record of an historical event, describing the complete defeat of the Assyrians by the Jews through the prowess of a woman. The following is a sketch of the narrative : — Nebuchadnezzar, or, as he is called in the Greek, Nabuchodonosor, king of the Assyrians, having, in the twelfth year of his reign, conquered and taken Arphaxad, by whom his territory had been invaded, formed the design of subduing the people of Asia to the westward of Nineveh his capital, who had declined to aid him against Arphaxad. With this view he sent his general, Holofernes, at the head of a powerful army, and soon made him- self master of Mesopotamia, Syria, Libya, Cilicia, and Idumaea. The inhabitants of the sea-coast made a voluntary submission ; -which, however, did not prevent their territories from being laid waste, their sacred groves burned, and their idols destroyed, in order that divine honours should be paid only to Nebuchadnezzar. Holofernes, having finally encamped in the plain of Esdraelon (ch, i. 3), remained inactive for a whole month — or two, according to the Latin version. But the Jews, who had not long returned from captivity, and who had just restored their temple and its worship, prepared for war under the direction of their high- priest Joacim, or Eliakim, and the senate. The high -priest addressed letters to the inhabitants of Bethulia (Gr. BervAova) and Betomestham, near Esdraelon (ch. iv. 6), charging them to guard the passes of the mountains. The Jews at the same time kept a fast, and called upon God for protec- tion against their enemies. Holofernes, astonished at their audacity and preparations, inquired of the Moabites and Ammonites who these people were. Achior, the leader of the Ammonites, informed him of the history of the Jews, adding, that if they offended their God he would deliver them into the hands of their enemies, but that otherwise they would be invincible. Holofernes, however, prepares to lay siege to Bethulia, and commences operations by taking the mountain glasses, and in- tercepting the water, in order to compel the inhabit- ants to surrender. Ozias, the governor of the city, holds out as long as possible ; but at the end of thirty-four days' siege, the inhabitants are reduced to that degree of distress from drought, that they are determined to surrender unless relieved within five days. Meantime Judith, a rich and beautiful woman, the widow of Manasseh, forms the patriotic design of delivering the city and the nation. With this view she entreats the governor and elders to give up all idea of surrender, and to permit the gates of the city to be opened lor her. Arrayed in rich attire, she proceeds to the camp of Holofernes, attended only by her maid, bearing a bag of provisions. She is admitted into the presence of Holofernes, and informs him that the Jews could not be overcome' so long as they remained faithful to God, hut that they had now 18Z JUDITH. sinned against Him in converting to their own use the tithes, which were sacred to the priests alone ; and that she had fled from the city to escape the impending, and inevitable destruction which awaited it. She obtains leave to remain in the camp, with the liberty of retiring by night for the purpose of prayer, and promises that at the proper moment she will herself be the guide of Holofernes to the very walls of Jerusalem. Judith is favourably entertained ; Holofernes is smitten with her charms, gives her a magnificent entertainment, at which, having drunk too freely, he is shut up with her alone in the tent. Taking advantage of her opportunity, while he is sunk in sleep, she seizes his falchion and strikes off his head. Giving it to her maid, who was outside the tent door, she leaves the camp as usual, under pretence of devotion, and returns to Bethulia, dis- playing the head of Holofernes. The Israelites, next morning, fail on the Assyrians, who, panic- struck at the loss of their general, are soon dis- comfited, leaving an immense spoil in the hands of their enemies.. The whole concludes with the triumphal song of Judith, who accompanies all the people to Jerusalem to give thanks to the Lord. After this she returns to her native city Bethulia, gives freedom to her maid, and dies at the advanced age of 105 years. The Jews enjoying a profound and happy peace, a yearly festival (according to the Vulgate) is instituted in honour of the victory. The difficulties, historical, chronological, and geographical, comprised in the narrative of Judith are so numerous and serious as to be held by man}' divines altogether insuperable. Events, times, and manners are said to be confounded, and the chronology of the times before and those after the exile, of the Persian and Assyrian, and even of the Maccabaean period, confusedly and unac- countably blended. The first and greatest difficulty is to fix the period when the alleged events took place. Those who place them before the exile are divided in opinion between the time of Manasses and that ot Zedekiah. Among those who refer the history to the time of Manasseh are Calmet {Commentary) , Prideaux (Connection), Montfaueon, who places the scene in the latter part of his reign {Hist. Ver. Judith.), and Bellarmine (De Verbo Dei). These writers consider Nebuchadnezzar to be the same with Saosduchin. See also Lud. Capell (Comm. Crit.), and Huet (Dem. Evangel.). As the events in Judith are positively asserted to have taken place after the captivity (ch. iv. 3; v. 18, 19 in the Greek ; ch. v. 22, 23 in the Vulgate), the commentators who adopt, the view just referred to assume that it is only some temvjorary and transient captivity (as that of Manasseh) which is here meant. Calmet is not disconcerted by supposing that Judith might in this case be sixty- three or sixty years old, ' being then what we call a fine woman, and having an engaging air and person,' ' likely,' adds Du Pin, ''to charm an old general.' Jahn, however, maintains that it would be altogether inconsistent with historical truth to assert that the Jews had no idols in the reign ef Manasseh (ch. viii- 18). The reign of Zedekiah has been held by others as the era of Judith : and Genebrard is of opinion that the Nebuchadnezzar of Judith is Nebuchad- nezzar the Great [Nsbuohadbezzae],. Jahn JUDITH. conceives that the author of Judith confounds Nebuchadnezzar with Nereglissor, who, in pre- paring his expedition against the Medes, invited the Lydians, Phrygians, Carians, Cappadociansy Cilicians, Paphlagon-ians, and other neighbouring nations to the war, when, however, he was himself overcome and slain by Cyrus (Bibl. ArchceoL part ii. torn. i. § 47, p-. 216). Those who consider the events recorded in Judith to have taken place after, the captivity, find equal difficulty in fixing the era. The most ancient tradition of the Jews (preserved by Eusebius in his Chronicon) considers Cambyses as the Nebu- chadnezzar of Judith. Julius Africanus, who is followed by the Roman Catholic Professor Al her, of Pesth, ascribes the history to the time of Xerxes, others to that of Darius Hystaspis (Whiston, Hist, of the Old Test.), or of Artaxerxes Ochus (Sulpitius Severus, Hist. Sac. ii. 12). Jahn (In- trod.) maintains that there was no time after the exile when it was possible for these events to have taken place, for he observes that the Jews wrere subject to the Persians for 207 years, after which, they were subject to Alexander the Great, then to the Ptolemies, and to the kings of Syria, until they obtained their independence. The only time to which they could possibly be referred is that of Antiochus Epi plumes, but this supposition is in- consistent with the fact that the Jews had but recently returned from captivity, and restored the worship of God in the Temple. The geographical difficulties are equally embarrassing. While some have endeavoured to account for these difficulties by imputing them to the errors of transcribers, others have supposed that the book of Judith could not possibly have been intended by its author to be a purely historical narrative. Grotius conceived it to be an allegory, the design of which was to encourage the Jews in their hopes of deliverance from the Syrians, when the Temple was polluted by Antiochus Epiphanes. Judith, he says, represents the Jewish nation; Bethulia, the Temple ; the sword issuing from them, the prayers of the saints ; Nebuchad- nezzar, the devil; and Holofernes (E?n3 "12 ? H, the Officer of the Serpent), Antiochus Epiphanes, who wishes to overcome the beautiful but wi- dowed Judaea. The prayers of the saints were heard, and he was punished by God. Eliakim, the name of the high-priest, signifies that God will arise. Among, the Roman Catholics this notion of an allegory is favoured by Jahn, who main- tains that the difficulties are otherwise insuperable. De Wette, however, considers that the fact of Ho- lofernes being an historical name (together with other reasons), militates against the notion of an allegory, as maintained by Grotius. The name Holofernes is found in Appian (In Syriac. c. 47), and in Polybius (x. 11). The latter historian states that Holofernes, having conquered Cappa- docia, lost it by endeavouring to change the customs of the country, and to introduce the drunken rites of Bacchus; and Casaubon (ad Athen.) conjectures that this was the Holofernes of Judith. From its termination the name is sup- posed to be of Persian extraction, as Tissaphernes, Artaphemes, Bargaphernes, &c. Luther first conceived the idea that the book of Judith was a patriotic romance, a drama or sacred poem, written by some pious man, with the JUDITH. intention of showing that God was accustomed to assist the Israelites who had faith in his promises. This view was subsequently adopted by Buddeus (Hist. Eccles. V. T., ii. 611, sq.), Semler, and Bertholdt. ' Judith,' says Luther, ' is a beautiful composition ; it is good, sound, and worthy of being read with attention by Christians. Its con- tents ought to be read as the work of a sacred poet, or of a prophet animated by the Holy Spirit, who instructs by the characters whom he intro- duces on the stage to speak in his name' (Pre/, to Judith). And again, ' If the action of Judith could be justified by proof drawn from incontest- able historical documents, it would doubtless merit to be received into the number of sacred books as an excellent work.' Date of the composition, and author. — The authorship of the book is as uncertain as its date. It is not named either by Philo or Josephus ; nor have we any indication whatever by which to form a conjecture respecting its author. But it has been supposed by some that it could not have been written by a contemporary, from the cir- cumstance of the family of Achiov being men- tioned as still in existence, and of the Festival of Judith being still celebrated. If this festival ever took place, it must have been of temporary duration, for, as Calmet observes, no record of it can be traced since the exile. Professor Alber of Pesth, however, maintains that it is still recorded in the Jewish calendars. Jahn, after Grotius, refers the date of the book to the Maccabaean period, and derives an argument for its late com- position from the fact of the Feast of Ihe New Moon being mentioned (ch. viii. 6, compared with Mark xv. 42). De Wette (Einleitung) con- ceives that the whole composition bespeaks an author who was a native of Palestine,, who could not have lived beyond ihe end of the first cen- tury of the Christian era (the date assigned to it by Eichhorn), inasmuch as it is then cited by Clement of Rome; but that the probability is that it was much earlier written. Movers, a Roman Catholic Professor at Bonn, a man of great penetration in similar investigations re- specting the canonical books of the Old Testa- ment, endeavours to fix the date of its composition in the year b.c. 104. ' The author,' he observes, ' who lias transferred the geographical relations of his own time to a former period,* makes the Jewish territory commence at Scythopolis (ch. iii. 10), and makes Betliulia, against which Holofernes directed his attack, the first Jewish city at the entrance into Judcea (iv. 7), * The Rev. Charles Forster {Geography of Arabia, 1844) observes (i. 185), 'that in the book of Judith, the race of Ishmael is noticed by their patronymic as extending to the southern confines of Syria and Cilicia. Holofernes, moving south from Cilicia, spoiled all the children of Rasses and the children of Ishmael which were towards the wilderness, at the south of the land of the Chillians. The same verse,' he adds (Judith ii. 23), ' makes mention of " Phud and Lud " as inhabitants of the hill country, or Upper Cilicia, and thereby corrects the geography of Bochart and Wells, who not only carry these two nations into Africa, but confine them exclu- sively to that continent. The march of Holo- fernes is wholly inconsistent with this notion.' JUDITH. 185 reckoning the territory intervening between thia and Samaria as tributary to the Jewish high- priest. This state of affairs continued from the time of John Hyrcanus to Pompey's invasion of Judaea. Hyrcanus had seized upon Samaria, and wrested Scythopolis, with the surrounding territory, from Epicrates, the general of Ptolemy Lathurus (Josephus, Antiq. xiii. 10. 3), B.C. 110, according to Usher. But Samaria and Scythopolis, with other acquisitions of the Maccabees, were lost for ever to the Jewish nation, when Pompey, b.c. 48, reduced Judaea to its ancient limits. The sea-coast (ch. iii. 1), independent of the Jews, continued, since the last years of the reign of Alexander Jannseus, to be a Jewish possession ; but Carmel, which (ch. i. 8) was inhabited by the Gentiles, was still independent in the beginning of his reign, and he first seized it after the war with Ptolemy Lathurus (xiii. 15. 4). It is to tins war that Movers considers the book of Judith to refer, and he supposes it to have been written after the unfortunate battle at Asochis in Galilee (or rather Asophen on the Jordan) (Movers, Ueber die Ursprache der Deuterokan. Bucher, in the Bonner Zeitschrift, xiii. 36, sq.). De Wette conceives that this hypothesis is opposed by the following geographical combinations : — 1. Galilee belonged to the Asmonseans, the proof of which, indeed, is by no means certain, while the following indications thereof present them- selves : — (a) Asochis seems to have belonged to Alexander Jannseus, as it received Ptolemy Lathurus (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 12. 4, comp. with xv. 4). (b) Hyrcanus had his son Alexander Jan- naeus brought up in Galilee (xiii. 12. 1). (c) Anti- gonus returned from Galilee (De Bell. Jud. i. 3. 3). (d) Aristobulus seized upon Ituraja (Antiq. xiii. 11.3), which presupposes the possession of Galilee. (e) Even after the limits of Galilee were circum- scribed by Pompey, it still belonged to the Jewish high-priest (De Bell. Jud. i. 10. 4). 2. Idumsea belonged to the Jewish state, but the sons of Esau came to Holofernes (vii. 8. 18). 3. If the author had the war with Ptolemy Lathurus in view, the irruption of Holofernes would rather correspond with the movements of the Cyprian army, which proceeded from Asochis to Sepphoris, and thence to Asophen (Einleitung, § 307). Language of Judith.— The original language is uncertain. Eichhorn and Jahn (Introduction') and Seiler (Biblical Ilermcneutics), with whom is Bertholdt, conceive it to have been Greek. Calmet states on the authority of Origen (Ep. ad African.), that the Jews had the book of Judith in Hebrew in his time. Origen's words, however, are, ' They make no use of Tobir, nor of Judith, nor have they them even in the Apocrypha in Hebrew, as we have learned from themselves.' Jerome (Pre/, to Judith) states that it is written in Chaldee, from which he translated it, with the aid of an interpreter, givilig rather the sense than the words. He also complains of numbers of incorrect copies of Judith in the Latin translation, which he had expurgated, retaining only what was in the Chaldee. Many of the errors of Jerome's translation can be corrected by the Greek; as, for instance, airdrvs, 'of deceit' (ch. xi. 5), was mistaken for ay dirris, and translated caritatis ; icAavaomcu was mistaken lor uavcrovrat, and translated urentur, &C. &c. The Chaldee text, from which Jerome translates, and which varies 186 JUDITH. considerably from the Greek, betrays, according to De Wette, many and undoubted marks of a Hebrew original. It is impossible, however, to say whether this was best represented by the Greek or by the Chaldee. Jerome probably himself, or his interpreter, took many liberties with the original, with which he states that he was but imperfectly acquainted. The Syriac version seems evidently taken from the Greek, and the more correct manner in which the names of cities are given, as well as other variations, have been supposed to attest the ex- istence of more correct Greek copies than those which we now possess, as no book in the Septua- gint has so few Greek particles as the book of Judith. Gesenius, and especially Movers, have been very successful in their efforts to correct the present geographical errors by the supposition of a Hebrew original. Betani (ch. i. 9) the latter conceives to be Beth-anoth (Josh, xv), and the two seas (ch. i. 12), the two arms of the Nile. For ■XpXkaiwv he reads xaA.Saicoz', and considers Rasses to be an oversight for Tarshish. Movers, observes De Wette, explains the historical inaccuracies and anachronisms, by a free poetical use of his- tory after the manner of Shakspeare. Movers may therefore be included among those writers who have followed Luther in considering Judith an historical romance. Seiler (Biblical Herme- neutics) conceives it to be a fiction, founded on fact, written by a Palestinian Jew. The old Latin ante-hieronymian version (from the Greek) is still extant, and the many discre- pancies between it and Jerome's version, confirm the fact of the great and faulty variety in the copies, of which that father conrolains. The text of this version is by some supposed to have been mixed with that of Jerome, and the variations between the Vulgate and the Greek are numerous and considerable. Authority of Judith in the Church. — Although the book of Judith never formed part of the Jewish canon [Deutero-c anoxic al], and finds no place in the ancient catalogues, its authority in the Christian church has been very great. It is thus referred to by Clemens Romanus, the companion of the Apostles, in his first (or genuine) epistle to the Corinthians : — ' The blessed Judith, when the city was besieged, asked leave of the elders to go to the camp of the foreigners, and fearless of danger in her patriotism, she proceeded, and the Lord delivered Holofernes into the hands of a woman. In like manner, Esther,' &c. &c. Jerome observes that ' Ruth, Esther, and Judith had the honor of giving their names to sacred books1 (Ad Principiatn). Among the Hebrews, he ■observes, ' it is reckoned among the Hagiographa (or Apocrypha) whose authority is not proper for confirming controverted matters,' but he adds, ' since the council of Nicaea is read (legitur) to have reckoned Judith among the sacred Scrip- tures, I have agreed to your request (to translate it). . . . Receive Judith as an example of chas- tity. . . . He who was the rewarder of her chastity gave her such virtue as to enable her to over- come him who was invincible.' It is spoken of by Origen as received by the church (Horn. xix. in Gen. & i. iii„ in Johan.~), and is cited by Ter- tullian (De Mo?iogamia), Ambrose (lib. iii. De Offic), and Chrysostom (Homil.). JUSTIFICATION. Indeed, no question as to Judith's being an his- torical personage appears to have been raised before the era of the Reformation, and this question is still unsettled. ' Even,' says Calmet (ut supra), ' if by the force of our adversaries' reasons we should be compelled to acknowledge that the book con- tains but a parable, or a fiction written for the encouragement of the Jews in their affliction, and to give them a model of virtue in the person of Judith, we do not perceive what advantage they would derive against us, and against the authen- ticity of the book. Would it be on that account the less divinej less inspired, less worthy of the Holy Spirit ? The fathers who have cited it, the coun- cils which have received it into the canon, the church which authorizes it and receives it, — would they be on this account in error ? and would re- ligion suffer the least injury ? Does not the Old Testament, as well as the New, abound in pa- rables, so circumstantially detailed as to present the appearance of real histories, &c. ?' (Pref.to Co7nm.~) And as to the action of Judith, the same able commentator observes: 'We cannot approve in all respects, either the prayer or the action of Judith ; we commend her good intentions, and think that the uprightness of her design and her ignorance abate much of the crime. . . . Yet will not this suffice entirely to excuse her ; a lie told with so much solemnity, and carried on through her whole conversation with Holofernes, is still in- defensible. The employing her beauty and her little winning arts to inflame his passion, and thereby exposing her person to a rude attack, is a step likewise not to be justified.' The book of Judith is supposed by some to be referred to by St. Paul (1 Cor. x. 9, 10, comp. with Judith viii. 24, 25). Judith, with the other deuterocanonical books, has been at all times read in the church, and lessons are taken from it in the Church of England in course. — W. W. JULIA ('Iou/U'a, a name common among the Romans), a Christian woman of Rome, to whom St. Paul sent his salutations (Rom. xvi. 15) ; she is named with Philologus, and is supposed to have been his wife or sister. JULIUS ClovXios), the centurion who had the charge of conducting Paul as a prisoner to Rome, and who treated him with much consideration and kindness on the way (Acts xxvii. 1, 3). JUNIAS Qlowlas), a person who is joined with Andronicus in Rom. xvi. 7 : ' Salute An- dronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and fellow- prisoners, who are of note among the apostles.' They were, doubtless, Jewish Christians. JUSTIFICATION. Justification may be de- fined, in its theological sense, as the non-imputation of sin, and the imputation of righteousness. That there is a reciprocation between Christ and be- lievers, i. e. in the imputation of their sins unto Him, and of His righteousness unto them ; and that this forms the ground of the sinner's justifi- cation and acceptance with God, it will be the object of the following remarks to demonstrate. The vicarious nature of the Redeemer's suffer- ings was set forth under the Mosaic dispensation by very significant types, one of the most ex- pressive of which was the offering of the scape- goat : ' And Aaron shall lay his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them JUSTIFICATION. »n the head of the goat, and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities ' (Lev. xvi. 21, 22). Abarbinel, in the introduction to his commentary on Leviticus (De Viel. p. 301), represents this cere- mony as a symbolical translation of the sins of the offender upon the head of the sacrifice, and as a way by which the evil due to his transgression was to be deprecated. Nachmaindes also, commenting on Lev. i., observes, respecting the biunt-offerings and sacri- fices for sin : 'It was right the offerer's own blood ■should be shed, and his body burnt, but that the Creator, in His mercy, hath accepted this victim from him as a vicarious substitute and atonement, that its blood should be poured out instead of his blood, and its life stand in place of his life.' We are informed by Herodotus (ii. 39) that the practice of imprecating on the head of the' victim the evils which the sacrificer wished to avert from himself was usual also amongst the hea- then. The Egyptians, he adds, would not taste the head of any animal, but flung it into the river as an abomination. If this type foreshadowed the vicarious nature of the sufferings and death of Christ — and who with the inspired comment of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews before him can doubt this ? — we may with confidence appeal also to the voice of prophecy, and the expositions of apostles, for the further illustration and enforce- ment of the same truth. The 53rd chapter of Isaiah is so full upon this point, that Bishop Louth says, f This chapter declares the circumstances of our Saviours sufferings so exactly, that it seems rather a history of His passion than a prophecy.' In verses 5 and 6 we are told that God ' laid upon Him the iniquities of us all, that by His stripes we might be healed' — that our sin was laid on Hiin, and He bare it (ver. 11). St. Paul, re- echoing the same truth, says, ' He was made sin for us who kuew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him' (2 Cor. v. 21). This is the reciprocation spoken of above. Again, in Rom. viii. 3, 4, the apostle informs us that God sent His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin condemned, sin in the flesh, that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us ; that sin was made His, and he bore its penalty; His righteousness is forensically trans- ferred to the believer, and he becomes a happy participator of its benefits. This, then, is the change in 'relation to God from which the soul of a convinced sinner can find peace. Before we notice the objections which have been, and still are, urged against, this view of the question, we may inquire how far it is confirmed by the earliest and most eminently pious fathers of the Christian church. Amongst these fathers none could have been better acquainted with the mind of St. Paul than the venerable Clement of Rome, inasmuch as he is honourably recorded by the apostle as one of his fellow-labourers in the Gospel whose names are written in the book of life (Philipp. iv. 3). Nothing can be more explicit than this writer is on the point of forensic justifying righteousness, and of intrinsic sanctifying righteousness (see Clem. Rom. Epist. ad Corinth, i. sec. 32, 33). Chrysostom's commentary on 2 Cor. (ch. v. Horn. ii.) is also very expressive on this subject : ' What word, what speech is this, what mind can com- JUSTIFICATION. 137 prehend or speak it ? for he saith, He made Him who was righteous to be made a sinner, that He might make sinners righteous ; nor yet doth He say so neither, but that which is far more sublime and excellent. For He speaks not of an inclina- tion or affection, but expresseth the quality itself. For He says not, He made Him a sinner, but sin, that we might be made not merely righteous, but righteousness, and that the righteousness of God, when we are justified not by works (for if we should, there must be no spot found in them), but by grace, whereby all sin is blotted out.' Again, Justin Martyr (Epist. ad DiognetS) speaks to the same purpose : ' He gave His son a ransom for us ; the holy for transgressors : the innocent for the guilty ; the just for the unjust ; the incorruptible for the corrupt ; the immortal for mortals. For what else could hide or cover our sins but His righteousness ? In whom else could we wicked and ungodly ones be justified, or esteemed righteous, but in the Son of God alone ? O sweet permutation or change ! O unsearchable work, or curious operation ! O blessed beneficence, exceeding all expectation ! That the iniquity of many should be hid in one Just One, and the righteousness of one should justify many trans- gressors !' So Gregory Nyssen (Orat. II. in Cant.) de- serves notice : ' He hath transferred to Himself the filth of my sins, and communicated unto me His purity, and made me partaker of His beauty !' Augustine also speaks to the same effect : f He was sin that we might be righteousness, not our own, but the righteousness of God, not in ourselves, but in Him' (Enchirid. ad Laurent, c. 41). As our limits will not admit of more quotations from those who are usually designated ' the fathers of the church,' we must refer the reader to Suicer's Thesaurus, torn. i. p. 900. In accordance with the above expressed views of the fathers on the important doctrine of justifi- cation, is that which is taken by the church of England. Articles eleventh, twelfth, and thir- teenth run thus : — ' We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort, as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Jus- tification.' ' Albeit that good works, which are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification, cannot put away our sins, and endure the severity of God's judgment ; yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith, insomuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit.' 'Works done before the grace of Christ, and the inspiration of His Spirit, are not pleasant to God, forasmuch as they spring not of faith in Jesus Christ, neither do they make men meet to receive grace, or (as the School-authors say) de- serve grace of congruity : yea, rather, for that they are not done as God hath willed and com- manded them to be done, we doubt not but they have the nature of sin.' The homily referred to in the eleventh article, under the title of the Homily of Justification, is styled in the first book of Homilies itself, ' A 188 JUSTIFICATION. Sermon of the Salvation of Mankind, by only Christ our Saviour, from sin and death everlasting.1 In this sermon the reader will find strikingly set forth the inseparable connection there is between justification and sanctification, the one the cause, the other the effect. It was this doctrine of justification which con- stituted the great ground of controversy between the reformers and the church of Rome (see Luther to Geo. Spenlein, Epist. Ann. 1516, torn. i.). That the reader may be able to see in a contrasted form the essential differences upon this head between the two churches, we subjoin what the Tridentine fathers have stated. In sess. vi. c. xvi. p. 54, they announce the views of their church on justifica- tion in the following language : — ' Jesus Christ, as the head into the members, and as the vine into the branches, perpetually causes His virtue to flow into the justified. This virtue always precedes, accompanies, and follows their good works ; so that without it such good works could in nowise be acceptable to God, and bear the character of meritoriousness. Hence we must believe, that to the justified themselves nothing more is wanting which needs to prevent us from thinking both that they have satisfied the divine law, according to the state of this life, by those works which are performed in God ; and also that, in their own time, provided they depart in grace, they truly merit the attainment of eternal life. Thus neither our own proper righteousness is so determined to be our own, as if it were from ourselves ; nor is the righteousness of God either unknown or rejected. For that which is called our righteousness, because through its being in- herent in us we are justified, that same is the righteousness of God, because it is infused into us by God through the merit of Christ. Far, however, be it from a Christian man that he should either trust or glory in himself, and not in the Lord ; whose goodness to all is so great, that what are truly His gifts He willeth to be estimated as their merits.' Such, so far as the justification and accept- ance of man before God are concerned, is the doctrinal scheme of the church of Rome; and nothing can be more foreign than it is from the system set forth by the church of England. In the view of the latter, justification signifies making just in trial and judgment, as sanctification is making holy ; but not making just by infusion of grace and holiness into a person, according to the view of the former, thus confounding justification and sanctification together. On the Protestant principle justification is not a real change of a sinner in himself, though a real change is an- nexed to it ; but only a relative change iu refer- ence to God's judgment. Thus we find the word used in Rom. iii. 23, 24, 25, 26. In fine, the doctrine of Justification by Faith may be ex- pressed in Scriptural language thus : ' All have sinned and come short of the glory of God ; every mouth must be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God; therefore, by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh living be justified in His sight. But we are justified freely by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth as a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His right- eousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the foibearance of God. Where is boast- JUSTIFI CATION. ing, then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith with- out the deeds of the law.' For a full exposition of the differences between the two churches, see Holder's Symbolik, translated from the German by Robertson. We now come to notice the objections which may be urged against this view of justification. 1. It does not consist, say some, with the truth and holiness of God, that the innocent should suffer for the guilty. We answer, that it is no injustice, or cruelty, for an innocent person to suffer for the guilty, as Christ did, provided there be these conditions : — 1. That the -person suffering be of the same nature with those for whom he suffers. 2. That he suffers of his own free will. 3. That he be able to sustain all that shall be laid upon him. 4. That a greater amount of glory redound to the divine attributes than if he had not so suffered. Now the Scriptures assure us that all these con- ditions were realized in the incarnate Saviour. Bishop Butler (Analogy, ch. v.) has a- striking answer to this objection. He shows that in the daily course of God"s natural providence the innocent do often and constantly suffer for the guilty ; and then argues that the Christian ap- pointment against which this objection is taken, is not only of the same kind, but is even less open to exception, ' because, under the former, we are in mauy cases commanded, and even neces- sitated, whether we will or no, to suffer for the faults of others ; whereas the sufferings of Christ were voluntary. The world's being under the righteous government of God does, indeed, imply that, finally, and upon the whole, every one shall receive according to his personal deserts ; and the general doctrine of the whole Scripture is, that this shall be the completion of the divine govern- ment. But during the progress, and for aught we know, even in order to the completion of this moral scheme, vicarious punishments may be fit, and absolutely necessary. Men, by their follies, run themselves into extreme distress — into diffi- culties which would be absolutely fatal to them, were it not for the interposition and assistance of others. God commands by the law of nature that we afford them this assistance, in many cases where we cannot do it without very great pains, and labour, and sufferings to ourselves. And we see in what variety of ways one person's sufferings contribute to the relief of another, and how, or by what particular means, this comes to pass, or follows from the constitution or laws of nature which come under our notice, and, being familiarised with it, men are not shocked with it. So that the reason of their insisting upon objec- tions of the foregoing kind against the satisfaction of Christ, is either that they do not consider God's settled and uniform appointments as His appoint- ments at all, or else, they forget that vicarious punishment is a providential appointment of every day's experience ; and then, from their being unacquainted with the more general laws of nature or divine government over the world, and not seeing how the sufferings of Christ could contribute to the redemption of it unless by arbi- trary and tyrannical will, they conclude his sufferings could not contribute to it any other JUSTIFICATION. way. And yet, what has been often alleged in justification of this doctrine, even from the ap- parent natural tendency of this method of our redemption — its tendencies to vindicate the au- thority of God's laws and deter his creatures from sin, — this has never yet been answered, and is, I think, plainly unanswerable.' 2. Again it is objected, if we are justified on receiving Christ by faith as the Lord our right- eousness, and if this be the sole ground of salva- tion propounded by St. Paul, there is then a pal- pable discrepancy between him and St. James; for the former states, that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law (Rom. iii. 8 ; Gal. ii. 16); while the latter says, ' a man is justified by works and not by faith only' (James ii. 21). That there is a difficulty here there can be no question, and that it led Eusebius and Jerome, together with Luther and Erasmus, to question the authority of St. James's Epistle, is notorious to every reader of ecclesiastical history. The church of Rome builds her system of man being justified by reason of inherent righteousness, on the assumption that when St. Paul says ' by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified,' he means the ceremonial and not the moral law. In this way she would establish her own system of human merit, and harmonise the two apostles. But it is quite clear to the impartial reader of the Epistle to the Romans, that the scope of St. Paul's argument must include both the moral and the ceremonial law ; for he proves both Jew and Gentile guilty before God, and this with the view of establishing the righteousness of faith in the imputed merits of Christ as the only ground of a sinner's salvation. Leaving, then, this so- phistical reconcilement, we come to that which our Protestant divines propose. This is of a two-fold character, viz., first, by distinguishing the double sense of justification^ which may be taken either for the absolution of a sinner in God's judgment, or for the declaration of his righteousness before men. This distinction is found in Scripture, in which the word justify is used in both accepta- tions. Thus St. Paul speaks of justification in foroDei; St. James speaks of it inforo hominis. A man is justified by faith without works, saith the one ; a man is justified by works, and not by faith only, declares the other. That this is the true solution of the difficulty appears from the fact that the two apostles draw their apparently opposite conclusions from the same example of Abraham (Rom. iv. 9-23 ; comp. James ii. 21-24). ' If Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness' (Rom. iv. 2, 3). Thus speaks St. Paul ; yet St. James argues in manner following : ' Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar ? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works ; and from works faith was perfected ? And the Scripture was ful- filled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Ye see then how from works a man is justified, and not from faith only.' Another mode of reconciling the apostles is by regarding faith in the double sense in which it is often found in Scripture. St. Paul, when he KABBALAH. 189 affirms that we are justified by faith only, speaks of that faith which is true and living, working by love. St. James, when he denies that a man is justified by faith only, disputes against that faith which is false and unproductive ; when the true Christian, speaking to the hypocritical boaster of his faith, asks, ' Show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works.' 3. One objection more may be urged against this fundamental doctrine, that sinners are justified by the free grace of God through the imputed righteousness of the Redeemer, namely, that it weakens the obligations to holiness of life. This objection the apostle himself anticipates when he asks, ' What shall we say then ? shall we continue in sin that grace may abound ? ' To which he answers by rejecting the consequence with the utmost abhorrence, and in the strongest manner affirming it to be without any foundation. ' How shall we,' he continues, 'that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?' (Rom. vi. 1-2). He who ex- pects justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ, has the clearest and strongest convictions of the obligation of the law of God, and of its ex- tent and. purity. He sees in the vicarious sufferings of his Saviour the awful nature of sin and the in- finite love of God ; and this love of God, being thus manifested, constrains him to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this world. In a word, he loves much because he feels that God hath forgiven him much, because the love of God is shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Ghost which is given unto him. What a practical illustration have we of this in the life of the great apostle of the Gentiles himself? (See further on this subject, the several treatises on Justification by Hooker ; Winterspoon, vol. i. ; Anthony Burgess, Lond. 1655; Wm. Pemble, Oxon. 1629; Faber, Lond. 1839 ; Walter Marshall, Lond. 1692).— J. W. D. 1. JUSTUS '('IoCo'tos), surnamed Barsabas. [Joseph.] 2. JUSTUS, a Christian at Corinth, with whom Paul lodged (Acts xviii. 7). 3. JUSTUS, called also JESUS, a believing Jew, who was with Paul at Rome when lie wrote to the Colossians (Col. iv. 11). The apostle names him and Marcus as being at that time his only fellow-labourers. K. KABBALAH (n^»3|?, from ?3i?, to receive). This word is an abstract, and means reception, a doctrine received by oral transmission ; so that with mere reference to its etymological significa- tion, it is the correlate of ITYlDD, tradition. The term Kabbalah is employed in the Jewish writings to denote several traditional doctrines: as, for example, that which constituted the creed of the patriarchal age before the giving of the law ; that unwritten ritual interpretation which the Jews believe was revealed by God to Moses on the mount, and which was at length committed to writing and formed the Mislinah. Besides being applied to these and other similar traditions, it has also been used in, comparatively speaking, modem times, to denote a singular mystical mode 190 KABBALAH. of interpreting the -Old Testament, in which sense only it forms the subject of the present article. This Kabbalah is an art of eliciting mysteries from the words and letters of the Old Testament by means of some subtle devices of interpretation, or it is an abstruse theosophical and metaphysical doctrine containing the traditional arcana of the remotest times. It is of two kinds, practical * and speculative (TVVtyn and HW). The spe- culative Kabbalah, to which we confine ourselves, is again subdivided into the artificial and inar- tificial, which correspond to the terms of our definition. The artificial Kabbalah, which is so called because it is a system of interpretation the appli- cation of which is bound by certain rules, is divided into three species. The first, Gematria (UnfipSJ, from the Greek yetafj-erpla, but used in a wider sense), is the arithmetical mode of interpre- tation, in which the letters of a word are regarded with reference to their value as numeral signs, and a word is explained by another whose united letters produce the same sum. For example, the word Shiloh (fiW, Gen. xlix. 10), the letters of which amount, when considered as numerals, to 358, is explained to be Messiah (ITE^D), because they are both numerically equivalent, and the three Targums have actually so rendered it. The second species, Temurah (n"l1DD, permutation), is the mode by which one word is transformed into another different one by the transposition or systematic interchange of„ their letters ; as when *!3&6o, my angel (Exod. xxiii. 23), is made into ?W>0, Michael. The kinds of commutation described in the article Atbach also belong to this species. The third species, Notarikon (jlp^taiJ, from the Latin notare), is that in which some or all of the letters of a word are con- sidered to be signs denoting other words of which they are the initials, and is of two kinds. In the one, either the initial or the final letter of two or more words occurring together in the Old Testa- ment are combined to form one new word, as when *23!0, Maccabee, is made out of "|1DD ■>£> nirP bvXll (Exod. xv. 11); or when the divine name HIPP is extracted from Hft 1DE> HO "9 (Exod. iii. 13). In the other, the several letters of one word are taken in their series to be the initials of several other words, as when EH$ is explained by TOO, EH, "IBK, dust, Mood, gall The inartificial or dogmatical Kabbalah con- sists solely of a traditional doctrine on things divine and metaphysical, propounded in a sym- bolical form. It treats principally of the mys- teries of the doctrine of emanation, of angels and spirits, of the four Kabbalistical worlds, and of the ten Sephiroth or so-called Kabbalistic tree. It is a system made up of elements which are also found in the Magian doctrine of emanation, in the Pythagorean theory of * It may suffice for our present purpose merely to notice the existence of the practical Kabbalah, which differs little from magic. He who is curious in such things will find one of the fullest details of the portentous miracles which are said to have been effected by its agency in Edzard's edition of the second chapter of the tract Abodah Zarah, p. 346, sq. KABBALAH. numbers, in the philosophy of the later Platonists, and in the tenets of the Gnostics ; but these doc- trines are here stated with enigmatical obscurity, and without the coherence and development of a single and entire scheme. Its general tenor may be conceived from the eminent prerogatives which it assigns to the law, and from the consequent latitude of interpretation. Thus, it is argued in the book of Sohar : ' Alas for the man who thinks that the law contains nothing but what appears on its surface; for, if that were true, there would be men in our day who could excel it. But the law assumed a body ; for if angels are obliged, when they descend to this world, to assume a body in order that they may subsist in the world, and it be able to receive them, how much more neces- sary was it that the law, which created them and which was the instrument by which the world was created, should be invested with a body in order that it might be adapted to the comprehension of man? That body is a history, in which if any man think there is not a soul, let him have no part in the life to come.' Manasseh-ben-Israel, who makes this citation from the book of Sohar, enforces' this view with many arguments (Con- ciliator, Amstelod. 1633, p. 169). The ten Sephiroth have been represented in three different forms, all of which may be seen in H. More's Opera Philos. i. 423 ; and one of which, although not the ■ most usual one, has been already given in the article God. The Sephiroth have been the theme of endless discus- sion ; and it has even been disputed whether they are designed to express theological, philosophical, or physical mysteries. The Jews themselves generally regard them as the sum and substance of Kabbalistical theology, as indicating the emanating grades and order of efflux according to which the nature and manifested operation of the Supreme Being may be comprehended. Several Christian scholars have discerned in them the mysteries of their own faith, the trinity, and the incarnation of the Messiah.* In this they have received some sanction by the fact noticed by Wolf, that most learned Jewish converts en- deavour to demonstrate the truth of Christianity out of the doctrines of the Kabbalah (Biblioth. Hebr. i. 360). The majority of all parties appear to concur in considering the first three . Sephiroth to belong to the essence of God, and the last seven to denote his attributes, or modes of ex- istence. The following treatises on this subject * It is worth while to adduce the words of Count G. Pico della Mirandola, as cited in Hot- tinger's Thesaurus Philologicus, p. 439 : ' Hos ego libros non mediocri impensa mihi cum com- parassem, summa diligentia, indefessis laboribus cum perlegissem, vidi in ill is (testis est Dens) religionem non tam Mosaicam, quam Christiauam. Ibi Triniratis mysterium, ibi Verbi incarnatio, ibi Messiae divinitas, ibi de peccato originali, de illius per Christum expiatione, de coalesti Hieru- salem, de casu dsemonum, de ordinibus ange- lorum, de purgatoriis, de inferorum posnis : eadem legi, quae apud Paulum et Dionysium, apud Hieronymum et Augustinum quotidie legimus .... In plenum, nulla est ferme de re nobis cum Hebrseis controversia, de qua ex libris Cabbalis- tarum ita redargui convincique non possint, ut ne angulus quidem reliquus sit, in quern se condant.' KABBALAH. are among the most remarkable : a dissertation by Rhenferd, De Stylo Apocalypseos Cabbalistico, in Danz's Nov. Test, ex Talmude illust. p. 1090, in which lie endeavours to point out many extra- ordinary coincidences between the theosophy of the Kabbalah and the book of Revelation (which may be compared with an essay of similar ten- dency in Eichhorn's Bibl. Biblioth. iii. 191); and a dissertation by Vitringa, De Sepliiroth Kabbalistarum, in his Observat. Sacr. i. 126, in which he first showed how the Sephiroth accorded with the human form. The origin of the Kabbalah is involved in great obscurity. The Jews ascribe it to Adam, or to Abraham, or to Moses, or to Ezra ; the last being apparently countenanced by 2 Esdras xiv. 20-48. The opinions of Christian writers are as variously divided; and the Kabbalah is such a complex whole, and has been aggregated together at such distant periods, that no general judgment can apply to it. Their opinions need only be noticed in their extremes. Thus, on the one hand, Rhen- ferd and others maintain that the Jewish church possessed, in its inartificial Kabbalah, an ancient unwritten traditional doctrine, by which they were instructed that the types and symbols of the Mosaic dispensation were (to use Luther's words) but the manger and the swaddling-clothes in which the Messiah lay — of which genuine doc- trine, however, they nevertheless believe our pre- sent Kabbalah to contain only fragments amidst a mass of Gentile additions. On the other hand, Eichhorn accounls for the origin of that important part of this Kabbalah, the system of allegorical interpretation (by which their occult doctrine was either generated, or, if not, at least, brought into harmony with the law), by supposing that the Jews adopted it immediately from the Greeks. According to him, when the Jews were brought into contact with the enlightened speculations of the Greek philosophers, they felt that their law (as they had hitherto interpreted it) was so far behind the wisdom of the Gentiles, that — both to vindi- cate its honour in the eyes of the scoffing heathen, as well as to reconcile their newly adopted philo- sophical convictions with their ancient creed — they borrowed from the Greek allegorizers of Homer the same art of interpretation, and applied it to conjure away the unacceptable sense or the letter, or to extort another sense which harmonized with the philosophy of the age {Bibl. Biblioth. v. 237, sq.). Both these opinions, however, coincide at a cer- tain point, in assuming that the Jews did adopt the doctrines of Gentile philosophy ; and a wide field is open for conjectures as to the particular sources from which the several elements of the Kabbalah have been derived. Thus, whether the Persian religion, in which the doctrine of ema- nation is so prominent (the zeruane akerenc, or infinite time, being the F]1D {""N of the Sepliiroth), supplied that theory to the Jews during the Baby- lonian captivity ; or whether it was borrowed from any other scheme containing that doctrine, down as late as the origin of Gnosticism ; or even whether, as H. More asserts, the Kabbalah itself is the primitive fountain from which the Gentiles have themselves drawn — these, and the many such questions which could be raised about the origin of the other Kabbalistic doctrines, can only receive a probable solution. KADESH. 191 However these matters may be decided, the date of the most important works in which the doctrine of the Kabbalah is contained may be brought to a nearer certainty. Of these the book Jezirah (m"1^, creation), which is the oldest of them, and which is attributed to the patriarch Abraham, cannot be credibly ascribed to any earlier author than the Rabbi Akibah, who lived in the first century of our era ; but the cautious Wolf thinks that it is prudent not to insist on any earlier or more precise date for it than that it was written before the completion of the Talmud, as it is cited in the treatise Sanhedrin. It has often been printed; as by Rittangel, a converted Jew, with a Latin version and notes, Amsterd. 1642, 4,to. ; and, more recently, with a German version, notes, and a glossary, by J. F. von Meyer, Leipz. 1830, 4to. The obscure book of Sohar ("1H1T, sjrfen- clour), which has been called the Bible of the Kab- balists, is ascribed to Simeon ben Jochai, who was a pupil of R. Akibah ; but the earliest men- tion of its existence occurs in the year 1290 ; and the anachronisms of its style, and of the facts referred to, together with the circumstance that it speaks of the vowel-points and other Masoretic inventions, which are clearly posterior to the Talmud, justify J. Morinus (although too often extravagant, in his wilful attempts to depreciate the antiquity of the later Jewish writings) in as- serting that the author could not have lived much before the year 1000 of the Christian era (Exerci- tationes Biblica, pp. 358-369). The best edition of the book of Sohar is that by Baron C. von Rosenrotb, with Jewish commentaries, Sulzbach, 1684, fob, to which his rare Cabbala Denudata, 1677-1684, 4to., forms an ample introduction. Wolf has given an extended account of the Kabbalah, and of the numerous manuscripts and printed Jewish works in which its principles are contained, as well as abundant references to Christian authors who have treated of it {Biblioth. llebr. ii. 1191, sq.). The work of P. Beer (Ge- sehichte der Lehren alter Secten der Jtiden, und der Cabbala, Briinn, 1822, 2 vols. Svo.), which is mentioned with approbation, has not been avail- able for this article. — J. N. KADESH (KH£ ; Sept. KaSfc), or Kadesh- barnea, a site on the south-eastern border of the Promised Land towards Edom, of much interest as being the point at which the Israelites twice encamped with the intention of entering Pales- tine, and from which they were twice sent back ; the first time in pursuance of their sentence to wander forty years in the wilderness, and the second time from the refusal of the king of Edom to permit a passage through his territories. It was from Kadesh that the spies entered Palestine by ascendi-ng the mountains ; and the murmuring Israelites afterwards attempting to do the same were driven back by the Amalekites and Ca- naanites, and afterwards apparently by the king of Arad, as far as Hormah, then called Zephath (Num..xiii. 17; xiv. 40-45; xxi. 1-3; Deut. i. 41-44 ; comp. Judg. i. 7). There was also at. Kadesh a fountain (En-mishpat) mentioned long before the exode of the Israelites (Gen. xiv. 7) ; and the miraculous supply of water took place only on the second visit, which implies that at the first there was no lack of this necessary article. After this Moses sent messengers to the 192 KADESH. king of Edom, informing him that they were in Kadesh, a city in the uttermost part of his border, and asking leave to pass through his country, so as to continue their course round Moab, and approach Palestine from the East. This Edom refused, and the Israelites accordingly marched to Mount Hor, where Aaron died ; and then along the Arabah (desert of Zin) to the Red Sea (Num. xx. 14-29). The name of Kadesh again occurs in describing the southern quarter of Judah, the line defining which is drawn ' from the shore of the Salt Sea, from the bay that looked southward ; and it went out to the south side of Akrabbim, and passed along to Zin, and ascended up on the south side to Kadesh- barnea' (Josh. xv. 1-3; comp. Num. xxxiv. 3, 4). From these intimations the map-makers, who found it difficult to reconcile them with the place usually assigned to Kadesh (in the desert about midway between the Mediterranean and Dead Sea), were in the habit of placing a second Kadesh nearer the Dead Sea and the Wady Arabah. It was left for the editor of (he Pictorial Bible to show (Note on Num. xx. 1) that one Kadesh would sufficiently answer all the conditions required, by being placed more to the south, nearer to Mount Hor, on the west border of the Wady Arabah, than this second Kadesh. The gist of the argument lies in the following passage : — ' We conclude that there is but one Kadesh mentioned in Scripture, and that the diffi- culties which have seemed to require that there should be a second or even a third place of the name, may be easily and effectually obviated by altering the position commonly assigned to Kadesh-barnea, that is, the Kadesh from which the spies were sent in the fifteenth chapter, and from which the wanderings commenced. We are at perfect liberty to make this alteration, be- cause nothing whatever is distinctly known of such a place, and its position has been entirely fixed upon conjectural probabilities. But being once fixed, it has generally been received and reasoned upon as a truth, and it has been thought better to create another Kadesh to meet the diffi- culties which this location occasioned, than to disturb old maps and old topographical doctrines. Kadesh is usually placed within or close upon the southern frontier of Palestine, about midway be- tween the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean. This location would seem in itself improbable without strong counter-reasons in its favour. For we do not find that a hostile people, when not prepared for immediate action, confront them- selves directly with their enemies, but encamp at some considerable distance and send scouts and spies to reconnoitre the country ; nor is it by any means likely that they would remain so long at Kadesh as they seem to have done at. their first visit, if they had been in the very face of their enemies, as must have been the case in the assigned posi- tion. We should, therefore, on this ground alone, be inclined to place Kadesh more to the south or south-east than this. Besides, if this were Kadesh, how could Kadesh be on the borders of Edom, seeing that the Edomites did not, till many cen- turies later, occupy the country to the south of Canaan, and were at this time confined to the region of Seir ? Moreover, from a Kadesh so far to the north they were not likely to send to the king of Edom without moving down towards the KADESH. place where they hoped to obtain permission to cross Mount Seir, particularly as by so moving they would at the same time be making pro- gress towards the point which the refusal of the Edomites would oblige them to pass, and which they actually did pass. Therefore, the stay of the host at Kadesh, waiting for the king's answer, seems to imply that Kadesh was so near as not to make it worth while to move till they knew the result of their application to him. Further, we read in ch. xxxiii., xxxvi., after an enumeration of distances of manifestly no great length, that in the present, instance (the second) the move to Kadesh was Eziongeber, at the head of the Gulf of Akabah, the distance between which and the Kadesh of the maps is about 120 miles ; and this is the consideration which has chiefly influenced those who have determined that there must have been two places of the name. And we must confess that while thinking over the other reasons which have been stated we were, for a time, inclined to consider them as leading to that conclusion, and that the second Kadesh must have been very near Mount Hor. And this im- pression (as to Kadesh being near Mount Hor) was confirmed when, happening to find- that Eusebius describes the tomb of Miriam (who died at Kadesh), being still in his time shown at Kadesh, near Petra, the capital of Arabia Petrcea, we perceived it important to ascertain where this author fixed Petra, since one account places this city more to the north than another ; and we found that he places Petra near Mount Hor, on which Aaron died and was buried ; and consequently the Kadesh of Num. xx. 1, where Miriam died and was buried, must, in the view of Eusebius, have been at no very great distance from Mount Hor.' Other arguments are adduced to show that if there were two Kadeshes, the one of the second journey must have been in the po- sition indicated, and that one in this position would answer all the demands of Scripture. According to these views Kadesh was laid down in the map (in the Illuminated Atlas) prepared under the writer's direction, in the same line, and not far from the place which has since been assigned to it from actual observation by Dr. Robinson. This concurrence of different lines of research in the same result is curious and valu- able, and the position of Kadesh will be regarded as now scarcely open to dispute. It was clear that the discovery of the fountain in the northern part of the great valley would go far to fix the question. Robinson accordingly discovered a fountain called Ain el-Weibeh, which is even at this day the most frequented watering-place in all the Arabah, and he was struck by the entire adaptedness of the site to the Scriptural account: of the proceedings of the Israelites on their second arrival at Kadesh. ' Over against us lay the- land of Edom ; we were in its uttermost border ; and the great Wady el-Ghuweir afforded a direct and easy passage through the mountains to the table-land above, which was directly before us ; while further in the south Mount Hor formed a prominent and striking object, at the distance of two good days' journey for such a host ' {Bib. Researches, ii. 538). Further on (p. 610) he adds : ' There the Israelites would have Mount Hor in the S.S.E. towering directly before tnem KADMONITES. .... in the N.W. rises the mountain by which they attempted to ascend to Palestine, with the pass still called Sufah (Zephath) ; while further north we find also Tell Arad, marking the site of the ancient Arad. To all this comes then the vicinity of the southern bay of the Dead Sea,^ the line of cliffs or offset separating the Ghor from the Arabah, answering to the ascent of Akrabbim ; and the desert of Zin, with the place of the same name between Akrabbim and Kadesh, not im- probably at the water of Hasb, in the Arabah. In this way all becomes easy and natural, and the Scriptural account is entirely accordant with the character of the country.' KADMONITES C-f®7\> ', Sept. Ked/xwvcuoi), one of the nations of Canaan, which is supposed to have dwelt in the north-east part of Palestine, under Mount Hemion, at the time that Abraham sojourned in the land (Gen. xv. 19). As the name is derived from Dip kedem, which means ' east,' it is supposed by Dr. Wells and others to denote ' an eastern people,' and that they were situated to the east of the Jordan, or rather that it was a term applied collectively, like ' Easterns,' or ' Orientals,' to all the people living in the coun- tries beyond that river. To this opinion we in- cline, as the Kadmonites are not elsewhere men- tioned as a distinct nation ; and the subsequent discontinuance of the term, in the assigned ac- ceptation, may be easily accounted for, by the nations beyond the river having afterwards be- come more distinctly known, so as to be men- tioned by their several distinctive names. The reader may see much ingenious trifling respecting this name in Bocbart {Canaan, i. 19); the sub- stance of which is, that Cadmus, the founder of Thebes, in Boeotia, was originally a Kadmonite, and that the name of his wife Hermione, was derived from Mount Hermon. KALI ck\>, N^i?). This word occurs in several passages of the Old Testament, in all of which, in the Authorized Version, it is translated parched com. The correctness of this translation has not, however, been assented to by all commen- tators. Thus, as Celsius (Hierobot. ii. 231) says, ' Syrus inteipres, Onkelos, et Jonathan Ebraea voce utuntur, Lev. xxiii. 11; I Sam. xvii. 17; xxv. 18; 2 Sam. xvii. 28.' Arias Montanus and others, he adds, render kali by the word tostum, considering it to be derived from PPp, which in the Hebrew signifies torrere, ' to toast' or ' parch.' So in the Arabic , Jj kali signifies anything cooked in a frying-pan, and is applied to the common Indian dish which by Euro- peans is called currie or curry. , J \l kalee, and \i\i kalla signify one that fries, or a cook. From the same root is supposed to be derived the word kali or al'kali, now so familiarly known as alkali, which is obtained from the ashes of burnt vegetables. But as, in the various passages of Scripture where it occurs, kali is without any adjunct, different opinions have been entertained respecting the substance which is to be understood as having been toasted or parched. By some it is supposed to have been corn in general ; by others, only wheat. Some Hebrew writers maintain that VOL. II. KALI. 193 Hour or meal, and others, that parched meal, is intended, as in the passage of Ruth ii. 14, where the Septuagint translates kali by &\, ' reed of fra- grance'), and Kaneh Hattob (21LDn i"l!)j3, cala- mus bomis, ' good' or 'fragrant reed'), appear to have reference to the same substance. It is mentioned under the name of kaneh bosem in Exod. xxx. 23, and under that of kaneh hattob in Jer. vi. 20. It is probably intended also by kaneh (' reed ') simply in Cant. iv. 14 ; Isa. xliii. 24; and Ezek. xxvii. 17; as it is enumerated with other fragrant and aromatic substances. Kaneh, as we have seen in the preceding article, is probably the original df 'canna, Ka.Aafj.os being the Greek equivalent, for both. Of all these the primaiy signification seems to have been the hollow stems of grasses. They were applied afterwards to things made of such stems. From the passages in which this sweet cane or calamus is mentioned we learn that it was fragrant and reed-like, anil that it: was brought from a far country (Jer. vi. 20 ; Ezek. xxvii. 10) : Dan also and Javan going to and fro carried bright iron, cassia, and calamus to the markets of Tyre. If we recur to the method which we have adopted in other eases, el' examining the writings of ancient heathen authors, to ascertain if they describe anything like the substances noticed in the sacred writings, we shall experience no diffi- culty in identifying the ' sweet cane, or reed, from o2 196 KANEH BOSEM. a far country.' For though the common reeds are described by Dioscorides, in book i. c. 114, we find in a very different part of the same book, namely, in c. 17, a Ko.Kafj.os d.pcafj.o.TiK6s, described among the aromata, immediately after 2xotuos. 367. [Andropogon calamus aromaticus.] It is stated to be a produce of India, of a tawny colour, much jointed, breaking into splinters, and having the hollow stem filled with pith, like the web of a spider; also that it is mixed with ointments and fumigations on account of its odour. Hippocrates was acquainted with appa- rently the same substance, which he calls ko.Xo- jxos euciSrjs- and cryolvos evocrfj.os, also KaXa/j-os (Dioscor. i. 12), this has been thought to be the same word as the Hebrew mp, from Tip, in Arabic jjj, to split, hew, or tear anything lengthwise, as must be done in separating cassia bark from the tree. But it does not follow that this is a correct inter- pretation of the origin of the name of an Eastern product. The word occurs first in Exod. xxx. 24, where cassia (kiddah) is mentioned in con- nection with olive oil, pure myrrh, sweet cinna- mon, and sweet calamus ; secondly, in Ezek. xxviii. 19, where Dan and Javan are described as bringing bright iron, cassia (kiddah), and calamus to the markets of Tyre. There is no reason why the substance now called cassia might not have been imported from the shores of India into Egypt and Palestine. Consi- derable confusion has, however, been created by the same name having been applied by bota- nists to a genus containing the plants yielding senna, and to others, as the cassia fistula, which have nothing to do with the original cassia. Cassia-buds, again, though no doubt produced by a plant belonging to the same, or to some genus allied to that producing cinnamon and cassia, were probably not known in commerce at so early a period as the two latter substances. There is some difficulty also in determining what the ancient cassia was. The author of this article, in his Antiquity of Hindoo Medicine, p. 84, has already remarked, ' The cassia of the ancients it is not easy to determine ; that of commerce, Mr. Marshall says, consists of only the inferior kinds of cinnamon. Some consider cassia to be distin- guished from cinnamon by the outer cellular covering of the bark being scraped off the latter, KIDRON. but allowed to remain on the former. This is, however, the characteristic of the (Cochin-Chinese) dnnamomum aromaticum, as we are informed by Mr. Crawford (Embassy to Siam, p. 470) that it is not cured, like that of Ceylon, by freeing it from the epidermis.1 There is, certainly, no doubt that some cassia is produced on the coast of Malabar. The name also would appear to be of Eastern origin, as kasse koronde is one kind of cinnamon, as mentioned by Burmann in his Flora Zeylonica ; but it will be preferable to treat of the whole subject in connection with cinnamon [Kinnamon]. — J. F. R. KIDRON (flTjp, the turbid; Sept. KeSpw), the brook or winter torrent which flows through the valley of Jehoshaphat (as it is now called), on the east side of Jerusalem. ' The brook Kidron1 is the only name by which ' the valley ' itself is known in Scripture ; for it is by no means certain, nor even probable, that the name ' valley of Je- hoshaphat' in Joel (iii. 12) was intended to apply to this valley. The word rendered ' brook' (2 Sam. xv. 23; 1 Kings ii. 37, &c), is PHJ imchal, which may be taken as equivalent to the ArabiG Wady, meaning a stream and its bed or valley, or properly the valley of a stream, even when the stream is dry. The Septuagint, Josephus, and the Evangelists (John xviii. 1), designate it ^«- fxappos, a storm brook, or winter torrent. The brook Kidron derives all its importance from its vicinity to the holy city, being nothing more than the dry bed of a winter torrent, bearing marks of being occasionally swept over by a large volume of water. No stream flows through it, except during the heavy rains of winter, when the waters descend into it from the neighbouring hills. But even in winter there is no constant flow, and the resident missionaries assured Dr. Robinson that they had not during several years seen a stream running through the valley. The ravine in which the stream is collected takes its origin above a mile to the north-east of the city. This ravine deepens as it proceeds, and forms an angle opposite the temple. It then takes a south- east direction, and, passing between the village of Siloam and the city, runs off in the direction of the Dead Sea, through a singularly wild gorge, the course of which few travellers have traced (Pic- torial Palestine, Introd. p. cxciv.). It is in this ravine that the celebrated monastery of Santa Saba is situated. Mr. Madden, who went through the valley to the Dead Sea, thus speaks of the character which it assumes as it approaches the monastery : — ' After traversing for the last hour a wild ravine, formed by two rugged perpen- dicular mountains, the sides of which contained innumerable caverns, which once formed a sort of troglodyte city, in which the early Christians resided, the sight of the convent in this desolate place was like a glimpse of paradise.' On leav- ing the convent the next day he says that he ' marched through the bed of the Kidron, along the horrible ravine which he entered the day be- fore ;' but he gives no account of its outlet into the Dead Sea. This defect is supplied by Dr. Ro- binson (Biblical Researches, ii. 249), who, on passing along the western borders of the lake, came ' to the deep a*nd almost impassable ravine of the Kidron, running down by Mar Saba, and thence called Wady-er-Rahib, " Monk's Valley;" KIKAYON. but here also bearing the name of Wady en-Nar, " Fire Valley." At this place it was running E.S.E., in a deep narrow channel, between per- pendicular walls of rock, as if worn away by the lushing waters between these desolate chalky hills. There was, however, no water in it now ; nor had there apparently been any for a long time.' KIKAYON" (fi^i?) occurs only in Jonah iv., where it is several times mentioned, as in ver. 6, 7, 9, 1 0. It is translated gourd in our Authorized Version, probably from the ko\ok{ivQt\ of the Septuagint, often rendered ciccurbita. In the margin of the English Bible, Palm-Christ is given. In the Vulgate kikayon is translated hedera, ' ivy.' Neither the gourd nor ivy is con- sidered by modern writers to indicate the plant intended; which is remarkable for having given rise to some fierce controversies in the early ages of the Church. The difficulties here, however, do not appear to be so great as in many other instances. But before considering these, it is desirable to ascertain what are the characteristics of the plant as required by the text. We are told, ' The Lord God prepared a gourd (kikayon), and made it to come over Jonah, that it might be a shadow over his head,' &c. (ver. 6). ' But God prepared a worm when the morning rose the next day, and it smote the gourd that it withered ' (ver. 7). And in ver. 10 it is said of the gourd that it ' came up in a night, and perished in a night.' Hence it appears that the growth of the kikayon was miraculous, but that it was probably a plant of the country, being named specifically ; also that it was capable of affording shade, and might be easily destroyed. There does not appear any- thing in this account to warrant us in considering it to be the ivy, which is a plant of slow growth, cannot support itself, and is, moreover, not likely to be found in the hot and arid country of an- cient Nineveh, though we have ourselves found it in more southern latitudes, but only in the temperate climate of the Himalayan Mountains. The ivy was adduced probably only from the resemblance of its Greek name, kig by means of the ephod, inquired of the Lord, and thereupon urged KING. the king to take a certain course, which proved successful (see also 2 Sam. ii. 1). Sometimes, indeed, as appears from 1 Sam. xxviii., it was a prophet who acted the part of prime minister, or chief counsellor, to the king, and who, as bearing that sacred character, must have possessed very weighty influence in the royal divan (1 Kings xxii. 7, sq.). We must not, however, expect to find any definite and permanent distribution of power, any legal determination of the royal pre- rogatives as discriminated from the divine autho- rity ; circumstances, as they prompted certain deeds, restricted or enlarged the sphere of the mo- narch's action. Thus, in 1 Sam. xi. 4, sq., we find Saul, in an emergency, assuming, without consultation or deliberation, the power of demand- ing something like a levy en masse, and of pro- claiming instant war. With the king lay the administration of justice in the last resort (2 Sam. xv. 2; 1 Kings iii. 16, sq.). He also possessed the power of life and death (2 Sam. xiv.). To provide for and superintend the public worship was at once his duty and his highest honour (1 Kings viii. ; 2 Kings xii. 4; xviii. 4 ; xxiii. I). One reason why the people requested a king was, that they might have a recognised leader in war (1 Sam. viii. 20). The Mosaic law offered a powerful hindrance to royal despotism (1 Sam. x. 25). The people also, by means of their elders, formed an express compact, by which they stipu- lated for their rights (1 Kings xii. 4), and were from time to time appealed to, generally in cases of ' great pith and moment ' (1 Chron. xxix. 1 ; 2 Kings xi. 17 ; Joseph., De Bell. Jud. ii. 1. 2). Nor did the people fail to interpose their will, where they thought it necessary, in opposition to that of the monarch (1 Sam. xiv. 45). The part which Nathan took against David shows how effective, as well as bold, was the check exerted by the prophets ; indeed, most of the prophetic history is the history of the noblest Opposition ever made to the vices alike of royalty, priesthood, and people. If needful, the prophet hesitated not to demand an audience of the king, nor was he dazzled or deterred by royal power and pomp (1 Kings xx. 22, 38 ; 2 Kings i. 15). As, how- ever, the monarch held the sword, the instrument of death was sometimes made to prevail over every restraining influence (1 Sam. xxii. 17). After the transfer of the crown- from Saul to David, the royal power was annexed to the house of the latter, passing from father to son, with pre- ference to the eldest born, though he might be a minor. Jehoash was seven years old when he began to reign (2 Kings xi. 21). This rule was not, however, rigidly observed, for instances are not wanting in which nomination of a younger son gave him a preferable title to the crown (1 Kings i. 17 ; 2 Chron. xi. 21) : the people, too, and even foreign powers, at a later period, interrupted the regular transmission of royal authority (2 Kings xxi. 24; xxiii. 24, 30; xxiv. 17). The ceremony of anointing, which was observed at least in the case of Saul, David, and Solo- mon (1 Sam. ix. 14; x. 1 ; xv. 1 ; xvi. 12; 2 Sam. ii. 4 ; v. I ; 1 Kings i. 34 ; xxxix. 5), and in which the prophet or high-priest who per- formed the rite acted as the representative of the theocracy and the expounder of the will of heaven, must have given to the spiritual power ve/y con- siderable influence ; and both in this particular KING. KING. 207 and in the very nature of the observance directs the mind to Egypt, where the same custom pre- vailed, and where the power of the priestly caste was immense (Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, v. 279). Indeed, the ceremony seems to have been essential to constitute a legitimate monarch (2 Kings xi. 12; xxiii. 30); and thus the autho- rities of the Jewish church held in their hands, and had subject to their will, a most important power, which they could use either for their own purposes or the common good. In consequence of the general observance of this ceremony, Ae term ' anointed,' ' the Lord's anointed ' (1 Sam. ii. 10; xvi. 6; xxiv. 6; 2 Sam. xix. 21; Ps. ii. 2 ; Lam. iv. 20), came to be employed in rhetorical and poetical diction as equivalent in meaning to the designation king. We have seen in the case of Saul that personal and even ex- ternal qualities had their influence in procuring ready obedience to a sovereign ; and further evi- dence to the same effect may be found in Ps. xlv. 3 ; Ezek. xxviii. 12 : such qualities would natu- rally excite the enthusiasm of the people, who appear to have manifested their approval by accla- mations (1 Sam. x. 24 ; 1 Kings i. 25 ; 2 Kings ix. 13; xi. 13; 2 Chron. xxiii. 11 ; see also Jo- seph. De Bell. Jtid., i. 33. 9). Jubilant music formed a part of the popular rejoicings (1 Kings i. 40) ; thank-offerings were made (1 Kings i. 25); the new sovereign rode in solemn procession on the royal mule of his predecessor (1 Kings i. 38), and took possession of the royal harem — an act which seems to have been scarcely less essential than other observances which appear to us to wear a higher character (1 Kings ii. 13, 22; 2 Sam. xvi. 22). A numerous harem, indeed, was among the most highly estimated of the royal luxuries (2 Sam. v. 13 ; 1 Kings xi. 1 ; xx. 3). It was under the supervision and control of eunuchs, and passed from one monarch to another as a part of the crown property (2 Sam. xii. 8). The law (Deut. xvii. 17), foreseeing evils such as that by which Solomon, in his later years, was turned away from his fidelity to God, had strictly forbidden many wives ; but Eastern passions and usages were too strong for a mere written prohibition, and a cor- rupted religion became a pander to royal lust, interpreting the divine command as sanctioning eighteen as the minimum of wives and concubines. In the original distribution of the land no share, of course, was reserved for a merely possible monarch ; yet the kings were not without several sources of income. In the earlier periods of the monarchy the simple manners which prevailed would render copious revenues unnecessary ; and a throne which was the result of a spontaneous demand on the part of the people, would easily find support in free-will offerings, especially in a part of the world where the great are never approached without a present. There seems also reason to conclude that the amount of the con- tributions made by the people for the sustenance of the monarch depended, in a measure, on the degree of popularity which, in any particular case, he enjoyed, or the degree of service which he obviously rendered to the state (1 Sam. x. 27 ; xvi. 20 ; 2 Sam. viii. 11 ; 1 Kings x. 11, 25, sq.). That presents of small value and humble nature were not despised or thought unfit for the accept- ance of royalty, may be learnt from that which Jesse sent to Saul (1 Sam. xvi. 20), 'an ass, with bread and a bottle of wine, and a kid.' The indirect detail ; of the substance which was king David's,' found in 1 Chron. xxvii. 25, sq. (comp. 1 Sam. viii. 14 ; 2 Chron. xxvi. 10, sq.), shows at how early a period the Israelitish throne was in possession of very large property, both per- sonal and real. The royal treasury was re- plenished by confiscation, as in the case of Nabotb. (1 Kings xxi. 16 ; comp. Ezek. xlvi. 16, sq. ; 2 Sam. xvi. 4). Nor were taxes unknown. Samuel had predicted (1 Sam. viii. 15), ' He will take the tenth of your seed and of your vine- yards,' &c. ; and so in other passages (1 Kings v. 13 ; ix, 21) we find that levies both of men and money were made for the monarch's pur- poses; and, in cases of special need, these exac- tions were large and rigorously levied (2 Kings xxiii. 35), as when Jehoiakim ' taxed the land to give the money according to the commandment of Pharaoh ; he exacted the silver and the gold of the people of the land, of every one according to his taxation.' So long, however, as the native vigour of a young monarchy made victory easy and frequent, large revenues came to the king from the spoils of war (2 Sam. viii. 2, sq.). Com- merce also supplied abundant resources (1 Kings x. 15). In the 14th verse of the chapter last referred to, it is said that ' the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred three score and six talents of gold.' In the same connection we find particulars which give a high idea of Solomon's opulence and splendour : ; Two hundred targets of beaten gold, each of six 'hun- dred shekels ; three hundred shields of beaten gold, of three pounds of gold each ; a great throne of ivory, overlaid with the best gold ; drinking- vessels of gold : silver was accounted nothing of in Solomon's days.' A navy is also spoken of, which was at sea with the navy of Hiram, king of Tyre : this navy came once in every three years, bringing gold and silver, ivory, apes, and pea- cocks. ' So king Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth for riches.' Accordiug to Oriental custom, much ceremony and outward show of respect were observed. Those who were intended to be received with special honour were placed on the king's right hand (1 Kings ii. 19). The most profound homage was paid to the monarch, which was required not merely by common usage, but by the voice of religious wisdom (Prov. xxiv. 21) — a requirement which was not unnatural in regard to an ofiice that was accounted of divine origin, and to have a sort of vice-divine authority. Those who pre- sented themselves before the royal presence fell with their face towards the ground till their fore- head touched it (1 Sam. xxv. 23 ; 2 Sam. ix. 6; xix. IS), thus worshipping or doing obeisance to the monarch, a ceremony from which even the royal spouse was not exempted (1 Kings i. 16). A kiss was among the established tokens of rever- ence (1 Sam. x. 1 ; Ps. ii. 12), as were also hyper- bolical wishes of good (Dan. ii. 4 ; iii. 9). Serious offences against the king were punished with death (1 Kings xxi. 10). Deriving their power originally from the wishes of the people, and being one of the same race, the Hebrew kings were naturally less despotic than other Oriental sovereigns, mingled more with their subjects, and were by no means difficult of access (2 Sam. xix. 8 ; 1 Kings xx. 39 ; Jer. xxxviii. 7 ; 208 KINGS, BOOKS OF. 1 Kings in. 16; 2 Kings vi. 26; viii. 3). After death the monarchs were interred in the 'royal cemetery in Jerusalem : ' So David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David ' (I Kings ii. 10; xi. 43; xiv. 31). But bad kings were excluded ' from the sepulchres of the kings of Israel ' (2 Chron. xxviii. 27). In 1 Kino-s iv. will be found an enumeration of the hi°h officers of state under the reign of Solomon (see also 1 Kings x. 5; xii. 18 ; xviii. 3 ; 2 Kings viii. 16; x. 22; xviii. 18; xix. 2; 1 Chron. xxvii. 25 ; Isa. xxii. 15 ; Jer. lii. 25). The misdeeds of the Jewish crown, and the boldness with which they were reproved, may be seen exemplified in Jer. xxii. : ' Thus saith the Lord, Execute judg- ment and righteousness, and do no wrong; do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow ; neither shed innocent blood. But if ye will not hear these words, this house shall become a desolation,' &c. Reference on the subject here treated of may be made to Schickard, Jus Re- gium Hebrcsor. Tubing. 1621 ; Carpzov, Appar. Crit. p. 52; Michaelis, Mos. Recht, i. 298; Othon. Lex. Rabbin, p. 575. — J.R. B. KINGS, BOOKS OF.- The two books of Kings formed anciently but one book in the Jewish Scriptures. The present division, follow- ing the Septuagint and Latin versions, has been common in the Hebrew Bibles since the Venetian editions of Bomberg. That the book was origin- ally an unbroken treatise is affirmed by Origen and Jerome, Melito of Sardis, and Josephus, (Origen, apud Euseb. Praep. Evang. vi. 25, BacriXeioov Tpirri, TerapTij, ev kvi Ovajj.fj.eXex Aa/3iS; Hieronym. Prolog. Gal.; Joseph. Cont. Apion. i. 8). Great stress cannot always be laid on the Jewish forms of the sacred books, as they were arranged so as to correspond with the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. The old Jewish name was borrowed, as usual, from the commencing words of the book, TH *pD!"11, Grecized as in the above quotation from Eusebius. The Septuagint and Vulgate now number them as the third and fourth books of Kings, reckoning the two books of Samuel the first and second. Their present title, D^pD, BafTiKeloiv, Regum, in the opinion of Hiivernick, has respect more to the formal than essential character of the composition (Einleitung ', () 168) ; yet under such forms of government as those of Judah and Israel the royal person and name are intimately associated with all national acts and movements, legal decisions, warlike preparations, domestic legislation, and foreign policy. The reign of an Oriental prince is iden- tified with the history of his nation during the period of his sovereignty. More especially in the theocratic constitution of the Jewish realm the character of the monarch was an important ele- ment of national history, and, of necessity, it had considerable influence on the fate and fortunes of the people. The books of Kings contain the brief annals of a long period, from the accession of Solomon till the dissolution of the commonwealth. The first chapters describe the reign of Solomon over the united kingdom, and the revolt under Rehoboam. The history of the rival states is next narrated in parallel sections till the period of Israel's down- fall on the invasion of Shalmanezer. Then the remaining years of the principality of Judah are KINGS, BOOKS OF. recorded till the conquest of Nebuchadnezzar and the commencement of the Babylonish captivity. In the article Israel, the period comprised has been exhibited under the name and reign of the kings who are mentioned in these books, and there also, and in the article Judah, the chro- nology of the books has been sufficiently con- sidered. There are some peculiarities in this succinct history worthy of attention. It is very brief, but very suggestive. It is not a biography of the sovereigns, nor a mere record of political occur- rences, nor yet an ecclesiastical register. King, church, and state are all comprised in their sacred relations. It is a theocratic history, a retrospective survey of the kingdoms as existing under a theocratic government. The character of the sovereign is tested by his fidelity to the religious obligations of his office, and this decision in reference to his conduct i3 generally added to the notice of his accession. The new king's religious character is generally portrayed by its similarity or opposition to the way of David, of his father, or of Jeroboam, son of Nebat, ' who made Israel to sin.' Ecclesiastical affairs are noticed with a similar purpose, and in contrast with past or prevalent apostacy, especially as manifested in the popular superstitions, whose shrines were on the 'high places.' Political or national incidents are introduced in general for the sake of illus- trating the influence of religion on' civic pros- perity ; of showing how the theocracy maintained a vigilant and vengeful guardianship over its rights and privileges — adherence to its principles securing peace and plenty, disobedience to them bringing along with it sudden and severe retribu- tion. The books of Kings are a verification of the Mosaic warnings, and the author of them has kept this steadily in view. He has given a brief history of his people, arranged under the various political chiefs in such a manner as to show that the government was essentially theocratic, that its spirit, as developed in the Mosaic writings, was never extinct, however modified or inactive it might sometimes appear. Thus the books of Kings appear in a religious costume, quite different from the form they would have assumed either as a political or ecclesias- tical narrative. In the one case legislative enact- ments, royal edicts, popular movements, would have occupied a prominent place ; in the other, sacerdotal arrangements, Levitical service, music and pageantry, would have filled the leading sections of the treatise. In either view the points adduced would have had a restricted reference to the palace or the temple, the sovereign or the pontiff, the court or the priesthood, the throne or the altar, the tribute or tithes, the nation on its farms, or the tribes in the courts of the sacred edifice. But the theocracy conjoined both the political and religious elements, and the inspired annalist unites them as essential to his design. The agency of divinity is constantly recognised, the hand of Jehovah is continually acknowledged. The chief organ of theocratic influence enjoys peculiar prominence. We refer to the incessant agency of the prophets, their great power and peculiar modes of action as detailed by the com- poser of the books of Kings. They interfered with the succession, and their instrumentality was apparent in the schism. They roused the KINGS, BOOKS OF. people, and they braved the sovereign. The balance of power was in their hands ; the regal 'dignity seemed to be sometimes at their disposal. In times of emergency they dispensed with usual modes of procedure, and assumed an authority with which no subject in an ordinary state can safely be intrusted, executing the law with a sum- mary promptness which rendered opposition im- possible, or at least unavailing. They felt their divine commission, and that they were the cus- todiers of the rights of Jehovah. At the same time they protected the interests of the nation, and, could we divest the term of its association with unprincipled turbulence and sedition, we would, like Winer, style them the demagogues of Israel (Winer, Realwort. art. Prophet). The divine prerogative was to them a vested right, guarded with a sacred jealousy from royal usurpation or popular invasion ; and the interests of the people were as religiously protected against encroach- ments, too easily made under a form of govern- ment which had not the safeguard of popular representation or aristocratic privilege. The priesthood was in many instances, though there are some illustrious exceptions, merely the crea- ture of the crown, and therefore it became the prophetenthum to assert its dignity and stand forth in the majestic insignia of an embassy from heaven. The truth of these sentiments, as to the method, design, and composition of the books of Kings, is confirmed by ample evidence. 1. Large space is occupied with the building of the temple — (he palace of the Divine Protector — his throne in it being above the mercy-seat and between the cherubim (ch. v.-viii.). Care is taken to record the miraculous phenomenon of the descent of the Sc'hekinah (ch. viii. 10). The prayer of Solomon at the dedication of the house is full of theocratic views and aspirations. 2. Reference is often made to the Mosaic Law with its provisions ; and allusions to the earlier history of the people frequentlv occur (1 Kings ii. 3; iii. 14; vi. 11, 12; viii. 58, &c. ; 2 Kings x. 31 ; xiv. 6; xvii. 13, 15, 37; xviii. 4-6 ; xxi. 1-8). Allusions to the Mosaic code are found more frequently toward the end of the second book, when the kingdom was drawing near its termination, as if to account for its decay and approaching fate. 3. Phrases expressive of Divine interference are frequently introduced (1 Kings xi. 31 ; xii. 15; xiii. 1, 2, 9; and xx. 13, &c). 4. Prophetic interposition is a very prominent theme of record. It tills the vivid foreground of the historical picture. Nathan was occupied in the succession of Solomon (1 Kings i. 45) ; Ahijah was concerned in the revolt (xi. 29-40). She- rftaiab disbanded the troops which Rehoboam had mustered (xii. 21). Ahijah predicted the ruin of Jeroboam, whose elevation he had promoted (xiv. 7). Jehu, the prophet, doomed the house of Baasha (xvi. 1). The reign of Ahab and Ahaziah is marked by the buhl, rapid, mysterious move- ments of Elijah. Under Aliab occurs the predic- tion of Micaiah (xxii. 8). The actions and oracles of Elisha form the marvellous topics of narration under several reigns. The agency of Isaiah is also recognised (2 Kings xix. 20 ; xx. 16). Be- sides 1 Kings xiii. presents another instance of prophetic operation ; and in xx. 35, the oracle of VOL. II. KINGS, BOOKS OF. 209 an unknown prophet is also rehearsed. Huldah, the prophetess, was an important personage under the government of Josiah (2 Kings xxii. 14). Care is also taken to report the fulfilment of strik- ing prophecies, in the usual phrase, ' according to the word of the Lord' (1 Kings xii. 15 ; xv. 29 ; xvi. 12; 2 Kings xxiii. 15-18 ; ix. 36 ; xxiv. 2). So, too, the Old Syriac version prefixes, ' Here follows the book of the kings who flourished among the ancient people ; and in this is also exhibited the history of the prophets who flourished during their times.' 5. Theocratic influence is recognised both in the deposition and succession of kings (1 Kings xiii. 33 ; xv. 4, 5, 29, 30 ; 2 Kings xi. 17, &c). Compare on the whole of this view Havernick, Einleit. § 168; Jahn, Introduct. §46; Gesenius, UeberJes. vol. i. p. 934. It is thus apparent that the object of the author of the Books of Kings was, to describe the history of the kingdoms, especially in connection with the theocratic element. T'.is design accounts for what De Wette (Einleit 6 185) characteristically terms der steife prophe- tische pragmatismus, and for the frequent myths which this writer finds in these books. The authorship and age of this historical treatise may admit of several suppositions. Whatever were the original sources, the books are evidently the composition of one writer. The style is generally uniform throughout. Tne same forms of expression are used to denote the same thing, e. g. the male sex (1 Kings xiv. 10, &c); the death of a king (1 Kings xi. 43, &c.) ; modes ' of allusion to the law (1 Kings xi. 13) ; fidelity to Jehovah (1 Kings viii. 63, &c. ; De Wette, Einleit. § 184, «; Havernick, Einleit. §171). Similar idioms are ever recurring, so as to produce a uniformity of style (Monotonie der Darstellung, Havernick, I. c). The sources whence this historic information has been derived have been variously named. That annals contemporary with the events which they describe were written in the early period of the Jewish state, may be at once admitted. Eichhorn supposes that the sources of ' Kings ' were private historical works (Einleit. § 482). De Wette, from the legends related in them, cannot believe them to be official docu- ments. Bertholdt, HUvemick, and Movers hold that the books are extracts from the public annals (comp. Havernick, § 169). The inspired historio- grapher refers his readers to these sources of evi- dence in such frequent phrases as l|"m "iJVl ' the rest of the acts.' Such a reference is made espe- cially to the sources, when other royal acts than those narrated in the books of Kings are glanced at. These sources are styled the book of ihe Chronicles of the kings of Judah, or Israel. Si- milar phraseology is used in Esther x. 2; vi. 1, to denote the official annals of the Persian empire. Public documents are spoken of in the same way (Neb. xii. 23). There is little reason to suppose that the book referred to in this last passage is that styled Chronicles in our copy of the Scrip- tures (Movers, Chronik, § 234). So we infer that the ' Book of the Chronicles of the Kings," so often alluded to, was an authentic document, public and official. Once indeed mention is made of a work entitled 'The Book of the Acts of Solo- mon.' That the prophets themselves were employed in recording contemporaneous events, is evident 210 KINGS, BOOKS OF. from 2 Chron. xx. 34 ; 1 Chron. xxix. 29. In the course of the narrative we meet with many instances of description, having the freshness and form of nature, and which are apparently direct quotations from some journal, written by one who testified what he had seen (1 Kings xx. 10 ; 2 Kings xii. 15 ; xiv. 8). Thus the credibility of the history contained in these books rests upon a sure foundation. What neologists style their mythical character or colouring furnishes to every believer in the reality of the theocratic government established by Moses, continued evi- dence that the Jews were God's peculiar people — that Jehovah was their sovereign (Havemick, § 170 ; Hengstenberg, Beitr. ii. 169). As to what has been termed the anti-Israelitish spirit of the work (Berthdldt, Einleit. p. 949), we do not perceive it. Truth required that the king- dom of Israel should be described in its real character. Idol-worship was connected with its foundation ; moscholatry was a state provision; fidelity obliged the annalist to state that all its kings "patronized the institutions of Bethel and Dan, while eight, at least, of the Jewish sove- reigns adhered to the true religion, and that the majority of its kings perished in insurrection, while those of Judah, in general, were exempted from seditious tumults and assassination. Now, the compiler from these old documents — he who shaped them into the form they have in our present books of Kings — must have lived in a late age. The Second Book of Kings con- cludes with an account of the liberation of Jehoiachin, king of Judah, from prison in Ba- bylon— an event which, according to Jahn, happened in the twenty-sixth, or according to Prideaux, in the twenty-eighth year after the de- struction of Jerusalem, Jahn and Havemick place the composition of ' Kings' in the reign of Evil-merodach ; and De "Wette, towards the end of the Captivity. Instances of later phra- seology occurring in the books of Kings are given by De Wette (&- 115. 6). Jewish tradition makes Jeremiah the" author (Baba-batkra, fol. 15. 1). Calmet ascribes the authorship to Ezra. The former opinion, adopted by Grotius, and lately revindicated by Havemick, certainly ap- pears the more probable. There is considerable linguistic affinity between the books of Kings and the prophecy of Jeremiah. Kings. Jeremiah. 2 K. xvii. 13 . . vii. 13. 1 K. x. 8 ... xxii. 8. 2 K. xxiv.-xxv. . . lii. 1 K. xi. 4 ; viii. 25 ; xxxiii. 17; xiii. 13; ix. 5. xvii. 25. 2 K. xxi. 12 . . xix. 3. In the absence of certain evidence this opinion may be deemed the most likely, and is a more simple theory than that of Movers, who supposes that Jeremiah compiled a more ancient production a book of Kings — the source of our present trea- tise. It explains the close similarity of the books of Kings and Jeremiah in spirit, style, and ten- dency, more easily and more satisfactorily than the supposition of De Wette", or any other conjecture of like nature. Objections against this opinion, from the hasty way in which Jeremiah has de- scribed his own times, admit of an easy solution. Contemporaries were familiar with his life and KINNAMON. times, while his own prophecy contains the dc* sired information. Another objection, that Jere- miah could not have lived longer than Evil- merodach, is noticed and refuted by Havemick ( Ueber Daniel, p. 14). The age of the Jewish tradition as to the authorship of the books of Kings, may be inferred from the fact that they are placed among the Q^Sl. In reference to apparent contradictions or anachronisms, it must be borne in mind that the text of these books is not in a very pure state, and that in nothing do copyists blunder more than in the transcription of numerals. [Chro- nicles.J As to points of real or alleged contra- diction, see Davidson's Sacred Hermeneutics,. p. 516. It has been sometimes thought that the books of Samuel were the production of the same redactor who composed the books of Kings. Both compositions form a history almost conti- nuous, though 2 Sam. xvi.-xxiv. is evidently an appendix. That there should fee many points o? similarity in two works of history on kindred themes, and having a similar purpose in view, surprises no one. The close philological affinity on which Stahelin insists so much (see Tholuck's Literar. Anzeig, 1838, p. 52S), may" thus be easily accounted for ; yet there are also points of dissimilarity. The language of 'Samuel' has few marks of later usage; the style has more traces of an early age about it. The books of Samuel have not the compactness and symmetry of the books of Kings. The greater portion of them seems to be an original work, rather than a compilation. The age of the books of Kings may be inter- mediate between the early work of Samuel and the later treatise of Chronicles. The ' Introductions ' referred to in the course of this article may be consulted. Modem commen- tators upon 'Kings' are scarce, and there are not many old ones : Seb. Leonhardi 'Tiro/iv-tinaTa, in Libb. Reg. Erf. 1606, Lips. 1610-14; Seb. Schmidii Awnot. in Libb. Reg. Strasb. 1687 ; and the various authors in the Critici Sacri. — J. E. 'KINNAMON (|W3p), translated 'cinnamon/ occurs in three places of Scripture ; first, about 1600 years before the Christian era, in Exod. xxx. 23, where it is enumerated as one of the ingredients employed in the preparation of the holy anointing oil : ' Take thou also unto thee powerful spices, myrrh, and of sweet cinnamon (kinnamon besetn) half as much (i. e. 250 shekels), together with sweet calamus and cassia.' It is next mentioned in Prov. vii. 17, ' I have per- fumed my bed with myrrh, aloes (ahalini), and cinnamon.'' And again in Cant. iv. 14, 'Spike- nard and saffron; calamus and cinnamon, with all trees of frankincense; myrrh and aloes (aha- lini), with all the chief spices. While in Rev. xxiii. 13, among the merchandise of Babylon, we have ' cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense.' In the earliest notice, it is called kinnamon besem, or ' sweet cinnamon.' Dr. Vincent is in- clined to consider khennah besem and hliinna- mon besem as derived from the same root. Many writers have doubted whether the kin- namon of the Hebrews is the same article that we now call cinnamon. Celsius quotes R. Ben Melech (ad Cant. iii. 14) and Saadias (Exod. KINNAMON. xxx.) as considering it to be the Lign Aloe, or Agallochum. Others have doubted whether our cinnamon was at all known to the ancients. But the same thing has been said of almost every other drug which is noticed by them. If we were to put faith in all these doubts, we should be left without any substances possessed of sufficiently remarkable properties to have been articles of ancient commerce. The word Klwafxoi/xov occurs in many of the Greek authors, as Herodotus, Hip- pocrates, Theophrastus, Dioscorides, Galen, &c. The first of these, writing 400 years before the Christian era, describes Arabia as the last inhabited country towards the south, and as the only region of the earth which produces frankincense, myrrh, cinnamon, cassia, and ledanum. Of cinnamon he says, ' which we, as instructed by the Phoenicians, call Kivvdixanuv."1 He states, moreover, that the Arabians were unacquainted with the particular spot in which it was produced, but that some asserted it grew in the region where Bacchus was educated. From all this we can only infer that it was the production of a distant country, probably India, and that it was obtained by the route of the Red Sea. Theophrastus (ix. 5) gives a fuller but still fabulous account of its production, and it is not until the time of Dioscorides, Galen, and the Periplus of the Erythraean sea, that we get more definite information. Galen says that cassia and cinnamon are so mucli alike that it is not an easy matter to distinguish the one from the other. This is a difficulty that still continues to be ex- perienced. Dioscorides (i. 12) says that cas- sia grows in Arabia, and that there are several kinds of it ; and of cinnamon he states also (i. 13) that there are several species, named from the different places where it is procured. But the best sort is that which is like the. cassia of Mosylon, and is itself called Mosyllitic, or as Pliny says, ' Portus Mosyllites quo cinnamo- rnum devehitur" (vi. 29). Mr. Conley, however, in his edition of Lurcher's Notes to Herodotus, ad- duces from Brace's Travels (vol. vii. p. 329), ' the bastard kind of cinnamon, called by the Italians canella, which, notwithstanding what Bellonins says, and before him Pliny, grows plentifully among 1 he incense and myrrh at Cape Guardafui, the Mosylon promoiitorium and promontorium aromaticum, and here only the distinction obtains of mountain cassia and that which grows on the plain.' Notwithstanding this, it would require the testimony of a careful and well-qualified bota- nist to prove that the cinnamon plant grows in Africa as well as in Ceylon. Several kinds are described' by Dioscorides, and no fewer than ten kinds in the Periplus of Amah (vid. Vincent, Perijjlus, ii. p. 711), and among these the '2,K\jjpoT6pd, from the Greek aK\T]p6s, ' hard,' Which he translates ' xylocassia,' or ' wood cin- namon,' and states to be ' a term which occurs frequently, and perhaps distinguishes the cassia lignea (wood cinnamon) from the cassia fistula (cannella, or pipe cinnamon).' It is curious that the Persians and Arabians denominate cinnamon, for which they give akimona as the Greek name, dar-seeni, evidently derived from the Hindoo Sar-cheenee, or Chinese wood, as if it had, like the cinnamon of the Greeks, been originally only the small brandies and twigs, and not the separated bark, as in modern cinnamon and cassia. It lias been asked 'whether the foreign element (kiv) KINNAMON. 211 in the Greek name KLvvd/j.a>/j.ov, does not point to the Chinese origin of the production so named ? ' But the Cingalese cacyn-nama (dulce lignum) and the Malayan kaimanis are more probable derivations. Cinnamon of the best quality is imported in the present day from Ceylon, and also from the Malabar coast, in consequence of the cinnamon plant (Cinnamoynum Zeylanicum) having been introduced there from Ceylon. An inferior kind is also exported from the peninsula of India, the produce of other species of cinnamomum, accord- ing to Dr. Wight. From ihese countries the cin- namon and cassia of the ancients must most likely have been obtained, though both are also produced in the islands of Sumatra and Borneo, in China, and in Cochinchina. Cinnamon is im- ported in bales and chests — the bundles weighing about 1 lb. each. The pieces consist of com- pound quills, are about three feet long, slender, and inclose within them several smaller quills. These are thin, smooth, of a brownish colour, of a warm, sweetish, and agreeable taste, and fragrant odour; but several kinds are known in modern markets, as they were in ancient times. S71. [Lauras kinnamomum.] In Ceylon cinnamon is carefully cultivated, the best cinnamon gardens being on the south- western coast, where the soil is light and sandy, and the atmosphere moist from the prevalent southern winds. The plants begin to yield cin- namon when about, six or seven years old, after which the shoots may be cut every three or four years. The best kinds of cinnamon are obtained from twigs and shoots ; less than hal f, or more than two or three inches in diameter, are not peeled. ' The peeling is effected by making two opposite, or when the branch is thick, three or four longitudinal incisions, and then elevating the bark by introducing the peeling knife beneath it. In twenty-four hours the epidermis and greenish pulpy matter are carefully scra|ied off. In a few hours the smaller quills are introduced into the larger ones, and in this way congeries of quills are formed, often measuring forty inches in length. The bark is then dried in the sun, and afterwards made into bundles, with pieces of split bamboo twigs' (Percival's Account of Ceylon). Besides cinnamon, an oil of cinnamon is obtained in Ceylon, by macerating the coarser pieces of the bark, after being reduced to a coarse powder, in sea- water, for two days, when both are submitted to distillation. A fatty substance is also obtained by p2 .* 212 KINNAMON. braising and boiling the riper fruit, when an oily body floats on the surface, which on cooling concretes into a dirty whitish, rather hard, fatty matter. Some camphor may be procured from the roots. Respecting the former, it yields a striking confirmation of the minute knowledge which the ancients had of some products of India. Thus, as we have elsewhere mentioned (Essay on Antiquity of Hindoo Medicine, p. 105), Theophrastus (ix. 7) along with cinnamon and cassia, describes two kinds of comacum, one a fruit, and the other em ployed for mixing with the most precious ointments. Bodaeus a Stapel (p. 1009) says, ' Quale fuerithoc comacum, quod unguentis addebatur, me ignorare fateor.' These seem to me to be substances of which we have only in recent times acquired any correct know- ledge, namely, the fruit of the cinnamon plant, and the fatty oil extracted from it, of which there are specimens in the (King's) College Museum of Materia Medica (Essay, p. 106). 372. [Kinnamomum cassia.] Cassia bark, as we have seen, was distinguished with difficulty from cinnamon by the ancients. In the present day it is often sold for cinnamon; indeed, unless a purchaser specify true cinna- mon, he will probably be supplied with nothing but cassia. It is made up into similar bundles with cinnamon, .has the same general appearance, smell, and taste ; but its substance is thicker and coarser, its colour darker, its flavour much less sweet and fine than that of Ceylon cinnamon, while it is more pungent, and is followed by a bitter taste ; it is also less closely quilled, and breaks shorter than genuine cinnamon. Dr. Pereira, whose descrip- tion we have adopted, has ascertained that cassia is imported into the London market from Bombay (the produce of the Malabar coast), and also from the Mauritius, Calcutta, Batavia, Singapore, the Philippine Islands, and Canton. Mr. Reeves (Trans. Med. Bot. Soc. 1S28, p. 26) says, ' Vast quantities both of cassia seeds (buds) and cassia lignea are annually brought to Canton from the province of Kwangse, whose principal city (Kweihin, literally ' cassia forest') derives its Dame from the forests of cassia around it. The Chinese themselves use a much thicker bark, unfit for the European market.' The Malabar cassia lignea is thicker and coarser that that of China. From KIPPOD. the various sources, independently of the different qualities, it is evident, as in the case of cinnamon, that the ancients might have been, as no doubt they were, acquainted with several varieties of cassia. These, we have no doubt, are yielded by more than one species. Mr. Marshall, from in- formation obtained while he was staff-surgeon in Ceylon, maintained that cassia, or at least a part of it, was the coarser bark of the true cinnamon. Dr. Wight has ascertained that more than one species yields the cassia of Malabar, often called cinnamon. The Chinese cassia is supposed to be produced by the cinnamomum aromaticum of Nees von Esenbeck, the cinnamomum cassia of Blume, which' Dr. Christison ascertained is culti- vated in our hot-houses, and confounded with the true cinnamon. It was first imported, we believe, by the Messrs. Loddiges from China. Besides cassia bark, there is also a cassia oil, and cassia buds, supposed to be produced by the same tree. There can be no reasonable doubt, as cinnamon and cassia were known to the Greeks, that they must have been known to the Hebrews also, as the commerce with India can be proved to have been much more ancient than is generally surj- posed [Kiddah]. — J. F. R. KIPPOD ("riSp). This name occurs but three times in Scripture (Isa. xiv. 23 ; xxxiv. 11 ; and Zeph. ii. 14), and has been variously inter- preted— owl, osprey, tortoise, porcupine, otter, and in the Arabic, bustard. Bochart, Shaw, Lowth, and other great authorities, have supported the opinion that it refers to the porcupine. The main stress of their argument seems to depend upon trie component parts of the original word, of which the first syllable is said to be derived from HJp kana, ' spine ; ' in confirmation of which Bochart, with his wonted learning, cites the Chaldee, Hebrew, Arabic, and Ethiopian names of the porcupine and hedgehog, which apparently confirm his opinion ; but although derivations, when they are supported by apparent identity of meaning in other kindred languages, may satisfy the judgment of mere philologists, something more will be demanded by naturalists, who, looking for more positive indications than apparent synonyma and inferential derivation, have recourse mainly to the context for the real conditions, which must determine the meaning of disputed terms. Now, in Isa. xiv. 23, ' I will make it a possession for the kippod (bittern), and pools of water,' &c, the words are plain and natural. Marshes and pools are not the habi- tation of hedgehogs, for they shun water. In Isa. xxxiv. 11, it is said, ' The cormorant (Sterna caspia) and the kippod (bittern) shall possess it, the owl also and fche raven shall dwell in it,' &c. ; that is, in the ruins of Idumfea. Here, again, the version is plain, and a hedgehog most surely would be out of place. Zeph. ii. 14, ' Both the cor- morant (Sterna caspia) and the kippod (bittern) shall lodge in the upper lintels of it ; and their voice shall sing in the windows,' &c. Surely here kippod cannot mean the hedgehog, a nocturnal, grovelling, worm-eating animal, entirely or nearly mute, and incapable of climbing up walls ; one that does not haunt ruins, but earthy banks in wooded regions, and that is absolutely solitary in its habits. We thus see that the arguments respect- ing kippod, supplied by kephud, or kephod — for we find these various readings — are all mere specu- KIR. lations, producing at best only negative results. Those drawn from indications of manners, such as the several texts contain, are, on the contrary, positive, and leave no doubt that the animal meant is not a hedgehog, nor even a mammal, but a bird. Hence, though we admit the assumed root of the denomination, still it must bear an interpretation which is applicable to one of the feathered tribes, probably to certain wading species, which have, chiefly on the neck, long pointed feathers, more or less speckled. The Arabian bustard, Otis houbara, might be selected, if it were not that bustards keep always in dry deserts and uplands, and that they never roost, their feet not admitting of perching, but rest on the ground. We think the term most ap- plicable to the heron tribes, whose beaks are formidable spikes that often kill hawks ; a fact well known to Eastern hunters. Of these, Nycti- corax Eumpceus, or common night heron, with its pencil of white feathers in the crest, is a species, not uncommon in the marshes of Western Asia ; and of several species of bittern, Ardea (botaurus) stellaris has pointed long feathers on the neck and breast, freckled with black, and a strong pointed bill. After the breeding-season it mi- grates and passes the winter in the south, fre- quenting the marshes and rivers of Asia and Europe, where it then roosts high above ground, uttering a curious note before and after its even- ing flight, very distinct from the booming sound produced by it in the breeding-season, and while it remains in the marshes. Though not building, like the stork, on the tops of houses, it resorts, like the heron, to ruined structures, and we have been informed that it has been seen on the sum- mit of Tauk Kesra at Ctesiphon. — C. H. S. KIR (Tj? ; Sept. Kvpios), a people and country subject to the Assyrian empire, to which the conquered Damascenes were transplanted (2 Kings xvi. 9 ; Isa. xxii. 6 ; Amos i. 5), and whither also the Aramaeans in the east of Syria once wandered (Amos ix. 7). This is supposed by Major Rennet to be the same country which still bears the name of iCwrdistan or Kourdistan (Geog. of Herodot. 391). There are, however, objections to this view, which do not apply so strongly to the notion of Rosenmiiller and others, that it was a tract on the river Cyrus, or rather Kuros (Kvpos and Kvjipos), in Zend Koro, which rises in the mountains between the Euxine and Caspian Seas, and runs into the latter after being joined by the Araxes. Gwrjtstan, or Grusia (Grusiana), commonly called Georgia, seems also to have derived its name from this river Kur, which Hows through it. KIR-HARESH; Kik-Hakeseth ; Km- Herbs. [Kib-Moab.] KIRJATH. This word means toion or city, and is much used in the formation of names of places, like our own town. The following are the principal places distinguished by this term : — 1. KIRJATHAIM (tfc'oSpi double town; Sept. Kipiadal/j), one of the most ancient towns in the country east of the Jordan, as it was pos- sessed by the gigantic Emim (Gen. xiv. 5), who were expelled by the Moabites (Dent. ii. 9, 10), who in their turn were dispossessed by the Amo- rites, from whom it was taken by the Israelites. Kirjathaim was then assigned to Reuben (Num. KIR-MOAB. 213 xxxii. 37 ; Josh. xiii. 19). But during the Assyrian exile, the Moabites again took posses- sion of this and other towns (Jer. xlviii. 1-23 ; Ezek. xxv. 9). Eusebius places it about half an hour west of the ruins of Medeba. Burckhardt found other ruins, called El Teym, which he conjectures to have been ~¥L\riB.thaim, the last syllable of the name being retained. This is somewhat doubtful, as the KapidSa (KapidOa) of Eusebius is placed ten miles west of Medeba, whereas El Teym is but two miles. There was another place of this name in the tribe of Naph- tali (1 Chron. vi. 76). 2. KIRJATH-ARBA, the ancient name of Hebron, but still in use in the time of Nehemiah (vi. 26) [Hebron]. 3. KIRJATH-BAAL (city of Baal). This city is more usually called Kirjath-jearim. 4. KIRJATH-HUZOTH (city of streets), a town in Moab (Num. xxii. 39). 5. KIRJATH-JEARIM (DnjJ* n?]j?, city of forests ; Sept. Kapiadiapifi), one of the towns of the Gibeonites (Josh. ix. 17). It was to this place that the ark was brought from Beth- shemesh, after it had been removed from the land of the Philistines, and where it remained till removed to Jerusalem by David (1 Sam. vii. ; 1 Chron. xiii.). This was one of the ancient sites which were again inhabited after the exile (Ezra ii. 25; Neh. vii. 29). Euse- bius and Jerome speak of it as being in their day a village nine or ten miles from Diospolis (Lydda), on the road to Jerusalem. Dr. Robin- son thinks it possible that the ancient Kirjath- jearim may be recognised in the present Kuryet- el-Enab. The first part of the name (Kirjath, Kuryet, signifying city) is the same in both, and is most probably ancient, being found in Arabic proper names only in Syria and Palestine, and not very frequently even there. The only change has been, that the ancient ' city of forests' has, in modern times, become the ' city of grapes.' The site is also about three hours, or nine Roman miles from Lydda, on the road to Jerusalem, and not very remote from Gibeon, from which Kirjath- jearim could not well have been distant. So close a correspondence of name and position seems to warrant the conclusion of Dr. Robinson in favour of Kuryet-el-Enab. This place is that which ecclesiastical tradition has identified with the Anathoth of Jeremiah, which Dr. Robinson refers to Anata [Anathoth]. It is now a poor vil- lage, its principal buildings being an old convent of the Minorites, and a Latin church. The latter is now deserted, but not in ruins, and is said to be one of the largest and most solidly constructed churches in Palestine (Robinson, ii. 109; 334-337). 6. KIRJAT H-SANNAH (city of palms ; Josh. xv. 49), otherwise Kirjath-sepiier (city of the book), a city of the tribe of Judah, called also Debir, which see (Josh. xv. 15, 16 ; Judg. i. 11, 12). KIR-MOAB pNiCTT'i?, 'the wall, strong- hold, or citadel of Moab ;' Sept. rb re?xos ttjs Ma>a/8iVi5os ; Isa. xv. I); called also Kih-hare- SBTH and KiR-BJSR.ES (nDirrVp and D^n'Tp, brick-fortress ; Isa. xvi. 7, 11 ; Jer. xlviii. 31), a fortified city in the territory of Moab. Joram king of Israel tuuk the city, and destroyed it, except the J 214 KISH. •walls ; but it appears from the passages here cited that it mast have been rebuilt before the time of Isaiah. In his prophecy (xv. 1), the Chaldee paraphrast has put 2K1?D"K'3"ti kerraka Moab, « castle of Moab ;' and the former of these words, pronounced in Arabic karak, kerek, or krak, is the name it bears in 2 Mace. xii. 17, Xapaita : in Steph.Byzant. it is called XapaK/xcofia, in Abulfeda (Tab. Syr. p. 89), and in the historians of the Crusades. Abulfeda describes Karak as a small town, with a castle on a high hill, and remarks that it is so strong that one must deny himself even the wish to take it by force. In the time of the Crusades, and when in possession of the Franks, it was invested by Saladin ; but after lying before it a month he was compelled to raise the siege (Bohaeddim, Vita Saladin. p. 55). The first person who visited the place in modern times was Seet- zen, who says, ' Near to Karak the wide plain terminates which extends from Rabbab, and is broken only by low and detached hills, and the country now becomes mountainous. Karak, for- merly a city and bishop's see, lies on the top of the hill near the end of a deep valley, and is sur- rounded on all sides with lofty mountains. The hill is very steep, and in many places the sides are quite perpendicular. The walls round the town are for the most part destroyed, and Karak can at present boast of little more than being a small country town. The castle, which is unin- habited, and in a state of great decay, was formerly one of the strongest in these countries. The inha- bitants of the town consist of Mohammedans and Greek Christians. The present bishop of Karak resides at Jerusalem. From this place one enjoys, by looking down the Wady Karak, a fine view of part of the Dead Sea, and even Jerusalem may be distinctly seen in clear weather. The hill on which Karak lies is composed of limestone and brittle marl, with many beds of blue, black, and grey flints. In the neighbouring rocks there are a num- ber of curious grottoes ; in those which are under ground wheat is sometimes preserved for a period of ten years ' (Zach's Monatliche Correspond. xviii. 434). A fuller account of the place is given by Burckhardt (Travels in Syria, pp. 379- 3S7), by whom it was next visited ; and another descrip- tion is furnished by Irby and Mangles (Travels, pp. 361-370). From their account it would seem that the caverns noticed by Seetzen were probably the sepulchres of the ancient town. We also learn that the Christians of Karak (which they and Burckhardt call Kerek), are nearly as numerous as the Turks, and boast of being stronger and braver. They were, however, on good terms with the Turks, and appeared to enjoy equal freedom with them. KISH, son of Ner, and father of King Saul (1 Sam. ix. 1). KISHON (jiBfa ; Sept. Ktow), a river which, after traversing the plain of Acre, enters the bay of the same name at its south-east corner. It is celebrated in Scripture for the overthrow of the host of Sisera in its overflowing stream (Judg. iv. 13; v. 21). It has been usual to trace the source of this river to Mount Tabor ; but Dr. Shaw affirms that in travelling along the south-eastern brow of Mount Carmel, he had an opportunity of seeing the sources of the river Kishon, three or four of which lie within less than a furlong of each KISHON. other, and are called Ras el Kishon, or the head of the Kishon. These alone, without the lesser contributions near the sea, discharge water enough to form a river half as large as the Isis. During the rainy season ail the waters which fall upon the eastern side of Carmel, or upon the rising grounds to the southward, empty themselves into it in a number of torrents, at which time it over- flows its banks, acquires a wonderful rapidity, and carries all before it. It was doubtless in such, a season that the host of Sisera was swept away, in attempting to ford ' it. But such inundations are only occasional, and of short duration, as is indeed implied in the destruction in its waters of the fu- gitives, who doubtless expected to pass it safely. The course of the stream, as estimated from the sources thus indicated, is not more than seven miles. It runs very briskly till within half a league of the sea ; but when not augmented by rains, it never falls into the sea in a full stream, but insensibly percolates througha bank of sand, which the north winds have thrown up at its mouth. It was in this state that Shaw himself found it in the month of April, 1722, when it was crossed by him. Notwithstanding Shaw's contradiction, the as- sertion that the Kishon derives its source from Mount Tabor has been repeated by modern tra- vellers as confidently as by their ancient prede- cessors. Buckingham's statement, being made with reference to the view from Mount Tabor itself, deserves attention. He says that near the foot of the mountain on the south-west are ' the springs of the Ain-es-Sherrar, which send a perceptible stream through the centre of the plain of Esdraelon, and form the brook Kishon of antiquity.' Further on, the same traveller, on reaching the hills which divide the plain of Esdraelon from that of Acre, saw the pass through which the river makes its way from the one plain to the other ( Travels in Palest. i. 168, 177). We have had opportunities of seeing much of streams similarly constituted ; and it does not seem to us difficult to reconcile the seem- ingly conflicting statements with reference to the Kishon. On further inquiry, and more extensive comparison of observations made at different times of the year, it will probably be found that the remoter source of the river is really in Mount Tabor ; but that the supply from this source is cut off in early summer, when it ceases to be main- tained by rains or contributory torrents ; whereas the copious supply from the nearer springs at Ras el Kishon, -with other springs lower down, keep it up from that point, as a perennial stream, even during the drought of summer. Thus during one part of the year the source of the river may appear to be in Mount Tabor, while during another part the source of the diminished stream is at Ras el Kishon. In this view of the case we should expect that travellers crossing the plain in or shortly after the season of rain, would have encountered the temporary stream from Mount Tabor before the point where it meets the perennial streams from Carmel. The fact is, however, that the route has been little travelled in that season ; but the required evidence is by no means wanting. Mariti (ii. 1 12) mentions the case of the English dragoman who was drowned, and his horse with him, in the attempt to cross such a stream in February, 1761. During the battle of Mount Tabor, between the French and Arabs, XISHUIM. April 16, 1799, many of the latter were drowned in their attempt to cross a stream, coming from Deburieh, which then inundated the plain (Burck- hardt, Syria, p. 339). Monro, who crossed the river early in April (in its lower or perennial part), in order to ascend Mount Carmel, describes it as traversing the plain of EsdraeLon : which he could not have done if he had not seen a stream flowing in that direction uniting with the river below Mount Carmel. The river, where he crossed it, in a boat, was then thirty yards wide. Afterwards, in crossing an arm of it, in the plain from Solam to Nazareth, he incidentally furnishes ground for his former view by stating that he crossed ' a consi- derable brook, and afterwards some others, which flow into a small lake on the northern side of the plain, and eventually contribute to swell the Kishon ' (Ramble, i. 55, 281). Dr. Robinson says that this account corresponds with channels that he observed (Bibl. Researches, iii. 230). Prokesch also, in April, 1829, when travelling directly from Ramleh to Nazareth, entered the plain of Esdraelon at or near Lejjun, where he came upon the Kishon, flowing in a deep bed through marshy ground ; and after wandering about for some time to find his way through the morass, he was at last set right by an Arab, who pointed out the proper ford (Reise ins H. Land, p. 129). The Scriptural account of the overthrow of Sisera's host manifestly shows that the stream crossed the plain, and must have been of consider- able size. The above arguments, to show that it did so, and still does so, notwithstanding Dr. Shaw's account, were, in substance, given several years ago in the Pictorial History of Palestine (Introd. p. exci.) ; and the writer has had the satisfaction of seeing his view since confirmed by Dr. Robin- son, who adds that ' not improbably, in ancient times, when the country was perhaps more wooded, there may have been permanent streams through- out the whole plain.' The transaction of the prophet Elijah, who, after liis sacrifice on Carmel, commanded the priests of Baal to be slain at the river Kishon (1 Kings xviii. 40), requires no explanation, seeing that it took place at the perennial lower stream. This also explains, what has sometimes been asked, whence, in that time of drought, the water was obtained with which the prophet inundated his altar and sacrifice. KISHUIM (D^X^p) is translated cucumbers in our Auth. Vers,, and the correctness of this rendering has been almost universally admitted. It first occurs in Num. xi. 5, in the verse already quoted in Abattachim, where the Israelites, when in the desert, express their longings for the melons and the kishuim or cucumbers of Egypt. Reduced from the plural form, the word kisha is so similar to the Arabic «_*2J kissa, that there can be very little doubt of their both meaning the same thing. Celsius gives keta, kati, and kusaia, as different pronunciations of the same word in difl'erent Ori- ental languages. It does not. follow that these names always indicate exactly the same species ; since in the different countries they would probably be applied to the kinds of cucumber most com- mon, or perhaps to those which were most esteemed in particular localities. Thus in Egypt the name KISS. 215 kati appears to be applied to the species which ig called Cucumis chate by botanists, and ' queen of cucumbers ' by Hasselquist, who describes it as the most highly esteemed of all those cultivated in •Egypt [Abattachim]. In India the name kissa S73. tCucumis sativus.] is applied by the Mohammedans to the Cucu~ mis utilissimus, or the common kukree of the natives ; while in Persia and Syria the same name would probably be applied only to the common cucumber, or Cucumis sativus, as the two preced- ing species are not likely to be much known in either country. All travellers in the East notice the extensive cultivation and consumption of cu- cumbers and other herbs of the same tribe, espe* cially where there is any moisture of soil, or the possibility of irrigation. Thus even in the driest parts, the neighbourhood of a well is often occu* pied by a field of cucurbitaceous plants, generally with a man or boy set to guard it from plunder, perched up on a temporary scaffolding, with a slight protection from the sun, where he may himself be safe from the attacks of the more powerful wild animals. That such plants appear to have been similarly cultivated among the He- brews is evident from Isa. i. 8, ' The daughter of Zion is left like a cottage in a vineyard, like a lodge in a garden of cucumbers ;' as well as from Baruch vi. 70, ' As a scarecrow in a garden of cucumbers keepeth nothing, so are their gods of wood' [Abattachim]. — J. F. R. KISS. Originally the act of kissing had a symbolical character, and, though this import may now be lost sight of, yet it must be recognised the moment we attempt to understand or explain its signification. Acts speak no less, sometimes far more forcibly, than words. In the early period 216 KISS. of society, when the foundation was laid of most even of our Western customs, action constituted a large portion of what we may term human lan- guage, or the means of intercommunication be- tween man and man; because then words were less numerous, books unknown, the entire ma- chinery of speaking, being in its rudimental and elementary state, less developed and called into play ; to say nothing of that peculiarity of the Oriental character (if, indeed, it be not a cha- racteristic of all nations in primitive ages) which inclined men to general taciturnity, with occa- sional outbreaks of fervid, abrupt, or copious eloquence. In this language of action, a kiss, inasmuch as it was a bringing into contact of parts of the body of two persons, was naturally the expression and the symbol of affection, re- gard, respect, and reverence ; and if any deeper source of its origin were sought for, it would, doubtless, be found in the fondling and caresses with which the mother expresses her tenderness for her babe. That the custom is of very early date appears from Gen. xxix. 13, where we read — ' When Laban heard the tidings of Jacob, his sister's son, he ran to meet him, and embraced him and kissed him, and brought him to his house :' the practice was even then established and recognised as a matter of course. In Gen", xxvii. 26, 27, a kiss is a sign of affection between a parent and child. It was also, as with some modern nations, a toKen of friendship and regard bestowed when friends or relations met oi sepa- rated (Tobit vii. 6; x. 12; Luke vii. 45; xv. 20 ; Acts xx. 37 ; Matt. xxvi. 48 ; 2 Sam. xx. 9). The church of Ephesus wept sore at Paul's departure, and fell on his neck and kissed him. When Orpah quitted Naomi and Ruth (Ruth i. 14), after the three had lifted tip their voice and wejjt, she ' kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clave unto her.' It was usual to kiss the mouth (Gen. xxxiii. 4 ; Exod. iv. 27 ; xviii. 7 ; I Sam. xx. 41 ; Prov. xxiv. 26) or the beard, which was then taken huld of by the hand (2 Sam. xx. 9). Kiss- ing of the feet was an expression of lowly and tender regard (Luke vii. 38). Kissing of the hand of another appears to be a modern practice : the pas- sage of Job xxxi. 27, ' Or my mouth hath kissed my hand,' is not in point, and refers to idolatrous usages, namely, the adoration of the heavenly bodies. It was the custom to throw kisses towards the images of the gods, and towards the sun and moon (1 Kings xix. 18; Hosea xiii. 2; Minuc. Felix, ii. 5 ; Tac. Hist. iii. 24. 3 ; Lucian, De Salt. c. 17 ; Plin. Hist. Nat. xxviii. 5). The kiss- ing of princes was a token of homage (Ps. ii. 12; 1 Sam. x. 1 ; Xenoph.Cyj-op. vii. 5. 32). Xenophoti says (Agesil. v. 4) that it was a national cus- tom with the Persians to kiss whomsoever they honoured ; and a curious passage to this effect may be found in the Cyropcedia (i. 4. 27). Kissing the feet of princes was a token of subjection and obedience ; which was sometimes carried so far that the print of the foot received the kiss, so as to give the impression that the very dust had become sacred by the royal tread, or that the subject was not worthy to salute eveu the prince's foot, but was content to kiss the earth itself near or on which he trod (Isa. xlix. 23 ; Micah vii. 17 ; Ps. • lxxii. 9 ; Dion Cass. lix. 27 ; Seneca, De Bene/. n. 12). The Rabbins, in the meddlesome, scru- pulous, and falsely delicate spirit which animated KISSOS. much of what they wrote, did not permit more than three kinds cf kisses, the kiss of reverence,, of reception, and of dismissal (Breschith Rabba on Gen. xxix. 11). The peculiar tendency of the Christian religion to encourage honour towards all men, as men, to foster and develop the softer affections, and, in the trying condition of the early church, to make its members intimately known one to another, and unite them in the closest bonds, led to the observ- ance of kissing as an accompaniment of that social worship which took its origin in the very cradle of our religion. Hence the exhortation — ' Salute each other with a holy kiss' (Rom. xvi. 16; see also 1 Cor. xvi. 20 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 12 ; 1 Thess. v. 26 ; in 1 Pet. v. 11, it is termed ' a kiss of charity'). The observance was continued in later days, and has not yet wholly disappeared, though the peculiar circumstances have vanished which gave propriety and emphasis to such an expres- sion of brotherly love and Christian friendship. On the subject of this article consult Pfanner, De Osculis Christwnor. Veter. ; M. Kempius, De Osculis, Franeof.1680; Jac.Herrenschmidius, Osculogia, Viteb. 1630 ; P. Muller, De 'Osculo Sa?icto, 1674; Boberg, De Osculis Hebr—3. R. B. KISSOS (Gr. khtitos), ' ivy,' is mentioned only once, and that in the Apocrypha (2 Mace. vi. 7), where the Temple is described as being desecrated by the Gentiles, and the Jews forced to depart from the laws of their fathers : ' And when the feast of Bacchus was kept, the Jews were com- piled to go in pocession to Bacchus, carrying 3-74. [Hedera helix.] ivy.5 The term Kiatros or kittos seems to have been applied by the Greeks in a general sense, and to have included many plants, and among them,, some climbers, as the convolvulus, besides the KOHATH. KOPHER. 217 common ivy. which was especially dedicated to Bacchus, and which was distinguished by the name of ' Hedera poetica, Dionysia aut Bac- chica, quod ex ea poetarum coronae consuerentur.' It is well known that in the Dionysia, or festivals in honour of Dionysus, and in the processions called Qiaffoi, with which they were celebrated, women also took part, in the disguise of Bacchae, Naiades, Nymphae, &c, adorned with garlands of ivy, &c. : thus Ovid {Fasti, iii. 766) : — Cum hedera cincta est? hedera est gratissima Baccho Bacchus is generally thought to have been educated in India, and the Indian Baghes has been supposed to be the original of the name. The fact of Baghes being a compound of two words signifying tiger and master or lord, would appear to confirm the identity, since Bacchus is usually repiesented as drawn in his chariot by a tiger and a lion, and tigers, &c, are described as follow- ing him in his Indian journey. As the ivy, how- ever, is not a plant of India, it might be objected to its being characteristic of an Indian god. But in the mountains which bound India to the north, both the ivy and the vine may be found, and the Greeks were acquainted with the fact that Mount Mero is the only part of India where ivy was pro- duced. Indeed, Alexander and his companions are said to have crowned themselves with ivy in honour of Bacchus. The ivy, Hedera Helix, being a native of most parts of Europe, is too well known to require special notice. — J. F. R. KITE. [Glede.] KNEADING-TROUGHS. [Bread.] KOHATH (l"inj5, assembly; Sept. Kaaff), son of Levi, and father of Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel (Gen. xlvi. 11). The descendants of Kohath formed one of the three great divisions of the Levitical tribe. This division contained the priestly family which was descended from Aaron, the son of Amram. In the service of the taber- nacle, as settled in the wilderness, the Kohathites had the distinguished charge of bearing the ark and the sacred vessels (Exod. vi. 16 ; Num. iv. 4-6). KOPHER, or Copher QS3), occurs twice in the Song of Solomon, and is in both places translated camphire in the Authorized Version. Thus (i. 14), ' My beloved is unto me as a cluster of camphire (kopher) in the vineyards of En-gedi ;' and in iv. 13, ' Thy plants are an orchard of pomegranates, with pleasant fruits, camphire (kopher), with spikenard.' It has been supposed to indicate a bunch of grapes (Botrus kopher), also camphor. The word camphire is the old mode of spelling camphor, but this sub- stance does not appear to have been known to ancient commerce; at least we cannot adduce any proof that it was so. The word Kopher is cer- tainly very like Kafoor, the Eastern name for camphor, but it also closely resembles the Greek Kimpos, or Kupros, usually written Cypros. In- deed, as has been observed, it is the same word, with the Greek pronunciation and termination. The Kinrpos of the Greeks is, no doubt, the Laio- sonia inermis of botanists, and is described by Dioscorides (i. 125) and by Pliny (xii. 24) : — 1 Cypros in iEgypto est arbor ziziphi (piece, Dioscor.) foliis, semine coriandri, ilore candido, odorato. Coquitur hoc in oleo, premiturque postca, quod cyprinum (Kvirptvov, Dioscor. i. 65) vocatur Optimum habetur e Canope, in ripis Nili natum : secundum Ascalone Judsae : tertium Cypro in- sula, odoris suavitate praecipuum.' Sir T. Browne and others have inferred that the Kvirpos of the Greeks was the kopher of the Hebrews. Mariti remarks, that ' the shrub known in the Hebrew language by the name of kopher is common in the island of Cyprus, and thence had its Latin name :' also, that ' the Botrus Cypiri has been supposed to be a kind of rare and exquisite grapes, transplanted from Cyprus to Engaddi ; but the Botrus is known to the na&ves of Cyprus as an odoriferous shrub called henna, or alkanna? So R. Ben Melek (ad Cant. i. 14), as quoted and translated by Celsius (i. 223) : — ' Botrus Copher id ipsum est, quod Arabes vocant Al- Hinna.' Upon this Celsius remarks : — ' Haec in Talmude ssspius memoratur, quod in Judasa cres- ceret, et Judaeorum legibus subjecta esset.' If we refer to the works of the Arabs, we find both in Serapion and Avicenna, reference from their Hinna to the description by Dioscorides and Galen, of Kupros or Cypros. This identity is now uni- versally acknowledged : the Kupros, therefore, must have been Luwsonia inermis, as the Hinna of the Arabs is well known to be. If we exa- mine the works of Oriental travellers and natu- ralists, we shall find that this plant is universally esteemed in Eastern countries, and appears to have been so from the earliest times, both on account of the fragrance of its flowers, and the colouring properties of its leaves. 375. [Lawsonia inermis.] Thus Rauwolff, when at Tripoli (Travels, iv.), ' found there another tree, not unlike unto our privet, by the Arabians called Alcana, or Henna, and by the Grecians, in their vulgar tongue, Schcniiii, which they have from Egypt, where, but above all in Carve, they grow in abundance. The Turks and Moors nur.-e these up with great care and diligence, because of their sweet-smelling flowers. They also, as I am in- 218 KORAH. formed, keep their leaves all winter, which leaves they powder and mix with the juice of citrons, and stain therewith against great holidays the hair and nails of their children of a red colour, which colour may perhaps be seen with us on the manes and tails of Turkish horses.' So Belon (ii. 74), when leaving Cairo for Jeru- salem, says : — ' Nous trouvasmes un petit arbris- seau nomme Henne ou Alcanna, qu'ils taillent et cultivent diligemment, et font d'iceluy des beaux petits bois taillis. II est de grand revenu en Egypte, car ils deseichent ses feuilles pour mettre en poudre, a faire de la teinture pour teindre en jaune ; les femmes de tous les pays de Turquie ont coustume de teindre les mains, les pieds, et partie des cheveux en couleur jaune ou rouge ; et les hommes se teignent les ongles en rouge avec la susdicte poudre1 (Observ. p. 301). This custom of dyeing the nails and the palms of the hands and soles of the feet, of an iron-rust colour, with henna, exists throughout the East, from the Mediterranean to the Ganges, as well as in Northern Africa. In some parts the practice is not confined to women and children, but is also followed by men, especially in Persia. In dyeing the beard, the hair is turned to red by this application, which is then changed to black by a preparation of indigo. In dyeing the hair of children, and the tails and manes of horses and asses, the process is allowed to stop at the red colour which the henna produces. In reference to this universal practice of the East, Dr. Harris observes that ' the expression in Deut. xxi. 12, " pare her nails/' may perhaps rather mean " adorn her nails,'' and imply the antiquity of this prac- tice. This is a universal custom in Egypt, and not to conform to it would be considered indecent. It seems to have been practised by the ancient Egyptians, for the nails of the mummies are most commonly of a reddish hue.' Seeing, then, that the henna is so universally admired in the East, both on account of the fragrance of its flowers and the dye yielded by its leaves, and as there is no doubt that it is the Kvvpos of the Greeks, and as this word is so similar to the kopher of the Hebrews, there is every probability of this last being the henna of the Arabs, Laivsonia alba of botanists. — J. F. R. KORAH (Hip, ice; Sept. Kope), a Levite, son of Izhar, the brother of Amram, the father of Moses and Aaron, who were therefore cousins to Korah (Exod. vi. 21). From this near relation- ship we may, with tolerable certainty, conjecture, that the source of the discontent which led to the steps afterwards taken by this unhappy man, lay in his jealousy that the high honours and privi- leges of the priesthood, to which he, who re- mained a simple Levite, might, apart from the divine appointment, seem to have had as good a claim, should have been exclusively appropriated to the family of Aaron. When to this was added the civil authority of Moses, the whole power over the nation would seem to him to have been en- grossed by his cousins, the sons of Amram. Un- der the influence of these feelings he organized a conspiracy, for the purpose of redressing what appeared to him the evil and injustice of this arrangement. Dathan, Abiram, and On, the chief persons who joined him, were of the tribe of Reuben; but he was also supported by many KORAH. more from other tribes, making up the number of 250, men of name, rank, and influence, all who may be regarded as representing the families of which they were the heads. The private object of Korah was apparently his own aggrandize- ment, but his ostensible object was the general good of the people ; and it is perhaps from want of attention to this distinction that the transaction has not been well understood. The design seems to have been made acceptable to a large body of the nation, on the ground that the first-born of Israel had been deprived of their sacerdotal birth- right in favour of the Levites, while the Levites themselves announced that the priesthood had been conferred by Moses (as they considered) on his own brother's family, in preference to those who had equal claims ; and it is easy to con- ceive that the Reubenites may have considered the opportunity a favourable one for the recovery of their birthright — the double portion and civil pre-eminence — which had been forfeited by them and given to Joseph. These are the explanations of A ben-Ezra, and seem as reasonable as any which have been offered. The leading conspirators having organized their plans, repaired in a body to Moses' and Aaron, boldly charged them with their usurpa- tions, and required them to lay down their ill- gotten power. Moses no sooner heard this than he fell on his face, confounded at the enormity of so outrageous a revolt against a system framed so carefully for the benefit of the nation. He left the matter in the Lord's hands, and desired them to come on the morrow, provided with censers for incense, that the Lord himself, by some manifest token, might make known his will in this great matter. As this order was particularly addressed to the rebellious Levites, the Reubenites left the place, and when afterwards called back by Moses, returned a very insolent refusal, charging him with having brought them out of the land of Egypt under false pretences, ' to kill them in the wil- derness.' The next day Korah and his company appeared before the tabernacle, attended by a multitude of people out of the general body of the tribes. Then the Shekiuah, or symbol of the divine pre- sence, which abode between the cherubim, ad- vanced to the entrance of the sacred fabric, and a voice therefrom commanded Moses and Aaron to stand apart, lest they should share in the destruction which awaited the whole congregation. On hear- ing these ^wful words the brothers fell on their faces, and, by strong intercession, moved the Lord to confine his wrath to the leaders in the rebellion, and spare their unhappy dupes. The latter were then ordered to separate themselves from their leaders and from the tents in which they dwelt. The terrible menace involved in this direction had its weight, and the command was obeyed ; and after Moses had appealed to what was to happen as a proof of the authority by which he acted, the earth opened, and received and closed over the tents of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. The Reubenite conspirators were in their tents, and perished in them ; and at the same instant Korah and his 250, who were offering incense at the door of the tabernacle, were destroyed by a fire which ' came out from the Lord ;' that is, most probably, in this case, from out of the cloud in which his presence dwelt. The censers which they had used KUSSEMETH. were afterwards made into plates, to form an outer covering to the altar, and thus became a standing monument of this awful transaction (Num. xvi.). On, although named in the first instance along With Dathau and Abiram, does not further appear either in the rebellion or its punishment. It is hence supposed that he repented in time : and Abendana and other Rabbinical writers allege that his wife prevailed upon him to abandon the cause. It might be supposed from the Scripture narra- tive that the entire families of the conspirators perished in the destruction of their tents. Doubt- less all who were in the tents perished ; but as the descendants ofKorah afterwards became eminent in the Levitical service, it is clear that his sons were spared. They were probably living in sepa- rate tents, or were among those who sundered them- selves from the conspirators at the command of Moses. There is no reason to suppose that the sons of Korah were children when their father perished. The Korahites were appointed by David to the office of guarding the doors of the temple, and of singing praises. They, in fact, occupied a distinguished place in the choral service of the temple, and several of the Psalms (xlii. xliv. xlix. lxxxiv. lxxxv. lxxxvii. lxxxviii.) are inscribed to them. Heman, the master of song under David, was of this family, and his genea- logy is traced through Korah up to Levi (1 Chron. vi. 31-38.) KOTZ. [Thorn.] KRINON. [Lily.] KUSSEMETH (HEiM) occurs in three places of Scripture. In the Authorized Version it is translated rye in Exod. ix. 32 ; Isa. xxviii. 25, and fitches in Ezek. iv. 9 ; but its true mean- ing still remains uncertain. It was one of the cul- tivated grains both of Egypt and of Syria, and one of those employed as an article of diet. It was also sown along with wheat, or, at least, its crop was in the same state of forwardness ; for we learn from Exod. ix. 32, that in the seventh plague the hail-storm smote the barley which was in the ear, and the flax which was boiled; but that the wheat and the kussemeth were not smitten, for they were not grown up. Respecting the wheat and the barley, we know that they are often sown and come to maturity in different months. Thus Forskal says, ' Hordeum cum mense Februario maturatur, triticum ad finem Martii persistit1 (Flora JEgypt., p. 43). The events above referred to probably took place in February (vid. Pict. Bible). That kussemeth was culti- vated in Palestine we leam from Isa. xxviii. 25, where it is mentioned along with ketzah (nigella) and cumin, wheat and barley ; and sown, ac- cording to some translators, ' on the extreme border of the fields,' as a kind of fence for other kinds of corn. This is quite an Oriental practice, and may be seen in the case of flax and other grains in India, at the present day. The rye is a grain of cold climates, and is not cultivated even in the south of Europe. Korte declares (Travels, p. Ifi8) that no rye grows in Egypt; and Shaw states (p. 351) that rye is little known in Barbaiy and Egypt (Rosenmiiller, p. 76). That the kussemeth was employed for making bread by the Hebrews we know from Ezek. iv. 9, where the prophet is directed to ' take wheat, KUSSEMETH. 219 and barley, and beans, and lentiles, and millet, and kussemeth, and put them in a vessel, and make bread thereof.' 376. [Triticum spelta.] Though it is very unlikely that kussemeth can mean rye, it is not easy to say what cultivated grain it denotes. The principal kinds of grain, it is to be observed, are mentioned in the same passages with the kussemeth. Celsius has, as usual, with great labour and learning, collected together the different translations which have been given of this difficult word. In the Arabic translation of Exod. ix. 32, it is rendered julban : ' cicercula, non circula, ut perperam legitur in versione Latina.' By other Arabian writers it is considered to mean peas, and also beans. Many translate it vicia, or vetches, as in the Authorized Version of Exod. ix. 32 ; for according to Maimonides (ad Tr. Shabb. xx. 3), carschinin is a kind of legume, which in the Arabic is called kirsana, but in the sacred language kussemeth. Both julban and kirsana mean species of pulse, but it is not easy to ascer- tain the specific kinds. The majority, however, instead of a legume, consider kussemeth to indi- cate one of the cereal grains, as the rye (secale), or the oat (avena), neither of which is it likely to have been. These have probably been selected because commentators usually adduce such grains as they themselves are acquainted with, or have heard of as commonly cultivated. Celsius, how- ever, informs us that in the Syriac and Chaldee versions kussemeth is translated kunta ; far in the Latin Vulgate ; far adoreum, Guisio, Tract. Peah, viii. 5, and Tract. Chilaim, i. 1 ; £ed in the Septuagint, Isa. xxviii. Aquila, Symmachus, and others render it spelta. So Ben Melecli, on Exod. ix., and Ezekiel iv., says ' kyssemeth, vulgo sjielta,'' and the Septuagint has 6\vpa. Upon which Celsius remarks: 'all these — that is, kunta, far, ador, (ea, spelta, and oKvpa — are one and the same thing.' This lie proves satis- 220 LAANAH. factorily by quotations from the ancient authors (I. c. ii. 100). Dr. Harris states that the word kussemeth seems to be derived from casam, ' to have long hairs ;' and that hence a bearded grain must be intended ; which confirms the probability of spelt being the true meaning. Dioscorides has stated (ii. Ill), that there are two kinds of Zeia, one simple, and the other called dicoccos. Sprengel concludes that this is, without doubt, the Triticum Spelta of botanists ; that the olyra was a variety which Host has called Triticum Zea ; and also that the simple kind is the Triticum monococcon. That these grains were cultivated in Egypt and Syria, and that they were esteemed as food in those countries, may also be satisfactorily proved. Thus Herodotus states that the Egyptians employ olyra, which others call zea, as an article of diet. Pliny (Hist. Nat. xviii. S) mentions it as found both in Egypt and in Syria : ' jEgypto autem ac Syriae, Cili- ciasque et Asiae, ac GraeciEe peculiares, zea, olyra, tiphe.1 So in more modern times : ' In _d7]vai, hc/iBurev 'lepras K\aiav, koX £Qpi)VT)(Te rbv dpyjvov rovTOV 67rl 'UpowaX^fj., Ka\ etire. ' And it came to pass, after Israel had been carried away captive, and Jerusalem was become desolate, that Jeremiah sat weeping, and lamented with this lamentation over Jerusalem, and said.' This has been copied into the Arabic and Vulgate versions ; but as it does not exist in the Hebrew, Chaldee, or Syriac, it was regarded by Jerome as spurious, and is not admitted into his version. It is disputed whether or not this verse existed in the Hebrew copies from which the translation of the Seventy was made. We are certainly not bound by its authority if disposed to question the conclusion which it supports. But it at least shows the opinion which prevailed as to the author, and the occasion of the book, at the time the translation was made. That opinion, as regards the author, has been admitted without dispute; but there has been less unanimity re- specting the subject-matter of the Lamentations. Funeral lamentations, composed by Jeremiah upon the death of king Josiah, are mentioned in 2 Chroti. xxxv. 25, and are there said to have been perpetuated by an ordinance in Israel. That, the Lamentations thus mentioned are those which we now possess, has been the opinion of many scholars of great eminence. Josephus clearly takes this view (Antiq. x. 5. 1), as do Jerome {Comment, in Zech. Hi. 11), Theodoret, and others of the fathers ; and in more modern times, Archbishop Usher (De LXX. Interpret), Michaelis (Note on Lowth's Sac. Poet. Ilebr. Praelect. xxii.), who afterwards changed his opi- nion, Dathe (Proph. Major, ed. 1), and others. De Wette {Einleit. § 273) is clearly of opinion LAMENTATIONS. 223 that the passage in 2 Chronicles refers to the existing book of Lamentations, and that the author considered the death of Josiah as its prin- cipal subject. This daring writer uses so little ceremony with the author of the book of Chro- nicles on other occasions, that his own opinion is not to be inferred from this admission ; and we are not surprised to find from what follows, that he feels at liberty to take a different view from the one which he believes the writer of Chro- nicles to have entertained. The received opinion, namely, that in accord- ance with the argument prefixed to the book in the Septuagint, is now all but universally acquiesced in. It is adopted by nearly all commentators, who, as they proceed through the book, find that they cannot follow out the details on any other supposition. Indeed, but for the reference sug- gested by the passage in Chronicles, no one would have been likely to imagine that such expressions as are found in chap. i. 1, 2, 3, 7, could point to any other circumstances than those which attended and followed the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians. Besides, the prophet throughout speaks of the city and temple of Jerusalem as ruined, profaned, and desolated : which certainly was not the case in the time of Josiah, or at his death. We may, under this view, regard the two first chapters as occupied chiefly with the circum- stances of the siege, and those immediately fol- lowing that event. In the third the prophet deplores the calamities and persecutions to which he had himself been exposed : the fourth refers to the ruin and desolation of the city, and the un- happy lot of Zedekiah ; and the fifth and last seems to be a sort of prayer in the name, or on behalf of, the Jews in their dispersion and cap- tivity. As Jeremiah himself was eventually compelled to withdraw into Egypt much against his will (Jer. xliii. 6), it has been suggested that the last chapter was possibly written there. Pa- reau refers chap. i. to Jer, xxxvii. 5, sqq. ; chap, iii. to Jer. xxxviii. 2, sqq. ; chap. iv. to Jer. xxxix. 1, sqq,, and 2 Kings xxv. 1, sqq.; chap, ii. to the destruction of the city and temple ; chap. v. is admitted to be the latest, and to refer to the time after that event. Ewald says that the situation is the same throughout, and only the time different. In chaps, i. and ii. we find sorrow without consolation ; in chap. iii. conso- lation for the poet himself; in chap. iv. the lamentation is renewed with greater violence ; but soon the whole people, as if urged by their own spontaneous impulse, fall to weeping and hoping' (Die Poctischen Bueher). De Wette describes the Lamentations somewhat curtly, as ' five songs relating to the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and its temple (chaps, i. ii. iv. v.), and to the unhappy lot of the poet himself (iii.). The historical relation of the whole cannot be doubted ; but yet there seems a gradual ascent in describing the condition of the city ' {Einleit. § 273). Dr. Blayney, regarding both the date and occasion of the Lamentations as established by the internal evidence, adds, ' Nor can we admire too much the flow of that full and graceful pa- thetic eloquence, in which the author pours out the effusions of a patriotic heart, and piously weeps over the ruins of his venerable country ' (Jeremiah, p. 37G). ' Never,' says an vmques- 224 LAMP. tionable judge of these matters, '' was there a more rich and elegant variety of beautiful images and adjuncts, arranged together within so small a compass, nor more happily chosen and applied (Lowth, De Sacra Poesi Hebr. Prselect. xxii.). Jarchi, and some other Jewish commentators, fancy that the book, which, after being pub- licly read by Baruch, was cut to pieces by king Jehoiachin, and cast into the fire ( Jer. xxxvi. 4, 5), : was composed of chaps, i. ii. iv. of the Lamenta- tions, to which chap, v. was afterwards added. But this notion does not require confutation, as there is not a shadow of probability in its favour. In the ancient copies this book is supposed to have occupied the place which is now assigned to it, after Jeremiah. Indeed, from the manner in which Josephus reckons up the books of the Old Testament (Contra Apion. i. 8), it has been supposed that Jeremiah and it originally formed but one book (Prideaux, Connection, i. 332). In the Bible now used by the Jews, however, the book of Lamentations stands in the Hagiographa, and among the five Megilloth, or books of Ruth, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Solomon's Song. They believe that it was not written by the gift of prophecy, but by the spirit of God (between which they make a distinction), and give this as a reason for not placing it among the prophets. It is read in their synagogues on the ninth of the month Ab, which is a fast for the destruction of the holy city. LAMP (T,37, whence, perhaps, Gr. Kafiirds, the jjl being introduced in place of the Hebrew S, Lat. lampas, and our lamp). Lamps are very often mentioned in Scripture ; but there is nothing to give any notion of their form. Al- most the only fact we can gather is, that vegetable oils were burnt in them, and especially, if not exclusively, olive-oil. This, of the finest qua- lity, was the oil used in the seven lamps of the Tabernacle (Exod. xxvii. 20). It is somewhat remarkable, that while the golden candlestick, or rather candelabrum, is so minutely described, not a word is said of the shape, or even the ma- terial, of the lamps (Exod. xxv. 37). This was, perhaps, because they were to be of the common LAMP. which they had just quitted. They were in this instance doubtless of gold, although metal is scarcely the best substance for a lamp. The golden candlestick may also suggest, that lamps in ordinary use were placed on stands, and where more than one was required, on stands with two or more branches. The modern Orientals, who are satisfied with very little light in their rooms, use stands of brass or wood, on which to raise the lamps to a sufficient height above the floor on which they sit. Such stands are shaped not un- like a tall candlestick, spreading out at the top. Sometimes the lamps are placed on brackets against the wall, made for the purpose, and often upon stools. Doubtless the same contrivances were employed by the Hebrews. From the fact that lamps were carried in the pitchers of Gideon's soldiers, from which, at the end of the march, they were taken out, and borne in the hand (Judg. vii. 16, 20), we may with certainty infer that they were not, like many of the classical lamps, entirely open at top, but so shaped that the oil could not easily be spilled. 377. [Egyptian Lamps.] forms, already familiarly known to the Hebrews, and the same probably which were used in Egypt, 378. [Classical Lamps.] This was remarkably the case in the Egyptian specimens, and is not rare in the classical. Gi- deon's lamps must also have had handles ; but that the Hebrew lamps were always furnished with handles we are not bound to infer: in Egypt we find lamps both with and without handles. Although the lamp-oils of the Hebrews were exclusively vegetable, it is probable that animal fat was used, as it is at present by the Western Asiatics, by being placed in a kind of lamp, and burnt by means of a wick inserted in it. This we have often witnessed in districts where oil- yielding plants are not common. Cotton wicks are now used throughout Asia ; but the Hebrews, like the Egyptians, probably employed the outer and coarser fibre of flax (Pliny, Hist. Nat. xix. 1) ; and perhaps linen yarn, if the Rabbins are correct in alleging that the linen dresses of the priests were unravelled when old, to furnish wicks for the sacred lamps [Candlestick]. It seems that the Hebrews, like the modern Orientals, were accustomed to burn lamps over- night in their chambers ; and this practice may appear to give point to the expression of ' outer- darkness,' which repeatedly occurs in the New LAMPS. Testament (Matt. viii. 12 ; xxii. 13) : the force is greater, however, when the contrast implied in the term outer is viewed with reference to the effect produced by sudden expulsion into the darkness of night from a chamber highly illuminated for an entertainment. This custom of burning lamps at night, with the effect produced by their going out or being extinguished, supplies various figures to the sacred writers (2 Sam. xxi. 17 ; Prov. xiii. 9 ; xx. 20). And, on the other hand, the keeping up of a lamp's light is used as a symbol of en- during and unbroken succession (1 Kings xi. 36 ; xv. 4; Ps. cxxxii. 17). It appears from Matt. xxv. 1, that the Jews used lamps and torches in their marriage-ceremonies, or rather when the bridegroom came to conduct home the bride by night. This is still the custom in those parts of the East where, on account of the heat of the day, the bridal procession takes place in the night-time. The connection of lamps and torches with marriage-ceremonies often appears also in the classical poets (Homer, Iliad, vi. 492 ; Eurip. Phaeniss. 346 ; Medea, 1027 ; Virg. Eclog. viii. 29) ; and indeed Hymen, the god of marriage, was figured as bearing a torch. The same connection, it may be observed, is still preserved in Western Asia, even where it is no longer usual to bring home the bride by night. During two, or three, or more nights preceding the wedding, the street or quarter in which the bridegroom lives is illu- minated with chandeliers and lanterns, or with lan- terns and small lamps suspended from cords drawn across from the bridegroom's and several other LAMPS. 225 red and green, are attached to other cords (Lane's Mod. Egypt, i. 201). A modern lantern much used on these occasions, with lamps hung about it and suspended from it, is represented in the preceding cut (No. 379). The lamps used separately on such occasions are represented in the following cut (No. 380). Figs. 1, 3, and 5, show very distinctly the houses on each side to the houses opposite ; and se- veral small silk flags, each of two colours, generally VOL. II. shape of these lamps, with the conical receptacle of wood which serves to protect the flame from the wind. Lamps of this kind are sometimes hung over doors. The shape in fig. 3 is also that of a much-used in-door lamp. It is a small vessel of glass, having a small tube at the bottom, in which is stuck a wick formed of cotlon twisted round a piece of straw : some water is poured in first, and then the oil. Lamps very nearly of this shape appear on the Egyptian monuments, and they seem also to be of glass (Wilkinson's ' Ancient Egyptians, iii. 101 ; v. 376). If the Egyptians had lamps of glass, there is no reason why the Jews also might not have had them, espe- cially as this material is more proper for lamps in- tended to be hung up, and therefore to cast their light down from above. The Jews certainly used lamps in other festivals besides those of marriage. The Roman satirist (Persius, Sat. v. 179) ex- pressly describes them as making illuminations at their festivals by lamps hung up and arranged in an orderly manner; and the Scriptural intimations, so far as they go, agree with this descrijrtion. If this custom had not been so general in the ancient and modern East, it might have been supposed that the Jews adopted it from the Egyptians, who, accord- ing to Herodotus (ii. 62), had a ' Feast of Lamps,' which was celebrated at Sais, and, indeed, throughout the country at a certain season of the year. The description which the historian gives of the lamps employed on this occasion, strictly applies to those in modern use already described, and the concurrence of both these sources of illus- tration strengthens the probable analogy of Jewish usage. He speaks of them as ' small vases filled with salt and olive-oil, in which the wick floated, and burnt during the whole night.' It does not indeed appear of what, materials these vases were made ; but we may reasonably suppose them to have been of glass. The later Jews had even something like this feast among themselves. A ' Feast of Lamps' was held every year on the twenty-fifth of the month Chisleu. It was founded by Judas Macca- bffius in celebration of the restoration of the temple worship (Joseph. Antiq. xii. 7. 7), and has ever since been observed by the lighting up of lamps or candles on that day in all the coun- tries of their dispersion (Maimon. Mosh. Hasha- Z26 LANTERN. LAODICEA. nah, fol. 8). Other Orientals have at this day a similar feast, of which the ' Feast of Lanterns' among the Chinese is, perhaps, the best known (Davis's Chinese, p. 138). LANGUAGE. [Tongues, Confusion of.] LANTERN (oa/6s). This word occurs only in John xviii. 3, where the party of men which went out of Jerusalem to apprehend Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane is described as being pro- vided ' with lanterns and torches.' In the article Lamp it has been shown that the Jewish lantern, or, if we may so call it, lamp-frame, was similar to that now in use among the Orientals. Another of the same kind is represented in the annexed engraving (No. 381, fig. 1). As the streets of Eastern towns are not lighted at night, and never were so, lanterns are used to an extent not known among us. Such, doubtless, was also formerly the case; and it is therefore remarkable that the only trace of a lantern which the Egyptian monuments offer, is that contained in the present, engraving (No. 382). In this case it seems to be borne by the night-watch, or civic guard, and is shaped like those in common use among ourselves. A similar lantern is at this day used in Persia, and perhaps does not ma- terially differ from those mentioned in Scripture. More common at present in Western Asia is a large folding lantern of waxed cloth strained over rings of wire, with a top and bottom of tinned copper (No. 381, figs. 2, 3). It is usually about two feet long by nine inches in diameter, and is carried by servants before their masters, who often pay visits to their friends at or after supper-time. In many Eastern towns the municipal law for- bids any one to be in the streets after nightfall without a lantern. LAODICEA (AaoSiKeia). There were four places of this name, which it may be well to dis- tinguish, in order to prevent them from being con- founded with one another. The first was in the western part of Phrygia, on the borders of Lydia ; the second, in the eastern part of the same country, denominated Laodicea Combusta ; the third, on the coast of Syria, called Laodicea ad Mare, and serving as the port of Aleppo ; and the fourth, in the same country, called Laodicea ad Libanum, from its proximity to that mountain. The third of these, that on the coast of Syria, was destroyed by the great earthquake of Aleppo in August, 1822, and at the time of that event was supposed by many to be the Laodicea of Scripture, al- though in fact not less than four hundred miles from it. But the first named, lying on the confines of Phrygia and Lydia, about forty miles east of Ephesus, is the only Laodicea mentioned in Scripture, and is that one of the 'seven churches in Asia1 to which St. John was commissioned to deliver the awful warning contained in Rev. iii. 14-19. The fulfilment of this warning is to be sought, as we take it, in the history of the Chris- tian church which existed in that city, and not in the stone and mortar of the city itself; for it is not the city, but 'the church of the Laodiceans,' which is denounced. It is true that the city is utterly ruined ; but this is the case with innu- merable other towns in Asia Minor. It is the precise reference to the seven churches as such, without any other reference to the cities than as giving them a name, which imparts a marked dis- tinction to the Apocalyptic prophecies. But this has been little heeded by writers on the subject, who somewhat unaccountably seek, in the actual and material condition of these cities, the accom- plishment of spiritual warnings and denunciations. At the present day, would an authorized denun- ciation of ' the church in London,' as in danger of being cast forth for its lukewarmness, be un- derstood to imply that London itself was destined to become a heap of ruins, with its bridges broken down, and its palaces and temples overthrown? Laodicea was the capital of Greater Phrygia, and a very considerable city at the time it was named in Scripture (Strabo, p. 578) ; but the frequency of earthquakes, to which this district has always been liable, demolished, some ages after, great part of the city, destroyed many of the inhabitants, and eventually obliged the re- mainder to abandon the spot altogether. Smith, in his Journey to the Seven Churches (1671), was the first to describe the site of Laodicea. He was followed by Chandler and Pococke ; and the lo- cality has, within the present century, been visited by Mr. Hartley, Mr. Arundell, and Col. Leake. LAPWING. Laodieaa is now a deserted place, called by the Turks Eski-hissar {Old Castle), a Turkish word equivalent to Paleo-kastro, which the Greeks so frequently apply to ancient sites. From its ruins, Laodicea seems to have been situated upon six or seven hills, taking up a large extent of ground. To the north and north-east runs the river Lycus, about a mile and a half distant; but nearer it is watered by two small streams, the Asopus and Capitis, the one to the west, and the other to the south-east, both passing into the Lycus, which last flows into the Mseander (Smith, p. 85). Laodicea preserves great remains of its import- ance as the residence of the Roman governors of Asia under the emperors ; namely, a stadium, in LAPWING. 227 uncommon preservation, three theatres, one of which is 450 feet in diameter, and the ruins of several other buildings (Antiq. of Ionia, pt. ii. p. 32 ; Chandler's Asia Minor, c. 67). Col. Leake says : ' There are few ancient sites more likely than Laodicea f;> preserve many curious remains of antiquity beneath the surface of the soil ; its opulence, and the earthquakes to which it was subject, rendering it probable that valuable works of art were often there buried beneath the ruins ofthe^public and private edifices (Cicero, Epist. ad Amic. ii. 17; iii. 5; v. 20 ; Tacit. Annal. xiv. 27). And a similar remark, though in a lesser degree, perhaps, will apply to the other cities of the vale of the Maeander, as well as to <%$2 383. [Laodicea.] some of those situated to the north of Mount Tmolus ; for Strabo (pp. 579, 62S, 630) informs us that Philadelphia, Sardis, and Magnesia of Sipylus, were, not less than Laodicea and the cities of the Maeander as far as Apameia at the sources of that river, subject to the same dreadful calamity' {Geography of Asia Minor, p. 253). LAPWING, in our version, is used for 1"|Q',>,I'?J dukiphaih, a word which, occurring only in Lev. xi. 19, and Deut. xiv. 18, affords no internal or collateral evidence to establish the propriety of the translation. It has been surmised to mean 'double-crest;' which is suf- ficiently correct when applied to the hoopoe ; lml less so when applied to the lapwing, or the cock of the woods, Tetr'ao Urogallus; for which bird Bochart produces a more direct etymology; and he might have appealed to the fact, that the Attagan visits Syria in winter, exclusive of at least two species of Pteroclesf or sand-grouse, which probably remain all the year. But these names were anciently, as well as in modern times, so often confounded, that the Greek writers even used the term Gallinacea to denote the hoo- poe : for Hesychius explains eiroip in j^schylus by the Greek appellations of ' moor- cock ' and ' mountain-eock' (see Bochart, in voce Dttki- phath); and in modem languages similar mis- takes respecting this bird are abundant. The Sepfuagitrt and Vulgate agree with the Arabian interpreters in translating the Hebrew riQ^IT by IttoiJ', and upupa ; and as the Syrian name is kikupkah, and the Egyptian kuhuphah, both apparently of the same origin as dukiphatfr, the propriety of substituting hoopoe for lapwing in our version appears sufficiently established. The hoopoe is not uncommon in Palestine at this day, and was from remote ages a bird of mystery. The summit i f the augural rod is said to have been carved in the ft rm of an hoopoe's head ; and one of the kind is still used by Indian gosseins, and even Armenian bishops, attention being no doubt drawn to the bird by its pecu- liarly arranged black and white liars upon a de- lii . ■ . inous fawn-.colour, : ml ellished with a beautiful fan-shaped crest of the same colour, tipped with white and black. Its appel- lations in all languages appear lo be either imita- tions of the bird's voice, or indications of its filthy <2 228 LATINISMS. habits; which, however, modern ornithologists deny, or do not notice. In Egypt these birds are 384. [Hoopoe.] numerous ; forming, probably, two species, the one permanently resident about human habitations, the other migratory, and the same that visits Europe. The latter wades in the mud when the Nile has subsided, and seeks for worms and in- sects ; and the former is known to rear its young so much immersed in the shards and fragments of beetles, &c. as to cause a disagreeable smell about its nest, which is always in holes or in hollow trees. Though an unclean bird in the Hebrew law, the common migratory hoopoe is eaten in Egypt, and sometimes also in Italy ; but the stationary species is considered inedible. It is unnecessary to give further description of a bird so well known as the hoopoe, which, though not common, is nevertheless an annual visitant of England, arriving soon after the cuckoo. — C. H. S. LATINISMS. This word, which properly signifies idioms or phraseology peculiar to the Latin tongue, is extended by Biblical critics so as to include also the Latin words occurring in the Greek Testament. It is but reasonable to expect the existence of Latinisms in the language of every country subdued by the Romans. The in- troduction of their civil and military officers, of settlers, and merchants, would naturally be fol- lowed by an infusion of Roman terms, &c, into the language of their new subjects. There would be many new things made known to some of them, for which they could find no corresponding word in their own tongues. The circumstance that the proceedings in courts of lav/ were, in every part of the Roman empire, conducted in the Latin lan- guage, would necessarily cause the introduction of many Roman words into the department of law, as might be amply illustrated from the pre- sent state of the juridical language in every coun- try once subject to the Romans, and among others, our own. Valerius Maximus (ii. 2. 2), indeed, records the tenacity of the ancient Romans for their language in their intercourse with the Greeks, and their strenuous endeavours to propagate it through all their dominions. The Latinisms in the New Testament are of three kinds, consisting (1) of Latin words in Greek letters ; (2) of Latin senses of Greek words ; and (3) of those forms of speech which are more properly called Latinisms. The following may suffice as examples of each of these : First, Latin words in Greek characters : affffotpiov, ' farthing,' from the Latin assarius (Matt. x. 29). This word is used likewise by LATINISMS. Plutarch, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, and Aths* nseus, as may be seen in Wetstein, in he. Krjj/cros, census (Matt. xvii. 25) : Kzvrvpiov, centurio (Mark xv. 39), &c. : \eyedov, legio, ' legion' (Matt. xxvi. 53). Polybius (b.c. 150) has also adopted the Roman military terms (vi. 17) 1616. ~2-7reicov- Xwra>p, speculator, ' a spy,' from speculor, ' to look about ;' or, as Wahl and Schleusner think, from spiculum, the weapon carried by the specu- lator. The word describes the emperor"s life- guards, who, among other duties, punished the con- demned ; hence ' an executioner ' (Mark vi. 27), margin, ' one of his guard ;' (comp. Tacitus, Hist. i. 25 ; Joseph. De Bell. Jud. i. 33. 7 ; Seneca, Delrd, i. 16). M&ceXAoy, from maceUum, ' a mar- ket-place for flesh ' (1 Cor. x. 25). As Corinth was now a Roman colony, it is only consistent to find that the inhabitants had adopted this name for their public market, and that Paul, writing to them, should employ it. MlMou (Matt. v. 41). This word is also used by Polybius (xxxiv. 11. 8) and Strabo (v. p. 332). Secondly, Latin senses of Greek words : as Kapvos (Rom. xv. 28), ' fruit,' where it seems to be used in the sense of emolu- mentum, ' gain upon money lent,' &c. :_ iiraivos, ' praise,' in the juridical sense of elogium, a tes- timonial either of honour or reproach (1 Cor. iv. 5). Thirdly, those forms of speech which are pro- perly called Latinisms : as (3ov\6/j.evos tQ o%Ac.r to 'iKaubv TTOLrjcraL, ' willing to content the people' (Mark xv. 15), which corresponds to the phrase satisfacere alicui: Aa/3e?f to litavhv -wapd, ' to take security of,' satis accipere ah (Acts xvii. 9) : Sbs ipyaaiav, ' give diligence,' da operam (Luke xii. 58) ; the phrase remittere ad aliitm juclicem is retained in Luke xxiii. 15 : ah tnf/ei, ' see thou to that,' tu videris (Matt, xxvii. 4) (Aricler, Eernie- rieut. Biblica, Viennse, 1813, p. 99; Michaelis' Introduction to the New Testament, by Marsh, Cambridge, 1793, vol. i. part i. p. 163, sqq.)'. The importance of the Latinisms in the Greek Testament consists in this, that, as we have partly shown (and the proof might be much extended), they are to be found in the best Greek writers of the same era. Their occurrence, therefore, in the New Testament adds one thread more to that compli- cation of probabilities with which the Christian history is attended. Had the Greek Testament been tree from them, the objection, though recon- dite, would have been strong. At the same time the subject is intricate, and admits of much dis- cussion. Dr. Marsh disputes some of the instances adduced by Michaelis (ut supra, p. 431, sqq.). Dresigius even contends that there are no Latin- isms in the New Testament. (De Latinismis, Leipsig, 1726 ; and see his Vindicice Disserta- tionis de Latinismis). Even Aricler allows that some instances adduced by him may have a purely Greek origin. Truth, as usual, lies in the middle, and there are, no doubt, many irre- fragable instances of Latinisms, which will amply repay the attention of the student (see Georgii Hierocrit. de Latinismis Novi Test. Witteberg, 1733; Kypke, Observ. Sacr. ii. 219, Wratis. 1755; Pritii Introductio in Led. Nov. Test., p. 207. sqq. Leips. 1722. Winer refers also to Wemsdorf, De Christo Latine loquente, p. 19 ; Jahn's Archiv. ii. iv. ; Olearius, De Stylo Nov. Test. p. 368, sqq.; Jnchofer, Sacrce Latinitatis Historia, Prag. 1742; seeBibl. Real-Worterbuch, art. Romer, Romisches, &c.\ — J. F. D. LAVER. LAVER 0*^3 and ^ ; Sept. KovrpSv), a basin to contain the water used by the priests in their ablutions during their sacred ministrations. There was one of brass (fabricated out of the metal mirrors which the women brought from Egypt, Exod. xxxviii. 8). It had a 'foot' or base, which, from the manner in which ' the laver and its foot' are mentioned, must have been a conspicuous feature, and was perhaps se- parable from the basin itself for the purpose of removal. We are not informed of the size or shape of this laver ; but it. appears to have been large. It stood between the altar of burnt- offerings and the door of the tabernacle (Exod. xxx. 18-21 ; xl. 30-32). The water of this laver seems to have served the double purpose of washing the parts of the sacrifices, and the hands and feet of the priests. But in the temple of Solo- mon, when the number of both priests and victims had greatly increased, ten lavers were used for the sacrifices, and the molten sea for the personal ablutions of the priests (2 Chron. iv. 6). These lavers are more minutely described than that of the tabernacle. So far as can be made out from the description, they consisted of a square base or stand mounted upon rollers or wheels, and adorned with figures of palm-trees, cherubim, lions, and oxen. The stand doubtless formed a hollow basin for receiving the water which fell from the laver itself, and which appears to have been drawn from it by means of cocks (1 Kings vii. 27-39). The form of the lavers is not men- tioned ; but it is stated that each of them con- tained forty baths, or. according to the usual computation, about 300 English gallons. From the manner in which the bases of the lavers are described, it is evident that they were regarded as admirable works of art, ; but it is difficult to follow out the details which are given. This is evinced by the great discrepancy in the different figures,, drawn from the descriptions which are given by Lam}', Calmet, and Villalpandus. In the second temple there appears to have been only one laver. Of its size or shape we have no information, but it was probably like those of Solomon's temple. LAW (iTYlFl ; Gr. v6/xos) means a rule of con- duct enforced by an authority superior to that of the moral beings to whom it is given. The word law is sometimes also employed in order to express not only the moral connection between free agents of an inferior and others of a superior power, but also in order to express the nexus causalis, the connection between cause and effect in inanimate nature. However, the expression laio of nature, lex Kattirce, is improper and figurative. The term law implies, in its strict sense, spiontaneity, ox the power of deciding between right and wrong, and of choosing between good and evil, as well on the part of the lawgiver, as on the part of those who have to regulate their conduct according to his dictates. It frequently signifies not merely an individual rule of conduct, as npljb"! min, the law of burnt offering ; T\T?V\1 T\1)T\ (Lev. xii. 2), the law concerning the conduct of women after childbirth ; J/TiJ0n mill, the law concerning the conduct of persons afflicted with leprosy (Lev. xiv. 2); HUH min, the description of a building to be erected by an LAW. 229 architect :— but it signifies also a whole body of legislation ; as HJ^KD DTlD (1 Kings ii. 3 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 25 ; Ezra iii. 2), the law given by Moses, which, in reference to its divine origin, is called nirT1 JTHfl, the law of Jehovah (Ps. xix. 8; xxxvii. 31; Isa. v. 21; xxx. 9). In the latter sense it is called, by way of eminence, mini!, the law (Deut. i. 5; iv. 8, 44; xvii. 18, 19; xxvii. 3, 8). If not the substance of legislation, but rather the external written code in which it is contained is meant, the following terms are emploved : XW'O min "1QD (2 Kings xiv. 6 ; Isa. viii! 31 ; xxiii. 6) ; mil* T\~\\T\ "ISD or D*r6tf min 1SD (Josh. xxiv. 26). In a wider sense the word v6/j.os, ' law,' is em- ployed in order to express any guiding or direct- ing power, originating from the nature of any- thing existing. The apostolic use of the word has been well expressed by Claudius Guilliaud in his work, In Omnes Pa-uli Epistolas Col- latio, p. 21. Law is a certain power restraining from some, and impelling to other things or actions. Whatever has such a power, and exer- cises any sway over man, may be called law, in a metaphorical sense. Thus the Apostle (Rom. vii. 23) calls the right impulses and the sanctified will of the mind, v6fios rov vo6s, the law of the mind; and the perverse desire to sin which is inherent in our members, vSfxos iv rots fi4\eai, the laio in the members. In the same manner he calls that power of faith which certainly governs the whole man, since the actions of every man are swayed by his convictions, u6fJ.os tt'kt- T6cos, the law of faith. So, the power and value ascribed to ceremonies, or rather to all outward acts, he designates v6jxos rwv ivroKuiv, the law of firecepts* Similar expressions are, vSfxos ttjs a/xaprias, the laio of sin (Rom. vii. 23); v6jjlos rov irvev- fjLaros, the laio of the Spirit (viii. 2) ; vSfxos 8ikcuoo-vi>7)s, the laio of righteousness (ix. 31) ; vojxos rov iivSpos, the authority of the husband over his wife (vii. 2) ; vo/jlos i\evQepias (James i. 25; ii. 12), the holy impulse created by the sense of spiritual liberty. If, however, the word v6/xos alone is used, it is al- most invariably equivalent to 6 v6,uosMcaoews: and ol iv rS vofitfi are the subjects of the Mosaical theocracy, viz., the Jews, who practise the avd- yvaio-is rov v6fj.ov, the reading of the law (Acts xiii. 15), are Zt]\wra\ rod vSpiov (xxi. 20), r-r]peiv (xv. 5, 24), or (pvAao-treiv, ttou7v (Rom. ii. 14), ■jpacrcreiv (ii. 25), rov vd/xov (Acts xxi. 24), zealots for the observance and performance of the law, although they debate often irep\ (^t?;- /.idrcov rov vofj.ov avr&v, about mere legal quib- bles; so that, as mere hearers, they cannot expect the blessings promised to the doers of the law. D^DSPDI D^pn fil^0 nnj>, paprvpta, Slkcu- w/xara, ivroAai, Kpl/.tara, Kpiaeis, irpoo-rdy^ara, are the various precepts contained in the law, mill, vofxos. The law .-is especially embodied in the last four books of the Pentateuch. In Exodus, Le- viticus, and Numbers, there is perceptible some arrangement of the various precepts, although they are not brought into a system. In Deuter- onomy the law or legislation contained in the three preceding books is repeated with slight modifications. The whole legislation has for its 230 LAW. manifest object, to fournd a theocratical hierarchy. We here use tbe word hierarchy without mean- ing- to express that the Mosaical legislation was like some, later hierarchies falsely so-called, in which it was attempted to carry into effect selfish and wicked plans, by passing them off as being of divine appointment. In the Mosaical hierarchy the aim is manifest, viz. to make that which is really holy (to tep6v) prevail ; while in the false hierarchies of later times the profanest selfishness has been rendered practicable by giv- ing to its manifestations an appearance of holi- ness calculated to deceive the multitude. In the Mosaical legislation the priests certainly exercise a considerable authority as external ministers of holiness ; but we find nothing to be compared with the sale of indulgences in the Romish church. There occur, certainly, instances of gross misdemeanour on the part of the priests, as, for instance, in the case of the sons of Eli ; but proceedings originating in the covetousness of the priests were never authorized or sanctioned by the law. In the Mosaical legislation almost the whole amount of taxation was paid in the form of tithe, which was employed in maintaining the priests and Levites as the hierarchical office- bearers of government, in supporting the poor, and in providing those things which were used in sacrifices and sacrificial feasts. The taxation by tithe, exclusive of almost all other taxes, is certainly the most lenient and most considerate which has ever anywhere been adopted or proposed. It precludes the possibility of at- tempting to extort from the people contributions beyond their power, and it renders the taxation of each individual proportionate to his possessions ; and even this exceedingly mild taxation was apparently left to the conscience of each person. This we infer from there never occurring in the Bible the slightest vestige either of persons having been sued or goods distrained for tithes, and only an indication of curses resting upon the neglect of paying them. Tithes were the law of the land, and nevertheless they were not recovered by law, during the period of the Tabernacle and of the first Temple. It is only daring the period of the second Temple, when a general demoralization had taken place, that tithes were farmed and sold, and levied by violent proceedings, in which re- fractory persons were slain for resisting the levy. But no recommendation or example of such pro- ceedings occurs in the Bible. This seems to indi- cate that the propriety of paying these lenient and beneficial taxes was generally felt ; so much so, that there were Cew, or perhaps no defaulters, and that it was considered inexpedient on the part of the recipients to harass the needy. Besides the tithes there was a small poll-tax, amounting to half a shekel for each adult male. This tax was paid for the maintenance of the sanctuary. In addition to this, the first-fruits and the first-born of men and cattle augmented the revenue. The first-born of men and of unclean beasts were to be redeemed by money. To this may be added some fines paid rn the shape of sin- offerings, and also the vows and free-will offerings. The Mosaical legislation is the further develop- ment of the covenant between Jehovah and Abra- ham. It is a politico-religious institution given to a nation of freeholders. The fundamental laws of this constitution are, I. Jehoyah alone is LAW. God, and the invisible King of the nation (comp. Josephus, Contra Apionem, ii. 16). II. The nation is the peculiar property of Jehovah, its King ; and it is therefore bound ta avoid all uncleanness, as well moral as phy- sical defilement, which must result from inter- mixture with foreign nations who are not sub- jects of the theocracy. A confederacy with these nations is accordingly forbidden (Exod. xxiii. 32, and xxxiv. 12). III. The whole territory of tbe state was to be so distributed that each family should have a freehold, which was intended to remain permanently the in- heritance of this family, and which ,even if sold, was to return at stated periods to its original owners. Since the whole population consisted of families of freeholders, there were, strictly speaking, neither citizens, nor a profane or lay-nobility, nor lords temporal. We do not overlook the fact that there were persons called heads, elders, princes, dukes, or leaders among the Israelites ; that is, persons who by their intelligence, character, wealth, and other circumstances, were leading men among them, and from whom even the seventy judges were chosen, who assisted Moses in administering justice to the nation. But we have -no proof that there was a nobility enjoying similar pre- rogatives like those which are connected with birth in several countries of Europe, sometimes in spite of mental and moral disqualifications. We do not find that, according to the Mosaical con- stitution, there were hereditary peers temporal. Even the inhabitants of towns were freeholders, and their exercise of trades seems to have been combined with, or subordinate to, agricultural pursuits. The only nobility was that of the tribe of Levi, and all the lords were lords spiritual, the descendants of Aaron. The priests and Levites were ministers of public worship, that is, ministers of Jehovah the King ; and as such,, ministers of state, by whose instrumentality the legislative as well as the judicial power was exercised. The poor were mercifully considered, but beggars are never mentioned. Hence it appears that as, on the one hand, there was no lay nobility, so, on the other, there was no mendicity. Such is a rapid sketch of the Mosaical consti- tution, which, however, was certainly consider- ably modified after its original perfection had been sacrificed to the popular clamour for a visible king. Owing to the rebellious spirit of the Israelites, the salutary injunctions of their law were so fre- quently transgressed, that it could not procure for them that degree of prosperity which it was calculated to produce among a nation of faithful observers; but it is evident that the Mosaical legislation, if truly observed, was more fitted to promote universal happiness and tranquillity than any other constitution, either ancient or modern. It has been deemed a defect that there were no laws against infanticide ; but it may well be observed, as a proof of national prosperity, that there are no historical traces of this crime; and it would certainly have been preposterous to give laws against a crime which did not occur, especi- ally as the general law against murder, 'Thou shalt not kill,' was applicable to this species also* The words of Josephus {Contra Apionem, ii. 24), Kcd yvvcaQv air^?Trey jx-ryf h^Xovv to airapiv, ' /irjTe dLcupBelpew a\ha t)v (pavelr], t<=kvqt6vos LAW. &C ef?j tyvxiiv a.(pavi^Qvaa ical yevos e\arrovcra, can only mean that the crime was against the spirit of the Mosaical law. An express verbal prohibition of this kind is not extant. There occur also no laws and regulations about wills and testamentary dispositions, although there are sufficient historical facts to prove that the next of kin was considered the lawful heir, that primo- geniture was deemed of the highest importance, and that if there were no male descendants, fe- males inherited the freehold property. We learn from the Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews (ix. 16, 17), that the Jews disposed of property by wills ; but it seems that in the times of Moses, and for some period after him, all Israelites died intes- tate. However, the word hia6i\K7), as used in Matthew, Mark, Acts, Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, and repeatedly in the Hebrews, implies rather a disposition, arrange- ment, agreement between parties, than a will in the legal acceptation of the term. There are no laws concerning guardians, and none against luxurious living. The inefficiency of sumptuary laws is now generally recognised, although renowned legislators in ancient times, and in the middle ages, displayed on this subject their wisdom falsely so called. Neither are there any laws against suicide. Hence we infer that suicide was rare, as we may well suppose in a nation of small freeholders, and that the ineffi- ciency of such laws was understood. The Mosaical legislation recognises the human dignity of women and of slaves, and particularly enjoins not to slander the deaf nor mislead the blind. The laws of Moses against crimes are severe, but not cruel. The agony of the death of cri- minals was never artificially protracted, as in some instances was usual in various' countries of Europe, even in the present century ; nor was torture employed in order to compel criminals to confess their crimes, as was done in the kingdom of Hanover as late as 1817, under the reign of George HI., and where the law of torture is per- haps not yet abolished. Forty was the maximum number of stripes to be inflicted. This maxi- mum was adopted for the reason expressly stated, that the appearance of the person punished should not become horrible, or, as J. D. Michael is ren- ders it, burnt, which expresses the appearance of a person unmercifully beaten ; while, in this Christian country, in the present year, a guilty soldier was sentenced to suffer 120 stripes. Moses expressly enjoined not to reap the corners of fields, in consideration of the poor, of persons of broken fortunes, and even of the beasts of the field. Punishments were inflicted, in order specially to express the sacred indignation of the Divine Lawgiver against wilful transgression of his commandments, and not for any purposes of hu- man vengeance, or for the sake of frightening other criminals. In lawsuits very much was left to the discre- tion of the judges, whose position greatly re- sembled that of a permament jury, who had not merely to decide whether a person was guilty, but who frequently had also to award the amount of punishment to be inflicted. In some instances the people at large were appealed to, in order to inflict summary punish- LAW. 231 ment by stoning the criminal to death. This was in fact the most usual mode of execution. Other modes of execution, also, such as burning, were always public, and conducted with the co- operation of the people. Like every human proceeding, this was liable to abuse, but not to so much abuse as our present mode of con- ducting lawsuits, which, on account of their cost- liness, often afford but little protection to persons in narrow circumstances. In the Old Testament we do not hear of a learned profession of the law. Lawyers (vo/jiikoI) are mentioned only after the decline of the Mo- saical institutions had considerably advanced. As, however, certain laws concerning contagion and purification were administered by the priests, these might be called lawyers. They, however, did not derive their maintenance from the ad- ministration of these laws, but were supported by glebe-lands, tithes, and portions of the sacri- ficial offerings. It is, indeed, very remarkable, that in a nation so entirely governed by law, there were no lawyers forming a distinct profes- sion, and that the vo/aiko'i of a later age were not so much remarkable for enforcing the spirit of the law, as rather for ingeniously evading its injunc- tions, by leading the attention of the people from its spirit to a most minute literal fulfilment of its letter. The Jews divide the whole Mosaical law into 613 precepts, of which 218 are affirmative and 365 negative. The number of the affirma- tive precepts corresponds to the 248 members of which, according to Rabbinical anatomy, the whole human body consists. The number of the negative precepts corresponds to the 365 days of the solar year ; or, according to the Rabbinical work Brandspiegel (which has been published in Jewish German at Cracow and in other places), the negative precepts agree in number with the 365 veins which, they say, are found in the hu- man body. Hence their logic concludes that if on each day each member of the human body keeps one affirmative precept and abstains from one thing forbidden, the whole law, and not the decalogue alone, is kept. The whole law is some- times called by Jewish writers Theriog, which word is formed from the Hebrew letters that are employed to express the number 613 ; viz. 400=n+200=1-hl0 = » + 3=a. Hence 613 = 5<,"in theriog. Women are subject to the negative precepts or prohibitions only, and not to the affirmative precepts or injunctions. This exception arises partly from their nature, and partly from their being subject to the authority of husbands. According to some Rabbinical statements women are subject to 100 precepts only, of which 64 are negative and 36 affirmative. The number 613 corresponds also to the num- ber of letters in the decalogue. Others are in- clined to find that there are 620 precepts accord- ing to the numerical value of the word 1]"D = crown; viz., 400 = n+'200 = 1+20 =3 ; and others, again, observe that the numerical value of the letters mill, lain, amounts only to 611. The first in order of these laws is found in Gen, i. 27, 1211 11D, be fruitful and multiply. The transgressor of this law is, according to Rabbi Eliezer, as wicked as a murderer. He who is still unmarried at twenty years of age is a trans- gressor ; and the law is binding upon every man, according to Schamai, until lie has two sons ; or, 232 LAW. according to Hillel, one son and one daughter (compare Jut is Hebreeorum leges, ductu Rabbi Levi Barzelonita?, auctore J. Henrico Hettinger). The Jews assert that, besides the written law, 2]"ID3E> rnifl, voixos eyypxcpos, which may be translated into other languages, and which is contained in the Pentateuch, there was com- municated to Moses on Mount Sinai an oral law, n3 yjl'y mi]"!, vou.os aypacpos, which was subsequently written down, together with many Rabbinical observations, and is contained in the twelve folio volumes which now consti- tute the Talmud, and which the Jews assert can- not be, or at least ought not to be, translated [Talmud]. The present article is, of course, closely inter- woven with the contents of a number of others which in this Cyclopaedia have preceded, or which follow it in alphabetical order, such as Adultery, Blood-revenge, Decalogue, Deuteronomy, Divorce, Exodus, Gospel, Leviticus, Marriage, Moses, Murder, Pentateuch, Retaliation, Robber}-, Sab- bath, Slavery, Theft, &c. &c. It is, indeed, both unnecessary and impracticable to exhaust in this place all that might with propriety be brought under the head of Law. We therefore make no such attempt, but refer our readers to the cognate articles for further information. The chief point here to be considered, is the authority ascribed in the Bible itself to law in general, and to Biblical law in particular. The misconceptions on this subject prevalent in the religious world are the more surprising, since many distinguished eccle- siastical teachers of various periods, and among these St. Augustine of the fourth and fifth, and the Reformers of the sixteenth century, have stated the Biblical doctrine respecting the law with par- ticular clearness. The great importance ascribed by the Reformers to the right understanding of the law is thus tersely expressed by Philip Melancthou : ' Htec demum Christiana cognitio est, scire quod lex poscat, unde faciendse legis vim, unde peccati gratiam petas, quomodo labascentem animam adversus dsemonem, camem, et mundum erigas, quomodo adflictam conscientiam consoleris.' ' This alone is Christian knowledge, to be acquainted with the demands of the law, to know whence to obtain the power requisite for fulfilling the law, and whence to obtain pardon for sins comm itted ; to know how to raise up the drooping soul against the devil, the flesh, and the world, and how to comfort the afflicted conscience.' Christ and the Apostles express themselves respecting the authority of the law so variously, that in order to reconcile their apparent con- tradictions, the divines of various Christian de- nominations have usually felt themselves com- pelled to distinguish between different portions of the law, some of which, they assert, were abo- lished by Christ, while they maintain that others were established by him. For instance, when Christ says, in the sermon on the mount, that he was not come to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfil them, it has usually been asserted that he meant this merely in reference to the moral law, but that he nevertheless abo- lished the ceremonial and civil law of the Jews. And again, when he declines to enter into the debate pending between the Samaritans and the LAW. Jews, concerning the proper place where God ought to be worshipped ; when he states as the reason for not entering into this debate, that God is a Spirit and that his true worshippers must wor- ship him in spirit and in truth; when he pro- mises a Comforter, the Spirit of truth, who would lead his true disciples into all truth; and when he indicates that this would be the period up to which the law would remain in force, namely, until all things are fulfilled — divines usually say that this future cessation of the law under the authority of the Spirit could never apply to the moral, but only to the ceremonial and the civil law. In a similar manner the abolition of the law, most clearly set forth in the epistles of Paul to the Romans and the Galatians, where the apostle teaches that Christians are as free from the authority of the law as the widow is free from the authority of her deceased husband, and as the adult is free from the authority of the schoolmaster who ruled his infancy, is said to apply only to the ceremonial and civil, but not to the moral law ; while the latter alone is held to be referred to when the Apostle, in apparent contradiction to the general tenor of his epistles, says that ' we establish the law by faith' (Rom. iii. 31). Against this convenient mode of overcoming the difficulty the following observations may be adduced : I. Neither Christ nor the Apostles ever distinguish between the moral, the ceremonial,, and the civil law, when they speak of its esta- blishment or its abolition. II. They even clearly indicate that the moral law is by no means excepted when they speak of the abolition of the law in general. Thus, for instance, St. Paul, after having stated that the law is not incumbent upon the righteous, guards us against misunderstanding him, as if this referred to the ceremonial law alone ; for he specifies various transgressors to whom the law is given, and who are restrained by the same. The trans- gressors mentioned by St. Paul are not those of the ceremonial, but of the moral law. ' But we know that the law is good, if a man use it law- fully ; knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobe- dient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for un- holy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for man-slayers, for whore- mongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for men-stealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine ' (1 Tim. i. 8-10). If it had been the intention of the Apostle to incul- cate that the righteous or the Christian believers were exempt from the observance of the ceremonial law, the examples taken from the transgressors of the moral law would not have illustrated, but obscured the subject. Whoever mentions mur- derers, whoremongers, men-stealers, liars, and perjurers, undoubtedly refers to the moral rather than to the ceremonial law. And whoever says that the law against the crimes alluded to has been abolished, cannot be supposed to speak of the ceremonial law only. And when Christ, in his first public sermon, declares that not a tittle of the law shall perish until all things are fulfilled, he cannot be supposed to mean that two-thirds of the law, viz., the civil and the ceremonial, perished eighteen centuries ago. The foreeoing observations are intended to in- LAW. duce the reader not hastily to reject our position, that the prevalent doctrine concerning- the law is not the doctrine of Christ, nor that of St. Paul. Nor is it that of St. Augustine, nor of Luther, Melancthon, and other teachers of the church, who felt no interest in paring truth down to meet the preconceived notions of congregations, but who endeavoured in their respective ages to receive revealed truth faithfully as it was given, and to communicate it in an unadulterated manner, in words as clear as the abstract nature of the subject will allow. In order to reconcile the apparent contradic- tions between the various dicta of the New Testament concerning the authority of the law, we must not commence, as is usually done, namely, by distinguishing the matter of the law, but the form or manner in which it is binding or obligatory. He who said that not a jot or a tittle of the law should perish until all things were fulfilled, certainly could not mean that more than two-thirds of the law were abo- lished, but intended forcibly to express the idea that, in a certain sense, by his instrumentality, the whole law, without any exception, had ob- tained an increased authority. On the other hand, when the Apostle says, Aoyi£b'/U60a oiiv TriCTet diKaiovadcu &v9pa)Trov, X^P^ epYajJ/ vofiov, Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law (Rom. iii. 2SJ, he cannot mean anything else but that, in a certain sense, the whole law, without any ex- ception, is not binding upon the faithful. We, therefore, conceive that in order to reconcile the apparent, but merely apparent, contradictions of the New Testament, we must distinguish not so much the various materials, ritual, civil, and moral, of which the law is composed, as the various manners in which its modus obligandi may exist. The authority which other beings may exercise upon us is two-fold : it is either nomothetical or didactical. The nomothetical authority, which a book, or the living voice of another moral being may exercise upon us, is either such that it precludes the exercise of our own judgment, like that which Pythagoras is said to have exercised upon his disciples, who were in the habit of settling all their disputes, as by a final reason from which there was no appeal, by avrbs ecpa, he has said so ; or the authority is such as to excite the faculties of the listener, so that he perceives the necessity of the truth communicated. In this last case the authority exercised is not nomothe- tical, but didactical. The college-tutor who meets the question, how minus multiplied by minus can give plus, by 'Upon my honour, gen- tlemen, it is so,' endeavours to exercise a nomo- thetial authority ; while he who endeavours to illustrate the internal necessity of this, to the un- initiated, startling fact, endeavours to exercise a didactical authority. Beginners in any science, either mental or moral, are obliged for some time to submit to nomothetical authority. II', as sometimes happens, we meet with adult pupils who, instead of taking for granted our- grammatical statements, constantly endeavour to cavil at the wording of those gram- matical rules which we give them, before they are enabled to judge for themselves, we invariably find that such pupils do not make the same progress LAW. 233 as others who admit without dispute what their teacher and their grammar state, until they have penetrated so far into the genius of the language to be acquired as to investigate for themselves the applicability of the rules communicated. On the other hand, students of a language who never learn to recognise the spirit of that language per- vading the works and discourses of eloquent men as an authority above the rules of grammar and of grammarians, remain always inferior to those who have raised themselves to the recognition of that higher authority which may enable them to surpass their instructors who formerly exercised a nomothetical authority over them. The same is the case in any other branch of knowledge or science, viz., beginners are necessarily under the law or under the nomothetical power of elemen- tary books and teachers until they are emancipated by seizing the spirit of the science or art ; after which the external authority of books and teachers can be for them didactical only, and subordinate to that spirit the life of which can never be fully embodied in words. So it was also with the human race at large : it was necessary that the law of Moses should exer- cise nomothetical authority by ' Cursed is he who does not continue in the words of this law.1 And so it is now with a great portion of Christian religionists, who still require frightful curses and opposite benedictions somewhat similar to those formerly pronounced on the mountains Ebal and Gerizim, in order to keep them in the right di- rection. But the assertion of this nomothetical authority was not the ultimate aim of Christ. His most intimate disciple, whom he especially loved, states strikingly, "On 6 v6/j.os 5ia McoceW iSoB't] • ■'] xaPls Ka^ V nA7)06ia 8t« 'Irjaov Xpiarov iyevero, For the law teas given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. In reference to this text, the Reformers declared it to be improper to call Christ a new lawgiver. This was an objection which drew forth against them the anathema pronounced in the sixth ses- sion of the Council of Trent : ' Si quis dixerit Christum Jesum a Deo hominibus datum fuisse ut redemrorem, cui fidant ; non etiam ut legisla- torem cui obediant ; anathema sit.' 'If any man should assert, that God granted Christ Jesus to mankind only as a Redeemer in whom they should trust, and not also as a lawgiver whom they should obey, let him be accursed1 (Cone. Trid. Sess. iv. Can. 21). It is, however, a fact, that Christ did not give new laws, but only new motives for keeping the moral precepts more or less clearly known to Jews and Gentiles, by making it a prominent doctrine, that love is due to God and to men in general, even to our enemies, and that intentions are of greater moral importance than outward acts. The characteristic of the doctrine of Christ does not consist in new laws given, but rather in the forgiveness offered for pasl transgressions, and in the guidance of the Holy Spirit promised to his true disciples. The authority of this Holy Spirit is described in the Gospel of John, ami in the Epistle to the Romans, as superior to the letter of the law. Whosoever i- tilled with this Spirit is not under the law, although he fulfils the holy aim and intention of the law. The true disciple of Christ, if asked. Why did you not kill such or such a person? cannot answer,-" Because it is 234 LAW. written, 'Thou sbalt do no murder.' Christians feel that they are filled with a spirit which pre- vents them from desiring the commission of crimes. But if they grieve that Spirit by for- saking his guidance, they sink again under the power of the written law, because they cease to belong to the SiKaiot ois vo/xos ou neiraL, whose actions are not extorted by any external authority, but who follow the holy impulses of their sancti- fied mind as a v6,uos e\evdepias, and thus are enabled to act more in harmony with the supreme scope of the law, viz., holiness unto the Lord, than any subjection to external precepts ever could produce. This is beautifully illustrated by St. Augustine : Augustinus, libro de Spiritu et Litera; 'Per legem cognitio peccati, per fidem impetratio gratise contra peccatum, per gratiam sanatio animae a vitio peccati, per animae sanitatem libertas arbitrii, per liberum arbitrium justitise dilectio, per justitise dilectionem legis operatio. Ac per hoc sicut lex non evacuatur, sed firmatur per fidem, quia fides impetrat gratiam, qua lex im- pleatur ; ita liberum arbitrium non evacuatur per gratiam, sed statuitur, quia gratia sanat volun- tatem qua justitia libere diligatur. Omnia haec (quae veluti catenatim connexui) habent voces suas in Scripturis Sanctis. Lex dicit, non concupisces. Fides dicit (Ps. xl.), " Sana animam meam, quia peccavi.'" Gratia ait (Joannis 5), " Ecce sanus fac- tus es, jam noli peccare, ne tibi deterius contingat." Sanitas dicit (Ps. xxix.), ''• Domine Deus mens, exclamaviad te, sanasti me." Liberum arbitrium dicit (Ps. cxviii.), "Narraverunt mihi injusti de- lectationes suas, sed non ut lex tua Domine." Hssc Augustinus. Non destruit legem Paulus, qui prasdicat factum, quod lex promisera? ; eumque nunciat in quem ceu scopum, summa legis spectabat. Nam Rom. x. finis est et. per- fectio legis Chrisrus, ad justitiam omni credenti, et Christus ait, " Non veni solvere legem, sed adimplere." Compare In omnes Pauli Epistolas Collatio, per Claudium Guilliaudum. Paris, 1550, p. 20. It is very surprising that the clear perception of the true source of the law. which was fulfilled even by its abrogation, could have been so effectually obscured as is done by the doctrine current in the religious world concerning the abolition of its civil and ceremonial, and the establishment of its moral precepts. The whole aim and scope of the Mosaical legislation have been established as much as the aim of temporary po- lice regulations, enacted in order to meet the emergencies of a commonwealth during a period of rebellion, is established and fulfilled by him who restores perfect peace and public tranquillity, although the natural consequence of this peace is, that those regulations cease to be in force. On the other hand, although the Christian, who is under the guidance of a spirit leading him into all truth, cannot be led by this spirit to the com- mission of any crime contrary to the moral pre- cepts of Moses, it cannot be said, that by not com- mitting murder . and adultery, he obeys the Mo- saical law, any more than that he obeys ihe in- junctions of the Code Napoleon, in these particular instances. However, the didactic authority of the whole Mosaical law is for the Christian much greater than that of any other legislation. This didactic or teaching authority is expressed even in the words of the New Testament. The law is not merely ' called Traidaycoyus els ~Kpiar6v, LAW. ' a schoolmaster' (z. e. an educational guide) ' ts, Christ' (Gal. iii. 24), but the whole Old Testa- ment (iracra ypaarison of the Laio of Moses with those of the Hindoos, etc. ; Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli et Pacis ; J. H. Hottinger, Juris llebrceorum leges eclxi., ad Judceorum mentem explicates, Tiguri, 1655 ; Selden, De Jure naturali et gentium juxta Hebraorum disciplinam, libri vii., Argentorati, 1665 ; John Spencer, Dissertatio de Theocratia Judaica ; Christoph. Blechschmidii Dissert, de Theocratia in Populo Sancto insti- tuta ; Salomonis Deylingii Exercitatio de Israeli Jehovce Dominio ; Thomas Goodwin, Dissert, de Theocratia Israelitarum ; Hen. Hulsii Dissert. de Jchova Deo Rege ac Duce militari in prisco Israele ; Dissert, de Schechinah, &c. ; Joh. Conr. Dannhaveri Politica Biblica ; Hermann! Con- LAWYER. LEAD. 235 ringii Exercit. de Politia sive de Rejmblica Hebrceorum ; Christ. Bened. Michaelis, Dissert. Philoi. de Antiquitatibus (Economics Patri- archate; Wilhelmi Schickardi Jus Regium Hebraorum cum animadversionibus et notis Jo. Bened. Carpzovii ; R. Isaaci Abarbanelis Dissert, de Statu et Jure Regio; Dissert, de Judicum et Regum differentia, in Blasii Ugolini Thesaurus Antiquitatum Sacrarum, vol. xxiv. ; D. Homsyli De principiis Legum Mosaicarum, Hafnise, 1792 ; Staudlini Commentationes II. de Legum Mosaicarum, Gottingse, 1796; Pur- mann, De fontibus et osconomia Legum Mosa- icarum, Francofurti, 1789; T. G. Erdmann, Leges Mosis prcestanliores esse legibus Lycurgi ct Solonis, Vitebergse, 1788 ; Hartmann, Verbin- duhff das Alien mid Neuen Testamentes ; Hee- ren, Idem, ii. 430, sq. Beilage iv. ; Pastoret, llktoire de la Legislation, Paris, 1817, vols. iii. et iv. ; J. Salvador, IHstoire des Institutions de Moise et du Peuple Hebreu, Paris, 1828, 3 vols. ; Welker, Die Letzten Griinde von Recht, p. 279, sq. ; St'audlin, Geschichte der Sittenlehre Jesu, i. Ill, sq. ; Holberg, Geschichte der Sittenlehre Jesu, ii. 331, sq. ; De Wette, Sittenlehre, ii. 21, sq. On the abolition of the law see several dis- sertations and programmata of the elder Witsch, published in Wittenberg, and De Legis Mosaicee Abrogatione, scripsit C. H. F. Bialloblotzky, Gottingse, 1824.— C. H. F. B. LAWYER (voixik6s). This word, in its ge- neral sense, denotes one skilled in the law, as in Tit. iii. 13. When, therefore,, one is called a lawyer, this is understood with reference to the laws of the land in which he lived, or to which he belonged. Hence among the Jews a lawyer was one versed in the laws of Moses, which he taught in the schools and synagogues (Matt, xxviii. 35 ; Luke x. 25). The same person who is called ' a lawyer ' in these texts, is in the pa- rallel passage (Mark xii. 28) called a scribe (ypaf-L/xarevs) ; whence it has been inferred that (he functions of the lawyers and the scribes were identical. The individual may have been both a lawyer and a scribe; but it does not thence follow that all lawyers were scribes. Some suppose, however1, that the 'scribes' were the public ex- pounders of the law, while the ' lawyers ' were the private expounders and teachers'of it. But this is a mere conjecture ; and nothing more is really known than that the ' lawyers ' were expounders of the law, whether publicly or privately, or both. LAZARUS (Adfrpos, an abridged form of the Hebrew name Eleazer), an inhabitant of Bethany, brother of Mary and Martha, who was honoured with the friendship of Jesus, by whom he was raised from the dead after he had been four days in the tomb. This great miracle is minutely described in John xi. The credit which Christ obtained among the people by this illustrious act, of which the life and presence of Lazarus afforded a standing evidence, induced the Sanhedrim, in plotting against Jesus, to contemplate the destruction of Lazarus also (John xii. 10). Whether they accomplished this object or not, we are not informed : but the probability seems to be that when they had satiated their malice on Christ, they left Lazarus unmolested. The raising of Lazarus from the dead was a Work of Christ beyond measure great, and of all the miracles he had hitherto wrought undoubtedly the most stupendous. ' If it can be incontro- vertibly shown that Christ performed one such miraculous act as this,' says Tholuck (in his Commentar zum Evang. Johannis"), ' much will thereby be gained to the cause of Christianity. One point so peculiar in its character, if irrefra- gably established, may serve to develope a belief in the entire evangelical record.' The sceptical Spinoza was fully conscious of this, as is related by Bayle (Diet., art. ' Spinoza') : ' On m'a assure, qu'il disait a ses amis, que s'il eut pu se per- suader la resurrection de Lazare, il auroit brise en pieces tout son systeme, il auroit embrasse sans repugnance la foi ordinaire des Chretiens.' It is not surprising, therefore, that the enemies of Christianity have used their utmost exertions to destroy the credibility of the narrative. The earlier cavils of Woolston and his followers were, however, satisfactorily answered by Lardner and others ; and the more recent efforts of the German neologists have been ably and successfully refuted by Oertelius, Langius, and Reinhard ; and by Htibner, in a work entitled Miraculorum ab Evangelistis narratorum interpretat. gramma- tico-historica, Wittenb. 1807 ; as well as by others of still more recent date, whose answers, with the objections to which they apply, may be seen in Kuinoel. See also Flatt', in Mag. fur Dogm. und Moral, xiv. 91 ; Schott, Opuse. i. 259; and Ewald's Lazarus fur Gebildete Chris- tusverehrer, Berl. 1790. 'LEAD (JTl.?y; Sept. MSXiffios), a well- known metal, the first Scriptural notice of which occurs in the triumphal song in which Moses celebrates the overthrow of Pharaoh, whose host is there said to have 'sunk like lead' in the waters of the Red Sea (Exod. xv. 10). Before the use of quicksilver was known, lead was used for the purpose of purifying silver, and separating it from other mineral substances (Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxii. 31). To this Jeremiah alludes where he figuratively describes the corrupt condi- tion of the people : ' In their fire the lead is con- sumed (in the crucible) ; the smelting is in vain, for the evil is not separated' (Jer. vi. 29). Ezekiel (xxii. 18-22) refers to the same fact, and for the same purpose, but amplifies it with greater mi- nuteness of detail. Compare also Mai. iii. 2, 3. Job (xix. 23, 24) expresses a wish that his words were engraven ' with an iron pen and lead.' These words are commonly supposed to refer to engraving on a leaden tablet ; and it is unde- niable that such tablets were anciently used as a writing material (Pausan. ix. 31 ; Plin. Hist. Nat. xiii. 11). But our authorized translators, by ren- dering ' an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever,' seem to have entertained the same view with Rosenmiiller, who supposes that molten lead was to be poured into letters sculptured on stone with an iron chisel, in order to raise the inscription. The translator of Rosenmiiller (in Bib. Cabinet, xxvii. 64) thinks that the poetical force of the passage has been overlooked by interpreters : ' Job seems not to have drawn his image from any tiling he had actually seen executed : he only wishes to express in the strongest possible language, the durability. due to his words; and accordingly he says, " May the pen he iron, and the ink of lead, with which they are written on an everlasting rock," i. c. Let them not be written 236 LEAH. with ordinary perishable materials.' This expla- nation seems to be suggested by that of the Septu- agint, which lias 'Ey ypacpelai cn5?jp Shaphdl, pD3 Neteq, ]VW Shechin, i. e. ' elevation,' ' depressed,' &c. ; and to each of these Dr. Good (I. c.) has assigned a modern systematic name. But, as it is useless to attempt to recognize a disease otherwise than by a description of its symptoms, we can have no object in discussing his interpretation of these terms. If a person had any of the above diseases he was brought before the priest to be examined. If the priest found the distinctive signs of a Tsordat, or contagious leprosy, the person was immediately declared unclean. If the priest had any doubt on the subject, the person was put under confinement for seven days, when he was examined a second time. If in the course of the preceding week the eruption had made no advance, lie was shut up for another seven days ; and if then the disease was still stationary, and had none of the distinctive signs above noticed, he was declared clean (Lev. xiii.). It may be useful here to subjoin a description of elephantiasis, or the leprosy of the middle ages, as this is the disease from which most of the LEPROSY. prevalent notions concerning leprosy have been derived, and to which the notices of lepers con- tained in modern books of travels exclusively refer. Elephantiasis first of all makes its appearance by spots of a reddish, yellowish, or livid hue, irregularly disseminated over the skin and slightly raised above its surface. These spots are glossy, and appear oily, or as if they were covered with varnish. After they have remained in this way for a longer or shorter time, they are succeeded by an eruption of tubercles. These are soft, roundish tumours, varying in size from that of a pea to that of an olive, and are of a reddish or livid colour. They are principally developed on the face and ears, but in the course of years ex- tend over the whole body. The face becomes frightfully deformed ; the forehead is traversed by deep lines and covered with numerous tuber- cles ; the eyebrows become bald, swelled, fur- rowed by oblique lines, and covered with nipple- like elevations; the eyelashes fall out, and the eyes assume a fixed and staring look; the lips are enormously thickened and shining ; the beard falls out ; the chin and ears are enlarged and beset with tubercles ; the lobe and alae of the nose are frightfully enlarged and deformed ; the nos- trils irregularly dilated, internally constricted, and excoriated ; the voice is hoarse and nasal, anil the breath intolerably fetid. After some time, generally after some years, many of the tubercles ulcerate, and the matter which exudes from them dries to crtists of a brownish or blackish colour; but this process seldom termi- nates in cicatrization. The extremities are affected in the same way as the face. The hollow of the foot is swelled out, so that the sole becomes flat ; the sensibility of the skin is greatly impaired, and, in the hands and feet, often entirely lost ; the joints of the toes ulcerate and fall off one after the other ; insupportable foe tor exhales from the whole body. The patient's general health is not affected for a considerable time, and his sufferings are not always of the same intensity as his external deformity. Often, however, his nights are sleepless or disturbed by frightful dreams ; he becomes morose and melancholy ; he shuns the sight of the healthy, because he feels what an object of disgust he is to them, and life becomes a loathsome burden to him ; or he falls into a state of apathy, and after many years of such an existence he sinks either from exhaustion, or from the supervention of internal disease. The Greeks gave the name of elephantiasis to this dis- ease, because the skin of the person affected with it was thought to resemble that of an elephant, in dark colour, ruggedness, and insensibility, or, as somejiave thought, because the foot, after the loss of the toes, when the hollow of the sole is filled up and the ankle enlarged, resembles the foot of an elephant. The Arabs called it a!3^. G'ltdk&m, which means 'mutilation,' 'amputa- tion,' in reference to the loss of the smaller mem- bers. They have, however, also described another disease, and a very different one from elephan- tiasis, to which they gave the name of jJwJjrlj Da'l fil, which means literally imrbus elephas. The disease to which they applied this name is called by modern writers the tumid Barbadoes leg, and consists in a thickening of the skin and LEVIATHAN. 239 subcutaneous tissues of the leg, but presents nothing resembling the tubercles of elephantiasis. Now the Latin translators from the Arabic, find- ing that the same name existed both in the Greek and Arabic, translated Dal fil by elephantiasis, and thus confounded the Barbadoes leg with the Arabic G\idhdm, while this latter, whicli was in reality elephantiasis, they rendered by the Greek term lepra. About the period of the Crusades elephantiasis spread itself like an epidemic over all Europe, even as far north as the Faroe Islands; and henceforth, owing to the above-named mis- takes, every one became familiar with leprosy under the form of the terrible disease that has just been described. Leper or lazar-houses abounded everywhere : as many as 2000 are said to have existed in France alone. The disease was considered to be contagious possibly only on account of the belief that was entertained respect- ing its identity with Jewish leprosy, and the strictest regulations were enacted for secluding the diseased from society. Towards the com- mencement of the seventeenth century the disease gradually disappeared from Europe, and is now confined to intertropical countries. It existed in Faroe as late as 1676, and in the Shetland Islands in 1736, long after it had ceased in the southern parts of Great Britain. The best authors of the present day who have had an opportunity of ob- serving the disease do not consider it to be con- tagious. There seems, however, to be little doubt as to its being hereditary (Good's Study of lied., iii. 421 ; Rayer, Mai. de la Peau, ii. 296; Simp- son On the Lepers and Leper Houses of Scotland and England, in Edin. Med. and Surg. Journ., Jan. 1, 1842).— W. A. N. LEVI Qw, a joining; Sept. Aeuef), the third son of Jacob and Leah, born in Mesopotamia B.C. 1750 (Gen. xxix. 34). No circumstance is recorded of him save the part which he and his full brother Simeon took in the massacre of the Shechemites, to avenge the wrong done to their sister Dinah (Gen. xxxiv. 25, 26). This transac- tion was to his last hour regarded by Jacob with abhorrence, and he failed n<>t to allude to it in his dying declaration. As Simeon and Levi were united in that act, so the patriarch couples them in his prophecy : ' Accursed be their auger, for it was fierce ; and their wrath, for. it was cruel ! I will divide them in Jacob, and disperse them in Israel.' And, accordingly, their descendants were afterwards, in different ways, dispersed among the other tribes ; although, in the case of Levi, this curse was eventually turned into a benefit, and blessing. LEVIATHAN (Jf)J1?, Job iii. 8 ; xli. 1 ; Ps. Ixxiv. 14; civ. 2G; Isa. xxvii. 1) [Behemoth, Crocodile. Dragon]. Gesenius very justly remarks that this word, which denotes any twisted animal, is especially applicable to every great tenant of the waters, such as the great marine serpents and crocodiles, and, it may be added, the colossal serpents and great monitors of the desert. In general it points to the crocodile, and Job xli. is unequivocally descriptive Of that Saurian. Pro- bably the Egyptian crocodile is therein depicted in all its magnitude, ferocity, and indolence, such as it was in early days, when as yet uncon- scious of the power of man. and only individually tamed for the purposes of an imposture, which had 210 LEVITES. sufficient authority to intimidate the public and protect the species, under the sanctified pretext that it was a type of pure water, and an emblem of the importance of irrigation ; though the people in general seem ever to have been disposed to con- sider it a personification of the destructive prin- ciple. At a later period the Egyptians, probably of such places as Tentyris, where crocodiles were not held in veneration, not only hunted and slew them, but it appears from a statue that a sort of' Bestiarii ct" uld tame them sufficiently to perform certain exhibitions mounted on their backs. The intense musky odour of its flesh must have ren- dered the crocodile, at all times, very unpalatable food, but breast-armour was made of the horny and ridged parts of its back. We have ourselves witnessed a periodical abstinence in the great Sau- rians, and have known negro women, while bathing, play with young alligators ; which, they asserted, they could do without danger, unless they hurt them and thereby attracted the vengeance of the mother ; but the impunity most likely resulted from the period of inactivity coinciding with the then state of the young animals, or from the negro women being many in the water at the same time. The occurrence took place at Old Har- bour, Jamaica. Some misstatements and much irrelevant learn- ing have been bestowed upon the Leviathan. Viewed as the crocodile of the Thebaid, it is not clear that it symbolised the Pharaoh, or was a type of Egypt, any more than of several Roman colonies (even where it was not indigenous, as at Nismes in Gaul, on the ancient coins of which the figure of one chained occurs), and of cities in Phoenicia, Egypt, and other parts of the coast of Africa. But in the Prophets and Psalms there are passages where Pharaoh is evidently apostrophized under the name of Leviathan, though other texts more naturally apply to the whale, notwithstanding the objections that have been made to that interpretation of the term [Whale].— C. H. S. LEVITES (D»^; Sept. A«/mw), the de- scendants of Levi, through his sons Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, whose descendants formed so many sub-tribes or great families of the general body. In a narrower sense the term Levites designates the great body of the tribe employed in the subordinate offices of the hierarchy, to distin- guish them from that one family of their body — the family of Aaron — in which the priestly func- tions were vested. While the Israelites were encamped before Mount Sinai, the tribe of Levi, to which Moses and Aaron belonged, was, by special ordinauce from the Lord, set specially apart for sacerdotal services, in the place of the first-born of the dif- ferent tribes and families to whom such func- tions, according to ancient usage, belonged ; and which indeed had already been set apart as holy, in commemoration of the first-born of the Israel- ites having being spared when the first-born of the Egyptians were destroyed (Num. iii. 12,13, 40-5 1 ; Exod. xiii.). When it was determined to set apart a single tribe of Levi for this service, the numbers of the first-born in Israel and of the tribe selected were respectively taken, when it was found that, the former amounted to 22,273, and the latter to 22,000. Those of the first-bom beyond the number LEVITES. of the Levites were then redeemed at the rate of five shekels, or 12s. 6d., each, and the money assigned to the priests. At the same time the cattle which the Levites then happened to possess were considered as equivalent to all the firstlings of the cattle which the Israelites had ; and, ac- cordingly, the firstlings were not required to be brought, as in subsequent years, to the altar and to the priesthood (Num. iii. 41-51). In the wilderness the office of the Levites was to carry the Tabernacle and its utensils and furni- ture from place to place, after they had been packed up by the priests (Num. iv. 4-15). In this service each of the three "Levitical families had its separate department; the Gershonites car- ried the hangings and cords of the Tabernacle, for which they were allowed two wains, each drawn by four oxen (Num. iii. 25, 26 ; iv. 24-28 ; vii. 7). The Kohatliites carried the ark, the table of shew-bread, the candlestick, the two altars, and such of the hangings as belonged to the sanctuary : for this they had no wains or oxen, the whole being carried upon their shoulders (Num. iii. 3 1 ; iv. 4-15 ; vii. 9); the Merarites had charge of the substantial parts of the Tabernacle — the boards, pillars, bars, bases, &c, and also all the ordinary- vessels of service, for which they were allowed four wains and eight oxen (Num. iii. 36, 37 : iv. 31, 32; vii. 8). In this manner they proceeded in all their journeys ; and when they settled in a place, and had erected the Tabernacle, the differ- ent families pitched their tents around it in the following manner : the'Gershonites behind it on the west (Num. iii. 23), the Kohatliites on the south (iii. 29), the Merarites on the north (iii. 35), and the priests on the east (iii. 38). They ail assisted Aaron and his sons in taking care of, and attending on, the Tabernacle, when it was pitched ; but they were allowed to take no part in the ser- vices of the altar (xviii. 2-7). This was the nature of their service in the desert : but when they entered the land of Ca- naan, and the tabernacle ceased to be migratory, the range of their service was considerably altered. While part attended at the tabernacle, the rest were distributed through the country in the several cities which were allotted to them. These cities are commonly reckoned forty-eight; but thirteen of them were reserved for the priests, so that only thirty-five belonged to the Levites. The names of these cities, and the tribes in which they were situated, are given in Josh. xxi. 20-42 ; 1 Chron. vi. 64-81. Of the forty-eight cities six were cities of refuge for the unintentional homicide, of which one, Hebron, was a priestly city (Deut. iv. 41-43 ; Josh. xx. 2-9). In the time of David, when the number of the priests and Levites had much increased, a third and very important alteration was effected, as much, or more, with reference to the Temple, for which he made every possible preparation, as for the existing service at the Tabernacle. While the priests were divided into twenty-four courses, that they might attend the Temple in rotation weekly, and only officiate about two weeks in the year, the Levites were also divided into twenty-four courses. In the book of Chronicles we have four times twenty-four courses of Levites mentioned, but all their employments are not distinctly stated (1 Chron. xxiii. 7-23; xxiv. 20-31; xxv. 1-31 ; xxvi. 1-12). The most conspicuous clas- LEVITES. LEVITES. 211 sification is that of twenty-four courses of porters and servitors, and twenty-four of musicians. The courses of the porters and servitors are mentioned in 1 Chron. xxvi. 1-12; their different posts are stated in verses 13-16; and it would ap- pear from 1 Chron. xxvi. 17-19, that the guard of Levites for each day was twenty-four. In 1 Chron. ix. 20-31 there are some further particulars of the articles they had in charge. It is clear from all this that the porter3 were quite distinct from the singers. The office of the porters was to open and shut the doors and gates of the Temple-courts, at which they also attended throughout the day to prevent „ the entrance of any harmful or unclean person or thing (1 Chron. xxvi. 17, IS). They had also the charge of the treasure-chambers in their re- spective wards ; for we find four of the chief porters holding this trust in 1 Chron. ix. 26, and their names and the articles in their charge are given in 1 Chron. xxvi. 20-29; 2 Chron. xxxi. 12-14. Besides acting as porters and servants during the day, we learn that they were also the guards of the Temple. Minute particulars with reference to the second Temple are given by the Rabbinical and other authors, and so far as they are correct, which they seem to be in substance, they may be supposed t'.» apply equally well to the first Temple, from which they must have been in the main transmitted. Without entering into specific de- tails, it may be remarked that the whole number of guards to the Temple, at night, is stated to have been twenty-four, of whom three were priests. These are described as having been under an ■jverseer, called ' the man of the mountain of the louse.1 He went his rounds to see that the guards were at their posts : if he found any one seated who should have been standing, he said ' Peace be unto thee;' but if he found any one asleep, he struck him, and sometimes set fire to his clothes (Maimon. Beth llabech. ch. viii.). This has been thought to throw light upon Rev. xvi. 15, ' Be- hold I come as a thief; blessed is be that watcheth and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.' Bishop Lowth (on Isa. lxii. 6) supposes that Ps. cxxxiv. furnishes an example of the manner in which the watchmen of tl»e Temple acted dur- ing the night, and that the whole Psalm is nothing more than the alternate cry of the two different divisions, the first addressing the second, remind- ing them of their duty, and the second answering by a solemn blessing. First chorus. — Come on, now, bless ye Jehovah, all ye servants of Jehovah ; ye who stand in the house of Jehovah in the night; Lift up your hands towards the holy place, and bless ye Jehovah. Second chorus. — Jehovah bless thee out of Zion, He that made heaven and earth.' The bishop fin I her supposes that the address and answer constituted a set form which each division proclaimed at stated intervals to notify the time of the night; and he illustrates this view by reference to Isa. lxii. 6 — ' Upon thy walls, O Jerusalem ! have I appointed watchmen, That shall never be silent the whole day nor the whole night.1 Here, however, the allusion is obviously to the guard of the city, not of the Temple ; although VOL. II. the existence of the practice in the city may sup ply an argument for its existence in the Temple. We have thus seen that one division of the Le- vites was employed as porters during the day, and another as guards during the night : a third di- vision served as musicians. A catalogue of these is given in 1 Chron. xxi. 1-9, according to their employments ; and another, according to their courses, in 1 Chron. xxi. 9-31. We shall have to speak of Music under that head, and need only here state that on grand occasions, when a full band was formed, the family of Heman sung in the middle {1 Chron. vi. 33-38), the family of Asaph on the right hand (vi. 39-43), and the family of Ethan on the left. The ordinary place for the musicians, vocal and instrumental, was at the east end of the court of the priests, between the court of Israel and the altar. We are told, how- ever, that although the Levites were the regular ministers of sacred song, other men of skill and note, of the commonalty, especially such as were connected by marriage with the priesthood, were occasionally allowed to assist in the instrumental department, with the instruments on which they excelled; but that even these might not, on any account, join in the vocal department, which was considered the most solemn ( T. Bab. tit. Eraclrin, fol. 11; Maimon. Keb Mikdash, ch. iii.). This may help to explain or illustrate 2 Sam. vi. 5. It seems that the singers could never be under twelve, because that number was jsarticularly men- tioned at their first appointment (1 Chron xxv. 9); but there was no objection to any larger num- , ber (Erachin, ut supra). The young sons of the Levites were, on such occasions only, allowed to enter the court of the priests with their fathers, that their small voices might relieve the deep bass of the men (Ge?nar. tit. Succah, ch. v.) ; and for this authority was supposed to be found in Ezra iii. 9. The Levites were not at liberty to exercise any properly sacerdotal functions: but on extraordi- nary occasions they were permitted to assist in preparing the sacrifices, without, however, in any way concerning themselves with the blood (2 Chron. xxix. 31; xxx. 16, 17; xxxv. 1). In Num. iv. 3 the Levites are described r mencing their actual service at thirty years but in Num. viii. 24, 25, twenty-five is the age mentioned; and in 1 Chron. xxiii. 21. 25, and Ezra iii. 8, twenty. The reason of these ap- parent discrepancies is, that from twenty-five to thirty they were in the state of probationers, doing some things, but excluded from others (Aben Ezra, on Num. viii.). At thirty they became qualified for every part of the Levitical service. This was under the Tabernacle ; but when the Temple was built, and bodily strength was less required, the age was reduced to twenty. After fifty they were no longer called upon to serve as a matter of obli- gation ; but they might attend if they thought proper, and perform any usual service which was not considered burdensome. Thus, in the wilder- ness, they ceased at that age to carry any part of the burdens when the ark and Tabernacle were removed (Num. viii. 25, 26). When the Levitical body was first set apart for its sacred duties, the existing members were consecrated in the manner particularly described in Num. viii. d, 22. They, and in them their descendants, were thus inducted into their par- ticular office ; and, in later times, when any one 242 LEVITES. became of age, it was sufficient for his admission to prove that he belonged to a Levitical family, and, probably, to oiler some trifling sacrifice. It does not appear that the Levites, when at home, had any particular dress to distinguish them from their countrymen ; nor is there any positive evi- dence that they had any distinctive garb, even when on actual service at the tabernacle or temple. Josephus (Antiq. xx. 9) relates, that only six years before the destruction of the Temple by the Romans, the Levites were allowed by Agrippa to wear a linen tunic, like the priests — an innovation with which the latter were highly displeased. This shows that the dress of the Levites, even when on duty, had not previously been in any respect similar to that of the priests. The subsistence of the Levites was provided for in a peculiar manner. It consisted, first, of a compensation for the abandonment of their right to one-twelfth of the land of Canaan ; and, secondly, of a remuneration for their services in their official capacity as devoted to the services of the sanctuary. The territorial compensation lay in the 48 cities which were granted to the whole tribe, including the priests. These cities were scattered among the different tribes, as centres of instruction, and had 1000 square cubits, equal to above 305 English acres, attached to each of them, to serve for gardens, vineyards, and pasturage. It is obvious, however, that this alone could not have been an adequate compensation for the loss of one-twelfth of tiie soil, seeing that the produce of 305 acres could not in any case have sufficed for the wants of the inhabitants of these cities. The further provision, therefore, which was made for them must be regarded as partly in compen- sation for their sacrifice of territory, although we are disposed to look upon it as primarily intended as a remuneration for the dedication of their services to the public. This provision consisted of the tithe, or tenth of the produce of the grounds allotted to the other tribes. The simplest view of this payment is to regard it, first, as the pro- duce of about as much land as the Levites would have been entitled to if placed on the same footing with regard to territory as the other tribes ; and also as the produce of so much more land, which the other tribes enjoyed in consequence of its not having been assigned to the tribe of Levi. In giving the produce of this land to the Levites the Israelites were therefore to be regarded as simply releasing them from the cares of agriculture, to enable them to devote themselves to the service of the sanctuary. The land which produced the tithe was just so much land held by the other tribes in their behalf; and the labour of cultivating this land was the salary paid to the Levites for their official services. The tenth was paid to the whole tribe of Levi ; but as the Levites had to give out of this one-tenth to the priests, their own allow- ance was only nine-tenths of the tenth. A more particular account of tithes belongs to another head [Tithes]. The Levites had also a certain interest in the ' second tithe,' being the portion which, after the first tithe had been paid, the cultivator set apart for hospitable feasts, which were held at the place of the sanctuary in two out of three years, but in the third year at home. This interest, however, extended no further than that the offerer was particularly enjoined to invite the priests and Levites to such feasts. LEVITES. The earliest notice we have of the numbers o7 the Levites occurs at their first separation in the desert, when there were 22,300, of a month old and upwards ; of whom 8580 were fit for service. or between the ages of 30 and 50 (Num. iii. 22, 28, 34 ; iv. 2, 34-49). Thirty-eight years after, just before the Israelites entered Canaan, they had increased to 23,000, not one of whom had been born at the time of the former enumeration (Num. xxvi. 57, 62-65). About 460 years after the entry into Canaan (b.c. 1015) they were again numbered by David, a little before his death, and were found to have increased to 38,000 men fit for Levitical service — of whom 24,000 were ' set over the work of the Lord,' 6000 were officers and judges, 4000 were porters, and 4000 were musicians (1 Chron. xxiii. 3, 4, 5). If the same proportion then existed between those come of age and those a month old which existed when the tribe quitted Egypt, the entire number of the Levitical body, in the time of David, must have been 96,433. After the revolt of the ten tribes, those of the Levites who resided in the territories of those tribes, having resisted the request of Jeroboam to transfer their services to his idolatrous^establish- ments at Dan and Bethel, were obliged to abandon their possessions and join their brethren in Judah and Benjamin (2 Chron. xi. 12, 13, 14; xiii. 9); and this concentration of the Levitical body in the kingdom of Judah must have had an impor- tant influence upon its condition and history. That kingdom thus actually consisted of three tribes — Judah, Benjamin, and Levi, — of which one was devoted to sacerdotal uses. This altered position of the Levites — after they had been de- jjrived of most of their cities, and the tithes from ten of the tribes were cut off — presents a subject for much interesting investigation, into which we cannot enter. Their means must have been much reduced; for it cannot be supposed that Judah and Benjamin alone were able, even if willing, to un- dertake the support of the whole Levitical body on the same scale as when the dues of all Israel flowed into its treasuries. In the subsequent his- tory of Judah the Levites appear less frequently than might have been expected. The chief public measure in which they were engaged was the restoration of the house of David in the person of young Joash (2 Chron. xxiii. 1-11); which may be regarded as mainly the work of the Le- vitical body, including the priests. Under the edict of Cyrus, only 341 Levites, according to Ezra (ii. 40-42), or 350, according to Nehemiah (vii. 43-45), returned with Zerub- babel to Jerusalem. This is less surprising than might at first sight appear ; for if, before the cap- tivity, the great body of them had been in strait- ened circumstances and without fixed possessions in Judah, it was only consistent with human pru- dence that those who had, in all probability, com- fortably settled themselves in Babylon, should not be anxious to return in such numbers to Pa- lestine as were likely to produce similar effects. A few more are mentioned in Neb., xii. 24-20. Those who did return seem to have had no very correct notion of their obligations and duties ; for there were many who formed matrimonial alli- ances with the idolaters of the land, and thereby corrupted both their morals and genealogies. But they were prevailed upon to reform this abuse ; LEVITES. and, as a token of obedience, signed the national covenant with Nehemiah, and abode at Jerusalem to influence others bv their authority and ex- ample (Neb. x. 9-13; xi. 15-19). The Levites are not mentioned in the Apocry- phal books, and very slightly in the New Testa- ment (Luke x. 32; John i. 19; Acts iv. 36) ; but the ' scribes ' and the ' lawyers,' so often named in the Gospels, are usually supposed to have belonged to them. It would be taking a very narrow view of the duties of the Levitical body if we regarded them as limited to their services at the sanctuary. On the contrary, we see in their establishment a pro- vision for the religious and moral instruction of the great body of the people, which no ancient lawgiver except Moses ever thought of attending to. But that this was one principal object for which a twelfth of the population — the tribe of Levi — was set apart, is clearly intimated in Deut. xxxii. 9, 10 : 'They shall teach Jacob thy judg- ments and Israel thy law; they shall put incense before thee, and whole burnt sacrifice upon thine altar.' They were to read the volume of the law publicly every seventh year at the Feast of Taber- nacles (Deut. xxxi. 10-13). 'This public and solemn periodical instruction,' observes Dean Graves (Lectures, p. 170), ' though eminently useful, was certainly not the entire of their duty ; they were bound from the spirit of this ordinance to take care that at all times the aged should be improved and the children instructed in the knowledge and fear of God, the adoration of his majesty, and the observance of his law ; and for this purpose the peculiar situation aud privileges of the tribe of Levi, as regulated by the divine appointment, admirably fitted them. Possessed of no landed property, and supported by the tithes and offerings which they received in kind, they were little occupied with labour or secular cure ; deriving their maintenance from a source which would necessarily fail if the worship of God were neglected, ihey were deeply interested in their support. Their cities being dispersed through all the tribes, and their families permitted to inter- man y with all, they were everywhere at hand to admonish and instruct ; exclusively possessed of the high-priesthood, as well as of all other reli- gious offices, and associated with the high-priest and judge in the supreme court of judicature, and with the elders of every city in the inferior tri- bunals, and guardians of the cities of refuge, where those who were guilty of homicide (led for an asylum, they must have acquired such influ- ence and reverence among the people as were ne- cessary to secure attention to their instructions ; and they were led to study the rules of moral conduct, the principle's of equity, and, above all, the Mosaic code, with unceasing attention ; but they were not laid under any vows of celibacy, or monastic austerity and retirement, and thus abstracted from the intercourse and feelings of social life. Thus circumstanced, they were as- suredly well calculated to answer the purpose of their institution, to preserve and consolidate the union of all the other tribes, and to instruct and forward the poor in knowledge, virtue, .and piety ' (Lectures, pp. 169-171 ; Brown's Antiquities, i. 301-347; Godwyn's Moses and Aaron, i. 5; Witsius, Dissert. 11. da Theocrat. Israelitar. add. Goodwiui Moses et Aaron; Jennings, An- levtticus. 243 tiquities, pp. 1 84-206 ; Carpzov, Apparat Crit. see Index ; Saubert, Comm. de Sacerdot. et Sacris Ilcebr. personis, Opp. p. 283, sqq. ; Gramberg, Iwit. Gesch. cler Religionsideen des Alien Test. vol. i. c. 3). LEVITICUS, in the Hebrew canon, is called ^"Ji?^! and is the third book of Moses. Contents. — Leviticus contains the further statement and development of the Sinaitic legis- lation, the beginnings of which are described in Exodus. It exhibits the historical progress of this legislation ; consequently we must not expect to find the laws detailed in it in a systematic form. There is, nevertheless, a certain order observed, which arose from the nature of the sub- ject, and of which the plan may easily be per- ceived. The whole is intimately connected with the contents of Exodus, at the conclusion of which book that sanctuary is described with which all external worship was connected (Exod. xxxv.- xl.). Leviticus begins by describing the worship itself. First are stated the laws concerning sacri- fices (ch. i.-vii.). In this section is first described the general quality of the sacrifices, which are divided into bloody and unbloody ; secondly, their aim and object, according to which they are either thank-offerings or sin-offerings; and lastly, the time, flace, and manner in which they should be made. Then follows a description of the manner ir. which Aaron and his sons were consecrated as priests, and how, by the manifestation of the, divine glory, they were ordained to be mediators between God aud his people (ch. viii.-ix.). As formerly the ingratitude of the people had been severely punished (Exod. xxxii. sq.), so now the disobedience of the priests was visited with signal marks of the divine displeasure (Lev. x.). On this occasion were given several laws concerning the requisites of the sacerdotal office. The theocratical sanctity of the nation was intimately connected with the existence of the sanctuary. Every subject, indeed, connected with ttie sanctuary was intended to uphold a strict separation between holy and unholy things. The whole theocratical life was based on a strict separation of things unclean from things clean, which alone were offered to God and might ap- proach the sanctuary. The whole creation, and especially all animal life, should, like man him- self, bear testimony to the defilement resulting from sin, and to its opposite, viz. the holiness of the Lord (ch. xi.-xv.). The great feast of atonement formed, as it were, the central point, of the national sanctity, this feast being appointed to reconcile the whole people to God, and to purify the sanctuary itself. All preceding institutions, all sacrifices and puri- fications, receive their completion in the great feast of Israel's atonement (ch. xvi.). Thus we have seen that the sanctuary was made the positive central point of the whole nation, or of national holiness; but it was to be inculcated negatively also, that all worship should be connected with the sanctuary, and that no sacrifices should be offered elsewhere, lest any pagan abuses should thereby strike root again (ch. xvii.). The danger of deserting Jehovah and his wor- ship would be increased after the conquest of b2 2U LEVITICUS. Canaan, when the Israelites should inhabit a country surrounded by pagans. The following chapters (xviii.-xx.) refer to the very important relation in which Israel stood to the surrounding tribes, and the positive motive for separating them from all other nations ; to the necessity of extirpating the Canaanites % and to the whole posi- tion which the people of the Lord should occupy with reference to paganism.. Chapter xviii. begins with the description of those crimes into which the people might easily be misled by (he influence of their pagan neighbours, viz. fornication, con- tempt of parents, idolatry, &c. The priests were specially appointed to lead the nation by their good example scrupulously to avoid every thing pagan and unclean, and thus to testify their faithful allegiance to Jehovah (ch. xxi.-xxii. 18). It is particularly inculcated that the sacrifices should be without blemish ; and this is made a means of separating the Israel- ites from all pagan associations and customs (ch. xxii. 17-33). But the strongest bulwark erected against pagan encroachments was the appoint- ment of solemn religious meetings, in which the' attention of the people was directed to the central point of national religion, and which theocra- tically consecrated their whole proceedings to the worship of God. This was the object of the laws relating to fasts (ch. xxiii.). These laws divided the year into sacred sections, and gave to agri- cultural life its bearing upon the history of the works of God, and its peculiarly theocratic cha- racter, in contradistinction to all pagan worship, which is merely bent upon the symbolisation of the vital powers of nature. In ch. xxiv. 1-9 follows the law concerning the preparation of the sacred oil, and the due setting forth of the shew-bread. Although this is in con- nection with ch. xxii. 17, sq., it is nevertheless judiciously placed after ch. xxiii., because it refers to the agricultural relation of the Israelites to Jehovah stated in that chapter. The Mosaical legislation is throughout illustrated by facts, and its power and significance are exhibited in the manner hi which it subdues all subjective arbi- trary opposition. So the opposition of the law to paganism, and the evil consequences of every approach to pagans, are illustrated by the history of a man who sprang from a mixed marriage, who cursed Jehovah, and was stoned as Jehovah directed (ch. xxiv. 10-24). The insertion of this fact in its chronological place slightly interrupts the order of the legal de- finitions. The law concerning the Sabbath and the year of Jubilee, which follow it, are intimately connected with the laws which precede. For the Sabbatical law completes the declaration that Jehovah is the real proprietor and landlord of Canaan, to whom belong both the territory and its inhabitants ; and whose right is opposed to all occupation of the country by heatheas (ch. xxv.). This section is concluded with the fundamental position of the law, viz. that Jehovah, the only true and living God, will bless his faithful people who heartily keep his law; and will curse all who despise him and transgress his law (ch. xxvi.). After it has thus been explained how the people might be considered to be the owners of the country, there appropriately follows the law concerning several possessions which were more exclusively consecrated to Jehovah, or which, like LEVITICUS. the first-born, belonged to him without being specially offered. The whole concludes with an appendix embracing the law concerning vows and tithes, with a manifest reference to the pre- ceding parts of the legislation (ch. xxvii. 17-24). Authenticity. — The arguments by which the unity of Leviticus has been attacked are very feeble. Some critics, however, such as De Wette, Gramberg, Vatke, and others, have strenuously- endeavoured to prove that the laws contained in Leviticus originated in a period much later than is usually supposed. But the following observations sufficiently support their Mosaical origin, and show that the whole of Leviticus is historically genuine. The laws in ch. i.-vii. con- tain manifest vestiges of the Mosaical period. Here, as well as in Exodus, when the priests are mentioned, Aaron and his sons are named ; as, for instance, in ch. i. 4, 7, 8, 11, &c. The taber- nacle is the sanctuary, and no other place of wor- ship is mentioned anywhere. Expressions like the following constantly occur, TJJID ^TIS 'OB'?, before the tabernacle of the congregation, of TJJ11D PHN nna, the door of the tabernacle of the congregation (ch. i. 3: iii. 8, 13, &c.). The Israelites are always described as a congregation (ch. iv. 13, sq.), under the command of the mj?n "Opt, elders of the congregation (ch. iv. 15), or of a NTO, rider (ch. iv. 22). Every thing has a reference to life in a camp, and that camp commanded by Moses (ch. iv. 12, 21; vi. 11; xiv. 8; xvi. 26, 28). A later writer could scarcely have placed himself so entirely in the times, and so completely adopted the modes of thinking of the age, of Moses : especially if, as has been asserted, these laws gradually sprung from the -usages of the people, and were written down at a later period with the object of sanction- ing them by the authority of Moses. They so entirely befit the Mosaical age, that, in order to adapt them to the requirements of any later pe- riod, they nrast have undergone some modifica- tion, accommodation, and a peculiar mode of in- terpretation. This inconvenience would have been avoided by a person who intended to forge laws in favour of the later modes of Levitical worship. A forger would have endeavoured to identify the past as much as possible with the present. The section in ch. viii.-x. is said to have a mythical colouring. This assertion is grounded on the miracle narrated in ch. ix. 24. But what could have been the inducement to forge this section ? It is said that the priests invented it in order to support the authority of the sacerdotal caste by the solemn ceremony of Aaron's con- secration. But to such an intention the nar- ration of the crime committed by Nadab and Abibu is strikingly opposed. Even Aaron him- self here appears to be rather remiss in the ob- servance of the law (comp. x. 16, sq., with iv. 22, sq.). Hence it would seem that the forgery- arose from an opposite or anti-hierarchical ten- dency. The fiction would thus appear to have been contrived without any motive which could account for its origin. In ch. xvii. occurs the law which forbids the slaughter of any beast except at the sanctuary. This law could not be strictly kept in Palestine, and had therefore to undergo some modification (Deut. xii.). Our opponents cannot show any LIBANUS. rational inducement for contriving such a fiction. The law (ch. xvii. 6, 7) is adapted to the nation only while emigrating from Egypt. It was the ob- ject of this law to guard the Israelites from, falling into the temptation to imitate the Egyptian rites and sacrifices offered to he-goats, t^TJ/K' ; which word signifies a'lso demons represented under the form of he-goats, and which were supposed to inhabit the desert (comp. Jablonsky, Pantheon JEgyptiacum, i. 272, sq.). The laws concerning food and purifications ap- pear especially important if we remember that the people emigrated from Egypt. The fundamental principle of these laws is undoubtedly Mosaical, but in the individual application of them there is much which strongly reminds us of Egypt. This is also the case in Lev. xviii. sq., where the lawgiver has manifestly in view the two op- posites, Canaan and Egypt. That the lawgiver was intimately acquainted with Egypt, is proved by such remarks as those about the Egyptian mar- riages with sisters (ch. xviii. 3) ; a custom which stands as an exception among the prevailing habits of antiquity (Diodorus Siculus, i. OH ; Pausa- nias, Attica, i. 7). The book of Leviticus has a prophetical cha- racter. The lawgiver represents to himself the future history of his people. This prophetical character is especially manifest in chs. xxv., xxvi., where the law appears in a truly sublime and di- vine attitude, and when its predictions refer to the whole futurity of the nation. It is impossible to say that these were vaticinia ex eventu, unless we would assert that this book was written at the close of Israelitish history. We must rather grant that passages like this are the real basis on which the authority of later prophets is chiefly built. Such passages prove also, in a striking manner, that the lawgiver had not merely an external aim, but that his law had a deeper purpose, which was clearly understood by Moses himself. That purpose was to regulate the national life in all its bearings, and to consecrate the whole nation to God. See espe- cially ch. xxv. 18, sq. But this ideal tendency of the law does not preclude its applicability to matters of fact. The law bad not merely an ideal, but also a rra2 cha- racter, evidenced by its relation to the faithlessness and disobedience of the nation. The whole future history of the covenant people was regulated by the law, which has manifested its eternal power and truth in the history of the people of Israel. Although this section has a general bearing, it is nevertheless manifest that it originated in the times of Moses. At a later period, for instance, it would have been impracticable to promulgate the law concerning the Sabbath and the year of Jubilee : for it was soon sufficiently proved how far the nation in reality remained behind the ideal Israel of the law. The sabbatical law bears the impress of a time when the whole legislation, in its fulness and glory, was directly communi- cated to the people, in such a manner as to attract, penetrate, and command. The principal works to be consulted with re- ference to Leviticus will be found under the article Pentateuch. — H. A. C. H. LIBANUS, or LEBANON (JUrt? ; Sept. Aifiavos), the Latin, or rather the Greek name of a long chain of mountains on the northern border LIBANUS. 245 of Palestine. The term Libanus is more con- venient in use than the Hebrew form Lebanon, as enabling us to distinguish the parallel ranges of Libanus and Anti-Libanus, which have no such distinctive names in connection with the Hebrew designation. Lebanon seems to be ap- plied in Scripture to either or both of these ranges ; and we shall also use it in this general sense : but Libanus means distinctively the westernmost of those ranges, which faces the Mediterranean, and Anti-Libanus the eastern, facing the plain of Da- mascus ; in which sense these names will be used in this article. The present inhabitants of the country have found the convenience of distin- guishing these parallel ranges ; and give to Li- banus the name of ' Western Mountain ' (Jebel esh-Sharki), and to Anti-Libanus that of ( Eastern Mountain ' (Jebel el-Gharbi) ; although Jebel Libnan (the same name in fact as Lebanon) occurs among the Arabs with special reference to the eastern range. These two great ranges, which together form the Lebanon of Scripture, commence about the parallel of Tripoli (lat. 34° 2&), run in a genera] direction from N.E. to S.W., through about one degree of latitude, and form, at their southern termination, the natural frontier of Palestine. These parallel ranges enclose be- tween them a fertile and well-watered valley, averaging about fifteen miles in width, which is the Ccele-Syria (Hollow Syria) of the ancients, but is called by the present inhabitants, by way of pre-eminence, El-Bekaa, or ' tl>e Valley,1 which is watered through the greater portion of its length by the river Litany, the ancient Leontes. Nearly opposite Damascus the Anti-Libanus separates into two ridges, which diverge some- what, and enclose the fertile Wady et-Teim. The easternmost of these two ridges, which has already been pointed out as the Hermon of Scrip- ture [Hermon], Jebel esh-Sheikh, continues its S.W. course, and is the proper prolongation of Anti-Libanus. From the base of the higher part of this ridge, a low broad spur or mountainous tract runs off towards the south, forming the high land which shuts in the basin and Lake of el-Huleh on the east. This tract is called Jebel Heish, the higher portion of which terminates at Tel el-Faras, nearly three hours north of Fiek. The other ridge of Anti-Libanus takes a more westerly direction. It is long, low, and level ; and continues to border the lower part of the great valley of Bekaa, until it seems to unite with the higher bluffs and spurs of Lebanon, and thus entirely to close that valley. In fact, only a narrow gorge is here left between precipices, in some places of great height, through which the Litany finds its way down to the sea, north of Tyre. The chain of Lebanon, or at least its higher ridges, may be said to terminate at the point where it is thus broken through by the Litany. But a broad and lower mountainous tract continues towards the south, bordering the basin of the Huleh on the west. It rises to its greatest elevation about Safed (Jebel Safed) ; and at length ends abruptly in the mountains of Nazareth, as the northern wall of the plain of Esdraelon. This high tract may very properly be regarded as a prolongation of Lebanon. The mountains of Lebanon are of limestone rock, which is indeed the general constituent of 243 LIBANUS. the mountains of Syria. In Lebanon it has generally a whitish hue, and from the aspect which the range thus bears in the distance, in its cliffs and naked parts, the name of Lebanon (which signifies 'white') has been supposed to be derived ; but others seek its origin in the snows which rest long upon its summits, and perpetu- ally upon the highest of them. Of the two ranges, that of Libanus is by far the highest. Its uppermost ridge is marked by a line, drawn at the distance of about two hours' journey from the summit, above which all is barren (Burckhardt, p. 4) : but the slopes and valleys below this line afford pasturage, and are capable of cultivation, by reason of the nume- rous springs which are met with in all directions. Cultivation is, however, chiefly found on the sea- ward slopes, where numerous villages flourish, and every inch of ground is turned to account by the industrious natives, who, in the absence of natural levels, construct artificial terraces in order to prevent the earth from being swept away by the winter rains, and at the same time to retain the water requisite for the irrigation of the crops (Burckhardt, pp. 19, 20, 23). When one looks upward from below, the vegetation on these terraces is not visible ; so that the whole moun- tain appears as if composed only of immense rugged masses of naked whitish rock, traversed by deep wild ravines, running down precipitously to the plain. No one would suspect among these rocks the existence of a vast multitude of thrifty villages, and a numerous population of mountaineers, hardy, industrious, and brave (Robinson, iii. 440). Here, amidst the crags of the rocks, are to be seen the remains of the re- nowned cedars ; but a much larger proportion of firs, oaks, brambles, mulberry-trees, fig-trees, and vines (Volney, i. 272). Although the general elevation of Anti-Libanus is inferior to that of Libanus, the easternmost of the branches into which it divides towards its termination (Jebel esh-Sheikh) rises loftily, and overtops all the other summits of Lebanon. Our information respecting Anti-Libanus is less dis- tinct than that concerning the opposite range. It appears, however, that it has fewer inhabitants, and is scarcely in any part cultivated. It is, in- deed, not equally cultivable : for it would appear from a comparison of the dispersed notices in Burckhardt, that its western declivities, towards the great enclosed valley, are completely barren, without trees or pasture ; but on the summits of the eastern side, fronting the plain of Damascus, there seem to be parts, at least, affording good pasturage, and abounding also in stunted oak trees, of which few are higher than 12 or 15 feet. The common route across these mountains, from Baalbec to Damascus, at one time ascends into the region of snow (in the month of March) ; at another follows the direction of the mountain torrents, between parallel lines of hills, by the side of aspens, oaks, and numerous willows which grow along the water-courses fBurckhardt, pp. 4, 15 ; Elliot, ii. 276). None of the summits of Libanus or Anti- Libanus have been measured. The author of the Pictorial History of Palestine (Introduct. p. lv.), by comparing the accounts of different travellers as to the continuance of snow upon the higher summits, and adjusting them with reference to LIBERTINES. the point of perpetual congelation in that latitude, forms a rough estimate, which, though higher than some estimates more loosely constructed, and lower than others, is probably not far from the truth. Ac- cording to this, the average height of the Libanus mountains, from the top of which the snow en- tirely disappears in summer, must be consider- ably below 11,000 feet, probably about 10,000 feet above the level of the sea. But the higher points, particularly the Sannin, which is the highest of all, must be above that limit, as the snow rests on them all the year. By the same rule the average height of the Anti-Libanus range is reckoned as not exceeding 9000 feet : but its highest point, in the Jebel es-Sheik, or Mount Hermon, is considered to be somewhat more lofty than the Sannin, the highest point in Libanus. In Scripture Lebanon is very generally men- tioned in connection with the cedar bees in which it abounded [Eres] ; but its wines are also noticed (Hosea xiv. 8); and in Cant. iv. 11: Hos. xiv. 7, it is celebrated for various kinds of fragrant plants fRobinson, Biblical Researches, iii. 344, 34-% 439 ; Kitto, Pictorial History of Palestine, Introd. pp. xxxii.-xxxv., lv. ; Reland, Palcestina, i. 311 ; Rosenmiiller, Biblisch. Alter- ihum,\\. 236; Raumer, Palastina, pp. 29-35; D'Arvieux, M'cmoires, ii. 250 ; Volney, Voyage en Syrie, i. 243 ; Seetzen, in Zach's Monatl. Corresp., June, 1806 ; Burckhardt, Travels in Syria, p. 1, sq. ; Richter, WaUfahrten, p. 102, &c. ; Irby and Mangles, Travels, pp. 206-220 ; Buckingham, Arab Tribes, p. 468, sq. ; Fisk, in Missionary Herald, 1824 ; Elliot, Travels, ii. 276 ; Hogg, Visit to Alexandria, Jerusalem, &c, i. 219, sq. ; ii. 81, sq. ; Addison, Palmyra and Damascus, ii. 43-82). LIBERTINES (Kifeprhoi). ' Certain of the synagogue, which is called (the synagogue) of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians.' &c, are mentioned in Acts vi. 9. There has been much diversity in the interpretation of this word. It obviously denotes state or con- dition, not nature (i. e. country) ; and smce Libertini here occurs among the names of na- tions, and Josephus (Antiq. xii. 1, and C'ont. Apion. ii. 4) has >old us that many Jews were removed by Ptolemy, and placed in the cities of Libya, Beza. Le Clerc, and others conclude that the word must have been Aifivcrricov, i. e. ' sprung from Libya.' But there is no authority of MSS. or versions for this reading. Others, on the same premises, conceive that the word Liber- tini denotes the inhabitants of some town called Libertus in Africa Proper, or Carthage ; but they fail to show that any town of this name existed in that quarter. The most probable opinion, and that which is now generally entertained, is, that the Libertini were Jews, whom the Romans had taken in war and conveyed to Rome, but after- wards freed ; and that this synagogue had been built at their expense. Libertini is, therefore, to be regarded as a word of Roman origin, and to be explained with reference to Roman customs. This view is further confirmed by the fact that the word o-wayaiyrjs does not 'occur in the middle of the national names, but stands first, and is followed by ttjs \eyofj.€vr}s : whence it clearly appears that AtfieprTvoi is at least not the name of a country or region. Further, we know that there were in the time of Tiberius many LIBNAH. libertini, or ' freed-men,' of the Jewish religion at Rome (Tacit. Annul, ii. 85 ; comp. Suet. Tib. 36 ; and Philo, p. 1014; see Bloomfield, Kuinoel, Wetstein, &c. on Acts vi. 9 ; and comp. Gerdes, De Synag. Libertinorum, Gron. 1 736 ; Scherer, De Synag. Libertin. Argent. 1754). LIBNAH (nn^5 ; Sept. Ae/3i>d), one of the royal cities of the Canaanites, taken by Joshua immediately after Makkedah (Josh. x. 20, 30). It lay within the territory assigned to Judah (Josh, xv. 42), and became one of the Levitical towns in that tribe (Josh. xxi. 13; 1 Chron. vi. 57). It was a strongly fortified place. The Assyrian king Sennacherib was detained some time before it when he invaded Judaea in the time of Heze- kiah ; and it was before it that he sustained that dreadful stroke which constrained him to with- draw to his own country (2 Kings xix. 8 ; Isa. xxxvii. 8). In the reign of King Jehoram, Libnah is said to have revolted from him (2 Kings viii. 22; 2 Chron. xxi. 10). From the circumstance of this revolt having happened at the same time with that of the Edomites, it has been supposed by some to have reference to another town of the same name situated in that country. But such a conjecture is unne- cessary and improbable. Libnah of Judah re- belled, because it refused to admit the idolatries of Jehoram ; and it is not said in either of the passages in which this act is recorded, a3 of Edom, that it continued in revolt ' unto this day.' It may be inferred either that it was speedily reduced to obedience, or' that, on the re- establishment of the true worship, it spontaneously returned to its allegiance. Libnah existed as a village in the time of Eusebius and Jerome, and is placed by them in the district of Eleuthe- ropolis. LIBNATH, or, more fully, Shihor-Libnath (71357 "irW; Sept. AafravaQ), a stream near Carmel, on the borders of Asher (Josh. xix. 26). Michaelis conceives this to be the 'glass-river' (H3J?), i. e. the Belus, from whose sands the first glass was made by the Phoenicians. LIBNEH (flJl?) occurs in two places of Scripture, viz. Gen. xxx. 37; Hos. iv. 13, and is supposed to indicate either the white poplar or the storax tree. The arguments in support of the respective claims of these are neaily equally balanced, although those in favour of the storax appear to us to preponderate. The libneh is first mentioned in Gen. xxx. 37, as one of the rods which Jacob placed in the watering troughs of the sheep ; the hits (the almond) and armon (the oriental plane) being the two others : he ' pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods.' In Hos. iv. 13 reference is made to the shade of trees and the burning of incense : — ' They sacrifice upon the top of the mountains, and burn incense upon the hills, under oaks gallon, 'terebinth tree') and poplars (libneh), because the shadow of them is good.' Libneh, in the passage of Hosea, is translated AevKV, ' white poplar,' in the Septuagint, and this translation is adopted by the majority of inter- preters. The Hebrew name libneh, being sup- posed to be derived from \1? (album esse), has been considered identical with the Greek XevKv, LIBNEH. 247 which both signifies 'white,' and also the 'white poplar,' Populus alba. This poplar is said to be called xohite, not on account of the whiteness of its bark, but of that of the under surface of its leaves. It may perhaps be so designated from the whiteness of its hairy seeds, which have a re- markable appearance when the seed covering first bursts. The poplar is certainly common in the countries where the scenes are laid of the transac- tions related in the above passages of Scripture. Belon (Obs. ii. 106) says, ' Lespeupliersblancset noirs, et arbres fruictiers font que la plaine de Damas resemble une forest.' Rauwolf also men- tions the white poplar as abundant about Aleppo and Tripoli, and still called by the ancient Arabic name hater or hor ( i%5"-)> which is the word used in the Arabic translation of Hosea. That poplars are common in Syria has already been men- tioned under the head of Baca. Others, however, have been of opinion that libneh denotes the storax tree rather than the white poplar. Thus, in Gen. xxx. 37, the Sep- tuagint has paPSov arvpaKivriv, ' a rod of styrax ;' and the Greek translation of the Pentateuch, ac- cording to Rosenmiiller, is more ancient and of far greater authority than that of Hosea. So R. Jonah, as translated by Celsius, says of libneh, Dicitur lingua Arabum Lubna ; and in the Arabic trans- lation of Genesis ( <-i.-J) lubne is employed as the representative of the Hebrew libneh. Lubne, both in Arabic and in Persian, is the name of a tree, and of the fragrant resin employed for fumigating, which exudes from it, and which is commonly known by the name of Storax. This resin was well known to the ancients, and is mentioned by Hip- pocrates and Theophrastus. Dioscorides describes several kinds, all of which were obtained from Asia Minor; and all that is now imported is believed to be the produce of that country. But the free is cultivated in the south of Europe, though it does not there yield any storax. It is found in Greece, and is supposed to be a native of Asia Minor, whence it extends into Syria, and pro- bably farther south. It is therefore a native of the country which was the scene of the transaction related in the above passage of Genesis. From the description of Dioscorides, and his 248 LIBYA. comparing the leaves of the styrax to those of the quince, there is no doubt of the same tree being intended : especially as in early times, as at the present day, it yielded a highly fragrant balsamic substance which was esteemed as a medicine, and employed in fumigation. From the simi- larity of the Hebrew name libneh to the Arabic labne, and from the Septuagint having in Genesis translated the former by styrax, it seems most probable that this was the tree intended. It is capable of yielding white wands as well as the poplar ; and it is also well qualified to afford com- plete shade under its ample foliage, as in the passage of Hos. iv. 13. We may also suppose it to have been more particularly alluded to, from its being a tree yielding incense. ' They sacrifice upon the tops of the mountains, and burn incense upon the hills, under the terebinth and the storax trees, because the shadow thereof is good.'- — J. F. R. LIBYA (Aifiva, Aipvy). This name, in its largest acceptation, was used by the Greeks to denote the whole of Africa. But Libya Proper, which is the Libya of the 'New Testament and the country of the Lubim in the Old, was a large tract, lying along the Mediterranean, to the west of Egypt. It is called Pentapolitana Regio by Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 5), from its five cities, Berenice, Arsinoe, Ptolemais, Apollonia, and Gyrene; and Libya Cyrenaica by Ptolemy (Geoff, iv. 5), from Gyrene, its capital. Libya is supposed to have been first peopled by, and to have derived its name from, tiie Lehabim or Lubim [Nations, Dispersion of]. These, its earliest inhabitants, appear, in the time of the Old Testament, to have consisted of wan- dering tribes, who were sometimes in alliance with Egypt, and at others with the Ethiopians, as they are said to have assisted both Shishak, king of Egypt, and Zerah the Ethiopian in their expeditions against Judaea (2 Chron. xii. 4 ; xiv. 8 ; xvi. 9). They were eventually subdued by the Carthaginians ; and it was the policy of that people to bring the nomade tribes of Northern Africa which they mastered into the condition of cultivators, that by the" produce of their industry they might be able to raise and maintain the numerous armies with which they made their foreign conquests. But Herodotus assures us that none of the Libyans beyond the Carthaginian ter- ritory were tillers of the ground (Herod, iv. 186, 187; comp. Polybius, i. 161, 167, 168, 177, ed. Schweighseuser). Since the time of the Car- thaginian supremacy the country, with the rest of the East, has successively passed into the hands of the Greeks, Romans, Saracens, and Turks. The name of Libya occurs in Acts ii. 10, where ' the dwellers in the parts of Libya about Gy- rene ' are mentioned among the stranger Jews who came up to Jerusalem at the feast of Pen- tecost. LICE (Q33 and D^S) occurs in Exod. viii. 16, 17, 18 (Heb. 12, 13, 14); Ps. cv. 31; Sept. o~Kvi(pes or (TKpiires; Vulg. cyniphes and scyniphes ; Wisd. xix. 10 ; Sept. cncviira (Alex. Aid. o~KviAou /xiKpa inrb robs ndivamas, ' less than gnats,' and (Lex. Cyrilli, MS. Brem.) aicvicpts favrpid icrnv ioiKora Kc&vwty'.v, ' very small creatures like gnats.' From this concur- rence of testimony it would appear that, not lice, but some species of gnats is the proper rendering, though the ancients, no doubt, included other species of insects under the name. Mr. Bryant, however, gives a curious turn to the evidence derived from ancient naturalists. He quotes Theophrastus, and admits that a Greek must be the best judge of the meaning of the Greek word but urges that the Septuagint translators concealed the meaning of the Hebrew word, which he labours to prove is lice, under the word they have adopted, for fear of offending the Ptolemies, under whose inspection they translated, and the Egyptians in general, whose detestation of lice was as ancient as the time of Herodotus (ii. 37), (but who includes r\ aWo /xvcrapou, ' any other foul creature'), and whose disgust, he thinks, would have been too much excited by reading that their nation once swarmed with those crea- tures through the instrumentality of the servants of the God of the Jews (Plagues of Egypt, Lond. 1794, p. 56, &c). This suspicion, if admitted, upsets all the previous reasoning. It is also in- consistent with Bryant's favourite hypothesis, that the plagues of Egypt were so adajjted as to afford a practical mortification of the prejudices of the Egyptians. Nor could a plague of lice, upon his own principles, have been more offensive to them than the plague on the river Nile, and the frogs, &c, which he endeavours to show were most signally opposed to their religious notions. Might it not be suggested with equal probability that the Jews in later ages had been led to in- terpret the word lice as being peculiarly humi- liating to the Egyptians? (see Joseph, ii. 14. 3, who, however, makes the Egyptians afflicted with phthiriasis.) The rendering of the Vulgate af- fords us no assistance, being evidently formed from that of the Septuagint, and not being illus- trated by any Roman naturalist, but found only in Christian Latin writers (see Facciolati, in voc.p The other ancient versions, &c, are of no value in this inquiry. They adopt the popular notion of the times, and Bochart's reasonings upon them involve, as Rosenmuller (apud Boc- hart) justly complains, many unsafe permuta- tions of letters. If, then, the Septuagint be dis- carded, we are deprived of the highest source of information. Bochart also reasons upon the similarity of the word 0^3 to i<.6vi8es, the word in Aristotle for the eggs of fleas, lice, bugs, &c, whelher infesting mankind or beasts (vi. 26), but which is not more like it than Kuivanres ; and an enthusiast in etymology might remark that /coViSes means both 'dust' and 'lice,' which Scaliger explains lendes, ' nits,' ab exiguitate similes pul- veri, ' from their minuteness, like dust' (p. 518). It is strange that it did not occur to Bochart that. if the plague had been lice, it would have been easily imitated by the magicians, which was attempted by them, but in vain (Exod. viii. 18). Nor is the objection valid, that if this plague were gnats, &c, the plague of Hies would lie antici- pated, since the latter most likely consisted of one particular species having a different desti- nation [Fly] ; whereas this may have consisted of not only mosquitoes or gnats, but of some other LIGHT. 249 species which also attack domestic cattle, as the oestrus, or tabanus, or zimb (Brace's Trowels, ii. 315, 8vo.) ; on which supposition these two plagues would be sufficiently distinct. But since mosquitoes, gnats, &c, have ever been one of the evils of Egypt, there must have been some peculiarity attending them on this occasion, which proved the plague to be ' the finger of God.' From the next chapter, verse 31, it appears that the flax and the barley were smitten by the hail ; that the former was beginning to grow, and that the latter was in the ear — which, according to Shaw, takes place in Egypt in March. Hence the D^3 would be sent' about February, i. e. before the increase of the Nile, which takes jjlace at the end of May, or beginning of June. Since, then, the innumerable swarms of mosquitoes, gnats, &c, which every year affect the Egyptians come, according - to Hasselquist, at the increase of the Nile, the appearance of them in February would be as much a variation of the course of nature as the appearance of the oestrus in January would be in England. They were also probably numerous and fierce beyond example on this occasion ; and as the Egyptians would be utterly unprepared for them (for it seems that this plague was not announced), the effects would be signally distressing. Bochart adduces instances in which both mankind and cattle, and even wild beasts, have been driven by gnats from their localities. It may be added that the proper Greek name for the gnat is ip-irts, and that probably the word r.u>vu\]i, which much resembles icvity, is appropriate to the mosquito. Hardouin observes that the oi Kviwes of Aristotle are not the ip.Trides, which latter is by Pliny always rendered culices, but which word he employs with great latitude [Gnat]. For a description of the evils inflicted by these insects upon man, see Kirby and Spence, Introduction to Entomology, Lond. 1S28, i. 115, &c. ; and for the annoyance they cause in Egypt, Maillet, "Description de VEgypte par lAbbe Mascrier, Paris, 1755, xc. 37; Forskal, Descript. Animal, p. 85. Michaelis proposed an inquiry into the meaning of the word o-ttvicpes to the Society des Savants, with a full description of the qualities ascribed to them by Philo, Origen, and Augustine (Recueil, &c. Amst, 1714). Niebnhr inquired after it of the Greek patriarch, and also of the metropolitan at Cairo, who thought it to be a species of gnat found in great quantities in the gardens there, and whose bite was extremely painful. A merchant who was present at the in- quiry called it dubub-el-keb, or the dog-fly (De- criplion de V Arable, Pref. pp. 39, 40). Besides the references already made, see liosennmller, Scholia in Exod. ; Michaelis, Suppl. ad Lex. Hebraic.,]). 1203, sq.; Oedmarm, Verm. Samml aus der Naturkunde, i. 6. 74-'j1 ; Bakerus, Annotat. ill Et. M. ii. 1090 ; Ilaivnberg, Ob- serv. Crit. de Insectis Aigyptum infeslantibus, in Miscell. Lips. Nov.. ii. 4. 617-20; vViner, Biblisches Real-wbrL-rbuch, art. ' Miicken. ' — J. F. D. LIGHT is represented in the Scriptures as the immediate result and offspring of a divine com- mand (Gen. i. 3). The earth was void and dark, when God said, ' Let light be, and light was.' This is represented as having preceded the placing of ' lights in the firmament of heaven, the greater 250 LIGHT. light to vule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. : he made the stars also ' (Gen. i. 14, sq.). Whatever opinion may be entertained as to the facility with which these two separate acts may be reconciled, it cannot be questioned that the origin of light, as of every other part of the universe, is thus referred to the exertion of the divine will : as little can it be denied that the narrative in the original is so simple, yet at the same time so majestic and impressive., both in thought and dic- tion, as to fill the heart with a lofty and plea- surable sentiment of awe and wonder. The divine origin of light made the subject one of special interest to the Biblical nations— the rather because light in the East has a clearness, a brilliancy, is accompanied by an intensity of heat, and is followed in its influence by a large- ness of good, of which the inhabitants of less genial climes can have no conception. Light easily and naturally became, in consequence, with Orientals, a representative of the highest human good. All the more joyous emotions of the mind, all the pleasing sensations of the frame, all the happy hours of domestic intercourse, were described under imagery derived from light (1 Kings xi. 36 ; Isa. lviii. 8 ; Esther viii. 16 ; Ps. xcvii. 1 1). The transition was natural from earthly to heavenly, from corporeal to spiritual things; and so light came to typify true religion and the feli- city which it imparts. But as light not only came from God, but also makes man's way clear before him, so it was employed to signify moral truth, and pre-eminently that divine system of truth which is set forth in the Bible, from its earliest gleamings onward to the perfect day of the Great Sun of Righteousness. The appli- cation of the term to religious topics had the greater propriety because the light in the world, being accompanied by heat, purifies, quickens, enriches ; which efforts it is the peculiar province of true religion to produce in the human soul (Isa. viii. 20; Matt. iv. 16; Ps. cxix. 105; 2 Pet. i. 19 ; Eph. v. 8 ; 2 Tim. i. 10 ; 1 Pet. ii. 9). It is doubtless owing to the special providence under which the divine lessons of the Bible were delivered, that the views which the Hebrews took on this subject, while they were high and worthy, did not pass into superstition, and so cease to be truly religious. Other Eastern nations beheld the sun when it shined, or the moon walking in brightness, and their hearts were secretly enticed, and their mouth kissed their hand in token of adoration (Job xxxi. 26, 27). This ' iniquity ' the Hebrews not only avoided, but when they considered the heavens they recognised the work of God's fingers, and learnt a lesson of humility as well as of reverence (Ps. viii. 3, sq.). On the contrary, the entire residue of the East, with scarcely any exception, worshipped the sun and the light, primarily perhaps as symbols of divine power and goodness, but, in a more degenerate state, as themselves divine ; whence, in conjunction with darkness, the negation of light, arose the doctrine of dualism, two prin- ciples, the one of light, the good power, the other of darkness, the evil power ; a corruption which rose and spread the more easily because the whole of human life, being a chequered scene, seems divided as between two conflicting agencies, the bright and the dark, the joyous and the sorrowful, LILY. what is called prosperous and what is called adverse. When the tendency to corruption to which we have just alluded is taken into account, we can- not but feel both gratified and surprised that, while the Hebrew people employed the boldest personifications when speaking of light, they in no case, nor in any degree, fell into the almost universal idolatry. That individuals among them, and even large portions of the nation, did from time to time down to the Babylonish cap- tivity forget and desert the living God, is very certain; but then the nation, as such, was not misled and corrupted ; witnesses to the truth never failed ; recovery was never impossible ; nay, was more than once effected, till at last affliction and suffering brought a changed heart, which never again swerved from the way of truth. Among the personifications on this point which Scripture presents we may specify, 1. God. The Apostle James (i. 17) declares that ' every good and perfect gift cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither sha- dow of turning ;' obviously referring to the faith- fulness of God and the constancy of his goodness, which shine on undimmed and unshadowed. So Paul (1 Tim. vi. 16) : 'God who dwelleth in the light which no man can approach unto.' Here the idea intended by the imagery is the incom- prehensibleness of the self-existent and eternal God. 2- Light is also applied to Christ : ' The peo- ple who sat in darkness have seen a great light' (Matt. iv. 16 ; Luke ii. 32 ; John i. 4, sq.). ' He was the true light ;' ' I am the light of the world ' (John viii. 12 ; xii. 35, 36). 3. It is further used of angels, as in 2 Cor. xi. 14 : ' Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.' 4. Light is moreover employed of men : John the Baptist ' was a burning and a shining light' (Jolin v. 35) ; ' Ye are the light of the world' (Matt. v. 14 ; see also Acts xiii. 47 ; Eph. v. S).— J. R. B. LIGN ALOES. [Ahalim.] LILY (npivov). The lily is frequently men- tioned in the Authorized Version of the Old Testa- ment as the translation of shoshun. We shall reserve for that head the several pioints of con- sideration which are connected with it, and con- fine our attention at present to the krinon, or lily, of the New Testament. This plant is mentioned in the well-known and beautiful passage (Matt, vi. 26) : ' Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin, and yet I say unto you, that even Solomon, in all his glory, was not arrayed like one of these ;' so also in Luke xii. 27. Here it is evident that the plant alluded to must have been indigenous or grown wild, in the vicinity of the sea of Galilee, must have been of an ornamental character, and, from the Greek term npivov being applied to it, of a liliaceous nature. The name lcpivov occurs in all the old Greek writers. Theophrastus first uses it, and is supposed by Sprengel to apply it to species of Narcissus and to Lilium candidum. Dioscorides indicates two species, but very imper- fectly : one of them is supposed to be the Lilium candidum, and the other, with a reddish flower, may be L. martagon, or L. chalcedouicum. He alludes more particularly to the lilies of Syria and of Parnphylia being well suited for making the LILY. ointment of lily. Pliny enumerates three kinds, a white, a red, and a purple-coloured lily. Tra- vellers in Palestine mention that in the month of January the fields and groves everywhere abound ■with various species of lily, tulip, and narcissus. LION. 251 389. [Lilium chalcedonicum.] Benard noticed, near Acre, on Jan. ISth, and about Jaffa, on the 23rd, tulips, white, red, blue, &c. Gumpenberg saw the meadows of Galilee covered with the same flowers on the 31st. Tulips figure conspicuously among the flowers of Palestine, varieties probably of Tidipa gesneriana (Kitto's Palestine, p. ccxv.). So Pococke says, ' I saw many tulips growing wild in the fields (in March), and any one who considers how beautiful those flowers are to the eye, would be apt to con- jecture that these are the lilies to which Solomon in all his glory was not to be compared.' This is much more likely to be the plant intended than some others which have been adduced, as, for instance, the scarlet amaryllis, having white flowers with bright purple streaks, found by Salt at Adovva. Others have preferred the Crown imperial, which is a native of Persia and Cash- mere. Most authors have united in considering the white lily, Lilium candidum, to be the plant to which our Saviour referred; but it is doubtful whether it has ever been found in a wild state in Palestine. Some, indeed, have thought, it to be a native of the new world. Dr. Lindley, however, in the Gardeners' Chronicle (ii. 7-14), says, ' This notion cannot be sustained, because the while lily occurs in an engraving of the Annunciation, executed somewhere about 1480 by Martin Schongauer; and the first voyage of Columbus diil not take place till 1492. In this very rare print the lily is represented as growing in an ornamental vase, as if it were cultivated as a curious object.' This opinion is confirmed by a correspondent at Aleppo (Gardeners' Chronicle, iii. 429), who has resided long in Syria, but is acquainted only with the botany of Aleppo and Antioch : ' 1 never saw the white lily in a wild state, nor have I heard of its being so in Syria. It is cultivated here on the roofs of the houses in pots as an exotic bulb, like the daffodil.' In consequence of this difficulty the late Sir J. E. Smith was of opinion that the plant alluded to under the name of lily was the Amaryllis hdea (now Oporanthus luteus), 'whose golden liliaceous flowers in autumn afford one of the most brilliant and gorgeous objects in nature, as the fields of the Levant are overrun with them : to them the expression of Solomon, in all his glory, not being arrayed like one of them, is peculiarly appro- priate.' Dr. Lindley conceives ' it to be much more probable that the plant intended by our Saviour was the Ixiolirion montanum, a plant allied to the amaryllis, of very great, beauty, with a slender stem, and clusters of the most delicate violet flowers, abounding in Palestine, where Col. Chesney found it in the most brilliant profusion' (I. c. p. 744). In reply to this a correspondent furnishes an extract of a letter from Dr. Bowring, which throws a new light upon the subject : ' I cannot describe to you with botanical accuracy the lily of Palestine. I heard it called by the title of Lilia syriaca, and I imagine under this title its botanical characteristics may be hunted out. Its colour is a brilliant red ; its size about half that of the common tiger lily. The white lily I do not remember to have seen in any part of Syria. It was in April and May that I observed my flower, and it was most abundant in the district of Galilee, where it and the Rhododendron (which grew in rich abun- dance round the paths) most strongly excited my attention.' On this Dr. Lindley observes, ' It is clear that neither the white lily, nor the Opo- ranthus luteus, nor Ixiolirion, will answer to Dr. Bowriug's description, which seems to point to the Chalcedonian or scarlet martagon lily, formerly called the lily of Byzantium, found from the Adriatic to the Levant, and which, with its scarlet turban-like flowers, is indeed a most stately and striking object' (Gardeners'1 Chro- nicle, ii. 854). As this lily (the Lilium chalce- donicum of botanists) is in flower at the season of the year when the sermon on the Mount is sup- posed to have been spoken, is indigenous in the very locality, and is conspicuous, even in the garden, for its remarkable showy flowers, there can now be little doubt that it is the plant alluded to by our Saviour. — J. F. R. LINEN. [Bad.] LINUS (AiVos), one of the Christians at Rome whose salutations Paul sent to Timothy (2 Tim. iv. 21). He is said to have been the first bishop of Rome after the martyrdom of Peter and Paul (Irenanis, Adv. Hares, iii. 3 ; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 2, 4 ; v. 6). LION CnX ari; it^N arjeh ; Sept. \4wv), the most powerful, daring, and impressive of all carnivorous animals, the most magnificent in aspect and awful in voice. Being very common in Syria in early times, the lion naturally supplied many forcible images to the poetical language of Scripture, and not a few historical incidents in its narratives. This is shown by the great number of passages where this animal, in all the stages of existence — as the whelp, the young adult, the fully mature, the lioness — occurs under dif- ferent names, exhibiting that multiplicity of de- nominations which always results when some great image is constantly present to the popular mind. Thus we have, 1. "Ilj gor, a lion's whelp, a very voung lion (Gen. xlix. 9 ; Deut. xxxiii. 20 ; Jer. Ii. 38; Ezek. xix. 2; Nahum ii. 11, 12, &c). 252 LION. 2. "VQ3 chephir, a young lion, when first leaving the protection of the old pair to hunt independently (Ezek. xix. 2,'3 ; Ps. xci. 13 ; Prov. xix. 12, &c). 3. "HK a-rU an adult and vigorous lion, a lion having paired, vigilant and enterprising in search of prey (Nahum ii. 12; 2 Sam. xvii. 10 ; Num. xxiii. 24). This is the common name of the animal. 4. ?Vty sachal, a mature lion in full strength ; a black lion? (Job iv. 10 ; x. 16 ; Ps. xci. 13; Prov. xxvi. 13; Hosea v. 14; xiii. 7). This denomination may very possibly refer to a distinct variety of lion, and not to a black species or race, because neither black nor white lions are recorded, excepting in Oppian (De Venat. iii. 43) ; but the term may be safely referred to the colour of the skin, not of the fur ; for some lions have the former fair, and even rosy, while in other races it is perfectly black. An Asiatic lioness, formerly at Exeter Change, had the naked part of the nose, the roof of the mouth, and the bare soles of all the feet pure black, though the fur itself was very pale buff. Yet albinism and melanism are not un- common in the felinae ; the former occurs in tigers, and the latter is frequent in leopards, panthers, and jaguars. 5. t£>v laish, a fierce lion, one in a state of fury (Job iv. 1 1 ; Prov. xxx. 30 ; Isa. xxx. 6). 6. SOU? labia, a lioness (Job iv. 11, where the lion's whelps are denominated ' the sons of Labiah,' or of the lioness). The lion is the largest and most formidably armed of all carnassier animals, the Indian tiger alone claiming to be his equal. One full grown, of Asiatic race, weighs above 450 pounds, and those of Africa often above 500 pounds. The fall of a fore paw in striking has been estimated to be equal to twenty-five pounds1 weight, and the grasp of the claws, cutting four inches in depth, is sufficiently powerful to break the vertebrae of an ox. The huge laniary teeth and jagged molars worked by powerful jaws, and the tongue entirely covered with horny papillae, hard as a rasp, are all subservient to an immensely strong, muscular structure, capable of prodigious exertion, and mi- nister to the self-confidence which these means of attack inspire. In Asia the lion rarely measures more than nine feet and a half from the nose to the end of the tail, though a tiger-skin of which we took the dimensions was but a trifle less than 13 feet. In Africa they are considerably larger, and supplied with a much greater quantity of mane. Both tiger and lion are furnished with a small homy apex to the tail — a fact noticed by the ancients, but only verified of late years, be- LION. cause this object lies concealed in the hair of the tip and is very liable to drop off. All the varieties of the lion are spotted when whelps; but they become gradually buff or pale. One African variety, very large in size, perhaps a distinct species, has a peculiar and most fero- cious physiognomy, a dense black mane extend- ing half way down the back, and a black fringe along tiie abdomen and tip of the tail ; while those of southern Persia and the Dekkan are nearly destitute of that defensive ornament. The roaring voice of the species is notorious to a proverb, but the warning cry of attack is short, snappish, and sharp. If lions in primitive times were as numerous in Western Asia and Africa as tigers still are in some parts of India, they must have been a seri- ous impediment to the extension of the human race; for Colonel Sykes relates that in less than five years, in the Dekkan alone, during his resi- dence there, above 1000 of the latter were shot. But the counterbalancing distribution of endow- ments somewhat modifies the dangerous vicinity of these animals : like all the felinae, they are more or less nocturnal, and seldom go abroad to pursue their prey till after sunset. When not pressed by hunger, they are naturally indolent, and, from their habit3 of uncontrolled superiority, perhaps capricious, but often less sanguinary and vindictive than is expected. Lions are monogamous, the male living con- stantly with the lioness, both hunting together, or for each other when there is a litter of whelps ; and the mutual affection and care for their offspring which they display are remarkable in animals by nature doomed to live by blood and slaughter. It is while seeking prey for their young that they are most dangerous ; at other times they bear abstinence, and when pressed by hunger will sometimes feed on carcasses found dead. They live to more than fifty years ; consequently, having annual litters of from three to five cubs, they multiply rapidly when not seriously opposed. After the conquest of Egypt by the Arabs the lion soon spread again into Lower Egypt; and Fidelio, a European traveller, in the beginning of the eighth century, saw one slain at the foot of the pyramids, after killing eight, of his assailants. Lately they have increased again on the Upper Nile ; and in ancient times, when the devastations of Egyptian, Persian, Greek, and Roman armies passed over Palestine, there can be little doubt that these destroyers made their appearance in great numbers. The fact, indeed, is attested by the impression which their increase made upon ibe mixed heathen population of Samaria, when Israel was carried away into captivity (2 Kings xvii. 25, 26). The Scriptures present many striking pictures of lions, touched with wonderful force and fide- , lity : even where the animal is a direct instrument of the Almighty, while true to his mission, he still remains so to his nature. Thus nothing can be more graphic than the record of the man of God (1 Kings xiii. 28), disobedient to his charge, struck down from his ass, and lying dead, while the lion stands by him, without touching the life- less body, or attacking the living .animal, usu- ally a favourite prey. See also Gen. xlix. 9 ; Job iv. 10, 11; Nahum ii. 11, 12. Samson"s ad- venture also with the young lion (Judg. xiv. 5, 6), LITTER. and the picture of the young lion coming up from the underwood cover on the banks of the Jordan — all attest a perfect knowledge of the animal and its habits. Finally, the lions in the den with Daniel, miraculously leaving him un- molested, still retain, in all other respects, the real characteristics of their nature. The lion, as an emblem of power, was symbol- ical of the tribe of Judah (Gen. xlix. 9). The type recurs in the prophetical visions, and the figure of this animal was among the few which the Hebrews admitted in sculpture, or in cast metal, as exemplified in the throne of Solomon. The heathen assumed the lion as an emblem of the sun, of the god of war, of Ares, Ariel, Arioth, Re, the Indian Seeva, of dominion in general, of valour, &c, and it occurs in the names and standards of many nations. Lions, in remote antiquity, appear to have been trained for the chace, and are, even now, occasionally domesticated with safety. Pla- cability and attachment are displayed by them even to the degree of active defence of their friends, as was exemplified at Birr, in Ireland in 1839, when ' a keeper of wild beasts, being within the den, had fallen accidentally upon a tiger, who immediately caught the man by the thigh, in the presence of numerous spectators ; but a lion, being in the same compartment, rose up, and seizing the tiger by the neck, compelled it to let go, and the man was saved.1 Numerous anecdotes of a similar character are recorded both by ancient and modern writers. Zoologists consider Africa the primitive abode of lions, their progress towards the north and west having at one time extended to the forests of Macedonia and Greece; but in Asia, never to the south of the Nerbudda, nor east of the lower Ganges. Since the invention of gunpowder, and even since the havoc which the ostentatious barbarism of Roman grandees made among them, they have diminished in number exceedingly, although at the present day individuals are not unfrequently seen in Barbary, within a short distance of Ceuta. — C. H. S. LITTER. The word translated litter, in Isa. lxvi. 20, is 3V tzah ; and is the same which, in Num. vii. 3, denotes the wains or carts drawn by oxen, in which the materials of the taber- nacle were removed from place to place. The tzah was not, therefore, a litter, which is not drawn, but carried. This is the only place in which the word occurs in the Authorized translation. We are not, however, to infer from this that the Hebrews had no vehicles of the kind. Litters, or palanquins, were, as we know, in use among the ancient Egyptians. They were borne upon the shoulders of men (No. 391), and appear to have been used for carrying persons of consideration short distances on visits, like the sedan chairs of a former day in England. We doubt if the Hebrews had this kind of litter, as it scarcely agrees with their simple, unluxurious habits ; but that, they had litters borne by beasts, such as are still common in Western Asia, seems in the highest degree probable. In Cant. iii. 9, we find the word |V"1SX aphir- yon, Sept. iropelov, V ulg. ferculam, which occurs nowhere else in Scripture, and is applied to a vehicle used by king Solomon. This word is rendered 'chariot' in our Authorized version, although unlike any other word so rendered in LITTER. 253 that version. It literally means a moving couch, and is usually conceived to denote a kind of sedan, litter, or rather palanquin, in which great personages and women were borne from place to place. Tne name, as well as the object, im- mediately suggests that it may have been nearly the same thing as the ^j L^sb? takht-ravan, the moving throne, or seat, of the Persians. It consists of a light frame fixed on two strong poles, like those of our sedan-chair. The frame is generally covered with cloth, and lias a door, sometimes of lattice work, at each side. It is carried by two mules, one between the poles before, the other behind. These conveyances are used by great persons, when disposed for retire- ment or ease during a journey, or when sick or feeble from age. But they are chiefly used by ladies of consideration in their journeys (No. 392). The popular illustrators of Scripture do not appear to have been acquainted with this and the other litters of Western Asia; and have, there- fore, resorted to India, and drawn their illustra- tions from the palanquins borne by men, and from the hoicdahs of elephants. This is unnecessary, as Western Asia still supplies conveyances of this description, more suitable and more likely to have been anciently in use, than any which the further east can produce. If the one already described should seem too humble, there are other takht- ravans of more imposing appearance. Some readers may remember the ' litter of red cloth, adorned with pearls and jewels,' together with ten mules (to bear it by turns), which king Zahr-Shah prepared for the journey of Iris daughter (Lane's Arab. Nights, i. 52S). This was, doubtless, of the kind which is borne by four mules, two behind and two before. In Arabia, or in the countries where Arabian usages prevail, two camels are usually employed to bear the takht-ravan, and sometimes two horses. When borne by camels, the head of the hindmost of the animals is bent painfully down under the 254 LIVER. vehicle. This is the most comfortable kind of litter, and two light persons may travel in it. The shibreeyeh is another hind of camel-litter, resembling the Indian howdah, by which name (or rather hodaj) it is sometimes called. It is composed of a small square platform with a canopy or arched covering. It accommodates but one person, and is placed upon the back of a camel, and rests upon two square camel-chests, one on each side of the animal. It is very evi- dent, not only from the text in view, but from others, that the Hebrews had litters; and there is little reason to doubt that they were the same as those now employed in Palestine and the neighbouring countries, where there are still the same circumstances of climate, the same domestic animals, and essentially the same habits of life, as in the Biblical period. LIVER Op!) occurs in Exod. xxix. 13, 22 ; Lev. iii. 4, 10, 15; iv. 9; vii. 4; viii. 16, 25; ix. 10, 19; Prov. vii. 23; Lam. ii. 11; Ezek. xxi. 2L. The Hebrew word is generally derived from *12D, to be heavy, in reference to the weight of the liver as the heaviest of all the viscera, just as in English the lungs are called f the lights,' from their comparative lightness. Gesenius, however, adduces the Arabic &J&, meaning, probably, 'the most precious,' which, indeed, suits the notions of the ancient Orientals, who esteemed the liver to be the most valuable of all the viscera, because they thought it most concerned in the formation of the blood, and held that ' in the blood is the life.' In all the instances where the word occurs in the Pentateuch, it forms part of the phrase l>3rt hv mn»n, or -nan rnn\ or naan-jo, translated in the Authorized Version, ' the caul that is above the liver,' but which Gesenius, rea- soning from the root, understands to be the great lobe of the liver itself, rather than the caul over it; which latter he terms omentum minus hepati- cogastricum, and which, he observes, is incon- siderable in size, and has but little fat. Jahn LIVER. thinks the smaller lobe to be meant. The phrase is also rendered in the Sept. rbv Xoftiw rod rjTraros, or rhv ettI tov, &c, ' the lobe or lower pendent of the liver,' the chief object of attention in the art of hepatoscopy, or divination by the liver among the ancients. (Jerome gives reticulum jecoris, ' the net of the liver,' and arvina, ' the suet,' and adeps, ' the fat ;' see Bochart, Hieroz. i. 498.) It appears from the same passages that it was burnt upon the altar, and not eaten as sacrificial food (Jahn, Biblisches Archciol. § 378, n. 7). The liver was supposed by the ancient Jews, Greeks, and Romans to be the seat of the passions, pride, love, &c. Thus, Gen. xlix. 6, ' with their assembly let not '•HUD (lite- rally, ' my liver') be united ;' Sept. to rj-nara. ; see also Heb. of Ps. xvi. 9; Ivii. 9; cviii. 2; and Anacreon, Ode iii. fin. ; Theocritus, Idyll. xi. 16 ; Horace, Carm. i. 13. 4 ; 25. la ; iv. I. 12 ; and the Notes of the Delphin edition ; comp. also Persius, Sat. v. 129 ; Ju- venal, Sat. v. 647. Wounds in the liver we're supposed to be mortal ; thus the expressions in Prov. vii. 23, ' a dart through his liver,' and Lam. ii. 11,' my liver is poured out upon the earth,' are each of them a periphrasis for -death itself. So also ^Eschylus uses the words Oiyydyei. irpbs TyKo.p to describe a mortal wound {Aga- memnon, 1. 442). The passage in Ezekiel con- tains an interesting reference to the most ancient of all modes of divination, by the inspection of the viscera of animals and even of mankind sacrificially slaughtered for the purpose. It is there said that the king of Babylon, among other modes of divination referred to in the same verse, ' looked upon the liver.' The Cambridge manu- script of the Sept. gives Hy^ati ffKcnr-iiaacrdai ; other copies use the precise technical term rj-rr'aroffKO- TT7]cra(r9aL. The liver was always considered the most important organ in the ancient art of Extispicium, or divination by the entrails. Phi- lostratus felicitously describes it as ' the prophe- sying tripod of all divination' {Life of Apolt ,- nius, viii. 7. 5). The rules by which the Greeks and Romans judged of it are amply detailed iii Adams's Roman Antiquities, p. 261, &c, Lond. 1834 ; and in Potter's Archcsologia Grueca, i. 316, Lond. 1775. It is an interesting inquiry how this regard to it originated. Vitruvins sug- gests'a plausible theory of the first rise of hepa- toscopy. He says the ancients inspected the livers of those animals which frequented the places where they wished to settle ; and if they found the liver, to which they chiefly ascribed the process of sanguification, was injured, they concluded that the water and nourishment col- lected in such localities were unwholesome (i. 4). But divination is coeval and co-exten- sive with a belief in the divinity. We ac- cept the argument of the Stoics, ' sunt D\ : ergo est Divinatio.' We know that as early as the days of Cain and Abel there were certain means of communication between God and man, anil that those means were connected with the sacri- fice of animals ; and we prefer to consider those means as the source of divination in later ages, conceiving that when the real tokens of the divine interest with which the primitive families of man were favoured ceased, in consequence o{ the multiplying of human transgressions, their descendants endeavoured to obtain counsel and LIZARD. information by the same external observances. We believe that thus only will the minute resem- blances be accounted for, which we discover be- tween the different methods of divination, utterly untraceable to reason, but which have prevailed from unknown antiquity among the most distant regions. Cicero ascribes divination by this and other means to what he calls ' the heroic ages,' by which term we know lie means a period ante- cedent to all historical documents (De Divina- tione). Prometheus, in the play of that title (1. 474, &c), lays claim to having taught man- kind the dillerent kinds of divination, and that of extispicy among the rest ; and Prometheus, according to Servius (ad Virg. Eel. vi. 42), in- structed the Assyrians ; and we know from sacred record that Assyria was one of the countries first peopled. It is further important to remark that the first recorded instance of divination is that of the teraphim of Laban, a native of Padan- aram, a district bordering on that country (1 Sam. xix. 13, 16), but by which teraphim both the Sept. and Josephus understood rfirap twv alySiv ' the liver of goats1 (Antia. vi. 11. 4); nor does Whiston, perhaps, in his note on that passage, unreasonably complain that, ' since the modern Jews have lost the signification of the word TOD, and since this rendering of the Sept., as well as the opinion of Josephus, are here so much more clear and probable, it is unaccountable that our commentators should so much hesitate as to its true interpretation ' (Winston's Josephus, p. 169, note, Edinb. 1828; Bochart, i. 41, De Caprarum No minibus ; En- cyclopaedia Metropolitana, art.. ' Divination ; ' Eosenmiiller's Scholia on the several passages leferred to; Perizonius, adJElian. ii. 31 ; Peucer, Do rrcecipuis Divinationum Generibus, .&c, Witteberg, 1560).— J. F. D. LIZARD QV tzab, 113 coach, Ttitxh letaah, n^3X anakah, flO^R thinsemeth, \3ty\r\chomef, D^Diyy semmamitli). Under this denomination the modern zoologist places all the cold-blooded animals that have the conformation of serpents with the addition of four feet. Thus viewed, as one great family, they constitute the Saurians, Lacertinae, and Lacertidse of authors; embracing, numerous generical divisions, which commence with ( lie largest, that is, the crocodile group, and pass through sundry others, a variety of species, formidable, disgusting, or pleasing in appearance — some equally frequenting the land and water, others absolutely confined to the earth and to the most arid deserts ; and though in general harm- less, there are a few with disputed properties, some being held to poison or corrode by means of the exudation of an ichor, and others extolled as Aphrodisiacs, or of medical use in pharmacy ; but these properties in most, if not in all, are unde- termined or illusory. Of some genera, such as the crocodile and chameleon, we have already made mention [Chameleon; Crocodile; Dragon; Leviathan], and therefore we shall confine our present remarks to the lizards that are inhabitants of Western Asia and Egypt, and to those more particularly noticed in the Bible. Of these commentators indicate six or seven species, whereof some indeed may be misapprehended ; but when it is considered that the regions of Syria, Arabia, and Egypt arc overrun with animals of LIZARD. 255 this family, there is every reason to expect al- lusion to more than one genus in the Scriptures, where so many observations and similes are derived from the natural objects which were familiar to the various writers. Among the names enumerated above, Bochart refers 3;» tzab (Lev. xi. 29) to one of the group of Mo- nitors or Varanus, the Nilotic lizard, Lacerta Nilotica, Varanus Niloticus, or Waran of the Arabs. Like the other of this form, it is possessed of a tail double the length of the bod)-, but is not so well known in Palestine, where there is only one real river (Jordan), which is not tenanted by this species. We have already shown that the true crocodile frequented the shores and marshes of the coast down to a com- paratively late period ; and therefore it may well have had a more specific name than Leviathan — a word apparently best suited to the dignified and lofty diction of the prophets, and clearly of more general signification than the more collo- quial designation. Jerome was of this opinion ; and it is thus likely that tzab was applied to both, as icaran is now considered only a variety of, or a young, crocodile. There is a second of the same group, Lacerta Scincus of Merrem (Varanus Arenarius'), Waran-el-hard, also reaching to six feet in length ; and a third, not as yet clearly described, which appears to be larger than either, growing to nine feet, and covered with bright cupreous scales. This last prefers rocky and stony situations. It is in this section of the Saurians that most of the gigantic fossil species, the real Dv^Wp ben-nephilim, 'children of the giants,' are found to be located; and of the existing species some are reported to possess great strength. One of the last-mentioned pursues its prey on land with a rapid bounding action, feeds on the ^irger insects, and is said to attack game in a body, sometimes destroying even sheep. The Arabs, in agreement with the ancients, assert that this species will do fierce and victorious battle with serpents. Considerations like these induce us to assign the Hebrew name T\2 coach (a designation of strength) to the species of the desert ; and if the Nilotic icaran be the tzab, then the Arabian dhab, as Bruce asserts, will be Varanus Arenarius, or Waran-el-hard of the present familiar lan- guage, and t-)9'-)js~ chardaun, the larger copper- coloured species above noticed. But it is evident from the Arabic authorities quoted by Bochart, and from his own conclusions, that there is not only confusion among the species of lizard, but that the ichneumon of Egypt (Horpcstes P/taraonis) is mixed up with the history of these Saurians. 395. [Lacerta Stellio.] We come next to the group of lizards more properly so called, which Hebrew commentators 256 LIZARD. take to be the fl^tS? letaah, a name having some allusion to poison and adhesiveness. The word occurs only once (Lev. xi. 30), where Saurians alone appear to be indicated. If the Hebrew root were to guide the decision, letaah would be another name for the gecko or anaka, for there is but one species which can be deemed venomous ; and with regard to the quality of adhesiveness, though the geckos possess it most, numerous common lizards run up and down perpendicular walls with great facility. We, therefore, take 1313111 chomet, or the sand lizard of Bochart, to be the true lizard, several (probably many) species existing in my- riads on the rocks in sandy places, and in ruins in every part of Palestine and the adjacent countries. There is one species particularly abundant and small, well known in Arabia by the name of Sara- bandi. We now come to the Stelliones, which have been confounded with the noxious geckos and others from the time of Aldrovandus, and thence have been a source of inextricable trouble to commentators. They are best known by the bundles of starlike spines on the body. Among these Lacerta Stellio, Stellio Orientalis, the Kpo- KoSeiAos of the Greeks, and hay-dun of the Arabs, is abundant in the east, and a great frequenter of ruinous walls. The genus Uromastix offers Stellio Spinipes of Daud. or Ur-Spinipes, two or three feet long, of a fine green, and is the species which is believed to strike with the tail ; hence formerly denominated Caudi Verhera. It is frequent in the deserts around Egypt, and is probably the Guaril of the Arabs. Another subgenus, named Trapelus by Cuvier, is exemplified in the Tr. JEgrjpticus of Geoff., with a spinous swelled body, but remarkable for the faculty of changing colour more rapidly than the chameleon. Next we place the Geckotians, among which comes np3N anakah, in our versions denominated ferret, but which is with ^ore propriety trans- ferred to the noisy and venomous abu-burs of the Arabs. There is no reason for admitting the verb p]£>$ anak, to groan, to cry out, as radical for the name of the ferret, an animal totally unconnected with the preceding and succeeding species in Lev. xi. 29, 30, and originally found, so far as we know, only in Western Africa, and thence conveyed to Spain, prowling noiselessly, and beaten to death without a groan, though capable of a feeble, short scream when at play, or when suddenly wounded. Taking the Interpretation 'to cry out,' so little applicable to ferrets, in conjunction with the whole verse, we find the gecko, like all the species of this group of lizards, remarkable for the loud grating noise which it is apt to utter in the roofs and walls of houses all the night through : one, indeed, is sufficient to dispel the sleep of a whole family. The particular species most probably meant is the lacerta gecko of Hasselquist, the gecko lobatus of Geoffroy, distinguished by having the soles of the feet dilated and striated like open fans, from whence a poisonous ichor is said to exude, in- flaming the human skin, and infecting food that may have been trod upon by the animal. Hence the Arabic name of abu-burs, or ' father-leprosy,' at Cairo. The species extends northwards in Syria ; but it may be doubted whether (he gecko fascicularis, or tarentola, of South-Eastern Europe be not also an inhabitant of Palestine ; and in that case the Tl^OC? semmamith of Bochart would find an appropriate location. LOAN. To these we add the Chameleons, already de- scribed [Chameleon] ; and then follows the Scincus (in antiquity the name of varanus arenarius~), among which lacerta scincus, Linn., or scincus officinalis, is the el-aclda of the Arabs, figured by Bruce, and well known in the old pharmacy of Europe. S. cyp)rius, or lacerta cyprius scincoides, a large greenish species, marked with a pale line on each flank, occurs also ; and a third, scincus variegatus or ocillatus, often noticed on account of its round black spots, each marked with a pale streak, and commonly having likewise a stripe on each flank, of a pale colour. Of the species of Seps, that is, viviparous ser- pent-lizards, having the body of snakes, with four weak limbs, a species with only three toes on each foot, the lacerta chalcides of Linn., appears to extend to Syria. — C. H. S. LOAN. The Mosaic laws which relate to the subject of borrowing, lending, and repaying, are in substance as follows : — If an Israelite became poor, what he desired to borrow was to be freely lent to him, and no interest, either of money or produce, could be exacted from him; interest might be taken of a foreigner, but not of an Israelite by another Israelite (Exod. xxii. 25 ; Deut. xxiii. 19, 20 ; Lev. xxv. 35-3S). At the end of every seven years a remission of debts was ordained ; every creditor was to remit what he had lent : of a foreigner the loan might be exacted, but not of a brother. If an Israelite wished to borrow, he was not to be refused because the year of remis- sion was at* hand (Deut. xv. 1-11). Pledges might be taken, but not as such the mill or the upper millstone, for that would be to take a man's life in pledge. If the pledge was raiment, it was to be given back before sunset, as being needful for a covering at night. The widow's garment could not be taken in pledge (Exod. xxii. 26, 27 ; Deut. xxiv. 6, 17). A part of the last pass- age we must cite entire, as showing a most ami- able and considerate spirit on the part of Moses towards the poor : ' When thou dost lend thy brother anything, thou shalt not go into his house to fetch his pledge ; thou shalt stand abroad, and the man to whom thou dost lend shall bring out the pledge abroad unto thee ; and if the man be poor thou shalt not sleep with his pledge : in any case thou shalt deliver him the pledge again when the sun goeth down, that he may sleep in his own raiment, and bless thee ; and it shall be righteous- ness unto thee before the Lord thy God.' The strong and impressive manner in which the duty of lending is enjoined, is worthy of being exhibited in the words of Scripture : ' If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren, thou shalt not harden thy heart nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother, but thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him suffi- cient for his need. Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart, saying, the year of release is at hand, and thine eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou givest him nought, and he cry unto the Lord against thee, and it be sin unto thee : thou shalt surely give him, and thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest. unto him ; because that for this thing the Lord thy God shall bless thee in all thy works and in all that thou puttest thy hand unto.' These laws relating to loans may wear a strange LOAN. =a.nd somewhat repulsive aspect to the mere mo- dern reader, and cannot be understood, either in their bearing or their sanctions, unless considered from the Biblical point of view. The land of •Canaan, (as 'the entire world) belonged to its 'Creator, but was given of God to the descendants of Abraham under certain conditions, of which this liberality to the rseedy was one. The power of getting loans therefore was a part of the poor man's inheritance. It was a lien on the land (the ■source of all property with agricultural rjeople), which was as valid as the tenure of any given portion by the tribe or family to whose lot it had fallen. This is the light in which the Mosaic polity represents the matter, and in this light, so long as that polity retained its force, would it, as a matter of course, be regarded by the owners of property. Thus the execution of this particular law was secured by the entire force with which the constitution itself was recommended and sus- tained. But as human selfishness might in time endanger this particular set of laws, so Moses applied special support to the possibly weak part. Hence the emphasis with which he enjoins the duty of lending to the needy. Of this emphasis the very essence is the sanction supplied by that special providence which lay at the very basis of the Mosaic commonwealth ; so that lending to the destitute came to be enforced with all the power derivable from the express will of God, of the Almighty Cteator, of the Redeemer of Israel, of Him whose favour was life and whose frown was dismay and ruin. It is impossible not to admire the benevolence which runs through the entire of this piece of legislation; and when the age to which its origin is referred, and the peculiar circumstances under which it was produced, are considered, our ad- miration rises to a very high pitch, and we feel that it is most insufficient praise to say that nothing so benign in spirit had been previously conceived : nothing more beneficent and humane has been carried into effect, even since Jesus came to seek and to save the lost. The conduct which the Romans observed towards the debtor affords a striking contrast to what is thus required by Moses. Insolvent debtors might be compelled to serve their creditors, and often had to endure treatment as bad as that of slaves (Liv. ii. 23 ; A. Gell. xx. 1, 19; Appian, Ital. p. 40). In Athens also the creditor had a claim to the per- son ef the debtor (Plat. Vit. Sol. 15). Moses himself seems to have admitted some restrictions to his benevolent laws ; for from Lev. xxv. 39, sq., it appears that a poor Israelite might be sold to one possessed of substance: he was, however, to serve, not as a bond, but as a hired servant, who at (he jubilee was restored with his children to entire liberty, so (hat he might return unto the possession of his fathers. • That (he system of law regarding loans was •carried into effect, there is no reason to douht. It formed an essential part of the general constitution, and therefore came recommended with the entire sanction which that system had on its own be- half; nor were there any predominant antagonist principles at work which would prevent this from proceeding step by step, in its proper place and time, with 'the residue of the Mosaic legislation. Nor do the passages of Scripture (Job xxii. 6- xxiv. 3 ; Matt, xviii. 28 ; Prov. xxviii. S ; Ezek. VOL. II. LOAN. 257 xviii. 8; Ps. xv. 5; cix. II) which give us reason to think that usury was practised and the poor debtor oppressed, show anything but those breaches to which laws are always liable, espe- cially in a period when morals grow cocru.pt and institutions in consequence decline ; on the con- trary, the stern reproofs which such violations called forth forcibly demonstrate that the legis- lation in question had taken effect, and had also exerted a powerful influence on the national cha- racter, and on the spirit with which the misdeeds of rich oppressors and the injuries of the needy were regarded. While, however, the benign tendency of the laws in question is admitted, may it not be ques- tioned whether they were strictly just ? Such a doubt could arise only in a mind which viewed the subject from the position of our actual society. A modern might plead that he had a right to do what he pleased with his own ; that his property of every kind — land, food, money — was his own; and that he was justified to turn all and each part to account for his own benefit. Apart from reli- gious considerations this position is impregnable. But such a view of property finds no support in the Mosaic institutions. In them property has a divine origin, and its use is intrusted to man on certain conditions, which conditions are as valid as is the tenure of property itself. In one sense, indeed, the entire land — all property — was a great loan, a loan lent of God to the people of Israel, who might well therefore acquiesce in any ar- rangement which required a portion — a small' portion — of this loan to be under certain circum- stances accessible to the destitute. This view receives confirmation from the fact that interest might be taken of persons who were not Hebrews, and therefore lay beyond the sphere embraced by this special arrangement. It would open too wide a field did we proceed to consider how far the Mosaic system might be applicable in the world at large; but this is very clear to our mind, that the theory of jwoperty on which it rests — that is, making property to be divine in its origin, and therefore tenable only on the fulfilment of such conditions as the great laws of religion and mo- rality enforce — is more true and more philoso- phical (except in a college of atheists) than the narrow and baneful ideas which ordinarily prevail. Had the Hebrews enjoyed a free intercourse with other nations, the permission to take usury of foreigners might have had the effect of impover- ishing Palestine by affording a strong induce- ment for employing capital abroad ; but, under the actual restrictions of the Mosaic law. this evil was impossible. Some not inconsiderable advan- tages must have ensued from the observance of these laws. The entire alienation and loss of the lent property were prevented by that peculiar in- stitution which restored to every man his property at the great year of release. In the interval be- tween the jubilees the system under consideration would tend to prevent those inequalities of social condition which always arise rapidly, and which have not seldom brought disaster and ruin on states. The affluent, were required to part with a portion of their affluence to supply the wants of the needy, without, exacting that recompense which would only make the rich richer and the poor more needy ; thus superinducing a state of things scarcely more injurious to the one than to 258 LOCUST. the other of these two parties. There was aTso in this system a strongly conservative influence. Agriculture was the foundation of the constitu- tion. Had money-lending been a trade, money- making would also have been eagerly pursued. Capital would be withdrawn from the land; the agriculturist would pass into the usurer ; huge inequal ities would arise ; commerce would as- sume predominance, and the entire commonwealth be overturned — changes and evils which were pre- vented, or, if not so, certainly retarded and abated, by the code of laws regarding loans. As it was, the gradually increasing wealth of the country was in the main laid out on the soil, so as to augment its productiveness and distribute its bounties. These views may prepare the reader for con- sidering the doctrine of ' the Great Teacher ' on the subject of loans. It is found forcibly ex- pressed in Luke's Gospel (vi. 34, 35) : ' If ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye ? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again : but love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest ; for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.' The meaning of the passage is distinct and full, unmistakeable, and not to be evaded. He commands men to lend, not as Jews to Jews, but even to enemies, without asking or receiving any return, after the manner of the Great Benefactor of the Universe, who sends down his rains and bids his sun to shine on the fields of the unjust as well as of the just. To attempt to view this command in the light of reason and experience would require space which cannot here be given ; but we must add, that any attempt to explain the injunction away is most unworthy on the part of professed disciples of Christ; and that, not impossibly iat least, fidelity to the behests of Him whom we call Lord and Master would of itself answer all doubts and remove all misgivings, by practi- cally showing that this, as every other doctrine that fell from His lips, is indeed of God (John vii. 17).— J. R. B. LOAVES. [Bread.] LOCUST (order, Hemiptera; s-pec\es,Grylhis, Linn.). There are ten Hebrew words which ap- pear to signify ' locust' in the Old Testament : 1. n5"]fc? arbeh ; 2. 313 (job; 3. DT3 gazam ; 4. 23n chaqab ; 5. 7>D3n chanamal : 6. 7?DFI chasil ; 7. ?3"in chargol ; 8. p?\ yelek ; 9. Dy?D salam; 10. ?¥/¥ tzelatzal. Itbas^been supposed, however, that some of these words denote merely the different states through which the locust passes after leaving the egg, viz. the larva, the pupa, and the perfect insect — all which much resemble each other, except that the larva has no wings, and that the pupa possesses only the rudiments of those members, which; are fully developed only in the adult locust (Michaelis, Supplem. ad Lex. Hebr. ii. 667, 1080). But this supposition is manifestly wrong with regard to the first, fourth, seventh, and eighth, because, in Lev. xi. 22, the word WD?, ' after his kind,' or species, is added after each of them (comp. ver. 14, 15, 16). It is most probable, there- fore, that all the rest are also the names of species. But the problem is to ascertain the particular LOCUST. species intended by them respectively. Manj •writers have endeavoured to solve it. They have first examined the roots of these names, which are nearly all the resources afforded by the Hebrew, since there is only one instance in which any de- scriptive epithet is applied to the name of a locust which might assist in identifying the species (Jer. Ii. 27)j ' the rough caterpillar.' Bochart thus states the principle of this method of investigation : — ' Res latet in verbis, et exnomi- xiibus multa eruuntur quae ad horum animal ium naturam pertinent.' — ' The thing signified is couched in the words, and out. of the names many things are deduced which relate to the nature of these creatures' (Hierozoicon, a Rosenm tiller, 1796, vol. iii. p. 251, lib. iv. p. ii. c. 1). But as Hebrew roots afford only abstract ideas, these writers next endeavour to ascertain the particular species intended, by considering to what species of locust the general characteristic especially applies. This would be a sufficiently arduous task, supposing the true Hebrew roots to be known ; whereas it will be seen that several Hebrew roots often compete with equal claims for the place of etymon to the same word. The roots of the cognate dialects, to which these writers resort in the abseoce of any in Hebrew, which is frequently the case, are chargeable with the same vagueness and incertitude. The next resource would seem to be the ancient versions ; but the Septuagint, even in the most ancient and accurate portions of it, seldom gives a definite rendering. The renderings of the Vulgate, though nearly an echo of the Sept., are valuable, as furnishing all the illustration which Jerome could give in the fifth century. Bochart has observed, that all the other ancient versions, Chaldaic, Syriac, and Arabic, as well as the Targums and rabbins, .afford us no assistance in this inquiry, because ' vel retinent voces Hebrseas, vel aliis ntuntur nihilo magis notis' — ' they either retain the He- "brew words or use others no better understood.' 'Our only materials, then, consist of reasonings 'from the Hebrew roots, the Sept. and Vulg., and of those few places where the definite renderings they give can be illustrated from ancient Greek and Roman naturalists, &c. It will now be attempted to lay before the reader the results of these several sources of investigation. 1. PDIfcs arbeh; occurs in Exod. x. 4, Sept. aicplSa TroW-hv (' a vast flight of locusts/ or perhaps indicating that several species were employed), Vulg. hcustam; and, in ver. 12, 13, 14, 19, aicpis and locusta, Eng. locusts ; Lev. xi. 22, flpovxov, bruchus, locust ; Deut. xxviii. 38, aKpis, locustce, locust; Judg. vi. 5; vii. 12, aKpis, locustarum, grasshoppers ; 1 Kings viii. 37, fipovxos, locusta, locust ; 2 Chron. vi. 28, aKpis, locusta, locusts ; Job xxxix. 20, anpfiies, locustas, grasshoppers ; Ps. lxxviii. 46, dicpiSi, Symm. o~kc!o\i}ki, locustce, locust; Ps. cv. 34, aKpis, locusta, locust: Ps. cix. 23, aKpiSes, locustce, locust; Prov. xxx. 27, aKpis, locusta, locust; Jer. xlvi. 23, aKpiSa, locusta, grass- hoppers; Joel i. 4; ii. 25, aKpis, locusta, locust;. Nahum iii. 15, fipovxos, bruchus, locusts, ver. 17, drreAafios, locustce, locusts. In the foregoing conspectus the word illllN, in Exod. x., as indeed everywhere else, occurs in the singular number only, though it is there associated with verbs both in the singular and plural (ver. 5, 6), as are the corresponding words in Sept. and LOCUST. Vulg. This it might be, as a noun of multitude ; but it will be rendered probable that four species were employed in the plague on Egypt, rD"lN, ^Dn, pbs and Vctfn (Ps. lxxviii. 46, 47 ; cv. 31). These may all have been brought into Egypt from Ethiopia (which has ever been the cradle of all kinds of locusts), by what is called in Exodus, ' the east wind,' since Bochart proves that the word which properly signifies 'east' often means 'south' also. The word HTlX may be used in Lev. xi. 22, as the collective name for the locust, and be put first there as denoting also the most numerous species ; but in Joel i. 4, and Ps. lxxviii. 46, it is distinguished from the other names of locusts, and is mentioned second, as if of a different species; just, perhaps, as we use the v/mdjly, sometimes as a collective name, and at others for a particular species of insect, as when speaking of the hop, turnip, meat fly, &c. When the Hebrew word is used in reference to a particular species, it has been supposed, for rea- sons which will be given, to denote the gryllus gregarius or migratorius. Moses, therefore, in Exodus, refers Pharaoh to the visitation of the locusts, as well known in Egypt; but the plague would seem to have consisted in bringing them into that country in unexampled numbers, con- sisting of various species never previously seen there (comp. Exod. x. 5, 6, 15). The Sept. word fipovxos (Lev. xi. 22) clearly shows that the translator uses it for a winged species of locust, contrary to the Latin lathers (as Jerome, Augus- tine, Gregory, &c), who all define the bruchus to be the unfledged young or larva of (he locust, and who call it attela'ous when its wings are partially developed, and locusta when able to fly ; although both Sept. and Vulg. ascribe flight to the bruchus here, and in Nah. iii. 17. The Greek fathers, on the other hand, uniformly ascribe to the fipovxos both wings and flight, and therein agree with the descriptions of the ancient Greek naturalists. Thus Theophrastus, the pupil of Aristotle, who, with his preceptor, was probably contemnora- ries with the Sept. translators of the Pentateuch, plainly speaks of it as a distinct species, and not a mere state : xaAe7rcd yav ovv al aKpides, %aAeir&J- repoi Se ol drre\afiot, koX tovtcoj/ g.6,KiaTo. ovs Ka- \ovo~i fipovKovs. — ' The dtcplSes (the best ascer- tained general Greek word for the locust) are inju- rious, the aTTeAa/Soi still more so, and those most of all which they call ppovKOi' (DeAnim.). The Sept. seems to recognise the peculiar destructive- ness of the fipovxos in 1 Kings viii. 37 (but has merged it in the parallel passage, 2 Chron.), and in Nah. iii. 15, by adopting it for H21N. In these passages the Sept. translators may have understood the G. migratorius or gregarius (Linn.), which is usually considered to be the most destructive species (from fipdoffKw, I devour). Yet in Joel i. 4 ; ii. 25, they have applied it to the p?1*, which, however, appears there as engaged in the work of destruction. Hesychius, in the third cenlury, explains the fipovKos as dupiowv el:5os, ' a species of locust,' though, he observes, applied in his time by different nations to different species of locusts, and by some to the drTeAajSor. May not his testimony to this effect illustrate the various uses of the word by the Sept. in the minor prophets ? Our translators have wrongly adopted the word ' grasshopper' in Judg. and Jer. xlvi. 23, where LOCUST. 259 'locusts' would certainly have better illustrated the idea of ' innumerable multitudes;' and here, as elsewhere, have departed from their professed rule, ' not to vary from the sense of that which they had translated before, if the word signified the same in both places' (Translators to the reader, ad jlnern). The Hebrew word in question, is usually derived from nil, ' to multiply' or ' be numerous,' because the locust is remarkably pro- lific ; which, as a general name, is certainly not inapplicable ; and it is thence also inferred, that it denotes the G. migratorius, because that species often appears in large numbers. However, the largest flight of locusts upon record, calculated to have extended over 500 miles, and which darkened the air like an eclipse, and was supposed to come from Arabia, did not consist of the G. migratorius, but of a red species (Kirby and Spence, Introd. to Entomology, i. 210); and, according to Forskal, the species which now chiefly infests Arabia, and which lie names G. gregarius, is distinct from the G. migratorius of Linn. (Ency. Brit. art. ' En- tomology," p. 193). Others derive the word from 3")X,'to lie hid,' or ' in ambush,' because the newly hatched locust emerges from the ground, or because the locust besieges vegetables. Rosenmuller justly remarks upon such etymologies, and the in- ferences made from them, ' Quam iniirmum vero sit hujusmodi e solo nominis etymo petitum argumentum, uuusquisque intelliget ipse.' He adds, 'Nee alia est ratio reliquarum speeierum' (Schol. in Joel i. 4). ' How precarious truly the reasoning is, derived in this manner from the mere etymology of the word, every body may un- derstand for himself. Nor is the principle other- wise in regard to the rest of the species.' He also remarks that the references to the destructive- ness of locusts, which are often derived from the roots, simply concur in this, that locusts consume and do mischief. Illustrations of the propriet)- of his remarks will abound as we proceed. Still it by no means follows from a coincidence of the Hebrew roots, in this or any other meaning, that the learned among the ancient Jews did not recognise different species in the different names of locusts. The English word Jty, from the Saxon fieon, the Heb. fpJJ, and its representative ' fowl ' in the Eng. Version (Gen. i. 20, &c), all express both a general and specific idea. Even a modem entomologist might speak of 'the flies' in a room, while aware that from 50 to 100 different spe- cies annually visit our apartments. The scrip- tures use popular language : hence ' the mul- titude,' ' the devourer,' or ' the darkener,' may have been the familiar appellations for certain species of locusts. The common Greek words for locusts and grasshoppers, &c, are of them- selves equally indefinite ; yet they also served for the names of species, as dicp'is, the locust generally, from the tops of vegetables, on which the locust feeds ; but it is also used as the proper name of a particular species, as the grasshopper : TeTfxnrre- pv\\is, ' four-winged,' is applied sometimes to the grasshopper ; rpa>£aAAls, from ipoyyw, ' to chew,' sometimes to the caterpillar. Yet the Greeks had also distinct names restricted to particular spe- cies, as ovos, fxoXovpls, KepKcinrr]. &.c. The Hebrew names may also have served similar purposes. 2. 213 goh, Isa. xxxiii. 4 ; Sept. aKpiSas ; Vulg. is deficient; Eng. locusts; Amos vii. 1, t-myovi) Litpilmv ; Auuila, fiopdSccv (voratrices), s2 260 LOCUST. locustee, grasshoppers; Nah. iii. 17, arre\e^os, locustae, grasshoppers. Here the lexicographers, finding no Hebrew root, resort to the Arabic. Bochart derives it from the Arabic* fr523, ' to creep out ' (of the ground), as the locusts do in spring. But this applies to the young of all species of locusts, and his quotations from Aristotle and Pliny occur unfortunately in ge- neral descriptions of the locust. Castell gives another Arabic root (y -'*-) 250, secuit, ' to cut' or ' tear,' but this is open to a similar objection. Parkhurst proposes 23, anything gibbous, curved, or arched, and gravely adds, 'the locust in the caterpillar state, so called from its shape in general, or from its continually hunching out its back in moving.' The Sept. word in Nahum, arTeXefios, has already been shown to mean a perfect insect and species. Accordingly, Aris- totle speaks of its parturition and eggs (Hist. Anim. v. 29 ; so also Plutarch, De Isid. et Osir.~). It seems, however, not unlikely that it means a wingless species of locust, genus Podisma of La- treille. Grasshoppers, which are of this kind, he in- cludes under the genus Tettix. Hesychius defines the a.TTi\ej3os as aicpls /xiicpd, ' a small locust ;' and Pliny mentions it as ' locustarum minimae, sine pennis, quas attelabo3 vocant' (Hist. Nat. xxix. 5). Accordingly the Sept. ascribes only leaping to it, i^fiXaro uis «TTeAe/8os. In Nahum we have the construction *213 213, locusta locustarum, which the lexicons compare with D^kJHp £5Hp, and explain as a vast multitude of locusts. Archbishop Newcome suggests that ' the phrase is either a double reading where the scribes had a doubt which was the true reading, or a mis- taken repetition not expunged.' He adds, that we may suppose M13 the contracted plural for Q'QIi (Improved Version of the Minor Prophets, Pontefr. 1809, p. 188). . * From the affinity of Arabic to Hebrew, it might have been hoped that from inquiries in Arabia some light would have been cast upon the Hebrew names of locusts by the traditional names for them still in use in that region. But the modern Arabic names, which may be seen in Bochart, Tychsen, Forskal, Niebuhr, Shaw, &c, bear no resemblance to the Hebrew. The word rQIN was among the topics of inquiry proposed to Niebuhr by Michaelis in 1774 (Recueil de Questions ■proposecs, 8fc. Quest, xxx.). Niebuhr replied, ' Comme la philologie n"est point mon fort, je dois avertir de nouveau, que je ne saurois decider si l'explication en est foujours juste. Je n'ai fait que l'ecrire telle que je l'ai recue des Juifs, Chretiens, ou Mahometans orientaux. i"Ql£S sont a Bagdad et a. Maskat les sauterelles de passage,' &c. (Descript. de V Arabic, 1774, p. 33). Dr. Harris, however, makes Niebuhr say, ' Arbah is the name at Bagdad and Maskat of those locusts,' &c. (Nat. Hist, of the Bible, London, 1825, art. 'Locust'), which is evidently an cwer-translation. Indeed Forskal, who went in the same expedition with Niebuhr, expressly says that the Arabs every where call what he names G. gregarius cM»*e»- Djerdd, and that the Jews inhabiting Yemen (Arabia Felix) affirmed that it was the n2~lX ( Descr iptiones Animalium, §c. p. 81, Haunise, 1775, and Flora JEgypt, p. 83). LOCUST. 3. QT3 gazam ; Joel i. 4 ; ii. 25 ; Amos iv. 9 ; in all which the Sept. reads KafjLTrrj, the Vulg. eruca, and the English palmencortn. Bochart observes that the Jews derive the word from T13 or U3, ' to shear' or ' clip,' though he prefers D*3, ' to cut ;' because, he observes, the locust gnaws the tender branches of trees, as well as the leaves. Gese- nius urges that the Chaldaic and Syriac explain it as the young unfledged bruchus, which he considers very suitable to the passage in Joel, where the D?3 begins its ravages before the lo- custs ; but. Dr. Lee justly remarks that there is no dependence to be placed on this. Gesenius adds that the root D*3 in Arabic, and the Talmud, is kindred with 'DM, ' to shear' — a derivation which, however, applies to most species of locusts. Michaelis follows the Sept. and Vulgate, where the word in each most probably means the cater- pillar, the larvae of the lepidopterous tribe; of insects (Suppl. ad Lex., p. 290, compared with B.ecueil de Quest., p. 63). We have, indeed, the authority of Columella, that the creatures winch the Latins call erucce, are by the Greeks called Ka/nrai, or caterpillars : — ' Animalia qua a nobis appellantur erucae, grrece autem Ko.fJ.ircu norai- nantur' (xi. 3) ; which he also describes as creep- ing upon vegetables and devouring them. Never- theless, the depredations ascribed to the DT3 in Amos, better agree with the characteristics of the locust, as, according to Bochart, it was un- derstood by the ancient, versions. The English word ' palmerworm,' in our old authors, means properly a hairy caterpillar, which wanders like a palmer or pilgrim, and from its being rough, called also ' beareworm ' (Mouffet, Insectorum Theatram, p. 186). 4. 23n chagab ; Lev. xi. 22; Num. xiii. 33; Isa. xl. 22 ; Eccles. xii. 5 ; and 2 Chron. vii. 13 ; in all which the Sept. reads dicpis, Vulgate locusta, and English grasshopper, except the last, where the English has locusts. The mani- fest impropriety of translating this word ' grass- hoppers' in Lev. xi. 22, according to the English acceptation of the word, has already been shown [Grasshopper] ; in all the other instances it most probably denotes a species of locust. Our trans- lators have, indeed, properly rendered it 'locust' in 2 Chron. ; but in all the other places ' grass- hopper,' probably with a view to heighten the con- trast described in those passages, but with no real advantage. Oedman infers, from its being so often used for this purpose, that it denotes the smallest species of locust ; but in the passage in Chronicles voracity seems its chief characteristic. An Arabic root, signifying ' to hide,' is usuall} adduced, because it is said that locusts fly in such crowds as to hide the sun ; but others say, from their hiding the ground when they alight. Even Parkhurst demurs, that 'to veil the sun and darken the air is not peculiar to any kind of locust ;' and with no better success proposes to understand the cucullated, or hooded, or veiled species of locust. Tychsen suggests the G. coro- natus.. 5. ?D3n chanamal, Ps. lxxviii. 47 ; Sept. iraxvo ; Aq. iv Kpvet ; Vulg. in pruina ; Eng. ' frost.' Notwithstanding this concurrence of Sept., Vulg., and Aquila, it is objected that ' frost ' is nowhere mentioned as having been employed in the plagues of Egypt, to which the Psalmist evidently alludes ; but that, if his LOCUST. words be compared with Exod. x. 5, 15, it will be seen that the locusts succeeded the hail. The Psalmist observes the same order, putting the devourer after the hail (comp. Mai. iii. 11). Hence it is thought to be another term for the locust. If this inference be correct, and assuming that the Psalmist is describing facts, this would make a fourth species of locust employed against Egypt, two of the others, the i"Q1K and T^DI"!, being mentioned in the pieceding verse. Pro- posed derivation, fOPI, to settle, and ?0, to cut off, because where locusts settle they cut off leaves, &c, or as denoting some non-migrating locust which settles in a locality (see Bochart, in vac). 6. ?*Dn chasil; Sept. fipovxos, ipvo-ij3ri ; Vulg. ritbigo, bruchus, cerugo [Chasil]. 7. ?T\T\ chargol; Lev. xi. 22; 6* tzelatzal ; Deut. xxviii. 42, tpvcrifi-r], rubigo, locust. The root commonly assigned is ??¥, to sound ; hence, says Gesenius, a species of locust, that makes a shrill noise. Dr. Lee says a tree-cricket that does so. Tychsen suggests the G. stridulus of Linn. The song of the gryllo-talpa is sweet and loud. With equal certainty we might give the Chald. K?)i, to pray, and thence infer the mantis religiosa, or Prier Dieu, so called from its singular attitude, and which is found in Palestine (Kitto's Physical History, p. 419). The words in the Sept. and Vulg. properly mean the mildew on corn, &c, and are there applied metaphorically to the ravages of locusts. This mildew was anciently believed by the heathens to be a divine chastisement; hence their religious ceremony called Rubigalia (Pliny, Hist. Nat. xviii. 29). The general references to locusts in the Scriptures are well collected by Jahn (Biblisches Archaul., § 23). Some popular errors respecting them are, however, diligently retailed by others. It is well known that locusts live in a republic like ants. Mr. Home says ' like bees and ants.' Agur, the son of Jakeh, correctly says, ' the locusts have no king.' But Mr. Home gives them one {Introduction, &c, 1839, vol. iii. p. 76), and Dr. Harris, 'a leader whose motions they invariably observe ' (Nat. Sist. of the Bible, Lond. 1825, art. ' Locust '). See this notion refuted hy Kirby and Spence (vol. ii. p. 16), and even by Mouifet (Theat. Insect, p. 122, Lond. 1634). It is also worthy of remark that no Hebrew root has ever been ottered favouring this idea. Our translation (Nah. iii. 17) represents locusts, ' great grasshop- pers,' as ' camping in the hedges in the cold day, but when the sun ariseth as fleeing away.' Here the locust, ■Q'lJ, is undoubtedly spoken of as a perfect insect, able to fly, and as it is well known that at evening the locusts descend from their flights and form camps for the night, may not the cold day mean the cold portion of the day, i. e. the night, so remarkable for its coldness in the East, the word DT1 being used here, as. it often is, in a comprehensive sense, like the Gr. rj/xepa and Lat. dies/ And Gesenius suggests that rmil, ' hedges,' should here be understood like the Gr. aij.t-a.md, shrubs, brushwood, &c. As the result of the whole preceding analysis it would seem that several, if not all, of the Hebrew words denote as many species of locusts ; that the roots of these words afford no safe clue in any in- 262 LOCUST. stance to the particular species intended ; that the Sept. and Vulg. afford us assistance only where the definite renderingsthey give are elucidated by other writers; and that this elucidation goes no further than to render it probable that species and not states of the locust are denoted in such places. Take, for instance, the Sept. word 6(pio/xdxys and the corresponding word ophiomachus in the Vulg. (Lev. xi. 22), which is one of the few instances of a definite rendering in either, being elucidated by any ancient author, and compare it with the references made by Aristotle (ix. 9) and by Pliny (xi. 29), to locusts fighting with serpents, as the Greek word would indicate, and ' killing them, biting them at. the throat;' and even with the testimony of Simon Majolus"s gardener (C'olloq. viii. 123), who told his master that he had seen a locust thus occupied with a serpent ; and ' to speak advisedly,' we must confess that in the present state of our knowledge the elucidation is not very clear or satisfactory. There is one instance of agreement between Moses and Aristotle not unworthy of notice. Moses evidently assigns but ' four feet ' to locusts (Lev. vi. 22) ; so does Aristotle in the first instance, but afterwards re- marks that they have six, if the parts with which they leap be counted, ahv to7s aKruco?s fiopiois. Augustine remarks that Moses did not consider these as legs. The true solution appears to us to be, that Moses, and Aristotle also in the first instance, considers the two fore legs as hands and arms, and that. Aristotle takes in the parts both above and below in the hind legs, and with these 'leap- ing parts ' makes out six (see also Kirby and Spence, vol. i. p. 23). Still it must be confessed with Bochart, that we know not sufficiently how the words locusta, bruchus, attacus, and ophio- machus differ from each other, and much less whether these words in Greek and Latin accu- rately corresponded to the Hebrew. The specific application of the several names was evidently all but lost in the time of the Septuagint translators, since they make no distinctions, and, rather from the want of ability than inclination, we may pre- sume, apply dicpis to four out of the ten names, ppodxos to three, arTeXefios to two, ipvcriflri to two, and all the first three of these Greek words to nnS. It is doubtful whether they are correct in the only instance in which they observe uni- formity of rendering, viz., Ka^tr-q. Even where they have given definite renderings, how know we but that they have done here as Jerome says they have in other places, 'seemed to define this or that, rather because they would say something, than because they were sure of what they said ?' (Hieron. in Ez. c. iii.) But Jerome has him- self followed them in these passages for a similar reason. We must, then, admit, with Rabbi Selomo (apud Bochart), that we know not how to distinguish the several species. Bochart conjec- tures that till the time of John the Jews were able to do so, otherwise the Baptisr, he urges, would not have known which to eat (Matt. iii. 4). But surely the definition alone in Lev. xi. 21 must have been a sufficient guide to him, as it would be now to a Jew. It is a wild speculation of the Jewish doctors, that whenever their nation shall be restored a prophet will be directed to point out by inspiration the creatures distinguished by the different names in their law ; it is a spe- culation, however, originated by the confessed LOCUST. impenetrable obscurity of the general subject. It will be refreshing to the reader to turn from this dry and unsatisfactory, yet useful detail, to some proofs that locusts are not, as they have been commonly represented, wholly an evil ; not altogether ' pestis irse Deorum,' as Pliny calls them (xi. 29). When directed, indeed, by divine agency in enormous numbers and various species, as in the case of Egypt, their depredations might merit Mr. Home's description as ' one of the most terrible scourges by which mankind can be afflicted ' (Inirod. vol. iii. p. 74, Lond. 1839). With regard to the description in Joel, it is con- sidered by many learned writers as a figurative representation of the ravages of an invading 'army' of human beings, as in Rev. ix. 2-12, rather than a literal account, since such a devas- tation would hardly, they think, have escaped notice in the books of Kings and Chronicles. Accordingly some understand by the four species of locusts there mentioned, Salmaneser, -Nebu- chadnezzar, Antiochus, and the Romans. The- odoret explains them as the four Assyrian kings, Tiglathpileser, Salmaneser, Sennacherib, and Ne- buchadnezzar ; and Abarbanel, of the four king- doms inimical to the Jews, viz. the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans (Pococke's Works, vol. i. p. 211, &c, London, 1740: Rosenmiiller, Scholia in Joel, c. i.). Locusts, like many other of the general provisions of nature, may occasion incidental and partial evil ; but upon the whole they are an immense benefit to those portions of the world which they inhabit ; and so connected is the chain of being that we may safely believe that the advantage is not confined to those regions. ' They clear the way for the renovation of vegetable pro- ductions which are in danger of being destroyed by the exuberance of some particular species, and are thus fulfilling the law of the Creator, that of all which he has made should nothing be lost. A region which has been choked up by shrubs and perennial plants and hard half-withered im- palatable grasses, after having been laid bare by these scourges, soon appears in a far more beau- tiful dress, with new herbs, superb lilies, fresh annual grasses, and young and juicy shrubs of perennial kinds, affording delicious herbage for the wild cattle and game ' (Sparman's Voyage, vol. i. p. 367). Meanwhile their excessive mul- tiplication is repressed by numerous causes. Con- trary to the order of nature with all other insects, the males are far more numerous than the females. It is believed that if they were equal in number they would in ten years annihilate the vegetable system. Besides all the creatures that feed upon them, rains are very destructive to their eggs, to the larvae, pupse, and perfect insect. When per- fect, they always fly with the winds, and are there- fore constantly being carried out to sea, and often ignorantly descend upon it as if upon land. Myriads are thus lost in the ocean every year, and become the food of fishes. On land they afford in all their several states sustenance to countless tribes of birds, beasts, reptiles, &c. ; and if their office as the scavengers of nature, commissioned to remove all superfluous productions from the face of the earth, sometimes incidentally and as the operation of a general law, interferes with the labours of man, as do storms, tempests, &c, they have, from all antiquity to the present hour, afforded him an excellent supply till the land LOCUST. LOGOS. 263 acquires the benefit of their visitations, by yielding 'him in the meantime an agreeable, wholesome, and nutritious aliment. They are eaten as meat, are ground into flour, and made into bread. They are even an extensive article of commerce (Svjar- man's Voyage, vol. i. p. 367, &c). Diodorus Siculus mentions a people of Ethiopia who were so fond of eating them that they were called Acridophagi, ' eaters of locusts ' (xxiv. 3). Whole armies have been relieved by them when in danger of perishing (Porphyrius, De Absti- nentia Carnis). We learn from Aristophanes and Aristotle that they were eaten by the inha- bitants of Greece (Aristoph. Achamen. 1116, 11 17, ed. Dind.; Aristot. Hist. Anim. v. 30, where he speaks of them as delicacies). Their great flights occur only every fourth or fifth season. Those locusts which come in the first instance only fix on trees, and do not destroy grain : it is the young before they are able to fly which are chiefly injurious to the crops. Nor do all the species feed upon vegetables ; one, compre- hending many varieties, the truxalis, feeds upon in- sects. Latreille says the house-cricket will do so. ' Locusts,' remarks a very sensible tourist, ' seem to devour not so much from a ravenous appetite as from a rage for destroying.' Destruction, there- fore, and not food, is the chief impulse of their devastations, and in this consists their utility ; they are in fact omnivorous. The most poisonous plants are indifferent to them ; they will prey even upon the crowfoot, whose causticity burns the very hides of beasts. They simply con- sume everything without predilection, vegetable matter, linen, woollen, silk, leather, &c. ; and Pliny does not exaggerate when he says ' fores quoque tectorum,' ' and even the doors of houses ' (xi. 29), for they have been known to consume the very varnish of furniture. They reduce everything indiscriminately to shreds, which be- come manure. It might serve to mitigate popular misapprehensions on the. subject to consider what would have been the consequence if locusts had been carnivorous like wasps. All terrestrial beings, in such a case, not excluding man himself, would have become their victims. There are, no doubt, many things respecting them yet unknown to us which would still further justify the belief that this, like ' every ' other ' work of God is good ' — benevolent upon the whole (see Dillon"s Travels in Spain, p. 256, &c. 4to. Lond. 1780). The best account of their cookery and domestic uses will be found in Kitto's Physical History of Pales- tine, p. 420 : for the species whose existence in Palestine is ascertained, viz., G. domesticus, nasutus, gryllotalpa, migratorius, and falcatus, and for some beautiful and accurate cuts of lo- custs, see p. 419 ; and for an account of the locust- bird, Smurmur, which the Turks believe eats a thousand locusts in a day, pp. 410, 411. We subjoin a list of the principal writers on the Bibli- cal locusts, of whom we may say with Bochart,' Cre- dimus? an qui amant. ipsi sibi somnia fingunt!' Franciscus Stancarus, whom Moutl'et records to have written on seven of the Biblical locusts; Faber, De Locustis Biblicis, 4to. Vitemb. 1710 ; Don Ignacio de Asso y Del Rio, Abhandhcng von den Heuschrelcen, Rostock, 1787-8, to which is added sometimes in the same vol. Tychsen, Co7>i- ment. de Locustis, in which he has collected all the Chaldaic, Syriac, and Arabic names for locusts, p. 47, &c. ; Ludolphus, Dissert, de Locustis, Francof. 1694, and Ludol. Hist. JEthiop. Frank- fort, ad Maenum, 1691; and ad suam Hist.JEthiop. Comment, fol. Frank. 1691. He maintains that the quails (Num. xi.) were locusts, as do the Jewish Arabs to this day. So does Patrick, in his Comment, on Numbers. Oedman, Vermischte Sammlunffen, fasc. ii. c. vii. ; partic. ii. pp. 91, 92v Bochart's Hieroz. ii Rosenmuller. For general information, Kirby and Spence, Introduction to Entomology, vol. i. p. 215, &c, Lond. 1828; and the Travels of Russel, Tavernier, Hasselquist, Volney, Burckhardt, Clarke, &c. For the locusts of St. John, see Suicer, Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus, torn. i. pp. 169, 179; and Gutherr, De Victu Johannis Baptist, in Desertis, Franc. 1785. For the symbolical locusts (Rev. ix.), Newton, On the Prophecies ; and Woodhouse, On the Apo- calypse. Among the curiosities in this depart- ment is Norelii Schediasma de Avibus esu Ileitis, Arbeh, Solam, Charc/ol, et Chagab (Lev. xi. 22), Upsal, 1746, in which the author endeavours to show that these words denote birds and not locusts.— J. F, D. LOD. [Lydda.] LOG. [Weights and Measures.] LOGOS. It was in Egypt, that religion and philosophy came once more into the presence of each other after the lapse of so many ages; and whence they were once more to go forth on their divided, yet united, mission to the nations. We speak not of that forced union of doctrines and principles which was attempted in the Gnostic heresy, and which came so utterly to nothing that our knowledge of that heresy and its leaders is derived altogether from the report of its opponents ; but of that real and sound accord between religion and philosoph}', between the commands of God and the reason of man, which the Christian desires fo make more and more manifest, even to the coming of the perfect day. The Gnostic heresy attempted a union between fanatical feeling and ascetic discipline — a union which too often ends in licentiousness, and which never can attain the sound principles and right practices which together constitute man's rea- sonable service. On the other hand, the opponents of Gnosticism have too often exhibited an unfair- ness, a rancour, and a calumny, which must have had the worst effects upon themselves, as it has greatly tended to prejudice their cause, and has left us the example of a spirit so unchristian that we regret to see it associated with a purer faith. In spite of such opponents as the Gnostics — advocates of an unsound religion united to an unsound philosophy — and in spite also of supporters who knew not what spirit they were of, Christianity has triumphed so completely over Gnosticism as to leave of that great heresy little more than the name. Yet are the few and scattered me- morials of Gnosticism not without instruction, whether we examine them critically in all fair- ness, for the purpose of separating the good from the evil, or whether we trace them historically to their sources, or onward to their effects. In our article on Gnosticism, of which this is a sequel, we have given a brief and clear account, in the words of Professor Burton. — first, of the great leading doctrines of all the Gnostic sects ; secondly, of the three principal sources from which Gnosticism was derived ; and thirdly, of 264 LOGOS. LOGOS. the effects produced by the Gnostic heresy on the progress of Christianity, during the time which elapsed between the conversion of St. Paul, and his first preaching to the Gentiles. Before we return to the latter subject, which will be found closely connected with Professor Burton's view of the Logos in St. John's Gospel, we propose to examine a little farther into the merits of that philosophy of Plato, which he considers the im- mediate, if not the original, cause of the Gnostic heresy. The original cause of that heresy, more ancient even- than the theosophy of Babylon, must be sought in the mixed good and evil prin- ciples of human nature, which have so often led to folly in opinion, as well as to crime in con- duct. But the immediate cause of Gnosticism may certainly be traced to types and shadows in the philosophy of Plato ; and we consider Pro- fessor Burton to have done a valuable service to the cause of religion and philosophy, in directing the attention of the critic, as well as of the his- torian, to this source of information. It. would appear that some writers have a sort of dread of the philosophy of Plato, and labour rather disingenuously to fix upon all his writings the character of obscurity and mysticism, from which many of them are altogether free. Others, on the contrary, profess great admiration of his sublime doctrines and pure morality, and speak of him as a sort of herald of Christianity ; and, strange to say, ground their admiration of hirn on some of his most questionable works. It is in these works that we trace the immediate causes of the corruption which the Gnostic heresy attempted to introduce into Christianity, — mysti- cism, asceticism, and licentiousness ; from all which, in spite of that attempt, the Christian religion is so eminently free. Plato, as a writer, at least in many of his works, cannot be spoken of too highly : but Plato, as a philosopher, inde- pendently of what he reports of the conversation and teaching of Socrates, appears to us to have been estimated far beyond his deserts. The un- soundness of that which may justly be considered the philosophy of Plato, may be tested by the downward course of the philosophical schools and religious sects which proceeded from that phi- losophy in Alexandria. It is in this sense that the study of Plato's philosophy may be most profitable to the critic and historian, the moralist and divine ; and by which the contrast between Gnosticism and Christianity, in principles as well as in effects, may be made most manifest. And in our estimate of Plato, we would judge him by his own words, before we presume to make him answerable for Ihe mischievous consequences into which his disciples followed out his errors. In like manner, we would not judge of Gnos- ticism by the unjust and rancorous reports of some of its opponents ; but by the fairer views of the lives and doctrines of its professors, which have in many cases been established by the keen and searching criticisms of Beausohre. Indeed, it is hardly possible to oven-ate the advantage of having, in Professor Burton, a fair arbiter between the parties — between the Gnostics and the Fathers on the one hand, and between Plato and the Gnostics on the other hand. We have not space here for such an examina- tion of the philosophy of Plato as the largeness and complication of the subject demand. This is the less necessary, however, because theEngTish reader will find in Dr. Enfield's abridgment of Brucker's Hist, of Philosophy, a very sound, learned, and intelligible view of Plato's opinions, should he wish to know more of them than is contained in Professor Burton's work. But if we were re- quired to bring the inquiry to a clear issue, and in brief space, we should say that in the fifth book of the Republic of Plato may be seen that unsound union of religious mysticism with moral licentiousness, closely connected in other parts of his philosophy with opinions tending to asceticism, which the Professor has shown to have been strangely, but by no means rsnnaturally, united in the theory and practice of many of the Gnostics,, and which union is as much opposed to sound philosophy as to sound religion. The divine and moralist must not shrink from testing Plato's philosophy (for these theories are in- manifest dis- agreement with the practical piety and sound morality of Socrates, and unquestionably cannot be referred to him) by the contents of this cele- brated book, in which a system of the most unre- strained indulgence of the sensual appetites is set forth as the completion of politics and the per- fection of philosophy ; and in strange connection with this immoral plan are exhibited pretensions to a divine knowledge of the most mystic charac- ter, which, both in this book and in other works of Plato, is set forth as the elevator and purifier of human nature, just as the gnosis of Gnosticism was set forth at a later period. Here and else- where Plato speaks of matter as so altogether in- capable of good, from its weakness rather than its malignity, as to thwart the benevolent intentions of the Deity to promote human virtue and human happiness ; and, on the other hand, he sets forth intellect as only requiring to be separated from matter in order to be perfect ; and in close con- nection with these views of mind and body, he speaks of a mystic knowledge of the divine nature able to purify and elevate the mind by its intense contemplation, and, in the end, to free it from its corporeal prison-house. It is in the first part oS the fifth book of ihe Republic that the affections and duties of husband and wife, parent and child7 brothers and sisters, are sacrificed to a system of concubinage, as absurd in the arguments by which it is supported as it would be ruinous to domestic happiness and national character in its consequences ; and it is at the close of this very book that there is brought forward in the swelling language of mysticism a secret, and sublime, and a scarcely intelligible gnosis, which is to purify and elevate the intellect, whilst the body is, as we have seen, placed in a moral and political system of wide and deep sensualism. These are the deli- berate opinions of Plato, put forth in one of the latest, most highly finished, and most closely com- pacted of his works, and again deliberately con- firmed in a subsequent work of still higher pre- tension. Now, it was to Plato, the mystical pro- pounder of a divine gnosis, that the Gnostic sects gave ear; and whilst some devoted themselves to this divine contemplation, even to the maceration and mortification of the body, others were not wanting who thought such ideal and spiritual purity might render the service of the poor and despised body altogether unnecessary. How un- like is all this to the sound principles and strong sense, the rational piety and wholesome self-corn- LOGOS. mand of Christianity! It is the boast of the Christian religion that not its least pure worship is by the domestic hearth, and that marriage is the most honoured of all institutions by its founder, from Cana of Galilee, where the sign of water turned to wine teaches that a healthful purity must be the foundation of domestic happiness, to the mystic union of Christ with his church, applying'the nearest and dearest of ties to express the connection between man and his master and teacher and great exemplar. In the Christian commonwealth woman is neither the poor slave of the harem, nor the spoilt child of Feudalism, nor yet the Aspasia of Plato"s Republic, but the helpmeet for man, appointed to aid in working out the highest destinies of our race, beginning, not in the gymnasia or syssitia of Plato, but in the home of our affections, where must be born, bred, and educated a race strong in body, firm in mind, and stedfast in principle. It is plain that of these great domestic and national objects the system of Plato would be utterly destructive, tending to concubinage instead of marriage, fanaticism in- stead of piety, and asceticism instead of self- command. And as the licentiousness of Plato, and of some of his Gnostic followers, is in direct opposition to the precepts and practice of Christ and his disciples, so there is not a word in the New Testament, that would warrant divine contempla- tion being substituted for holiness of life, whether that contemplation consisted in endless genealogies of divine emanations, or in mystic reveries on the divine perfections; even though these were ac- companied with a voluntary humility in the wor- shipping of angels, or in fasting and prayer more rigidly ceremonial than those of the Pharisee. Those who feel themselves in danger of being mastered by some strong passion will do well to call to their aid such means, whether of prayer or fasting, as may enable them to overcome the temptation. But this use of a sound means to a good end, and under extraordinary circumstances, of which the individual can be and ought to be the only judge, is very different from the yoke of an ascetic discipline, whether it be dictated by a fanaticism which aims at something unsuited to our nature, or by that hard task-master, a spiritual tyranny. If the mystical ideas of Plato are fairly compared, on the one hand, with the plain Evi- dences of the Being, Power, Wisdom, and Good- ness of God, as set forth by Socrates in the Memo- rabilia of Xenophon, and, on the other hand, with the clear definitions of Species, Genus, Differentia, Property, and Accident, as laid down by Aris- totle in his Works on Logical Analysis, it will be seen that little was gained to religion or to philo- sophy by a theory, which certainly diverted men's minds from the right direction into which Socrates had turned them, both in philosophy and religion. Socrates had ascended step by step, by a process of logical reasoning, from matter to spirit, from the world to its Creator; and had arrived by that process at the sound conclusion, that such unity of design demonstrates the oneness of the de- signer. Plato, on the other hand, descends, as it were, in the theatrical machine of the 'Fiffneeus, from heaven to earth, bringing with him the fruits of his great master's philosophy, under the fanciful disguise of a mythological mysticism. This purely imaginative Statement of Plata might be mine imposing to some minds, and more adapted LOGOS. 265 to the perverted tastes of some periods, than the sound, rational statements of Socrates; more espe- cially when these dogmas of Plato came to be exhibited at one time as a political remedy in the Republic, at another as 'metaphysical abstrac- tion in the Parmenides, now in the mythological form of the Timesiis, and now as the foundation of asceticism in the Phcedo?i. The sound philo- sophical reasoning of Socrates receives a con- stantly increasing evidence from every fresh dis- covery in the physical and moral sciences ; whilst the ideal types of Plato are sickly exotics which cannot be revived — personified ideas in religion, and extracted essences in philosophy. Professor Burton's lectures, to which, as con- taining his remarks on the Logos of St. John's Gospel, and on its connection with Gnosticism, we must now return, will supply many texts from the New Testament clearly directed against the religious and moral errors of the Gnostic sects, and which cannot be rightly understood, unless this is constantly borne in mind. The following passages give a summary of this part of the Professor's work : — ' I pointed out in my first lecture the import- ance of the fact, that nearly fifteen years elapsed between our Saviour's death and St. Paul's first apostolical journey. During the greater part of this period, Simon Magus and his followers were spreading their doctrines ; and I have shown that Christ, as one of the ^ons, held a conspicuous place in their theological system. There is rea- son therefore to suppose that in many countries, before they were visited by an apostle, the name of Christ was introduced in a corruption of the Platonic doctrines.' Applying the same im- portant remark to the later period when St. John's Gospel is supposed to have been written," Pro- fessor Burton adds : — ' St. John was as far as pos- sible from being the first to apply the term Logos to Christ. I suppose him to have found it so universally applied, that he did not attempt to 3top the current of popular language, but only kept it to its proper channel, and guarded it from extraneous corruptions.' In these few words we have a brief statement of Professor Burton's theory respecting the first use of the term Logos by the Christian converts, and its subsequent adoption into the Gospel of St. John. In other parts of Professor Burton's work he shows how often the misuse of the term Logos, amongst other Gnostic errors, is referred to in the Epistles, and how many texts in the New Testament have a pri- mary reference to the Gnostic Heresy. Professor- Burton's theory respecting the first use of the term Logos is supported with great learning and moderation, and appears to us to tend equally to truth, faith, and charity. Professor Burton con- siders the term Logos to have been borrowed by the first Christian converts from the Gnostics, and to have been applied by them to Christ, and that it is one of the peculiar objects of St. John's Gospel to show in u-J.at so.se the term Logo- can be ..( plied properly to Christ. As the latter part of the inquiry respects some of the chief ends and objects rjf Christianity, in so far as Christ is set forth by St'. John as IheWo&D of God, it is our intention to return to this pari of the subject in an artidle nndei that The errors of the Gu '-': ctu'a]', religious and moral, a n human nature; and to 266 LOIS. guard against those corruptions is to guard against the evil tendencies of our own natures. But before we can clearly understand the application of such lessons as. are contained in the Scriptures to ourselves, we must, understand clearly their more immediate application to the errors against which they were first directed. Doubtless there is an absolute meaning in each of the texts quoted by Dr. Burton, which is as true now as it was true then ; but in order to get at this abso- lute meaning, we must attend closely to the rela- tive meaning of the text, as it applied to the opinions, practices, and persons against whom it was primarily directed. The truth of this re- mark, when fairly stated and considered, is equally obvious and important ; yet it is too commonly neglected, and hence great mistakes, and, we may add, great dangers have arisen, not only to individual Christians, but to Christian societies, and to Christianity itself. To use the strong language of Scripture, and which is itself an instance of the importance of calling in his- tory to aid the labour of criticism, men wrest texts to their own condemnation, and still more fre- quently to the condemnation of others, the force of which might be wisely and charitably modified by ascertaining their original relative application. Through the neglect of this many are made ene- mies, and the love of many waxeth cold. Pro- fessor Burton was too stanch a Protestant to be suspected of any leaning towards Rome ; but he has had the honest boldness to show that some texts have been applied prophetically to the Romanist, which had a direct, historical applica- tion to the Gnostic, and could only be applied to the Romanist (and then as a reproof, and not as a prophecy), in so far as the Romanist of that day shared in the errors of the Gnostic at an earlier period. To neglect this plain and obvious cau- tion has a tendency to fasten upon Christianity a narrow, harsh, and sectarian spirit, from which it is, in itself, eminently free ; and also tends more than any other thing to obscure that real accord between sound religion and sound phi- losophy, which, as we have before said, the Chris- tian desires to make more and more manifest, even to the coming of the perfect day. — J. P. P. LOIS (A&j'fy), the grandmother of Timothy, not by the side of his father, who was a Greek, but by that of his mother. Hence the Syriac has ' thy mother's mother.' She is commended by St. Paul for her faith (2 Tim. i. 5) ; for although she might not have known that the Christ was come, and that Jesus of Nazareth was he, she yet believed in the Messiah to come, and died in that faith. LONGEVITY. Longevity- is a compound of two Latin words, and signifies prolongation of life. The lengthened ages of some of the ante and post-diluvian fathers, as given by Moses in the Hebrew text, are as follows : — Years. Adam Gen. v. 5 930 Seth „ 8 912 Enos „ 11 905 Cainan ..... „ 14 910 Mahalaleel .... ,, 17 895 Jared „ 20 962 Enoch „ 23 365 Methuselah .... „ 27 969 Lamech „ 31 777 Noah ix. 29 950 LONGEVITY. Shem . . . . Gen. xi, , 10, 11 600 Arphaxad . . . » 12, 13 438 Salah . . )j 14, 15 433 » 16, 17 464 Peleg . . . . 33 18, 19 239 Reu . . . . 33 20, 21 239 Serug . . . 33 22,23 230 Nahor . . . 33 24, 25 148 Terah . , . 32 205 Abraham • . . „ xxv. 7 175 Infidelity has not failed, in various ages, to attack revelation on the score of the supposed ab- surdity of assigning to any class of men this lengthened term of existence. In reference to this Josephus (Antiq. lib. iii.) remarks : — ' Let no one upon comparing the lives of the ancients with our lives, and with the few .years which we now live, think that what we say of them is false ; or make the shortness of our lives at present an argu- ment that neither did they attain to so long a duration of life.' When we consider the com- pensating process which is going on, the marvel is that the human frame should not last longer than it does. Some, however, have supposed that the years above named are lunar, consisting of about thirty days ; but this supposition, with a view to reduce the lives of the antediluvians to our standard, is replete with difficulties. At this rate the whole time, from the creation of man to the Flood, would not be more than about 140 years; and Methuselah himself would not have attained to the age which many even now do, whilst many must have had children when mere infants ! Be- sides, if we compute the age of the post-diluvians by this mode of calculation — and why should we not? — we shall find that Abraham, who is said to have died in a good old age (Gen. xxv. 8) could not have been more than fifteen years old ! Moses must therefore have meant solar, not lunar years — not, however, exactly so long as ours, for the ancients generally reckoned twelve months, of. thirty days each, to the year. ' Nor is there,' observes St. Augustine (I)e Civ. Dei, xv. 12), ' any care to be given unto those who think that one of our ordinary years would make ten of the years of these times, being so short ; and there- fore, say they, 900 years of theirs are 90 of ours — their 10 is our 1 and their 100 our 10. Thus think they, that Adam was but 20 years old when he begat Seth, and he but 20^ when he begat Enos, whom the Scriptures call (the Sept. ver.) 205 yeais. For, as these men hold, the Scrip- ture divided one year into ten parts, calling each part a year ; and each part had a six-fold qua- drate, because in six days God made the world. Now 6 times 6 is 36, which multiplied by 10 makes 360 — i. e. twelve lunar months.' Abar- banel, in his Comment, on Gen. v., states that some, professing Christianity, had fallen into the same mistake, viz. that Moses meant lunar, and not solar years. Ecclesiastical history does not inform us of this fact, except it be to it that Lactantius refers (ii. 12) when he speaks of one Varro : — ' The life of man, though temporary, was yet extended to 1000 years; of this Yarro is so ignorant that, though known to all from the sacred writings, he would argue that the 1000 years of Moses were, according to the Egyptian mode of calculation, only 1000 months!" That the ancients computed time differently we learn from Pliny (Hist. Nat. vii.), and also LONGEVITY. from Scaliger (De Emend. Temporum, i.) : still this does not alter the case as above stated (see Heideggerus, De Anno Patriarcharurn). But it is asked, if Moses meant solar years, how came it to pass that the patriarchs did not begin to beget children at an earlier period than they are reported to have done? Seth was 105 years old, on the lowest calculation, when he begat Enos; and Methuselah 187 when La- mech was born ! St. Augustine (i. 15) explains this difficulty in a two-fold manner, by supposing 1 . Either that the age of puberty was later in proportion as the lives of the ante-diluvians were longer than ours ; or 2. That Moses does not record the first-born sons, but as the order of the genealogy required, his object being to trace the succession from Adam, through Seth, to Abraham. The learned Heideggerus (De JEtate Ante-Diluv.') thus con- firms this latter view : ' Consilium fuit Mosi, ufi cuilibet confectu proclive est, Noa? et Abra- hami genealogiam pertexere, turn quia illi duo inter cseteros fide et pietate eminebant et uterque divinitns insigni donatus est prserogativa.' Whilst the Jews have never questioned the longevity assigned by Moses to the patriarchs, they have yet disputed, in many instances, as to whe- ther it was common to all men who lived up to the period when human life was contracted. Mai- monides {More Nevochim, ii. 47) says — ' Longaevifatem hanc non fuisse nisi quorun- dam singularium commemoratorum in lege ; reli- quosillorum seculorum annos attigisse nonplures, quam hodie adhuc communiter fieri solet.' With this opinion Abarbanel, on Gen. v., agrees ; Nachmanides, however, rejects it, and shows that the life of the descendants of Cain must have been quite as long as that of the Sethites, though not noticed by Moses; for only seven indivi- duals of the former filled up the space which in- tervened between the death of Abel and the Flood, whereas ten of the latter are enumerated. We have reason then to conclude, that longevity was not confined to any peculiar tribe of the ante or post-diluvian fathers, but was vouchsafed, in general, to all. Irenaeus (Adversus Heeret. v.) informs us that some supposed that the fact of its being recorded that no one of the ante-dilu- vians named attained the age of 1000 years, was the fulfilment of the declaration (Gen. iii.), 'in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die ;' grounding the opinion, or rather conceit, upon Ps. xc. 4, namely, that God's day is 1000 years. As to the probable reasons why God so pro- longed the life of man in the earlier ages of the world, and as to the subordinate means by which this might have been accomplished, Josephus says ( Antiq. i. 3) : ' For those ancients were beloved of God, and lately made by God himself ; and be- cause their food was then titter for the prolongation of life, they might well live so great a number of years : and because God afforded them a longer time of life on account of their virtue and the good use they made of it in astronomical and geometrical discoveries, which would not have afforded the time for foretelling the periods of the stars unless they had lived 600 years; for the great year is completed in that interval.' To this he adds the testimony of many celebrated profane historians, who affirm that the ancients lived 1000 years. LONGEVITY. 267 In the above passage Josephus enumerates four causes of the longevity of the earlier patriarchs. As to the first, viz., their being dearer to God than other men, it is plain that it cannot be maintained ; for the profligate descendants of Cain were equally long-lived, as mentioned above, with others. Neither can we agree in the second reason he assigns; because we find that Noah and others, though born so long subsequently to the creation of Adam, yet lived to as great an age, some of them to a greater age than he did. If, again, it were right to attribute longevity to the superior quality of the food of the ante-diluvians, then the seasons, on which this depends, must, about Moses's time — for it was then that the term of human existence was reduced to its present standard — have assumed a fixed character. But no change at that time took place in the revolu- tion of the heavenly bodies, by which the seasons of heat, cold, &c. are regulated : hence we must not assume that it was the nature of the fruits they ate which caused longevity. How far the ante-diluvians had advanced in scientific re- search generally, and in astronomical discovery particular^', we are not. informed ; nor can we place any dependence upon what Josephus says about the two inscribed pillars which re- mained from the old world (see Antiq. i. 2. 9). We are not, therefore, able to determine, with any confidence, that God permitted the earlier generations of man to live so long, in order that they might arrive at a high degree of mental excellence. From the brief notices which' the Scriptures afford of the character and habits of the ante-diluvians. we should rather infer that they had not advanced very far in discoveries in natural and experimental philosophy (see Ante- diluvians). We must suppose that they did not reduce their language to alphabetical order ; nor was it necessary to do so at a time when human life was so prolonged, that the tradition of the creation passed through only two hands to Noah. It would seem that the book ascribed to Enoch is a work of post-diluvian origin (see Jurieu, Crit. Hist., i. 41). Possibly a want of mental employment, together with the labour they endured ere they were able to extract from the earth the necessaries of life, might have been some of the proximate causes of that degeneracy which led God in judgment to destroy the old world. If the ante-diluvians began to bear children at the age on an average of 100, and if they ceased to do so at 600 years (see Shuckford's Connect, i. 36), the world might then have been far more densely populated than it is now. • Supposing, moreover, that the earth was no more productive antecedently than it was subsequently to the flood; and that the ante- diluvian fathers were ignorant of those mecha- nical arts which so much abridge human labour now, we can easily understand how difficult they must have found it to secure for themselves the common necessaries of life, and this the more so if animal food was not allowed them. The pro- longed life, then, of the generations before the flood, would seem to have been rather an evil than a blessing, leading as it did to the too rapid peopling of the earth. We can readily conceive how this might conduce to that awful state of things expressed in the words, 'And the whole earth was filled with violence.' In the absence of any well regulated system of government, we can 268 LORD. imagine what evils must have arisen : the un- principled would oppress the eak, the crafty would outwit the unsuspecting, and, not having the fear of God before their eyes, destruction and misery would be in their ways. Still we must admire the providence of God in the longevity of man immediately after the creation and the flood. After the creation, when the world was to be peopled bj one man and one woman, the age of the greatest part of those on record was 900 and upwards. But after the flood, when there were thiiee couples to re-people the earth, none of the patriarchs, except Shem, reached the age of 500 ; and only the three first of his line, viz., Arphaxad, Selah, and Eber, came near that age, which was in the first century after the Flood. In the second century we do not find that any attained the age of 240 ; and in the third century (about the latter end of which Abraham was born), none, except Terah, arrived at 200 ; by which time the world was so well peopled, that they had built cities, and were formed into dis- tinct nations under their respective kings (See Gen. xv. ; see also Usher and Petavius on the increase of mankind in the three first centuries after the flood). That the common age of man has been the same in all times since the world was peopled, is manifest from profane as well as sacred history. Plato lived to the age of 81, and was accounted an old man ; and those whom Pliny reckons up (vii. 48) as rare examples of long life, may, for the most part; be equalled in modem times. We can- not, then, but see the hand of God in the propor- tion that there is between births and deaths; for by this means the population of the world is kept up. If the fixed standard of human life were that of Methuselah's age, or even that of Abraham's, the world would soon be overstocked ; or if the age of man were limited to that of divers other animals, to 10, 20, or 30 years only, the decay of mankind would then be too fast. But on the present scale the balance is nearly even, and life and death keep an equal pace ! In thus maintaining throughout all ages and places these proportions of mankind, and all other creatures, God declares himself to be indeed the ruler of the world. We may, then, conclude in the language of the Psalmist (Ps. civ. 29, 30), ' Thou hidest thy face, all creatures are troubled ; thou takest away their breath, they die and return to their dust. Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created ; and thou renewest the face of the earth.'— J. W. D. LOOKING-GLASSES [Mirrors]. LORD, a Saxon word signifying ruler or governor. In its original form it is Maford (hi apopb), which, by dropping the aspiration, be- came laford, and afterwards, by contraction, lord. In the authorized translation of the Scriptures it is used without much discrimination for all the names applied to God ; which cannot he helped, as our language does not afford the same number of distinguishing titles as the Hebrew. When, however, the word represents the dread name of Jehovah, it is printed in small capitals, LoRn, and is by this contrivance made a distinguishing term. Having already explained the different names of God which the .term Lord is made to represent, namely, Adonai, Elohim, Jehovah (see also God"), no further statement on the subject is here-necessary. It also, however, represents the LORD'S DAY. Greek Kvpws, which, indeed, is used in much the same way and in the same sense as Lord. It is fromtfOpos, authority,and signifies ' master' or 'pos- sessor.' In the Septuagint this, like Lord in our version, is invariably used for ' Jehovah ' and 'Adonai;' while Qeos, like God in our trans- lation, is generally reserved to represent the He- brew ' Elohim.' Kvpws in the original of the Greek Testament, and Lord in our version of it, are used much in the same manner as in the Septuagint ; and so also is the correspond- ing title, Dominus, in the Latin versions. As the Hebrew name Jehovah is one never used with reference to any but the Almighty, it is to be regretted .that the Septuagint, imitated by our own and other versions, has represented it by a word which is also used for the Hebrew ' Adonai,' which is applied not only to God, but, like our ' Lord,' to creatures also, as to angels (Gen. xix. 2; Dan. x. 16, 17), to men. in au- thority (Gen. xlii. 30, 33), and to proprietors, owners, masters (Gen. xlv. 8). In the New Tes- tament Kvpws, representing ' Adonai,' and both represented by Lord, the last, or human application of the term, is frequent. In fact, the leading idea of the Hebrew, the Greek, and the English words, is that of an owner or proprietor, whether God or man ; and it occurs in the inferior application with great frequency in the New Testament. This application is either literal or complimentary : literal, when the party is really an owner or master, as in Matt. x. 24 ; xx. 8 ; xxi. 40 ; Acts xvi. 16, 19; Gal. iv. 1, &c. ; or when he is so as having absolute authority over another (Matt. ix. 38; Luke x. 2), or as being a supreme lord or sove- reign (Acts xxv. 26) ; and complimentary, when used as a title of address, especially to superiors, like the English Master, Sir; the French Sieur, Monsieur ; the German Hen', &c, as in Matt. xiii. 27 ; xxi. 20 ; Mark vii. 8 ; Luke ix. 54. It cannot but be deemed desirable that, instead of the extensive use of the word Lord which we have described, discriminating terms should be adopted in translations. Apart from the Jewish superstitions which influenced the Seventy in their translation, there can be no good reason why the name Jehovah should not be retained wher- ever it occurs in the Hebrew. Then Lord might represent Adonai ; or perhaps Sir, or Master, might be used when that word is applied to creatures ; and God would very properly repre- sent Elohim. LORD'S DAY. The expression so rendered in the Authorized English Version (eV t?7 KvpiaKy TJ/j.epa) occurs only once in the New Testament, viz. in Rev. i. 10, and is there unaccompanied by any other words tending to explain its meaning. It is, however, well known that the same phrase was, in after ages of the Christian church, used to signify the first day of the week, on which the resurrection of Christ was commemorated. Hence it has been inferred that the same name was given to that day during the time of the apostles, and was in the present instance used by St. John in this sense, as referring to an institution well known, and therefore requiring no explanation. Others, however, have held that it means simply 'the day of the Lord,' the substantive being merely exchanged for the adjective, as in 1 Cor. xi. 20, Kvpiaicbv Se?7rjw, ' the Lord's Supper ;' LORD'S DAY. which would make it merely synonymous with ■ri vfiepa Kvplov, ' the day of the Lord' (1 Thes. v. 2). Such a use of the adjective became ex- tremely common in the following ages, as we have repeatedly in the fathers the corresponding expressions, Dominiese cracis, ' the Lord's cross,' Dominica nativitatis, 'the Lord's nativity' (Ter- tullian, De Idol. 5) ; Xoyitav KvpiaKuv (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 9). According to their view the passage would mean, ' In the spirit I was present at the day of the Lord,' the word ' day ' being used for any signal manifestation (possibly in allusion to Joel ii. 31), as in John viii. 56, ' Abraham rejoiced to see my day.' And the peculiar use of the word i)ixipa, as referring to a period of ascendancy, appears remarkably in 1 Cor. iv. 3, where avdpairiwr]s ri/xepas is rendered ' man's judgment.' But. upon the whole, the former interpretation is perhaps the most probable. Without, however, here pursuing further the question of the name (to which we shall afterwards recur), let us examine more closely the evidence for the actual institu- tion. This, as far as the New Testament records go, is, in fact, very scanty. We must class with very visionary interpreters those who can see anything really bearing on the question, in the circumstance of our Lord's re- appearance on the eighth day after his resurrec- tion (John xx. 26), or in the disciples being then assembled, when we know that they were all along abiding together in concealment for fear of the Jews. Nor, again, will their being in like manner together (Acts ii. 1) on the Feast of Pentecost appear remarkable, on the same grounds, even supposing the computation admitted which makes it fall on a Sunday; which depends on whether the fifty days were reckoned from the Sabbath of the Passover inclusive or not, on which difference of opinion has existed. Indeed, on any ground we could hardly look for any settled institution of this kind, till the Christian church had been actually in some degree organized, as it only was after the elfasion of the Holy Spirit. We find that immediately after that great event, the disciples met together daily for prayer, and communion (Acts ii. 46) ; and this practice has been supposed by some to be implied, at a htter period, in the expressions used in 1 Cor. xi. 21. But on one occasion afterwards, we have it specially recorded, that they 'came together on the first day of the week to break bread' (Acts xx. 7), when ' Paul preached unto them, and continued his speech till midnight.' It has from this last, circumstance been inferred 1])' some that the assembly commenced after sunset on the Sabbath, at which hour the first day of the week had commenced, according to the Jewish reckoning (Jahn's Bibl. Antiq. § 398), which would hardly agree with the idea of a commemo- ration of the resurrection. But further, (he words of this passage, 'Ej/ Se rrj j/.l5. tS>v cajS/BaTcoj', (rvvriy/xevcov rcov ^.aBTiTwv rod K\d.o~ai &prov have been by some considered to imply that such a weekly observance was then the established custom ; yet it is obvious that the mode of expression would be just as applicable if they had been in the practice of assembling daily. The regulation addressed to the church of LORD'S DAY. 269 Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 2) with respect to charitable contributions ' on the first day of the week,' is not connected with any mention of public wor- ship or assemblies on that day. Yet this has been inferred : and the regulation has been supposed to have a reference to the tenets of the Jewish con- verts, who considered it unlawful to touch money on the Sabbath (Vitringa, De Synagogd, trans- lated by Bernard, pp.75-] 67). In consideration for them, therefore, the apostle directs the collection to be made on the following day, on which secular business whs lawful; or, as Cocceius observes, they regarded the day ' non ut festum, sed ut ipyaaip.ov,'' ' not as a feast, but as a working day' (Vitringa, p. 77). Again, the phrase /iia Tuiv aafipdraiv is generally understood to be, according to the Jewish mode of naming the days of the week, the common expression for the first day. Yet it has been differently construed by some, who render it ' upon one of the days of the week ' (Tracts for the Times, ii. 1. 16). Thus far, then, we cannot say that the evidence for any particular observance of this day amounts to much ; still less does it appear what purpose or object was referred to. We find no mention of any commemoration, whether of the resurrec- tion or any other event in the Apostolic records. On these points we have no distinct testimony till a later period. The earliest, or apostolic fathers, make no mention whatever of such an institution, unless we except one passage to which we shall presently refer, but which is at most a mere allusion. The well-known letter of Pliny to Trajan (about a.d. 100) mentions the Christians assem- bling together for worship on a stated day: ' Soliti stato die ante lucem convenire carmenque Christo quasi Deo dicere,' — ' They are accustomed to as- semble on a stated day before light, and sing a hymn to Christ as a God' (Epist. x. 97). But it is not till the time of Justin Martyr (a.d. 140) that we find a distinct account of the observance. His statement is clear and circum- stantial, to the effect that the Christians were in the practice of assembling for public worship on the first day of the week, as being that on which the work of Creation was commenced, and on which Christ rose from the dead : — Ttjj/ 8e tov tjXluv 7]fx4pav KOivrj itdvres Tr\v awt\zvG~i.v iroiov- |Ue0a, iireiSr] irpu>T7) ia-rXv ri/xepa, iv fi u 0eos rb o~k6tos, teal tt]v vKrjv rpv\/os Kocrfiov iiroirjae, ko.\ 6 lrjaovs Xpi&Tos 6 y^urspos 2am;p ttj ahrfj ifj Ti/Atpa in veKpuv aviaTi) :' — ' On Sunday we all assemble in common, since that is the first day, on which God, having changed darkness and chaos, made the world, and on the same day our Saviour Jesus Christ rose from the dead' (Justin Mart. Apol. i. 67). In the so-called Epistle of Barnabas, probably a forgery of the second century [Barnabas], the first day of the week is spoken of as observed wilh rejoicing in memory of the resurrection: — "'AyojJ.ev tt)v i]fj.4pa.v r))V oySuiiv fi's evcppoavvTiv iv fj Kal 6 'liiaous avearrj iic vtKpSiv : — ' \\ e keep the eighth day with joy, on which also Jesus rose from the dead' (Barnab. Ep. i. 15). The earliest authentic instance in which the name of ' the Lord's day' is applied (after the passage in the Apocalypse), is not till a.d. 200, when Tertullian speaks of it as • die Dominico resurrexionis' (De Orat. § 23) ; again, ♦ Domini- 270 LORD'S DAY. cum diem* (De Idol. 14); and Dion ysius of Corinth (probably somewhat later), as ' yftepav KvpiaK-fjv (quoted by Euseb. Hist. JEccles. iv. 23). Thus far, also, nothing has appeared relative to any observance of the day beyond that of hold- ing assemblies for religious worship, and a festal commemoration of the resurrection and the be- ginning of the creation. But in these last cited writers we trace the commencement of a more formal observance. Thus the whole passage in Tertullian is : — ' Solo die Dominico resurrexionis non ab isto tantum (genuflexione), sed enim anxietatis habitu et officio cavere debemus, differentes etiam negotio ne quern diabolo locum demus,' — ' On the day of the Lord's resurrection alone we ought to abstain not only from kneeling, but from all devotion to care and anxiety, putting off even business, lest we should give place to the devil ;' and that of Dionysius, ' Tfyv arifxepov ovv KvpiaKrjv ay'iav 7]fjt.epav h~n)ydyotxevJ — ' We keep the Lord's day holy ;' and at dates later than this we find in- creasing indications of the same spirit, as appears from Clemens Alexandrinus {Strom, vii. p. 744), Hilary, Augustine, and other authorities, of which a large number will be found in Bishop Pearson On the Creed, and Notes (vol. ii. p. 341, ed. Oxford). But we must here notice one other passage of earlier date than any of these, which has often been referred to as bearing on the subject of the Lord's day, though it certainly contains no men- tion of it. It occurs in the Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians (about a.d. 100). The whole passage is confessedly obscure, and the text may be corrupt. It has, however, been understood in a totally different sense, and as referring to a dis- tinct subject; and such we confess appears to us to be the most obvious and natural construction of it. The passage is as follows : — ' Et oZv ot iv wa- Aaiois irpdy/xacriv dvaarpa(ptvres, els Kaiv6rj]ra iAiridos ^XQov — /nrjKeri cra^fiari^ovres, aWd Kara. KVpLaKTjV C(J3VV &VTes — (f" § Ka^ % Cwh yp.oiv dvereiAev 5" avrov, Kal rov davasrov avrov [iiv Tires dpvouvrai], 5i ov [ivs yj/u-eis SwrjaSfieOa (r)o~ai " x^P^ avrov ; ....,' &c. (Ignatius, ad Magnesios, § ix. ; Jacobson's Patres Apost. ii. 322. Oxford, 1 840). Now many commentators assume (on what ground does not appear), that after KvpiaKTjv the word TjfMepav is to be understood. On this hypo- thesis they endeavour to make the rest of the sen- tence accord with a reference to the observance of the Lord's day, by further supposing iv y to refer to rj/xepa understood, and the whole to be put in contrast with (rafS/3ari(ovres in the former clause. For opinions in support of this view, the reader is referred to the Notes in Jacobson's edition, p. 324. Dr: Neander, in his History of Christianity, translated by Mr. Rose (i. 336), refers to this passage adopting this supposition, on which the translator remarks (in a note) very truly, though somewhat laconically, that he can only find ' something of the kind ' in the passage. The meaning of Neander's version is altogether very confused, but seems to represent the Lord's day as a sort of emblem of the new life of a Christian. Let us now look at the passage simply as it stands. The defect of the sentence is the want of LORD'S DAY. a substantive to which avrov can refer. This defect, so far from being remedied, is rendered still more glaring by the introduction of r/fiepa. Now if we take Kvpiatcr) C<»r) as simply ' the life of the Lord,' having a more personal meaning, it certainly goes nearer to supplying the substan- tive to avrov. Again, iv y may well refer to far), and Kvpiaic)) far), meaning our Lord's life, as em- phatically including his resurrection (as in Rom. v. 10, &c), presents precisely the same analogy to the spiritual life of the Christian as is con- veyed both in Rom. v. ; Coloss. iii. 3, 4, and many other passages. Thus upon the whole the meaning might be given thus : — : ' If those who lived under the old dispensation have come to the newness of hope, no longer keeping Sabbaths, but living according to our Lord s life (in which, as it were, our life has risen again, through him, and his death [which some deny], through whom we have received the mystery, &c ), how shall we be able to live without him?' .... In this way (allowing for the involved style of the whole) the meaning seems to us simple, con- sistent, and grammatical, without any gratuitous introduction of words understood ; and this view has been followed by many, though it is a sub- ject on which considerable controversy has ex- isted. On this view the passage does not refer at all to the Lord's day; but even on the opposite supposition it cannot be regarded as affording any positive evidence to the early use of the term ' Lord's day' (for which it is often cited), since the material word r)fj.epa is purely conjectural. It however offers an instance of that species of contrast which the early fathers were so fond of drawing between the Christian and Jewish dis- pensations, and between the new life of the Chris- tian and the ceremonial spirit of the law, to which the Lord's day (if it be imagined to be referred to) is represented as opposed. To return, however, to the nature of this ob- servance in the Christian church, we will merely remark that though in later times we find con- siderable reference to a sort of consecration of the day, it does not seem at any period of the ancient church to have assumed the form of such an ob- servance as some modern religious communities have contended for. Nor do these writers in any instance pretend to allege any divine command, or even apostolic practice, in support of it. In the laws of Constantine(A.D. 300), cessation from ordinary work on the Lord's day was first enjoined, but with an express exception in favour of the labours of agriculture. (See Jortin's Re- marks on Eccles. Hist. iii. 236.) Chrysostom (a.d. 360) concludes one of his Homilies by dismissing his audience to their re- spective ordinary occupations. The Council of Laodicea (a.d. 364), however, enjoined Christians to rest (crxoXd(eiv) on the Lord's day. To the same effect is an injunction in the forgery called the Apostolical Constitutions (vii. 24), and various later enactments from a.d. 600 to a.d. 1100, though by no means extending to the prohibition of all secular business. In fact, in these subse- quent ages of the church we find the ceremonial spirit rather displaying itself in the multiplica- tion of religious festivals and solemnities, than in any increasing precision in the observance of the Lord's day. This is exemplified in the practice LOT. of the unreformed church in modern times, and retained by most of the reformed, with the ex- ception of those formed on the puritanical model, who have adopted a peculiar view of the entire institution, to which we shall refer in another place. [Sabbath.] We may add, also, that as in the case of Constantine, so in some modern states, where a church has been established by law, the same policy has prevailed of passing temporal enactments for the cessation of business, and even public amusements, on the Lord's day, especially in more recent times. But to pursue such topics would be beyond our purpose. Upon the whole we would observe, that on questions of this nature it is peculiarly important to bear in mind the propriety of not advancing to gratuitous inferences beyond what the evidence warrants. We can have no proof of the existence of tenets or practices in the first ages beyond the testimony of the writers of those ages ; and there was always in operation a power- ful tendency to an increasing formality in ex- ternal observances, which were in all cases in- troduced gradually from small beginnings. To those Christians who look to the written loord as the sole authority for anything claiming apostolic or divine sanction, it becomes peculiarly important to observe, that the New Testament evidence of the observance of the Lord's day amounts merely to the recorded fact that the dis- ciples did assemble on the first day of the week, and the probable application of the designation ' the Lord's day' to that day. — B. P. LOT (t3r?, a covering ; Sept. AcSt), son of Haran and nephew of Abraham, who by the early death of his father had already come into pos- session of his property when Abraham went into the land of Canaan (Gen. xi. 31). Their united substance, consisting chiefly in cattle, was not then too large to prevent them from living toge- ther in one encampment. Eventually, however, their possessions were so greatly increased, that they were obliged to separate ; and Abraham with rare generosity conceded the choice of pasture- grounds to his nephew. Lot availed himself of this liberality of his uncle, as he deemed most for his own advantage, by fixing his abode at Sodom, that his flocks might pasture in and around that fertile and well-watered neighbourhood (Gen. xiii. 5-13). He had soon very great reason to regret this choice; for although his flocks fed well, his soul was starved in that vile place, the inhabitants of which were sinners before the Lord exceedingly. There ' he vexed his righteous soul from day to day with the filthy conversation of the wicked ' (2 Pet. ii. 7). About eight years after his separation from Abraham (b.c. 1913), Lot was carried away pri- soner by Chedorlaomer, along with the other in- habitants of Sodom, and was rescued and brought back by Abraham (Gen. xiv.), as related under other heads [Abraham; Ciiedorlaomer], This exploit procured for Abraham much celebrity in Canaan ; and it ought to have procured for Lot respect and gratitude from the people of Sodom, who had been delivered from hard slavery and restored to their homes on his account. But this does not appear to have been the result. At length the guilt of ' the cities of the plain' brought down the signal judgments of Heaven. LOT. 271 The avenging angels, after having been enter- tained by Abraham, repaired to Sodom, where they were received and entertained by Lot, who was sitting in the gate of the town when they arrived. While they were at supper the house was beset by a number of men, who demanded that the strangers should be given up to them, for the unnatural purposes which have given a name of infamy to Sodom in all generations. Lot re- sisted this demand, and was loaded with abuse by the vile fellows outside on that account. They had nearly forced the door, when the angels, thus awfully by their own experience convinced of the righteousness of the doom they came to execute, smote them with instant blindness, by which their attempts were rendered abortive, and they were constrained to disperse. Towards morning the angels apprised Lot of the doom which hung over the place, and urged him to hasten thence with his family. He was allowed to extend the benefit of this deliverance to the families of his daughters who had married in Sodom ; but the warning was received by those families with incredulity and insult, and he therefore left Sodom accom- panied only by his wife and two daughters. As they went, being hastened by the angels, the wife, anxious for those who had been left behind, or reluctant to remove from the place which had long been her home, and where much valuable property was necessarily left behind, lingered behind the rest, and was suddenly involved in the destruction, by which — smothered and stiffened as she stood by saline incrustations — she became Qev and jca0e|7js; that is, starting from earlier facts in the history of the Baptist and of the infancy of our Lord, and continuing the narration in un- interrupted succession. Origen, Credner, and LUKE. Olahausen suppose that 1he ttoWo'i were heretical authors; but this is unlikely, since Luke does not express any blame of them. But it is also unsatisfactory to refer the word ttoWo'i. ' many,' merely to Matthew and Mark, as Hug and De Wef.te have done, especially since the iroKXoi are distinguished from the eye-witnesses. We must therefore, suppose that many Christians wrote brief accounts of the life of Jesus, although they had not been eye-witnesses. It is possible that Luke made use of such writings. It appears to be doubtful whether Luke had the Gospel of Matthew before his eyes, since, had that been the case, he would probably have been more careful to avoid apparent contradictions, especially in the history of the birth of Jesus, in which he seems to have made use of documents referring to the family of Mary, while the ac- counts given by Matthew refer more to the family of Joseph. This is also confirmed by the apho- ristic mode in which he reports the Sermon on the Mount. We can scarcely imagine that he would have communicated a relation so unusually ab- rupt, if he had seen the well-arranged and com- plete statements of Matthew. The Gospel of St. Luke contains exceedingly valuable accounts, not extant in the books of the other evangelists ; for instance, those concerning the childhood of Jesus, the admirable parables in chapters xv. and xvi., the narration respecting the disciples at Emmaus, the section from chap. ix. 51 to xix. 27, which contains particulars mostly wanting in the other evangelists. It has been usual, since the days of Schleiermacher, to consider this "portion as the report of a single journey to the feast at Jerusalem; but it is evident that it contains accounts belonging to several journeys, undertaken at different periods. Some critics of modern times, such as D.Schulz, Schleiermacher, Sieffert, and Schneckenburger, were in the habit of ascribing to the reports of Luke a greater historical accuracy than to those of Matthew; but of late, opinions on this subject have changed, and Strauss, De Wette, and Bruno Bauer find in the reports of St. Matthew more of independent and original information than in those of Luke. There is certainly in the details of die historical account given by St. Luke, more clearness ; but many discourses of our Redeemer given by St. Matthew have more of the impress of historical precision, especially the Sermon on the Mount, and the Discourse against the Pharisees in ch. xxiii. and xxiv. ; although it seems that Matthew sometimes brings into connection simi- lar discourses, held at various periods, concerning which we find in Luke more accurately stated the particular circumstances under which they were delivered. The statement of Luke himself, at the begin- ning of his Gospel, must dispose us favourabJy with regard to its historical credibility. He states that he had accurately investigated the truth of the accounts communicated, and that, following the example of the iroWoi, he had made use of the statements of eye-witnesses. Luke had frequent opportunity of meeting these eye- witnesses when he travelled with Paul. He himself reports, in Acts xxi. 15, that he met James. He gives also, with greater accuracy than the other evangelists, some chronological notices, such as those at the beginning of chapters LUKE. ii. and iii., and in Acts vii. 35, &c. Yet these very dates have been quoted by Strauss and De Wette as being quite incorrect, and as proofs that Luke was destitute of accurate historical inform- ation. This daring assertion has induced some modern apologetical authors to examine the matter more closely, who have triumphantly vindicated the historical character of these statements of Luke. (Compare the work of the learned jurist, Huschke, TJeber den zur Zeit der Geburt Christi gehaltenen Census, Breslau, 1840, ' On the Census taken at the Birth of Christ ;' see also Wieseler, Chronolo- gische Synopse der vier Evangelien, Ham- burg, 1843; and also Tholuck, Glaubwiirdigkeit der cvangelischcn Geschichte). As to the statements of the ancients concerning the date or time when the Gospel of St. Luke was written, we find in Irenseus (Adv. Hcer. iii. 1), that Mark and Luke wrote after Matthew. According to Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. vi. 28), Origen stated that Luke wrote after Matthew and Mark ; but Clemens Alexandrinus, accord- ing to the same writer (Hist. Eccles. vi. 14), asserted on the authority of the ■irapaSoais twv aueKaOev irpzfffivTepcav, ' the tradition of the earlier elders,' that the Gospels containing the genealogies were written before the others. Ac- cording to this view, Mark was written after Luke. It is however likely that this statement arose from a desire to explain why the genealogies were omitted by Mark and John. Eusebius, at least (Hist. Eccles. iii. 24), in reference to the Gospel of John, says : EIkotuis S'odv t^v fiev ttis capicbs rov awrripos '/]/xan/ yeveaAoyiav, cere Mardaia} Kat AovkS, irpoypatpHcrav, a.iroaionvrjo'a.t, tc-v 'loidvv7)v. — ' John properly passed over in silence the genealogy according to the flesh of our Saviour, which was detailed by Matthew and Luke.' Since the extreme criticism of Strauss and De Wette has been unable to produce even a plau- sible argument against, the authenticity of the Gospel of Luke, attempts have been made to prove at least the very late date of this Gospel. De Wette (Introduction to the New Testament, 4th edition, p. 176) endeavours to infer from the deliniteness with, which the destruction of Jeru- salem is predicted, and from the circumstance that, according to ch. xxi. 25, some time was to intervene between the destruction of Jerusalem and the second advent of Christ, that this Gospel was written some time after the destruction of the city had taken place, and after it had become apparent from facts that the second advent was not to be immediately consequent upon that de- struction. We do not here enter into the question whether, according (o St. Matthew xxiv. 29, it was ex- pected that the second advent should directly follow the destruction of Jerusalem ; we merely observe that a pe titio pfincipii tuns through the whole train of this argument, since it sets out with assuming the impossibility of detailed pre- dictions. From the circumstance that the book of Acts leaves St. Paul a captive) without relating the result of his captivity, most critics have, with considerable probability, inferred that Luke accompanied St, Paul to Rome, that he em- ployed his leisure while there m composing the LUKE. 277 Acts, and that he left off writing before the fate of Paul was decided. Now, since the Gospel of St. Luke was written before the Acts, it seems to follow that it was written a considerable time before the destruction of Jerusalem. De Wette meets this argument merely by his petitio prin- cipii, that from the detailed nature of the pre- dictions on that head in the Gospel, it would follow that they were written after the events to which they refer, and consequently after the de- struction of Jerusalem. It is likely that Luke, during Paul's captivity at. Caesarea, employed his leisure in collecting the accounts contained in his Gospel in the localities where the events to which they relate happened. The most ancient testimonies in behalf of Luke"s Gospel are those of Marcion, at the beginning of the second century, and of Irenseus, in the latter half of that century. According to Meyer's opinion, Luke terminates the Acts with Paul's captivity, because the later events were well known to Theophilus, to whom the Acts are dedicated. We do not know who this Theophilus was. Hug, however, infers, from the manner in which Luke mentions Italian lo- calities, that they were well known to Theophilus, and that consequently it was likelv he resided in Italy. A good separate commentary on the Gospel of Luke is still a desideratum. Kuinoel's Com- mentarius in Evangelium Lucce (4th ed. 1843) is not quite satisfactory ; nor Bornemann's Scholia in Lucam (1830). It is therefore necessary to have recourse to the best commentaries on the first three Gospels, and on the New Testament in general. Besides the Gospel which bears his name, Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles. This work con- tains the history of the foundation of the Christian church in two great sections : the first embracing the spread of Christianity among the Jews, chiefly by the instrumentality of Peter (ch. i.-xii.) ; and the second, its spread among the heathen, chiefly by the instrumentality of Paul (ch. xiii.-xxviii.). Schnecken burger has lately endeavoured, in his work TJeber den Ziveck der Aposlelgeschichte, 1S41, to prove that the Acts had an apologetical tendency, called forth by the particular circum- stances of the times. He especially appeals to the manner in which Paul refutes all objections of the Judaizers, who were his enemies. In those portions of the Acts in which Luke speaks as the companion of Paul, and, conse- quently, as an eye-witness, his Greek style is more classical than in the rest of the work. This circumstance supports the opinion that Luke fol- lowed some written documents in the earlier part of the Acts, as well as in the Gospel. Compare Riehm, De fontibus Actuum Apostolurum, Tra- jecti, 1825; Mayerhoff, Ueber den Zweck, die Qucllenund den I'cvfasscr der Apostelgeschichte (in his Einleitung in die petriuischen Schriften, pp. 1-30); Kling, Ueber den historischen Cha- racter der Apostelgeschichte (in the Studien und Kritiken, 1S37, Heft 2). That the accounts of Luke are authentic may be perceived mine especially from a close exami- nation of the inserted discourses and letters. The characteristic marks of authenticity in the oration of the Roman lawyer Tertullus, in ch. xxiv., and in the official letters in ch. xxiii. 26, sq. ; xv. 23, sq. ; 278 LUZ. LYCIA. can scarcely be overlooked. The address of Panl to the elders of the Ephesian church is charac- teristically Pauline, and even so full of definite allusions and of similarity to the Epistle to the Ephesians, that it furnishes a confirmation of the authenticity of that letter, which has lately been questioned. Respecting these allusions, see an essay of Tholuck in the Studien unci Kritiken, 1839, p. 306, sq. Characteristic also are the discourses of Stephen (ch. vii.), and those of Peter, concerning which compare Seyler's Abhandlungen uberr die Reden des Petrus, in the Studien und Kritiken, 1832, p. 53, sq. Even De Wette, in his Introduction, § 115 a, admits the appropriateness of these discourses. It is, however, difficult to reconcile some of Luke's statements with the chronological notices in the Epistles of Paul. Very important investi- gations on this subject are to be found in the work of Angar, De temporum in Actis Aposto- lorum ratione. As for the testimonies in behalf of the authenticity of the Acts, they are the same as for Luke's Gospel. Clemens Alexan- drinus, Ireneeus, and Tertullian, expressly men- tion the Acts, and Eusebius reckons them among the Homologoumena. However, the book of Acts was- not read and quoted so often in the early church as other parts of Scripture. Chry- sostom, in his first homily In Actus Apostolorum, says that many Christians in Asia knew neither the book nor its author. The Manichees rejected it for dogmatical reasons (Augustinus, De utili- tate credendi, n, 7). So also did the Sever/am (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iv. "29). Since the book of Acts was not much read, it is surprising that its text is particularly corrupt. It does not, how- ever, by any means appear that these corruptions arose, from intentional alterations made for dog- matical purposes (comp. Eichhorn's Einleitung ins Neue Testament, ii. 154). The most complete commentary on the Acts is that of Kuinoel, 2nd ed., 1827. A student of the Acts ought also to consult the very learned Dissertationes in Actus Apostolorum, ab Ema- nuele Walch, Jenae, 1756-61, 3 vols. 4 to. There are also some valuable manuals, as Meyer's Commentary, 1835, and that of De Wette, 2nd ed., 1841.— A. T. LUNATICS. [Demoniacs.] LUZ, the ancient name of Bethel (Gen. xxviii. 19) [Bethel]. The spot to which the name of Bethel was given appears, however, to have been at a little distance in the environs of Luz, and they are accordingly distinguished in Josh. xvi. 2, although the name of Bethel was eventually extended to that town. A small place of the same name, founded by an inhabitant of this Luz, is mentioned in Judg. i. 26. LUZ (T-17) occurs only once in the Old Testa- ment, namely, in Gen. xxx. 37 (a passage al- ready adduced in the article Libneh), where it indicates one of the kinds of rod from which Jacob peeled the bark and which he placed in the water-troughs of the cattle. Luz is translated hazle in the Authorized Version, as well as in several others ; in some it is rendered by words equivalent to ' walnut,' but ' almond' appears to be its true meaning. For in the Arabic we have jy louz, which is indeed the same word, and which denotes the almond. Thus Abu'l Fadli, as quoted by Celsius (Hieroboi. i. 254), says, ' Louz est arbor rsota, et magna, foliis mollibus. Species duas, hortensis et silvestris. Hortensis quoque duse sunt species, dulcis et amara ;' where refer- ence is evidently made to the sweet and bitter almond. Other Arab authors also describe the almond under the name of louz. But this name was well known to the Hebrews as indicating the almond ; for R. Saadias, in Ab. Esra's Comment., as quoted by Celsius (p. 253), remarks : ' Lus est amygdalus, quia ita earn appellant Arabes ; nam hse dues lingua, et Syriaca, ejusdem sunt familise.' Almonds have been always produced in Syria and Palestine, and extend from thence into Affghanistan. But as there is another word by which the almond was known to the Hebrews, we shall reserve our further remarks for that head [Shakad].— J. F. R. LYCAONIA (Avicaoi/ia), a province of Asia Minor, having Cappadocia on the east, Galatia on the north, Phrygia on the west, and Isauria and Cilicia on the south. It extends in length about twenty geographical miles from east to west, and about thirteen in breadth. It was an undulating plain, involved among mountains, which were noted for the concourse of wild-asses. The soil was so strongly impregnated with salt that few of the brooks supplied drinkable water, so that good water was sold for money. But sheep throve on the pasturage, and were reared with great advantage (Strabo, xii. p. 568 ; Pliny, Hist. Nat. viii. 69). It was a Roman province when visited by Paul (Acts xiv. 6), and its chief towns were Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, of which the first was the capital. ' The speech of Lycaonia* (Acts xiv. 11) is supposed by some to have been the ancient Assyrian language, also spoken by the Cappadocians (Jablonsky, Disquis. de Lingua Lycaonica, Opusc. iii. 3, sqq.) ; but it is more usually conceived to have been a corrupt Greek, intermingled with many Syriac words (Guiding, Dissert, de Lingua Lyceum."). LYCIA (Awcia), a province in the south-west of Asia Minor, having Pamphylia on the east, Phrygia on the north, Caria on the west, and the Mediterranean on the south. Great part of the country, however, consists of a peninsula project- ing south into the Mediterranean. It is moun- tainous, and is watered by numerous small rivers which flow from the mountains. Its inhabitants were believed to be descendants of Cretans, who came thither under Sarpedon, brother of Minos. One of their kings was Bellerophon, celebrated in mythology. The Lycians were a warlike people, powerful on the sea, and attached to their inde- pendence, which they successfully maintained against Croesus, king of Lydia, and were after- wards allowed by the Persians to retain their own kings as satraps. Lycia is named in 1 Mace, xv. 23, as one of the countries to which the Ro- man senate sent its missive in favour of the Jews. The victory of the Romans over Antiochus (b.c. 189) gave Lycia rank as a free state, which it re- tained till the time of Claudius, when it was made a province of the Roman empire (Suet. Claud. 25 ; Vespas. 8). Lycia contained many towns, two of which are mentioned in the New Testament; Patara (Acts xxi. 1, 2) ; My ra. (Acts xxvii. 5) ; and one, Phaselis, in the Apocrypha (1 Mace. xv. 23). LYDDA. LYDDA (A^SSa; Heb. l6), a town within tlie limits of the tribe of Ephraim, nine miles east of Joppa, on the road between that port and Jerusalem. It bore in Hebrew the name of Lod, and appears to have been first built by the Ben- jamites, although it lay beyond the limits of their territory; and we find it again inhabited by Ben- jamites after the Exile (1 Chron. viii. 12; Ezra ii. 33; Neh. xi. 35). It is mentioned in the Apocrypha (1 Mace. xi. 34), as having been taken from Samaria and annexed to Judaea by Deme- trius Kicator; and at a later date its inhabitants are named among those who were sold into slavery by Cassius, when he inflicted the calamity of his presence upon Palestine after the death of Julius Caesar (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 11. 2; xii. 6). In the New Testament the place is only noticed, under the name of Lydda, as the scene of Peter's miracle in healing ^Eneas (Acts ix. 32, 35). Some years later the town was reduced to ashes by Cestius Gallus, in his march against Jerusalem (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. ii. 19. 1); but it must soon have revived, for not long after we find it at the head of one of the toparchies of the later Judaea, and as such it surrendered to Vespasian (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. iii. 3, 5 ; iv. 8). At that time it is described by Josephus {Antiq. xx. 6. 2) as a village equal to a city ; and the Rabbins have much to say of it as a seat of Jewish learn- ing, of which it was the most eminent in Judaea after Jabneh and Bether (Lightfoot, Parergon, § 8). In the general change of names which took place under the Roman dominion, Lydda be- came Diospolis, and under this name it occurs in coins of Severus and Caracalla, and is often men- tioned by Eusebius and Jerome. It was early the seat of a bishopric, and at the different coun- cils the bishops are found to have subscribed their names variously, as of Lydda or Diospolis ; but in the later ecclesiastical records the name of Lydda predominates. The latest bishop distinctly mentioned is Apollonius, in a.d. 518. Lydda early became connected with the homage paid to the celebrated saint and martyr St. George, who was not less renowned in the east than afterwards in the west. He is said to have been born at Lydda, and to have suffered martyrdom at Nico- media in the earliest persecution under Diocletian and Maximian, at. the end of the third century. His remains were transferred to his native place, and a church erected in honour of him, by the Em- peror Justinian. This church, which stood outside the town, had just been levelled to the ground by the Moslems when the Crusaders arrived at Lydda ; but it was soon rebuilt by them, and they established a bishopric of Lydda and Ramleh. Great honours were paid by them to St. George, and they invested him with the dignity of their pafron : from this time his renown spread more widely throughout Europe, and he became the patron saint of England and of several other states and kingdoms. The church was destroyed by Saladin in 1191; and there is no evidence that it was ever rebuilt, although there was in later centuries an unfounded impression that the church, the ruins of which were then seen, and which still exist, had been built by our king Richard. From that time there has been little notice of Lydda by travellers. It now exists, under its ancient name of Lud, as a considerable village of small houses, with nothing to distin- LYSANIAS. 279 guish it from ordinary Moslem villages, save the ruins of the celebrated church of St. George, which are situated in the eastern part of the town. The building must have been very large. The walls of the eastern end are standing only in the parts near the altar, including the arch over the latter ; but the western end remains more perfect, and has been built into a large mosque, the lofty minaret of which forms the landmark of Lud (Raumer's Palastina, 208 ; Robinson's Bib. Re- searches, iii. 55 ; Sandys, Travailes; Cotovicus, Itiner. pp. 137, 138 ; D'Arvieux, Memoir es, ii. 28 ; Pococke, Description, ii. 58 ; Volney, Voy- age, i. 278). LYDI A (Ai/5ia)r a province in the west of Asia Minor, supposed to have derived its name from Lud, the fourth son of Shem (Gen. x. 22 ; see Nations, Dispersion of). It was bounded on the east by Greater Phrygia, on the north by yEolis or Mysia, on the west by Ionia and the jEgean Sea, and on the south it was separated from Caria by the Mseander. The country is for the most part level. Among the mountains that of Tmolus was celebrated for its saffron and red wine. In the palmy days of Lydia its kings ruled from the shores of the iEgean to the river Halys ; and Croesus, who was its king in the time of Solon and of Cyrus, was reputed the richest monarch in the world. He was able to bring into the field an army of 420,000 foot and 60,000 horse against Cyrus, by whom, however, he was defeated, and his kingdom annexed to the Persian empire (Herod, i. 6). Lydia after-' wards formed part of the kingdom of the Seleu- cidas ; and it is related in 1 Mace. viii. 3, that Antiochus the Great was compelled by the Ro- mans to cede Lydia to king Eumenes. In the time of the travels of the Apostles it was a pro- vince of the Roman empire. Its chief towns were Sardis (the capital), Thyatira, and Phila- delphia, all of which are mentioned in the New Testament, although the name of the province itself does not occur. The manners of the Lydians were corrupt even to a proverb (Herod, i. 93). LYDIA, a woman of Thyatira, ca seller of purple,' who dwelt in the city of Philippi in Macedonia (Acts xvi. 14, 15). The commen- tators are not agreed whether ' Lydia' should be regarded as an appellative, or a derivative from the country to which the woman belonged, Thy- atira, her native place, being in Lydia. There are examples of this latter sense ; but the pre- ceding word 6v6fJ.ari seems here to support the former, and the name was a common one. Lydia was not by birth a Jewess, but a proselyte, as the phrase ' who worshipped God ' (crejSo^eVT} Toy 0eoV) imports. She was converted by the preach- ing of Paul ; and after she and her household had been baptised, she pressed the use of her house so earnestly upon him and his associates, that they were constrained to accept the invitation. The Lydians were famous for the art of dyeing purple vests, and Lydia, as 'a seller of purple,' is sup- posed to have been a dealer invests so dyed, rather than in the dye itself (see Kuinoel on Acts xiv. 14). LYSANIAS (Avcravias), tetrarch of Abilene, when John commenced 1 1 is ministry as the har- binger of Christ (Luke iii. 1). He is supposed to have been son or grandson of another Lysanias, known in history, who was put to death by Mark 280 LYSIAS. Antony, and part of his territories given to Cleo- patra [Abilene]. LYSIAS (Avo-las), or Claudius Lysias, chiliarch and commandant of the Roman troops who kept guard at the temple of Jerusalem, by whom Paul was secured from the fury of the Jews, and sent under guard to the procurator Felix at Caesarea (Acts xxi. 27; xxiii. 31). LYSTRA (Auo-rpa), a city of Lycaonia in Asia Minor, to which Paul and Barnabas fled from the danger which threatened them at Ico- nium (Acts xiv. 6). Here, Paul having mi- raculously cured a cripple, they were both adored as gods ; but afterwards, at the instigation of the Jews, Paul was stoned and left for dead (Acts xiv. 8-21). Timothy was a native of Lystra (Acts xvi. 12; 2 Tim. iiL 11). This city was south of Iconium, but its precise site is uncertain, as well as that of Derbe, which is mentioned along with it. Col. Leake remarks that the sacred text ap- pears to place it nearer to Derbe than to Iconium ; for St. Paul, on leaving that city, proceeded first to Jjystra, and from thence to Derbe ; and in like manner returned to Lystra, to Iconium, and to Antioch of Pisidia. And he observes that this seems to agree with the arrangement of Ptolemy, who places Lystra iri Isauria, and near Isaura, which seems evidently to have occupied some part of the valley of Sidy Shehr, or Bey Shehr. Under the Greek Empire Homonada, Isaura, and Lystra, as well as Derbe and Laranda, were all included in the consular province of Lycaonia, and were bishoprics of the metropolitan see of Iconium. Considering all the circumstances, Col. Leake inclines to think that the vestiges of Lystra may be sought with the greatest probability of success at or near Wiran Khatoun, or Khatoun Serai, about thirty miles to the south of Iconium. ' Nothing,' says this able geographer, ' can more strongly show the little progress that, has hitherto been made in a knowledge of the ancient geo- graphy of Asia Minor, than that of the cities which the journey of St. Paul has made so inter- esting to us, the site of one only (Iconium) is yet certainly known.' -Mr. Aruudell supposes that, should the rains of Lystra not be found at the place indicated by Col. Leake, they may possibly be found in the remains at Kara-hissar, near the lake Bey-shehr (Leake, Tour and Geog. of Asia Minor ; Aruudell, Discoveries in Asia Minor). M. MAACAH (Hpy» ; Sept. MaaX&), or Maa- cath (n^yO), a city and region at the foot of Mount Hermon, not far from Geshur, a district of Syria (Josh. xiii. 13 ; 2 Sam. x. 6, 8 ; 1 Chron. xix. 7). Hence the adjacent portion of Syria is called Aram-Maacah, or Syria of, Maachah (1 Chron. xix. 6). The Israelites seem to have con- sidered this territory as included in their grant, but were never ablrfjg|o get possession of it (Josh, xiii. 13). In the time of David the small state bad a king of its own. who contributed 1000 men to the grand alliance of the Syrian nations against the Jewish monarch (2 Sam. x. 6, 8). The lot of the half-tribe of Manasseh beyond (he Jordan ex- tended to this country, as had previously the do- MACCABEES. minion of Og, king of Bashan (Deut. iii. 14 ; Josh, xii. 5). The Gentile name is TO^TD Maacathite, which is also put for the people (Deut. iii. 14 ; Josh. xii. 5 ; xiii. 11 ; 2 Kings xxv. 23). Near, or within the ancient limits of Maacah, was the town called for that reason Abel beth-Maacah [AbelI. MAACAH, or Maachah, is also the name of several persons in the Old Testament, male and female, who may be mentioned to distin- guish them from one another, namely — 1. MAACAH, the father of Achish, king of Gath (1 Kings ii. 39). 2. MAACAH, the father of Hanan, one of David's worthies (1 Chron. xi. 43). 3. MAACAH, the father of Shephatiah, the military chief of the Simeonites in the time of David (1 Chron. xxvii. 16). 4. MAACAH, a person whose sex does not appear, one of the offspring of Nahor's concubine Reumah (Gen. xxii. 24). 5. MAACAH, a concubine of Caleb (1 Chron. ii. 48). 6. MAACAH, grand-daughter of Benjamin;, who was married to Machir, son of Manasseh (1 Chron. vii. 16). 7. MAACAH, daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur, wife of David, and mother of.Absalom (2 Sam. iii. 3). In 1 Sam. xxvii. 8 we read of David's invading the land of the Geshurites, and the Jewish commentators allege that he then took the daughter of the king captive, and, in conse- quence of her great beauty, married her, after she had been made a proselyte according to the law in Deut. xxi. But this is a gross mistake, for the Geshur invaded by David was to the south of Judah, whereas the Geshur over which Talmai ruled was to the north, and was regarded as part of Syria (2 Sam. xv. S). The fact appears to be that David, having married the daughter of this king, contracted an alliance with him, in order to strengthen his interest against Ishbosheth in those parts. 8. MAACAH, daughter of Abishalom, wife of Rehoboam, and mother of Abijam (1 Kings xv. 1). In verse 10 we read that Asa's ' mother's name was Maacah, the daughter of Abishalom.' It is evident that here ' mother ' is used in a loose sense, and means ' grandmother,' which the Maa- cah named in verse 1 must have been to the Asa of verse 10. It therefore appears to be a great error to make two persons of them, as is done by Calmet and others. The Abishalom who was the father of this Maacah is called Absalom in 2 Chron. xi. 20, 21, and is generally supposed by the Jews to have been Absalom the son of David ; which seems not improbable, seeing that Reho- boam's other two wives were of his father's family (2 Chron. xi. 18). But Josephus says that she was the daughter of Tamar, the daughter of Ab- salom (Antiq. viii. 10. 1), and consequently his granddaughter. This seems not unlikely [Abi- jah]. It would appear that Asa's own mother was dead before he began to reign; for Maacah bore the rank and state of queen-mother (resem- bling that of the Sultaness Valide among the Turks), the powers of which she so much abused to the encouragement of idolatry, that Asa com- menced his reforms by ' removing her from being queen, because she had made an idol in a grove ' (1 Kings xv. 13; 2 Chron. xv. 16). MACCABEES. The etymology of this word MACCABEES. is too uncertain to reward the inquiries made re- specting it. As a family, the Maccabees com- menced their career of patriotic and religious heroism during the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, about the year B.C. 167. At this time the aged Mattathias, a descendant of the Asmo- nseans, and his five sons, inhabited the town of Modin, to which place Antiochus sent certain of his officers with instructions to erect an altar for heathen sacrifices, and to engage the inhabitants in the celebration of the most idolatrous and superstitious rites. The venerable Mattathias openly declared his resolution to oppose the orders of the tyrant, and one of the recreant Jews approaching the altar which had been set up, he rushed upon him, and slew him with his own hand. His part thus boldly taken, he called his sons and his friends around him, and immediately iled to the mountains, inviting all to follow him who had any zeal for God and the law. A small baud of resolute and devoted men was thus formed, and the governor of the district saw reason to fear that a general insurrection would be the consequence of their proceeding. By a sudden attack directed against them on the Sab- bath, when he knew the strictness of their prin- ciples would not allow them to take measures for their defence, he threw them into disorder, and slew about a thousand of their number, consisting of men, women, and children. Warned by this event, and yielding to the necessity of their present condition, Mattathias and his sons determined that for the future they would defend themselves on the Sabbath in the same manner as on other days. The mountain- hold of the little band was now guarded more cautiously than before. Fresh adherents to the holy cause were continually Hocking in; and in a few months the party found itself sufficiently strong to make attacks upon the towns and vil- lages of the neighbourhood, throwing down the heathen altars, and punishing the reprobates who had taken part with the enemies of God. By the deatli of Mattathias, the leadership of the party devolved upon his son Judas Macca- basus, whose worth and heroic courage pointed him out as most capable of carrying on the enter- prise thus nobly begun. Judas lost no time *n attacking the enemy. He made himself master of several towns, which he fortified and garrisoned. Apollonius, general of the army m Samaria, hastened to stop the progress of the insurgents. Judas met him on the way, joined battle with him, slew him, and routed his army. The same success attended him in his encounter with Seron, general of the Syrians; and it. now became evident to Antiochus that the Jewish nation would soon be delivered from his yoke, unless he proceeded against them with a more formidable force. While, therefore, he himself went into Persia to recruit his treasures, Lysias, whom he left as regent at. home, sent an army into Judaea, composed of forty thousand foot and seven thou- sand cavalry. This powerful array was further increased by auxiliaries from the provinces, and by bands of Jews, who dreaded nothing more than the triumph of those virtuous men of their own nation, who were struggling to save it from repro- bation. So unequal did the forces of Judas appear to 'an encounter with such an army, that in addressing his followers he urged those among MACCABEES. 281 them who had any especial reason to love the present world to retire at once ; while to those who remained he pointed out the promises of God as the best support of their courage and fidelity By a forced march he reached a portion of the enemy encamped at Emmaus, while utterly un- prepared for his approach. Complete success attended this bold proceeding. The several parts of the hostile army were successively put to flight, a splendid booty was secured, and Judas gained a position which made even the most powerful of his opponents tremble. Another and more nume- rous army was sent, against him the following year, but with no better success. At the head of ten thousand determined followers, Judas defeated the army of Lysias, consisting of sixty thousand. A way was thereby opened for his progress to Jerusalem, whither he immediately hastened, with the devout purpose of purifying the temple and restoring it to its former glory. ■ The solemn reli- gious rites having been performed which wero necessary to the cleansing of the sacred edifice, the Festival of the Purification was instituted, and added to the number of the other national festivals of more ancient date. Judas had full occupation for his courage and ability in repelling the incursions of those nume- rous foes who dreaded the restoration of order and religion. But every day added to his successes. Having overthrown the Syrian commanders sent against him, he occupied Samaria, made himself master of the strong city of Hebron, of Azotus, and other important places, taking signal vengeance on the people of Joppa and Jamnia, who had trea- cherously plotted the destruction of numerous faithful Jews. Antiochus Epiphanes was succeeded by Anti- ochus Eupator. At first this prince acted towards the Jews with moderation and tolerance. But he soon afterwards invaded Judsea with a powerful army, and was only induced to make peace with Maccabasus by the fears which he entertained of a rival aspirant to the throne. His caution did not save him. He was put to death by his own uncle, Demetrius, who, obtaining the throne of Syria, made peace with Judas, but took possession of the citadel of Jerusalem, which was occupied by his general, Nicanor, and a body of troops. Tin's state of things was not allowed to last long. Demetrius listened to the reports of Nicanor's enemies, and threatened to deprive him of his command unless he could disprove the accusation that lie had entered into a league with Judas, and was betraying the interests of his sovereign. Nicanor immediately took measures to satisfy Demetrius, and Judas saw it necessary to escape from Jerusalem, and put himself in a posture of defence. A battle took place in which he de- feated his enemy. Another was soon after fought at, Beth-horon, where he was again victorious. IMicanor himself fell in this battle, and bis bead and right hand were sent among the spills to Jerusalem. But the forces of Demetrius were still numerous. Judas had retired to Laish with about, three thousand followers. He was there attacked by overwhelming numbers. Only eight hundred of bis people remained faithful to him on this occasion. Resolved not to (lee, he bravely encountered the enemy, and was speedily slain; regarding his life as a tiffing sacrifice to the cause in which he was engaged. 282 MACCABEES, BOOKS OF. Simon and Jonathan, the brothers of Judas, rallied around them the bravest of their com- panions, and took up a strong position in the neighbourhood of Tekoa. Jonathan proved him- self a worthy successor of his heroic brother, and skilfully evaded the first attack of Bacchides, the Syrian general. For two years after this, the brothers were left in tranquillity, and they esta- blished themselves in a little fortress called Beth- tasi, situated among the rocks near Jericho. The skill and resolution with which they pursued their measures rendered them formidable to the enemy ; and the state of affairs in Syria some time after obliged Demetrius to make Jonathan the" general of his forces in Judaea, and to invest him with the authority of governor of Jerusalem. To this he was compelled by the rivalry of Alex- ander Balas ; but his policy was too late to secure the attachment of his new ally. Jonathan received offers from Alexander to support his interests among the Jews, and the high-priesthood was the proffered reward. The invitation was accepted ; and Jonathan became the first of the Asmonsean line through which the high-priesthood was so long transmitted. Alexander Balas left nothing undone which might tend to secure the fidelity of Jonathan. He gave him a high rank among the princes of his kingdom, and adorned him with a purple robe. Jonathan continued to enjoy his prosperity till the year b.c. 143, when he fell a victim to the treachery of Trypho, who aspired to the Syrian throne. He was succeeded by his brother Simon, who confirmed the Jews in their temporary independence; and in the year b.c. 141 they passed a decree whereby the dignity of the high-priesthood and of prince of the Jews was rendered hereditary in the family of Simon. He fell a victim to the treachery of his son-in-law, Ptolemy, governor of Jericho ; but was succeeded by his son, the celebrated John Hyrcanus, who possessed the supreme authority above thirty years, and at his death left it to be enjoyed by his son Aristobulus, who, soon after his accession to power, assumed the title 'of king. This dignity continued to be enjoyed by descendants of the Asmonean family till the year b.c. 34, when it ceased with the downfall of Antigonus, who, con- cpiered by Herod and the Romans, was put to death by the common executioner. — H. S. MACCABEES, BOOKS OF [Apocrypha] (Gr. MaKKaficuoi), a name usually supposed to have been cabbalistically derived from >l2'3f2 {Makkabi), the initial letters of t^>K2 robi 'D nini ('who among the gods is like Jehovah?'), the motto on the Jewish standard in the war with the Syrians. The books of Maccabees are the titles of certain Jewish histories containing prin- cipally the details of the heroic exploits referred to in the preceding article. It has been, how- ever, maintained in our more critical age, that according to the etymology here assigned, the name ought to be written Maxa/Scuoi with a x- The word is therefore with more probability sup- posed to be derived from ^2pD, ' a hammer' or ' mallet,' a word expressive of the prowess of Judas Maccabaeus, or the hammerer. For other deri- vations of this word, and of Asmoncea?is, see Hottinger's Thesaurus Philologicus, p. 516. There were in all four books (to which some add a fifth) known to the ancients, of which three . MACCABEES, BOOKS OF. are still read in the eastern, and two in the western church. Of these the third is the first in order of time. We shall, however-, to avoid con- fusion, speak of them in the order in which they are commonly enumerated. The First Book of Maccabees contains a lucid and authentic history of the undertakings of Antiochus Epiphanes against the Jews, from the year b.c. 175 to the death of Simon Macca- bseus, b.c. 135. This history is confessedly of great value. Although its brevity, observes De Wette (see 1 Mace. i. 6 ; viii. 7 ; xii), renders it in some instances unsatisfactory, defective, and uncritical, and occasionally extravagant, it is upon the whole entitled to credit, chronologically accurate, and advantageously distinguished above all other historical productions of this period (Einleitung in die Apokryfe Bucher, § 299). It is the second book in order of time. Language of the First Book. — There is little question that this book was written in Hebrew, although the original is now lost. The Greek version abounds in Hebraisms and errors of translation. Origen (apud Eusebium, Eccl. Hist. vi. 25) gives it a Hebrew title, ^.ap^Q lapfiuve I'A, 7H *J2 "IS? T\21W, ' the prince of the temple, the prince of the sons of God,' or according to others ?K ^IID Ji"1!-!^ ' the scourge of the rebels of God.' Jerome (Prolog. Galeat.) says that he had seen the Hebrew original. There is a Chal- dee work still extant, published by Bartolocci (i. 383), which Hengstenberg (Beitr. 1) main- tains to be the work referred to by Origen and Jerome. Kennicott, however (Diss. 2), observes that this work differs materially from the present Greek. There is a Hebrew version of the Chaldee extant, which is also published by Bartolocci (ut supra), with* a Latin translation. This work is said by Wolfius (Bib. Hist.) to be still found in the Jewish ritual, and to be read by the Jews at the feast of Dedication. Fabricius (Cod. Apoc.) has reprinted Bartolocci's Latin version. Wagenseil discovered a copy in Mora- via, and there is a MS. Hebrew roll of the same in the library of St. Sepulchre's in Dublin. Author and Age. — Of the author nothing is known ; but he must have been a Palestinian Jew, who wrote some considerable time after the death of Simon Maccabaeus, and even of Hyrcanus, and made use of several written, although chiefly of traditionary, sources of information. At the same time it is not impossible that the author was present at several of the events, which he so gra- phically describes. Versions. — The Greek text of the Alexandrine version is the original of all the others now extant. This text was that made use of by Josephus. The Latin version of the Vulgate is that in use before the time of Jerome, who did not translate the book. There is also a Syrian version, which has been printed in the Polyglotts. The Second Book of Maccabees (the third in order of time) is a work of very inferior cha- racter to the first. It is an abridgment of a more ancient work, written by a Jew named Jason, who lived at Gyrene in Africa, comprising the principal transactions of the Jews which occurred during the reigns of Seleucus IV., Antiochus Epiphanes, and Antiochus Eupator. It partly goes over the MACCABEES, BOOKS OF. same ground with the first book, but commences ten or twelve years earlier, and embraces in all a period of fifteen years. It does not appear that the author of either saw the other's work. The second book of Maccabees is divided into two unconnected parts. It commences with a letter from the citizens of Jerusalem and Judsea to the Greek Jews in Egypt, written B.C. 123 (which refers to a former letter written to the same, B.C. 143, acquainting them of their sufferings), and informs them that their worship was now restored, and that they were celebrating the Feast of Dedi- cation. The second part (ii. 18) contains a still more ancient letter, written B.C. 159, to the priest Aristobulus, the tutor of King Ptolemy, recount- ing, besides some curious matter, the death of Antiochus Epiphanes. The third part contains the preface, in which the author states that he is about to epitomise the five books of Jason. The work commences with the attack of Heliodorus on the temple, and closes with the death of Nicanor, a period of fifteen years. The history supplies some blanks in the first book ; but the letters prefixed to it contradict some of the facts recorded in the body of the work, and are consequently supposed to have been added by another hand. Neither are the letters themselves considered genuine, and they were probably written long after the death of Nicanor, and even of John Hyrcanus. This book gives a different account of the place and maimer of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes from that contained in the first book. The narrative, as De Wette observes, abounds in miraculous adventures (iii. 25, sq. ; v. 2; xi. 8 ; xv. 12), historical and chronological errors (x. 3, sq. comp. with 1 Mace. iv. 52, i. 20-29 ; xi. 1 comp. with 1 Mace. iv. 28, sq. ; xiii. 21, sq., comp. with 1 Mace. vi. 31, sq. ; iv. 13, comp. with 1 Mace, viii.), extraordinary and arbitrary embellishments (vi. 18, sq. ; vii. 27, sq. ; ix. 19- 27; xi. 16-38), affected descriptions (iii. 14, sq. ; V. 11, sq.), and moralising reflections (v. 17, sq.; vi. 12, sq. ; ix. 8, sq.). For a solution of the chronological discrepancy between it and the first book (comp. 1 Mace. vi. 20, with 2 Mace. xiii. 1), see Auctoritas utriusque Lib. Mace, p. 129, &c; Jahn's Antiq. ii. 1. 328 ; Michaelis on 1 Mace. x. 21; and Berlholdt, viii. 1079). The embellishments are those of the epitomiser. The letters in xi. 16, &c, are most probably genuine. Author and Age. — We are not aware when either Jason himself or his epitomiser lived. _ S. G. Hasse, who published a (German translation of this book, at Jena, in 17S6, supposes it to have been written B.C. 150, by the author of the Book of Wisdom. Jahn refers the age of the epitomiser to some time previous to the middle of the last century before the birth of Christ, and De Wette maintain^ that Jason must have written a consi- derable time after the year B.C. 161. This book is supposed to be that referred to by Clemens Atexandrmus (Stromata) as MaiucaPcuKwv 'E7n- Tofxi'i. The mode of computation differs from that in the first book, in which it takes place after the Jewish maimer. Language and Versions. — Jerome (Prolog. Galcat.) observes that the phraseology of this book evinces a Greek original. The elegance and purity of the style have misled some persons into the supposition that its author was Josephus. The Latin version (which is ante-Hieronymian) is a MACCABEES, BOOKS OF. 283 free translation from the Greek. The Syriac is also from the Greek, but is not always exact. The Arabic appears to be a compilation from the Greek books of Maccabees, and from the history appended to the works of Josephus. There have been two books of Maccabees found among the Chinese Jews ; but whether they are the same with ours is doubtful. In the celebrated theses of the Jesuit Professors Less and Hamelius, which were condemned by the theological faculties of Louvain and Douai in 1586, and which consisted in denying the necessity of universal verbal inspiration, as well as the immediate inspiration of every truth or sentence contained in Scripture, it is worthy of remark that this book is introduced in illustration of the third thesis, which is as follows : — ' Any book, such as the Second Book of Maccabees, written by human industry, without the aid of the Holy Spirit, becomes Holy Scripture, if the Holy Spirit afterwards testifies to its containing nothing false.' The truth of these theses, how- ever, was advocated by Cornelius 3 Lapide, Suarez, Bonfrere, Bellarmine, Huet, Du Pin, Calmer, and Richard Simon (Henderson, On In- spiration, lect. i. p. 65). The Third Book of Maccabees, still read in the Greek church, and contained in the Alexandrian and Vatican MSS. (A. & B.) is, as has been already observed, the first in order of time. It contains an account of the persecution of the Egyptian Jews by Ptolemy Philopator, who is said to have proceeded to Jerusalem after his victory at Raphia over Antiochus the Great, B.C. 217, and after sacrificing in the temple, to have attempted to force his way into the Holy of Holies, when he was prostrated and rendered motionless by an invisible hand. Upon his re- turn to Egypt, he revenged himself by shutting up the Jews in the Hippodrome, and exposing them to be crushed beneath the feet, of elephants. This book contains an account of their deliver- ance by divine interposition. It is anterior in point of date to the Maccaba?an period, and has received its designation from a general resem- blance to the two first books in the heroic cha- racter of the actions which it describes. Calmet (Coinmentary) observes that this book is rejected as apocryphal in the Latin Church ; not, however, as not containing a true history, but as not being inspired, as he considers the first two books to be. It is nevertheless regarded by De Wette as a tasteless fable, and notwithstanding the relation which it contains of an annual festival, con- sidered by him as most probably destitute of any historical foundation. Dr. Milman (Hist, of the Jeics) describes it as a ' romantic story.' There is a similar relation in the Latin version by Ru- finus of the Supplement to Josephus, which De Wette considers, although a highly improbable narration, to approach nearer to the truth than the third book of Maccabees. Josephus's narra- tive is placed fifty years later, not under Ptolemy Philomelor, but under Ptolemy Physci n. Author, Age, and Versions. — The author is unknown. Dr. Allix (Judgment of the Jewish Church') considers it to have been written b.cj 200, and by the author of Ecclesiasticus. There is a Syriac version in the Polyglotts, but no ancient Latin translation has come down to 284 MACCABEES, BOOKS OF. us. The work does not appear either in the MSS. or early printed editions of the Vulgate, and is first found in Latin in the edition of Frobenius (1538). There was an English ver- sion by Walter Lynne (1550), which was after- wards appended, with some corrections, to Day's folio Bible (1551). It. was again translated by Whiston {Authentic Documents, 1719 and 1727) and afterwards by Crutwell {Bible, 1785), and again by Dr. Cotton {Five Books of Maccabees, 1832). There is a French translation by Calmet, appended to his commentary. The version of 3 Maccabees (and of 3 and 4 Esdras), which is found in some German Bibles since Luther's time, was by Daniel Cramer. Luther himself only translated the first two books. The Fourth Book of Maccabees, which is also found in the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts, is generally supposed to he the same with the Supremacy of Reason, attributed to Josephus, with which it for the most part accords. It consists of an inflated amplification of the history of the martyrdom of Eleazar, and of the seven brothers, whose torments and death, with that of their mother, form the subject of 2 Mace. ch. vi. vii. In some Greek MSS. it is entitled the Supremacy of Reason, by Josephus, or the Fourth Book of Maccabees, in others sim- ply the Fourth Book of Maccabees. It is found in the Greek Bibles printed at Basle in 1545, and at Francfort in 1597, where it is entitled The Booh of Josippos (Josephus) on the Macca- bees. It bears the same title in several other MSS. Philostratus (Hist. Eccles.), Jerome (Be Script. Eccles. and lib. 2 cont. Relay.), and Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 10), ascribe this work to Josephus. Eusebius (I. c.) describes it as a ' work of no mean execution, entitled the Supre- macy of Reason, and by some Maccabaicum, because it contains the conflicts of those Jews who contended manfully for the true religion, as is related in the books called Maccabees.' St. Gregory Nazianzen ( Orat. cle Maccab.), St. Am- brose (Be Vita Beata, lib. ii. c. 10, 11, 12), St. Chrysostom Homil. ii. in Sand. Maccabeeos), and even St. Jerome (Epist. 100), in their eulo- gies of the consistency of the Maccabsean mar- tyrs, have evidently drawn their descriptions from the fourth book. The details given by St. Jerome of their sufferings, such as the breaking of their bodies on the wheel, the history of which, he adds, is read throughout the churches of Christ, are not found in the second book. Calmet (Preface to the Fourth Book of Mac- cabees) has pointed out several contradictions between this and the second book, as well as the books of Moses, together with some opinions de- rived from the Stoics, such as the equality of crimes ; which, he supposes, together with its tedious descriptions, have consigned it to the rank of an Apocryphal book. The fourth book was printed by Dr. Grabe from the Alexandrian MS. in the British Mu- seum. There is a French translation by Calmet (Commentary), and an English one by Dr. Cotton (Five Books of Maccabees, 1832). What has been called the Fifth book of Mac- cabees is now extant only in the Arabic and Syriac languages. It was first published, as the MACCABEES, BOOKS OF. supposed fourth book, in the Paris Polyglott, with a Latin version. Before this, Sixtus of Sienna had published an account of a Greek MS. containing the history of the pontificate of John Hyrcanus, which he had seen in the library of Sanctes Pagnini at Lyons, and which he persuaded himself and others to be the long- lost fourth book so often referred to in the an- cient church. This unique MS., however, soon after perished in the flames which consumed the library of Pagnini. Josephus remained as the sole authority for the history of these times. The Arabic work, however, above referred to, and which had the appearance of being a version from the Greek, bore such a resemblance to the lost MS. of Pagnini, commencing with the same words, ' After the death of Simon, his son John was made high-priest in his place,' that Le Jay, the editor, had no hesitation in printing it as the Fourth book of Maccabees. Calmet, how- ever, has advanced several reasons to show that this was not, in fact, the genuine fourth book. The whole Arabic history was translated into French by Baubrun in his edition of the Bible. Calmet has limited himself to the translation of seven chapters, or that portion which accords with what had been taken by Sixtus of Sienna for the fourth book of Maccabees. This is pre- ceded in the Arabic by nineteen, and followed by thirty-two chapters. It is described in the Paris Polyglott as being derived from a Hebrew original, in which cha- racter it also accords with the Greek MS. of Pagnini. From the Paris Polyglott it found its way into the London. Dr. Cotton has given a translation of the Latin version which first ap- peared in the Paris Polyglott. Author, Aye, and Subject. — It is impossible to ascertain the author, who could scarcely have been Josephus, as lie disagrees in many things with that historian (Calmet's Preface). Calmet sup- poses that the original Hebrew may have consisted of ancient annals, but that the .Greek or Arabic translator must have lived after the destruction of the temple by the Romans (see 5 Mace. ix. ; xxi.). To Samaria he gives its more modern name of Sebaste, and to Sichem that of Neapolis. The work consists of a history of Jewish affairs, commencing with the attempt on the treasury at Jerusalem by Heliodorus, and ending with the tragic fate of the last of the Asrnonaean princes, and with the inhuman execution by Herod of his noble and virtuous wife Mariamne, and of his two sons. This history thus fills up the chasm to the birth of Christ. Dr. Cotton has pointed out among the ' re- markable peculiarities' found in this book the phrases, ' Peace be unto thee,' and ' God be merciful to them,' showing that the practice of prayer for the dead was at this time prevalent. But the most remarkable passage in reference to this subject is 2 Mace. xii. 40-45, where Judas forwards to Jerusalem 2000. or according to the Syriac 3000, and according to the Vulgate 12,000, drachmas of silver, to make a sin-offering for the Jews slain in action, on whose persons were found things consecrated to idols, which they had sacrilegiously plundered in violation of the'law of Moses (Deut. vii. 25, 26). The author of the book remarks that it was a holy and good thought to pray for the dead, which, he observes, MACCABEES, BOOKS OF. would have been superfluous, had there been no resurrection. Grotius (in loe.) supposes that this practice commenced after the exile, when the Jews had learned from the prophets Ezekiel and Daniel a distinct notion of a future state (see Bartolocci's Bibl'wth. Rabbin, ii. 250; Basnage, Hist, des Juifs, iii. 4. 32, &c). Calmet observes that, according to the notions of the Jews and some of the Christian Fathers, the pains of hell for those who died in mortal sin (as appears to have been the case of these Jews) were alleviated by the prayers and alms of the living (Augustine, De Fide, Spe, et Charitate, ch. 110), if not entirely removed; and cites a passage from a very an- cient Christian Liturgy to the same effect. This learned commentator supposes that the ancient and Catholic practice of prayer for the dead had its origin in this usage of the Jews, although he admits it to be a distinct thing from the doctrine of purgatory as held in the Roman Church. As, however, it is intimated in ver. 45 that this mercy was reserved for those who died piously, which could not be predicated of persons who had died in mortal sin, he conjectures that Judas might have charitably presumed that they had repented before death, or that there were other extenuating circumstances unknown to us, which attended the character of their offence, and rendered them lit objects for the divine mercy. Church Authority of Maccabees. — The first two books of Maccabees have been at all times treated with a very high degree of respect in the Christian Church. Origen (apud Eusebium), professing to give a catalogue of the twenty-two canonical books, of which, however, he actually enumerates only twenty-one, adds, ' besides, there are the Maccabees.' This has given rise to the notion that he intended to include these books in the canon, while others have observed that he has omitted the minor prophets from his catalogue. In his preface to the Psalms he excludes the two books of Maccabees from the books of Holy Scripture, but in his Princip. (ii. 1), and in his Comment, ad Rom. ch. v., he speaks of them as inspired, and as of equal authority with the other books. St. Jerome says that the Church does not acknowledge them as canonical, although he elsewhere cites them as Holy Scripture (Com. ad Isa. xxiii. ; ad Eccl. vii., ix.; ad Dan. viii.). Bellarmine (De Verbo Dei) acknowledges that these, with the other deutero-canonical books, are rejected by Jerome, as they had not been then deter- mined by any general council. Vicenzi, however (Introd. in Scrip. Deutcrocan.), maintains. that Jerome only hesitates to receive them (Sanctus dubitat). St. Augustine (De Civit. Dei) observes that the ' books of Maccabees were not found in the canonical Scriptures, but in those which not the Jews, but the Church, holds for canonical, on account of the passions of certain martyrs.' The first councils which included (hem in the canon- ical Scriptures were those of Hippo and Car- thage ; the first council professing itself to be general, which is said to have adopted them, was that of Ferrara or Florence in the year 1 139 ; but the supposed canon of this council which contains them is by others said to be a forgery (see Raiboldi Censura Lib. A]joc, 1611, and Cosin's History of the Canon, ch. xvi). However this may be, we have already seen [Deuterocanonical] that they were received with the other books by the MACCABEES, BOOKS OF. 285 Council of Trent. Basnage, cited by Lardner (Credibility), thinks that the word ' Canonical ' may be supposed to be used here [by the coun- cils of Hippo and Carthage] loosely, so as to comprehend not only those books which are ad- mitted as a rule of faith, but those which are esteemed useful, and may be publicly read for the edification of the people, in contradistinction to such books as were entirely rejected. This is also the opinion of the Roman Catholic Professor Jahn (Introd. o 29), who expresses himself in nearly the same words. Dr. Lardner conceives that Augustine also, unless he would contradict himself, must be understood to have used the word in the same sense. De Wette (Einleitung , § 25) observes that as the Jewish Scriptures could only be read in the Alexandrian version, the early Christian writers frequently cite the apo- cryphal as if they were canonical writings, to which ell'ect he furnishes many examples ; and his translator adds that the most celebrated teachers of the second and third centuries regard them with the same esteem as the canonical writ- ings, of which he observes that the books of Mac- cabees are among those most often appealed to. De Wette (I. c.) supposes that at the end of the fourth century the word ' canon ' included the collateral idea of an ecclesiastical decision. It is remarkable that the ancient writers of the Greek church uniformly rejected from the canon all books written in the Greek language, in which they were followed in the west by Hilary and Jerome, while others continued to use all the books contained in the Alexandrian version. Dr. Cotton is astonished that ' a Roman Catholic at least should not have bowed with implicit de- ference to the recorded judgment of St. Jerome, to whom he owns himself indebted for his Bible ;' not recollecting that the authority of St. Augustine was at all times greater in the Western church than that of St. Jerome. It has been supposed by some that the Egyptian Jews had a peculiar canon distinct from the Hebrew ; but the utmost that can be said is, that the latter books were held in higher esteem among the Hellenist than among the Palestinian Jews. Bertholdt thinks that the apocryphal books were treated by the Egyptian Jews rather as an appen- dix to the canon than as a part of it, and were therefore placed, not in, but beside the canon ; but that the ancient Christians, not being ac- quainted with Hebrew, considered all the books of the Alexandrian codex as genuine and sacred, and made the same use of the Apocrypha and of the Hebrew canon. The ancient Greek catalogues sometimes enu- merate four, sometimes three, and at other times only two books of Maccabees. There are three books of Maccabees cited in the 84th of the apostolic canons. Theodoret (in Dan. xi. 7) cites the third book as Holy Scripture. The author of the Synopsis Scripturce enumerates four books of Maccabees among the antileyomena of the Old Testament. Nicephorus cites three only in the same class. Eusebius (Chronicon) merely observes that the third book is placed out of its chronological order. Philostorgius (Eccles. Hist.) a.d. 425, highly esteems the first book of Maccabees ; the second does not appear to him to have been the work of the same author. The third he calls a ' monstrous production,' having 286 MACEDONIA. nothing similar to the first book. There are four books of Maccabees named in ancient catalogues given by Coblerius as among the books not of the Seventy. Three books of Maccabees are received with equal authority in the Greek church. It is remarkable that although the Anglican church has received the canon of St. Jerome (art. vi.), she lias prescribed no lessons to be read from either of the books of Maccabees [Esther, Esdras, Deuterocanonicai,] which she has appended to the Old Testament. In John x. 22, there is a marginal reference in the authorized version to 1 Mace. iv. 59, and in Heb. xi. 35, 36, there are references to 2 Mace. vi. 18, 19; to vii. 7, &c., and to vii. 1-7. In the order of the books in the Codex Alexan- drinus [Deuterocanonical], the reader will observe the position which the four books of Mac- cabees occupy. In the Vatican Codex Tobit and Judith are placed between Nehemiah and Esther ; Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus follow Can- ticles ; Baruch and Lamentations are placed after Jeremiah, and the four books of Maccabees close the canon. — W. W. MACEDONIA (Uaicedovia), a country lying to the north of Greece Proper, having on the east Thrace and the j^Lgsean Sea, on the west the Adri- atic and Illyria, on the north Dardania and Maesia, and on the south Thessaly and Epirus. The country is supposed to have been first peopled by Chittim or Kittim, a son of Javan (Gen. x. 4) [Nations, Dispersion of] ; and in that case it is probable that the Macedonians are sometimes intended when the word Chittim occurs in the Old Testa- ment. Macedonia was the original kingdom of Philip and Alexander, by means of whose vic- tories the name of the Macedonians became cele- brated throughout the East, and is often used for the Greeks in Asia generally (Esth. Apoc. xviii. 10, 14 ; 2 Mace. viii. 20). The rise of the great empire formed by Alexander is described by the prophet Daniel under the emblem of a goat with one horn (Dan. viii. 3-8). As the horn was a general symbol of power, and as the oneness of the horn implies merely the unity of that power, we are not prepared to go the lengths of some over-zealous illustrators of Scripture, who argue that if a one-horned goat were not a recognised symhol of Macedonia we should not be entitled to conclude that Macedonia was intended. We hold that there could be no mistake in the mat- ter, whatever may have been the usual symbol of Macedonia. It is, however, curious and inter- esting to know that Daniel did describe Mace- donia under its usual symbol, as coins still exist in which that country is represented under the figure of a one-horned goat. There has been much discussion on this subject — more curious than valuable — but the kernel of it lies in this fact. The particulars may be seen in Murray's Truth of Revelation Illustrated, and in the article Macedonia, in Taylor's Calmet. WThen subdued by the Romans under Paulus jEmilius (b.c. 168), Macedonia was divided into four provinces ; but afterwards (b.c. 142) the whole of Greece was divided into two great provinces, Macedonia and Achaia [Greece, Achaia]. Macedonia therefore constituted a Ro- man province, governed by a proconsul {provincia MAGI. proconsulans ; Tacit Annal. i. 76 ; Suet. Claud. 26), in the time of Christ and his Apostles. The Apostle Paul being summoned in a vision, while at Troas, to preach the Gospel in Macedonia, proceeded thither, and founded the churches of Thessalonica and Philippi (Acts xvi. 9), a.d. 55. This occasions repeated mention of the name, either alone (Acts xviii. 5 ; xix. 21 ; Rom. xv. 26 ; 2 Cor. i. 16; xi. 9 ; Phil. iv. 15), or along with Achaia (2 Cor. ix. 2 ; 1 Thess. i. 8). The prin- cipal cities of Macedonia were Amphipolis, Thes- salonica, Pella, and Pelagonia (Liv. xlv. 29) ; the towns of the province named in the New Testament, and noticed in the present work, are Amphipolis, Thessalonica, Neapolis, Apollonia, and Beroea. MACHPELAH (H^SnO, tioofold, double; Sept. dnrXovs), the name of the plot of ground containing the cave which Abraham bought of Ephron the Hittite for a family sepulchre (Gen. xxiii. 9, 17) [Hebron]. MADAI (HD ; Sept. MaSoQ, third son of Japhet (Gen. x. 2), from whom the Medes, &c, are supposed to have descended [Gog.; Nations, Dispersion of]. M ADM ANN AH (n3O*|!0 ; Sept. MaB/x-nvd), a city of Simeon (Josh. xv. 31), very far south towards Gaza (1 Chron. ii. 49), which in the first distribution of lands had been assigned to Judah. Eusebius and Jerome identify it with a town of their time, called Menois, near the city of Gaza (0?iomast. p. 89). MADMENAH (n30"]0 ; Sept. MaSefirjvd), , a town only named in Isa. x. 31, where it is ma- nifestly placed between Nob and Gibeah. It is generally confounded with the preceding, which is much too far southward to suit the context. MAGDALA (MaySocAa), a town mentioned in Matt. xv. 39, and the probable birthplace of Mary Magdalene, i. e. MaTy of Magdala. It must have taken its name from a tower or castle, as the name signifies. It was situated on the lake Gennesareth, but it has usually been placed on the east side of the lake, although a careful consideration of the route of Christ before he came to, and after he left, Magdala, would show that it must have been on its icestem shore. This is confirmed by the Jerusalem Talmud (compiled at Tiberias), which several times speaks of Magdala as being adjacent to Tiberias and Hamath, or the hot-springs (Lightfoot, Cho- rog. Cent. cap. lxxvi.). It was a seat of Jewish learning after the destruction of Jerusalem, and the Rabbins of Magdala are often mentioned in the Talmud (Lightfoot, I. a). A small Moslem village, bearing the name of Mejdel, is now found on the shore of the lake aboitt three miles north by west of Tiberias ; and although there are no ancient ruins, the name and situation are very strongly in favour of the conclusion that it repre- sents the Magdala of Scripture. This was pro- bably also the Migclal-el, in the tribe of Naphtali, mentioned in Josh. xix. 38 (Burckhardt, Syria, p. 559; Seetzen in Monat. Corresp. xviii. 349; Fisk, Li/e,p.316; Rob'mso^Researches, iii. 279). MAGI. The Magi were originally one of the six tribes (Herod, i. 101 ; Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 29) into which the nation of the Medes was divided. MAGI. who, like the Levites under the Mosaic institu- tions, were intrusted with the care of religion : an office which was held in the highest honour, gave the greatest influence, and which they probably- acquired for themselves only after a long time, as well as many worthy efforts to serve their country, and when they had proved themselves superior to the rest of their brethren. Power originally has always excellence of some kind for its basis; and, since the kind of power exerted by the Magi was the highest on earth, as being concerned with religion, so is it certain that they surpassed their fellow-countrymen in all the finer and loftier points of character. As among other ancient na- tions, as the Egyptians, and Hebrews, for instance, so among the Medes, the priestly caste had not only religion, but the arte and all the higher culture, in their charge. Their name points immediately to their sacerdotal character (from Mag or Mog, which in the Pehlvi denotes 'priest'), either be- cause religion was the chief object of their atten- tion, or more probably because, at the first, reli- gion and art were so allied as to be scarcely more than different expressions of the same idea. Little in detail is known of the Magi during the independent existence of the Median govern- ment ; they appear in their greatest glory after the Medes were united with the Persians. This doubtless is owing to the general imperfection of the historical materials which relate to the earlier periods. So great, however, was the influence which the Magi attained under the united empire, that the Medes were not ill compensated for their loss of national independence. Under the Medo- Persian sway the Magi formed a sacred caste ov college, which was very famous in the ancient world. (Xenoph. Cyrop. viii. 1. 23; Ammian. Mar- cell, xxiii. 6 ; Heeren, Ideen, i. 451 ; Schlosser, Universal Uebers. i. 278). Porphyry (Abst. iv. 16) says, ' the learned men who are engaged among the Persians in the sendee of the Deity are called Magi;' and Suidas, 'Among the Per- sians the lovers of wisdom (cj>i\6y), son of Japhet (Gen. x. 2). In Ezekiel (xxxviii. 2 ; xxxix. 6) it occurs as the name of a nation, coupled with Gog, and is supposed to represent certain Scythian or Tartar tribes descended from the son of Japhet [Nations, Dispersion of]. MAHALATH, the title of Psalms liii. and lxxxviii. [Psalms.] M AH AN AIM (E^Qtt, two hosts; Sept. Ma- vdt/j.), a place beyond the Jordan, north of the river Jabbok, which derived its name from Jacob's having been there met by the angels on his return from Padan-aram (Gen. xxxii. 2). The name was eventually extended to the town which then existed, or which afterwards arose in the neigh- bourhood. This town was in the territory of the tribe of Gad (Josh. xiii. 26, 30), and was a city of the Levites (Josh. xxi. 39). It was in this city that Ish-bosheth, the son of Saul, reigned (2 Sam. ii. 8), probably because he found the in- fluence of David's name less strong on the east than on the west of the Jordan. The choice, at least, seems to show that Mahanaim was then an important and strong place. Hence, many years after, David himself repaired to Mahanaim when he sought refuge beyond the Jordan from his son Absalom (2 Sam. xvii. 24, 27 ; 1 Kings ii. 8). We only read of Mahanaim again as the station of one of the twelve officers who had charge, in monthly rotation, of raising the provisions for the royal establishments under Solomon (1 Kings iv. 14). The site has not yet been identified. In Dr. Robinson's Arabic list of names of places in Jebel Ajlun (Bib. Researches, vol. iii. Append, xi. p. 166), we find Mahneh, and this may possibly prove to be Mahanaim. MAHER-SHALAL-HASH-BAZ (^ ")H» ?2 CJT1 ; Sept. Tod 6£eais -wpovo^v iroi^o'ai ctkv- Xcav), words prognostic of the sudden attack of the Assyrian army ('he hasteth to the spoil'), which the prophet Isaiah was first commanded to write in large characters upon a tablet, and after- wards to give as a symbolical name to a son that was to be born to him (Isa. viii. 1, 3). It is, as Dr. Henderson remarks, the longest of any of the Scripiture names, but has its parallels in this re- spect in other languages, especially in our own during the time of the Commonwealth. MAHLON, one of the two sons of Elimelecli and Naomi, and first husband of Ruth the Moab- itess (Ruth i. 2, sq.). [Ruth.] MAKKEDAH (iTJ|»; Sept. MoktjScJ), a royal city of the ancient Canaanites (Josh. xii. 16), in the neighbourhood of which was the cave in which the five kings who confederated against Israel took refuge after their defeat (Josh. x. 10- 29). It afterwards belonged to Judah (Josh. xv. 41). Makkedah is placed by Ensebius and Jerome 8 Roman miles to the east of Eleuther- opolis (Onmnast. s. v. Maceda). MALACHI OpN^D ; Sept. Ma\aXMs ; Vulg. Malachius), the last of the minor prophets, and consequently the latest writer in the canon of the Old Testament. Ch. iv. 4, 5, 6, might alone suggest that he was the last of the Hebrew pro- phets till John the Baptist appeared. Nothing is known of his person or history. It appears that he lived after Zechariah, since in his time the second 290 MALACHI. temple was already built (ch. iii. 10) ; and it is probable that he was contemporary with Nehe- miah (comp. ch. ii. 11, with Neh. xiii. 23-27, and ch. iii. 8, with Neh. xiii. 10). Tradition, as usual, has not failed to supply the lack of authentic information. Malachi is represented to have been of the tribe of Zebulon, and a native of Sapha (Saphir ?) ; to have died young, and to have been buried with his ancestors at Sapha, after having assisted as a member of the great Synagogue, on the re-establishment of order and prosperity in his country (Epiphanius, De Proph. Vita et Interitu, cap. xxii. ; Isidor. De Vita et Morte Sand, cap. Ii.). . The name Malachi COX?D) means, as some un- derstand it, my angel; but it seems more correct to regard it as a contracted form of tTO&OtD, angel of Jehovah. The traditionists already cited regard it as a proper name, given to the prophet on account of the beauty of his person and his unblemished life. The word translated ' angel,1 however, means also a ' messenger,' angels being, in fact, the messengers of God ; and as the prophets are often styled angels or messengers of Jehovah, it is sup- posed that ' Malachi' is merely a general title de- scriptive of this character, and not a proper name. It has been very generally supposed that it de- notes Ezra. The Chaldee paraphrast is of this opinion, as is R. Joshua Ben Korcha and other Jewish writers ; but Kimchi resists this, alleging that Ezra is never called a prophet, but a scribe, and Malachi never a scribe, but a prophet. R. Nachman supposes Malachi to have been Mor- decai, and that he was so called because he was second to the Icing; the force of which reason is not very apparent. The current opinion of the Jews is that of the Talmud, in which this question is mooted, and which decides, it seems to us rightly, that this prophet is not the same with Mordecai, or Ezra, or Zerubbabel, or Nehemiah, whose claims had all been advocated by different par- ties, but a distinct person named Malachi (T. Bab. Megillak, fol. xv. 1). Jerome, however, supports the claim of Ezra (Comment, in Mai. i. 1), and many modern commentators have yielded to his authority ; but the prevailing opinion is in favour of the separate existence of Malachi. Some, however, have been content to leave the authorship unsettled, and to suppose that the title is taken from the promise of an angel or messenger of the Lord, in ch. iii. 1, ' Behold, I send my messenger ',' &c. where the word COfcSPfc) malachi) is the very same that forms the title of the book. Considering the peculiar import- ance of this text, which was fulfilled in John the Baptist, the harbinger of the new covenant, it cannot be denied that there is much force in this conjecture, although that for which we have intimated a preference seems to offer still stronger claims in its favour. By some the word malachi has been taken very literally to denote an incar- nate angel. This was one of the many vagaries of Origen, and it has been adopted by a good number of ancient and modern commentators, the rather, perhaps, as the Septuagint affords it some countenance by translating the first verse, Arj/^ua xSyov Kvpiov iirl tV 'l pflK, 'the last of them ;' and not seldom he is distinguished by the Rabbins as D^^JH Dflin, ' the seal of the prophets.' But although it is well agreed that Malachi was the last; of the prophets, the date of his prophecy has been variously deter- mined. Usher makes him contemporary with Nehemiah, in b.c. 416 ; and the general opinion that this prophet was contemporary with, or imme- diately followed, Nehemiah, makes most of the proposed alternatives range within a few years of that date. He censures the same offences which excited the indignation of Nehemiah, and which that governor had not been able entirely to reform. Speaking of God's greater kindness to the Israelites than to the Edomites, he begins with declaiming against the priests for their profane and mer- cenary conduct, and against the people for- their multiplied divorces and intermarriages with idol- atrous nations ; he threatens them with punish- ment and rejection, declaring that God would ' make his name great among the Gentiles' (ch. i. 11), for that he was wearied with the impiety of Israel (ch. i. ii.). From this the prophet takes occasion solemnly to proclaim that the Lord whom they sought should suddenly come to his temple, preceded by that messenger who, like a harbinger, should prepare his way; that the Lord when he should appear would purify the sons of Levi from their unrighteousness, and refine them as metal from the dross (ch. iii. 1-3) ; that then ' the offering of Jfidah,' the spiritual sacrifice of the heart, ' should be pleasant to the Lord,' as was that of the patriarchs and their uncorrupted ancestors (ch. iii. 4); and that the Lord would quickly exterminate. the corruptions and adul- teries which prevailed. The prophet then pro- ceeds with an earnest exhortation to repentance ; promising high rewards and remembrance to the righteous in that last day when the Lord shall make up his peculiar treasures, and finally establish a distinction of doom and condition between the righteous and the wicked (ch. iii. 16-18). Malachi then concludes with an impressive assurance of approaching salvation to those who feared God's name from that ' sun of righteousness,' who should arise with healing in his wings, and render them triumphant ; enjoining in the solemn close of his exhortation, when uttering as it were the last admonition of the Jewish prophets, an ob- servance of the law of Moses, till the advent of Elijah the prophet (ch. iv. 5, or John the Baptist, who came in the spirit and power of Elias, Mark xi. 12; Luke i. 17), who before the coming of that ( great and dreadful day of the Lord, should turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers' (ch. iv.). Thus Malachi sealed up the volume of prophecy with the description of that personage at whose appearance the evangelists begin their gospel history. The claim of the book of Malachi to its place in the canon of the Old Testament has never been disputed; and its authority is established by the references to it in the New Testament (Matt. xi. 10; xvii. 12; Mark i. 2; ix. 11, 12; Luke i. 17 ; Rom. ix. 13). MALCHUS. The manner of Malachi offers few, if any, dis- tinguishing characteristics. The style, rhythm, and imagery of his writings are substantially ■those of the old prophets, but they possess no remarkable vigour or beauty. This is accounted for by his living during that decline of Hebrew poetry, which we trace more or less in all the sacred writings posterior to the Captivity. In consequence of the peculiar questions which arise out of this prophecy and its authorship, the literature connected with Malachi is very ample. Copious notices will be found in the Latin, Ger- man, and English Introductions to the Old Testa- ment, and in the Prefatory Dissertations of the va- rious commentators. The principal separate works on the subject are : — Chytraeus, Explicat. Malach. Prophet. Rost. 15GS; Grynaeus, Hypomnemata in Malach. Frcf. 1652 ; Stock, Commentary upon the whole Prophesy e of Malachy, Lond. 1641; Schlater, A Brief and Plain Commentary upon the whole Prophecie of Malachy, Lond. 1650 ; Ursinus, Comment, in Malach. Frcf. 1652 ; Sal. van Til, Malach. illustrates, Lug. Bat. 1701 ; Wesselius, Malachias enucleatus, Lubeck, 1729; Malachia Propheta c. Targum Jonathis et Ra- daki Raschii ac Aben-Esrce Comment, et In- terpret. J. C. Hebenstreit, Lips. 1746 ; Venema, Comment, in Malach. Leovarii. 1759 ; Bahrdt, Comment, in Malachiam, c. examine verss. vett. et lectt. variant. Houbigantii, Lips. 17GS ; J. M. Faber, Comment, in Malachiam, Onold. 1779; ■T. F. Fischer, Observatt. Crit. in Malachiam, Lips. 1759 ; J. M. Faber, Abioeischungen der alten Uebersetser d. Propheten Malachias, in Eichhorn's Repcrt. vi. 104-124. MALCHUS (MdAxos), the servant of the high- priest Caiaphas, whose right ear was cut off by Peter in the garden of Gethsemane (John xviii. 10). The name of Malchus was not unfrequent among the Greeks (see Wetstein, in loc); but as it was usually applied to persons of Oriental countries, there is reason to suppose it derived from the Hebrew ~\7ft, melech, and, if so, it ex- actly corresponds to our title ' King.' Some, however, compare it with the Hebrew *]1?t3 mallauch, ' counsellor.' MALLUACH (H-IJD) occurs only once in Scripture, namely, in the passage where Job com- plains that he is subjected to the contumely of the meanest people, those 'who cut up malloios {malluach) by the bushes — for their meat ' (Job xxx. 4). The proper meaning of the word mal- luach has been a subject of considerable discussion among authors, in consequence, apparently, of its resemblance to the Greek /xaXaxv (malakhe), signifying ' mallow,' and also to maluch, which is said to be the Syriac name of a species of Orache, or Atriplex. It is difficult, if not impossible, to say which is the more correct interpretation, as both appear to have some foundation in truth, and seem equally adapted to the sense of the above- quoted passage. The malakhe of the Greeks is distinguished by Dioscorides into two kinds ; of which he states that the cultivated is more lit for food than the wild kind. Arab authors apply the description of Dioscorides to hhoob-bazce, a name which in India we found applied both to species of Malva rotundifolia and of M. sylvcstris, which extend from Europe to the north of India, and MALLUACH. 291 which are still used as food in the latter country, as they formerly were in Europe, and probably in Syria. That some kind of mallow has been so used in Syria we have evidence in the quota- tion made by Mr. Harmer from Biddulph, who says, ' We saw many poor people collecting malloios and three-leaved grass, and asked them what they did with it; and they answered, that it was all their food, and that they boiled it, and did eat it.' Dr. Shaw, in his Travels, on the con- trary, observes that ' Mell&u-keah, or mulookiah, SWIPE), as in the Arabic, is the same with the melochia or corchorus, being a podded species of mallows, whose pods are rough, of a glutinous substance, and used in most of their dishes. Mellou-keah appears to be little different in name from HI 71D (Job xxx. 4), which we render u mal- lows ;" though some other plant, of a more saltish taste, and less nourishing quality, may be rather intended.' The plant alluded to is Corchorus olitorius, which has been adopted and figured in her Scripture Herbal by Lady Calcott, who observes that this plant, called Jews' Mallow, appears to be certainly that mentioned by the patriarch. Avicenua calls it olus Judaicum ; and Rauwolf saw the Jews about Aleppo use the leaves as potherbs ; ' and this same mallow con- tinues to be eaten in Egypt and Arabia, as well as Palestine.' But there are so many plants cf a mild mucilaginous nature which are used as articles of diet in the East, that it is hardly pos- sible to select one in preference to another, unless we find a similarity in the name. Thus species of Amaranthus, of Chenopodium, of Portulacca, as well as the above Corchorus, and the mallow, are all used as food, and might be adduced as suitable to the above passages, since most of them are found growing wild in many parts of the countries of the East. The learned Bochart, however, contends {Hie- roz. part i. t. iii. c. 16) that the word mal- luach denotes a saltish plant called aAifios by the Greeks, and which with good reason is sup- posed to be the Atriplex Halimus of botanists, or tall shrubby Orache. The Septuagint, indeed, first gave ix\ifj.a as the interpretation of malluach. Celsius adopts it, and many others consider it as the most correct. A good abstract of Bochart "s arguments is given by Dr. Harris. In the first place the most ancient Greek translator inter- prets malluach by halimos. That, the Jews were in the habit of eating a plant called by the former name, is evident from the quotation given by Bochart from the Talmudical Tract Kiddusin, (c. iii. 66), where it is said : ' Ivit in urbem Co- chalith, quae est in deserto. Et invitatis omnibus sapientibus Israelis dixit, Patres nostri (pra? inopia) malluchim comederunt quo tempore laborabant in sedificatione Templi secundi : et nos quoque malluchim comedimus in memoviam patrum nostrorum. Et allati sunt malluchim super mensas aureas, et comederunt.' By Ibn Buetar, malookh is given as the synonyme of a? kutuf albuhuri, i. e. the sea-side Kutuf or Orache, which is usually considered to be the Atriplex marinum, now A. Halimus. Bochart, indeed, re- marks : ' Dioscorides libro primo halimum, quod populus Syviae vocat maluch, ait esse arbustum, ex quo fiunt sepes, rhamno simile, nisi quod caret spinis, et folio simili olese, sed latiori, et crescere v2 292 MAMMON. ad litora maris, et circa sepes.' This notice evi- dently refers to the"A\ifios of Dioscorides (Diosc. i. 121), which, as above stated, is supposed to be me Atriplex Halimzcs of botanists, and tiieKutiif buhuree of the Arabs, while the drpd 13, 22 ; ;xxxvii. 4, 8. RACA. RACHAM. 597 RACA ("PaKa), a word which occurs in Matt, v. 22, and which remains untranslated in the Authorized "Version. It is expressive of contempt, from the Chaldee Up'1'), and means an empty, worthless fellow. Jesus, contrasting the law of Moses, which could only take notice of overt acts, with his own, which renders man amenable for his motives and feelings, says in effect ; ' Whoso- ever is rashly angry with his brother is liable to the judgment of God; whosoever calls his brother Raca, is liable to the judgment of the Sanhedrim ; but whosoever calls him fool (Maipe) becomes liable to the judgment of Gehenna.' To appre- hend the higher criminality here attached to the te»m fool, which may not at first seem very obvious, it is necessary to observe that while 'raca' denotes a certain looseness of life and manners, 'fool' denotes a wicked and reprobate person : foolishness being in Scripture opposed to spiritual wisdom. RACE. [Games.] RACHAM (DIT}; Sept. rvkvov; Vulg. por- phyria; Lev. xi. 18 ; Deut. xiv. 17) is nowa dmit- ted to be the white carrion vulture of Egypt, Perc- nopterus Neophron JEgyptiacus. It would lead us beyond the limits prescribed to this article to enter into a disquisition on the manners of cranes, storks, swans, and pelicans, all in some degree confounded in the mind of Orientals when they describe the marvellous love, parental affection, and filial gra- titude of birds : consequently they have names for certain species which are claimed as derivatives from roots expressive of the affections. For al- though the incessant warfare of man upon brute animals in their native haunts has, at least in the populous west, well nigh obliterated all their 467. [Vultur percnopteius.] more generous instincts, and we are consequently not well acquainted with the natural attributes of their character, the swan alone can claim pre- tension to an ultra- maternal feeling, from her practice of supporting her young brood between her wings when she gives them thejr first lesson in swimming. All other tales of that nature recorded in the poets and historians of antiquity may be regardejj. as absolute fictions ; and among the rest, that in Horus Apollo, representing the Racham tearing the flesh of her thighs to feed her young, is evidently an invention of the Egyptian priesthood, fabricated in order to enhance the cha- racter of a useful bird, which, notwithstanding that it was sanctified in their mystical supersti- tions, and protected by the king as 'Pharaoh's fowl' (an ancient appellation), is jjerhaps the most revoltingly filthy bird in existence. With respect to the original imposition of the name Racham, as connected with any unusual affection for its young, there is no modern ornithologist who assigns such a quality to Percnopteri more than to other birds, although it is likely that as the pelican empties its bag of fish, so this bird may void the crop to feed her brood. Gesner had already figured (De Aquila quern Percnopterum vocant, p. 199) the Barbary variety, and pointed out the Racham of Scripture as the identical species, but Bruce first clearly established the fact. The Rachama of that, writer is apparently the Ak- bobha (' white father') of the Turks, and forms one of a small group of Vulturidae, subgenerically distinguished by the name of Perciiopterus and Neophron, differing from the other vultures in the bill being longer, straight, more attenuated, and then uncinated, and in the back of the head and neck being furnished with longish, narrow, suberectile feathers, but, like true vultures, having the pouch on the breast exposed, and the sides of the head and throat bare and livid. The great wing-coverts are partly, and the quill-feathers en- tirely, of a black and blackish ash-colour; those of the head, nape, smaller wing-coverts, body, and tail, in general white, witli tinges of buff and rufous; the legs are flesh- colour, and rather long; and the toes are armed with sharp claws. The females are brownish. In size the species is little bulkier than a raven, but it stands high on the legs. Always soiled with blood and garbage, offensive to the eye and nose, it yet is protected in Egypt both by law and public opinion, for the services it renders in clearing the soil of dead carcases putrefying in the sun, and the cultivated fields of innumerable rats, mice, and other vermin. Pious Moslems at Cairo and other places, bestow a daily portion of food upon them, and upon their associates the kites, who are seen hovering conjointly in great numbers about the city. The Racham extends to Palestine in the summer season, but becomes scarce towards the north, where it is not specially protected ; and it accompanies caravans, feasting on their leavmgs and on dead camels, &c. Gesner's figure represents the Barbary variety ; but there are two other species besides, viz., the Perciiopterus Angolensis, anil Percnopterus Hy- poleucus, both similarly characterized by their white livery, and distinguished from the Egyptian by a different arrangement of colour, a shorter bill, and more cleanly habits. In our version the name of Gier-eagle is cer- tainly most improper, as such a denomination can apply only to a large species, and is most appropriate to (he bearded vulture of the Alp*. The Liimmer-geyer of the Swiss (Gypaetus Bar- batus), which in the shape of varieties, or dis- tinct species, frequents also the high snowy ranges of Spain, Macedonia, Asia Minor, Crete, Abys- sinia, Caffraria, Barbary, and most likely of Libanus, was no doubt the bird intended by our 59S RACHEL. RAMAH. translators to represent the Racham ; nor was the application unreasonable, as will be shown in Vulture. The Percnopterus is somewhat sin- gularly classed both in Lev. and Deut, along with aquatic birds ; and it may be questioned whether any animal will eat it, since, in the parallel case of Vultur aura, the turkey-buzzard or carrion-crow of America, we have found even the ants abstaining from its carcase, and leaving it to dry up in the sun, though swarming around and greedy of every other animal substance [Vulture].— C. H. S. RACHEL (?rn, a eioe; Sept. 'Pa^A), one and the most beloved of the two daughters of Laban, whom Jacob married (Gen. xxix. 16, seq.), and who became the mother of Joseph and Benjamin, in giving birth to the latter of whom she died near Bethlehem, where her sepulchre is shown to this day (Gen. xxx. 22; xxxv. 16). For more minute particulars see Jacob, with whose history Rachel's is closely involved. RAGUEL, or Reuel (WlJH, friend cf God; Sept. 'PayovriK). 1. A son of Esau (Gen. xxxvi. 4, 10). 2. The father of Jethro (Exod. ii. 18; Num. x. 29). Some confound him with Jethro; but in the text last cited, lie is called the father of Hobab, who seems to have been the same as Jethro. In the same passage, indeed, the daugh- ters of the ' priest of Midian ' relate to ' Reuel their father ' their adventure with Moses : which might seem to support 1 j is identity with Jethro ; but it is quite a Scriptural usage to call a grandfather 'father,' and a granddaughter, ' daughter' (Gen. xxxi. 43 ; 2 Sam. xix. 25 ; 1 Kings xiv. 3 ; xvi. 2; xviii. 3). The Targum in this place reads, 'They came to Reuel their father's father.' [Hohab.] 3. Another person of this name occurs in 1 Chron. ix. 8. 1. RAHAB (3nT; Sept. 'Pai0), a name, signifying 'sea-monster,' which is applied as an appellation to Egypt in Ps. Ixxiv. 13, 14 ; lxxxvii. 4 ; lxxxix. 10 ; Isa. Ii. 9 (and some- times to its king, Ezek. xxix. 3; xxxiii. 3, comp. Ps. lxviii. 31) ; which metaphorical designation probably involves an allusion to the crocodiles, hippopotami, and other aquatic creatures of the Nile. 2. RAHAB, properly Rachab (2IT1, large ; Sept. 'Pa%a/3), a woman of Jericho who received into her house the two spies who were sent by Joshua into that city ; concealed them under the flax laid out upon the house-top, when they were sought after ; and, having given them important information, which showed that the inhabitants were much disheartened at the miracles which had attended the march of the Israelites, enabled them to escape over the wall of the town, upon which her dwelling was situated. For this im- portant service Rahab and her kindred were saved by the Hebrews from the general massacre which followed the taking of Jericho (Josh. ii. 1-21 ; vi. 17; comp. Heb. xi. 31). In the narrative of these transactions Rahab is called rtJIT conah, which our own, after the ancient versions, renders ' harlot.' The Jewish writers, however, being unwilling to entertain the idea of their ancestors being involved in a dis- reputable association at the commencement of their great undertaking, chose to interpret the word ' hostess,' one who keeps a public house, as if from JIT, ' to nourish ' (Joseph. Antiq. v. 1 ; ii» and vii. ; comp. the Targum, and Kimchi and Jarchi on the text). Christian interpreters also are inclined to adopt this interpretation for the sake of the character of a woman of whom the Apostle speaks well, and who would appear from Matt. i. 4 to have become by a subsequent mar- riage with Salmon prince of Judah, an ancestress of Jesus. But we must be content to take facts as they stand, and not strain them to meet diffi- culties ; and it is now universally admitted by every sound Hebrew scholar that nil? means 'harlot,' and not 'hostess.' It signifies harlot in every other text where it occurs, the idea of ' hostess' not being represented by this or any other word in Hebrew, as the function represented by it did not exist. There were no inns ; and when certain substitutes for inns eventually came into use, they were never, in any Eastern country, kept by women. . On the other hand, strangers from beyond the river might have repaired to the house of a harlot with- out suspicion or remark. The Bedouins from tlie desert constantly do so at this day in their visits to Cairo and Baghdad. The house of such a woman was also the only one to which they, as perfect strangers, could have had access, and certainly the only one in which they could calculate on obtaining the information they re- quired without danger from male inmates. This concurrence of analogies in the word, in the thing, and in the probability of circumstances, ought to settle the question. If we are concerned for the morality of Rahab, the best proof of her reformation is found in the fact of her subse- quent marriage to Salmon : this implies her pre- vious conversion to Judaism, for which indeed her discourse with the spies evinces that she was prepared. The Jewish writers abound in praises of Rahab, on account of the great service she ren- dered their ancestors. Even I hose who do not deny that she was a harlot, admit that she eventually became the wife of a prince of Israel, and that many great persons of their nation sprang from this union. The general statement is, that she was ten years of age at the time the Hebrews quirted Egypt, that she played the harlot during all the forty years they were in the wilderness, that she became a proselyte when the spies were received by her, and that after the fall of Jericho no less a personage than Joshua himself made her his wife. She is also counted as an ancestress of Jeremiah, Maaseiah, Hanameel, Shallum, Ba- ruch, Ezekiel, Neriah, Serial), and Huldah the prophetess. (See T. Babyl. tit. Megilla, fol. 14, col. 2 ; Juchasm, x. 1 ; Shalshalet Hakabala, vii. 2; Abarbanel, Kimchi, &c, on Josh. vi. 25 ; Mitzvoth Torek, p. 112; Lightfoot, Hor. Eel. ad Matt. i. 4; Meuschen, N. T. Talmud, p. 40.) RAIN. See under the head Climate, in art. Palestine. RAM. [Sheep.] RAMAH (nb'n, a high place, height ; Sept- 'Pa/m), the name of several towns and villages in Palestine, which it is not in all cases easy to distinguish from one another. 1. RAMAH, a town of Benjamin (Josh, xviii. 25), in the vicinity of Gibeah and Geba (Judg. RAMAH. xix. 13 ; Isa. x. 29 ; Hos. v. 8 ; Ezra ii. 2G ; Neh. vii. 30, xi. 33) ; on the way from Jerusalem to Bethel (Judg. iv. 5), and not far from the con- fines of the two kingdoms (1 Kings xv. 17; xxi. 22). It is also mentioned in Jer. xxxi. 15 ; xl. 1. Jerome places it six Roman miles north of Jeru- salem, and Josephus, who calls it ( Va/xaQoiv, places it forty stadia from Jerusalem (Antiq. viii. 12. 3). In accordance with all these intimations, at the distance of two hours' journey north of Jerusalem, upon a hill a little to the east of the great northern road, a village still exists under the name of Er-Ram, in which we cannot hesi- tate to recognise the representative of the ancient Ramah. This is one of the valuable identifica- tions fur which Biblical geography is indebted to Dr. Robinson (Researches, ii. 315-317). The difficult text (Jer. xxxi. 15), 'A voice was heard in Ramah . . . Rachel weeping for her children,' which the Evangelist (Matt. ii. 8) transfers to the massacre at Bethlehem, has been thought to require a southern Ramah not far from that place, near which indeed is Rachel's sepulchre. Bat no such Ramah has been found ; and Dr. Robinson thinks that the allusion of the prophet was originally applicable to this Ramah. The context refers to the exiles carried away captive by Nebuzar-adan to Babylon, who passed by way of Ramah, which was perhaps their rendez- vous (Jer. xl. 1). As Ramah was in Benjamin, the prophet introduces Rachel, the mother of that tribe, bewailing the captivity of her descend- ants. 2. RAMAH, of Samuel, so called, where the prophet lived and was buried (1 Sam. i. 19 ; ii. 11; vii. 17; viii. 4; xv. 34; xvi. 13, 15; xviii. 19, 22, 23 ; xxv. 1 ; xxviii. 3). It is probably the same with the Ramathaim-Zophim to which his father Elkanah belonged (1 Sam. i. 1, 19). The position of this Ramah was early lost sight of by tradition, and a variety of opinions have prevailed since the time of Eusebius and Je- rome, who regard it as the Arimathea of the New Testament, and place it near Lydda, where a Ra- mah anciently existed. Hence some have held the site to be that of the present Ramleb, which is itself a modern town [Arimathea]. Many writers have, however, been disposed to seek Samuel's Ramah in the Ramah of Benjamin (Pococke, ii. 71, 72; Bachiene, i. 155 ; Raumer, Paliist. p. 146 ; Winer, s. v.) ; but this was only half an hour distant from the Gibeah where Saul resided, which does not agree witli the historical intimation (comp. 1 Sam. ix. 10). Again, gene- ral opinion lias pointed to a place called Neby Samuel, a village upon a high point two hours north-west of Jerusalem, and which was, indeed, also usually supposed to be the Ramah of Ben- jamin, till Dr. Robinson established the separate claims of er-Ram to that distinction. But this appropriation does not agree with the mention of Rachel's sepulchre in 1 Sam. x. 2, for that is about as far to the south of Jerusalem as Neby Samuel is to the north- west. The like objection applies, though in a somewhat less degree, to the modern Soba, west of Jerusalem, which Robinson points out as possibly the site of Ra- tmXhsXm- Zoph\m and Ramah (Researches, ii. 330-331). The chief difficulties in connection with this matter arise of course out of the account given of Saul's journey after his father's asses. RAMESES. 599 The city in which Saul found Samuel is not named, but is said to have been ' in the land of Zuph' (1 Sam. ix. 5), and is assumed to have been Ramah-Zop/?im. In dismissing him from this place, Samuel foretells an adventure that should beta! him near Rachel's sepulchre. Now, as this sepulchre was near Bethlehem, and as Saul's abode was in Benjamin, the southern border of which is several miles to the north thereof, it is manifest that if Saul in going home was to pass near Rachel's sepulchre, the place where Samuel was must have been to the south of it. Gesenius contends that if we allow weight to the mention of Rachel, we can only seek for this Ramah in the neighbourhood of Bethlehem ; where also Eusebius speaks of a Ramah. Not far south-east of Bethlehem is the Jebel Fureidis, or Frank Mount, which Robinson has identified as the site of the ancient city and fortress of Herod, called Herodium ; and Gesenius contends that if we fix here the site of Ramah, all the cir- cumstances mentioned in 1 Sam. ix. 10 are sufficiently explained. But then the Ramah- Zophim of 1 Sam. i. 1 must have been a different place (Thesaurus, p. 1276). To this Dr. Robin- son himself, in his edition of Gesenius, objects that the difference assumed in the last sentence is inadmissible. ' Besides, no one who had seen the Frank mountain would suppose for a moment that a city ever lay upon it. It was indeed occu- pied by Herod's fortress ; but the city Herodium lay at its foot.' He adds that Eusebius, in the passage referred to, obviously places Ramah of Benjamin near Bethlehem, for the purpose of helping out a wrong interpretation of Matt. ii. 18. Another, and the most recent hy. thesis in this vexed question, would place this iilh it a site of ruins now called er-Rameh, n atlas, torfli of Hebron (Biblioth. Sacra, N J. pp. 46 51). But this also assumes that the 'namathaim-Zo- phim, the place of the prophet's birth, was different from the place of his residence and burial, con- trary to the testimony of Josephus (Antiq. vi. 4, 6 ; vi. 13, 5), and to the conclusion deducible from a comparison of 1 Sam. i. 1 with verse3 3, 19. In the midst of all this uncertainty, Dr. Robinson thinks that interpreters may yet be driven to the conclusion that the city where Saul found Samuel (1 Sam. ix. 10), was not Ramah his home. 3. RAMAH, a city of Naphtali (Josh. xix. 30). 4. RAMAH, a town of Gilead (2 Kings viii. 29), the name of which is given more fully in Josh. xiii. 26, as Ramoth-Mizpeh. RAMESES (DDDjn; Sept. 'Pa/ieT\, a noosed cord; Sept. 'Pe/3«cKa), daughter of Bethuel, and sister of La- ban, who became the wife of Isaac, and the mother of Jacob and Esau. Th particulars of her history and conduct, as given in Scripture, chiefly illustrate her preference of Jacob over Esau, and have been related in the article Jacob : see also Isaac. RECENSION. After the critical materials lying at the basis of the New Testament text had accumulated in the hands of Mill and Wetstein, they began to be surveyed with philosophic eye. Important readings in different documents were seen to possess resemblances more or less striking. Passages were found to present the same form, though the testimonies from which they were singled out belonged to various times and coun- tries. The thought suggested itself to Bengel, that the mass of materials might, be divided and classified in conformity with such peculiarities. The same idea also occurred to Semler. Both, however, had but a feeble and dim apprehension of the entire subject as it was afterwards disposed. But, by the consummate learning and skill of Griesbach, it was highly elaborated, so as to ex- hibit a new topic for the philosophical acumen ami the historic researches of the erudite inquirer. To the different phases of the text existing in the MSS., quotations made by the fathers, and in the ancient versions, the name recension was given by Griesbacli and Semler. Yet the appellation was not happily chosen. Family (which Bengel used), class, or order, would have been much more ap- propriate. Recension ordinarily suggests the idea of an actual revision of the text; but this is inap- plicable to the greater part of Griesbach's own system. If, however, it be remembered that re- cension simply denotes a certain class of critical testimonies characterized by distinctive pecu- liarities, it. matters little what designation be em- ployed ; though family is less likely to originate misconception. We shall first state the recension-systems of Griesbach, Hug, Eichhorn, and Scholz; then the chief objections to which they are exposed; concluding with some observations on the real state of the question. As to the systems of Mi- chaelis and Nolan, it is unnecessary to allude to them, since they are obviously incorrect. The latter, indeed, never attracted notice in this or any other country, having soon fallen into merited neglect. In Griesbach's system there are three recensions : 1. The Occidental ; 2. The Alexandrine, or Ori- ental ; 3. The Constantinopolitan, or Byzantine. The first two are the most ancient, and are assigned by him to the time in which the two collections — cvayyeAtov and 6 airoffroXos, were made. The Oriental, springing from the edition, as we should say in regard to a printed book, of the 6 airSffro^os, selected readings most conformable to pine Gieek, and made slight alterations in the text wheie the language did not appear to be chissical. The Occidental, based on the most ancient MSS., viz. such as were made before the epistles had been collected together, preserved with greater care than the Oriental the Hebraisms of the New Testa- ment, but made explanatory additions, and fre- quently preferred a more perspicuous and easy reading to another less facile. The Constantino- politan arose from the intermingling of the other two. A senior and a junior Constantinopolitan are distinguished. The former belongs to the fourth century, and is marked, to a still greater extent than the Alexandrine, by its rejection of readings that seemed less classical, as well as by its reception of glosses ; the latter originated in the fifth and sixth centuries, in consequence of the labours of the learned men belonging to the Syrian church. According to this system, the leading characteristic of the Occidental recension is its excgetical, that of the Oriental its grammatical tendency; while the Constantinopolitan bears a glossarial aspect. The Occidental recension is exhibited by eight Greek MSS. of the Gospels, D. E. F. G. of the Pauline epistles, the Latin versions made before Jerome, the Sahidic and Jerusalem-Syr iac ver- sions, and by the quotations of Tertullian, of IreniKus as translated into Latin, of Cyprian, Ambrose, and Augustine. The Alexandrine recension is found in the do- cuments B. C. L- |n the Gospels, with three others, in A. B. C. in the epistles, with three codices U- sides ; in the Memphitic, Harclean or Philoxenian, Ethiopic and Armenian versions ; and in the writings of the fathers belonging to die Alexan- drian school, especially those of Clement, Origen, Eusebius, Athanasius, Cyril of Alexandria, and Isidore of Pelusium. The senior Constantinopolitan is found in A. E. F. G. II. S. of the Gospels, and in the Moscow codices of Paul's epistles, in the Gothic 602 RECENSION. RECENSION. and Sclavonic versions, in the quotations of the fathers that lived during the fourth, fifth, and sixlh centuries in Greece, Asia Minor, and the neighbouring countries ; while the junior Con- stantinopolitan is exhibited by the greater num- ber of those MSS. which were written since the seventh century. Somewhat different from Griesbach's system is that of Hug, first proposed in his Introduction to the New Testament. 1. The kolvt] enSotns, i. e. the most ancient text, unrevised, conformed to no recension, exhi- biting diversities of readings of mixed origin, but containing particular glosses and interpolations intended to explain the sense. This text is found in five MSS. of the Gospels, in four of Paul's epistles, in the most ancient Latin versions and in the Sahidic, in the oldest of the fathers down to the time of Origen, and in Origen himself. Such a phase of the text is seen till the middle of the third century, and agrees with the Occi- dental recension of Griesbach. In reference to the old Syriac, Griesbach afterwards conceded to Hug that it approached nearer the Occidental than the Alexandrian. 2. About the middle of the third century, Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, undertook a re- vision of the Koivi] eitdocns. " But he was too fond of such readings as contained purer and more elegant Greek. To this Hesychian revision, which obtained ecclesiastical authority only in Egypt, belong B. C. L. of the Gospels, and A. B. C. of the Epistles, the Memphitic version, with the quotations of Athanasius, Macarius, and Cyril of Alexandria. Thus the Hesychian recension of Hug coincides with the Alexandrian of Griesbach. 3. About the same time, Lucian, a presbyter of Antioch in Syria, revised the Koivr/ e/c5ocns as it appeared in the Peshito, comparing different MSS. current in Syria. In this way he produced a text that did not wholly harmonize with the Hesychian, because he was less studious of elegant Latinity. This third form of the text is found in codll. E. F. G. H. S. V. of the Gospels, in G. of Paul's epistles, in the Moscow MSS., the Sclavonic and Gothic versions, and the ecclesiastical writers of those countries that adopted it, from the middle of the third century. 4. A fourth form of the text he attributes to Origen during his residence at, Tyre. This revi- sion was based on the Vulgate edition current in Palestine, and in many places differs both from the Hesychian and Lucianian. It is found in the codd. A. K. M. of the Gospels, in the Phi- loxenian or Harclean Syriac, and in the writings of Chrysostom and Theodoret. Here Plug and Griesbach are at variance, the latter believing the alleged Origenian recension to be nothing more than a branch of the Constantinopolitan or Lucianian. Eichhoru's system is substantially the same as that of Hug, with one important exception. That distinguished critic admitted a twofold form of the text before it had received any revision; the one peculiar to Asia, the other to Africa. This unrevised text may be traced in its two forms as early as the second century. Hesychius revised the first ; Lucian, the second. Accordingly, from the conclusion of the third century, there was a threefold phase of the text; the African or Alex- andrian ; the Asiatic or Constantinopolitan ; and a mixed form composed of the other two. Eichhora denies that Origen made a new recension. Scholz makes only two classes or families of documents, the Alexandrian, which he also ab- surdly calls the Occidental, and the Constantino- politan, which, with equal perversity, he designates the Oriental. The Occidental class of Griesbach is thus merged into the Alexandrian. The Alex- andrian embraces the MSS. that were made in Egypt and Western Europe, most of the Coptic and Latin versions, the Ethiopic, and the eccle- siastical writers belonging to Egypt and Western Europe. To the Constantinopolitan he refers the codices belonging to Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine, Eastern Europe, especially Constantinople, with the Harclean or Philoxenian, the Gothic, Georgian, and Sclavonic versions ; as also the ecclesiastical fathers of these regions. To the latter documents he gives a decided preference, because of their mutual agreement, and because they were written with great care agreeably to the most ancient exemplars ; whereas the Alexandrian were arbi- trarily altered by officious grammarians. Indeed, he traces the Constantinopolitan codices directly to the autographs of the original writers of the New Testament. Rinck agrees with Scholz in assuming two classes of MSS., the Occidental and the Oriental ; the former exhibited by A. B. C. D. E. F. G. in the epistles: the latter, by MSS. written in the cursive character. The occidental he subdivides into two families, the African (A. B. C.) and the Latin codices (D. E. F. G.). Matthaei, as is well known, rejected the entire theory of recensions ; and Lachmann, the latest editor of the Greek Testament, has no regard to such a basis for his new text. It remains for us to make a few remarks on the systems thus briefly stated. To Griesbach all concede the praise of ingenuity and acuteness. His system was built up with great tact and ability. However rigidly scrutinized, it exhibits evidences of a most sagacious mind. But it was assailed by a host of writers, whose combined attacks it could not sustain. In this country, Dr. Laurence shook its credit. In Germany, Michaelis, Matthaei, Eichhorn, Bertholdr, Hug, Schulz, Scholz, Gabler, Schotr, and others, have more or less made objection to it. The venerable scholar in his old age himself modified it to some extent, chiefly in consequence of Hug's investi- gations. By far the ablest, opponent of it is Mr. Norton, who, after it had been assailed by others, finally stepped forth to demolish it beyond the possibility of revival. Bold indeed must be the man who shall undertake to defend it after such a refutation. The great point in which it fails is, that the line of distinction between the Alexandrian and Western classes cannot be proved. Origen and Clement of Alexandria are the principal evidences for the Alexandrian form of the text, yet they coincide with the Western recension. Griesbach's allegations as to the origin of the Eastern and Western recensions are also visionary ; while it is not difficult to see that the text followed by the old Syriac presents a formi- dable objection to the whole scheme. The system of Hug, in so far as it materially differs from its predecessor, is as faulty as that of Griesbach. It puts Clement and Origen in the kolvt, eKdocris. But Origen employed an Occi- RECENSION. RECENSION. 603 dental MS. only in his commentary on Matthew ; in his commentary on Mark he uniformly quotes an Alexandrian codex ^ and his usual text cer- tainly agrees with the Alexandrian recension. As to Clement, lie frequently agrees with the Alexan- drian in opposition to the Western recension, and therefore he cannot be properly reckoned as be- longing to the latter, in a system where there are two distinct recensions agreeing with the Occi- dental and the Alexandrian. The Hesychian re- vision does not seem to have had much authority, or to have been widely'circulated even in the country where it was made. Besides, the form of the text ascribed to Hesychius appears to be older, even as old as Clement's time. Hesychius, there- fore, probably did nothing more than revise the Alexandrian recension. The historical basis on which Lucian's recension of the text rests is also insecure. The MSS. which he revised were not numerous ; neither did they obtain authority. The testimony of Jerome, so far from supporting Hug's view, goes indirectly to refute it. Again, it is very improbable that Origen undertook to revise the koivii e«8o0 ttSAis, Rehoboth-city), a town of ancient Assyria (Gen. x. 11), the site of which has not been ascertained. REHOBOTH-HANNAHARpriSri htahS; Sept. 'Powfiwd tt)s irapa iroTa/xSv), or, Rehoboth of the river, the birth-place of one of the Edom- itish kings, named Saul (Gen. xxxvi. 37). The river is, doubtless, the Euphrates, and the place is probably represented by the modern er-Rahabeh, upon the west bank of that river, between Rakkah and Anah (Rosenmiiller, Geoff, ii. 365; Winer, J5. Real-worterb., s.v.). REMPHAN, or Rkfhan ('Pefi^dv, 'Pecpdv), a name quoted in Acts vii. 43, from Amos v. 26, where the Septuagint has 'Paupdv, for the Hebrew ^"O Chiun. It is clear that, although thus REPHIDIM. changing the letter 2 into 1, the Sept. held the original to be a proper name, in which interpreta- tion our own and most other versions have con- curred. But this is by no means clear; for, ac- cording to the received pointing, it would better read, ' Ye bore the tabernacle of your king (idol), and the statue (or statues) of your idols, the star of your god, which ye make to yourselves;' ami so the Vulgate, which has 'Imaginem idolorum vestrorum.' According to this reading, the name of the idol so worshipped by tie Is- raelites is, in fact, not given, although the men- tion of a star still suggests that some planet is intended. Jerome supposes it may be Lucifer or Venus. But the Syriac renders the Hebrew by >Oa^V|N »OJl^>, ' Saturn your idol? who was worshipped by the Semitic nations along with Mars as an evil demon to be propitiated with sacrifices. This now seems to be the general conclusion, and Winer, indeed, treats the subject under the head Saturn. It has been alleged, but not satisfactorily proved, that Remphan and Rephan were Egyptian names of the planet Saturn. They, indeed, occur as such in the Coptic-Arabic Lexicon of Kircher {Ling. JEgypt. Restit., p. 49; (Edip. JEgypti, i. 386); but Jablonsky has long since shown that'this and other names of planets in these lexicons are of Greek origin, and drawn from the Coptic versions of Amos and the Acts (Jablonsky, Remphan ^gyptior., in Opusc, ii. 1, sq. ; Schrceder, De TabernaQ. Mo- lochi et Stella Dei Remph., 1745; Mains, Dis- sert, de Kium et Remphan, 1 763 ; Harenberg, De ldolis Chium et Remphan, 1723 ; Wolf, Dissert, de Chium et Uemph., 1741; Gesenius, Thesaurus, pp. 669, 670). REPHAIM (D'WESl; Sept. yiyavTes), an ancient people of unusual stature, who, in the time of Abraham, dwelt in the country beyond the Jordan, in and about Ashtoreth-Karnaim (Gen. xiv. 5). Subsequently, however, two of their southern tribes, the Emim and Zamzum- mim, were repressed and nearly annihilated by the Moabites and Ammonites ; so that at the time of the ingress of the Israelites under Joshua, none of the Repbaim were left save in the dominion of Og, king of Bashan, who was himself of this race (Deut. iii. 11; Josh. xii. 4; xiii. 12). There seems reason to think that the Rephaim were the most ancient or aboriginal inhabitants of Palestine prior to the Canaanites, by whom they were gradually dispossessed of the regions west of the Jordan, and driven beyond that river. Some of the race remained in Palestine Proper so late as the invasion of the land by the Hebrews, and are repeatedly mentioned as ' the sons of Auak,' and ' the remnant of the Rephaim' (Num. xiii. 28 ; Deut. ix. 2 ; Josh. xv. 14), and a few fami- lies existed in the land so late as the time of David (2 Sam. xxi. 16). [Giants.] REPHAIM, VALLEY OF, a valley be- ginning adjacent to the valley of Hinnom, south- west of Jerusalem, and stretching away south- west on the right of the road to Bethlehem (Josh. xv. 8; xvii. 5; xviii. 6; 2 Sam. v. 18, 22). This name corroborates the presumption that the Rephaim were originally west of the Jordan. REPHIDIM, a station of the Israelites in pro- ceeding to Sinai. [Sinai.] RESEN. S.ESEN (|5"1 ; Sept. Aatrrj), an ancient town of Assyria, described as a great city lying be- tween Nineveh and Calah (Gen. x. 12). Biblical geographers have been disposed to follow Bochavt (Phaleg. iv. 23) in finding a trace of the Hebrew name in Larissa, which is mentioned by Xenopbon (Anab. iii. 4. 9) as a desolate city on the Tigris, several miles north of the Lycus. The resem- blance of the names is too faint to support the inference of identity ; but the situation is not irre- concilable with the Scriptural intimation. Ephrem Syrus {Comment, in loc.) says that LC09 Rassa, which' he substitutes for Resen (the Peshito has S-CC? Ressin), was the same as ^-^ M*-'' Rish-Ain (fountain-head) ; by which Assemanni understands him to mean, not the place in Me- sopotamia so called, but another Rish-Ain in Assyria, near Saphsaphre, in the province of Marga, which he finds noticed in a Syrian monastic history of the middle age (Assemanni, Bibliuth. Orient, iii. 2. p. 709). It is, however, still uncertain if Rassa is the same with Rish- Ain ; and whether it is so or not, a name so exceedingly common (corresponding to the Arabic Rasel-Ain) affords a precarious basis for the identification of a site so ancient. RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. After our Lord had completed the work of redemption by his death upon the cross, lie rose victorious from the grave, and to those who through faith in him should l>ecome members of his body, he became apX^ybs rr/s £a>7Js, ' *ne prince of life.' Since this event, however, independently of its importance in respect to the internal connection of the Christian doctrine, was manifestly a miraculous occur- rence, the credibility of the narrative has from the earliest times been brought into question (Celsus, apud Origen. cont. Cels. i. 2; Woolston, Discourses on the Miracles, disc. vi. ; Chubb, Posth. Works, i. 330 ; Morgan, The Resurrection Considered, 1714). Others who have admitted The facts as recorded to be beyond dispute, yet have attempted to show that Christ was not really dead ; but that, being stunned and palsied, he wore for a time the appearance of death, and was after- wards restored to consciousness by the cool grave and the spices. The refutation of these views may be seen in detail in such works as Less, Leber die Religion, ii. 372; Less, Aufcrstehungsgeschichte, nebst Anhang, 1799; Doderlein, Fragmenteund Antifragmente, 1782. The chief advocates of these views are Paulus (Hist. Resurrect. Jes. 1795), and, more recently. Henneberg (Philol. Ilistor. Krit. Commentar. lib. d, Gesch. d. Begriihn. -d. Auferstehung u. IHmmelfahrt Jcsu, 1826). Objections of this nature do not. require notice here ; but a few words upon the apparent discre- pancies of the Gospel narratives will not be mis- placed. These discrepancies were early perceived; and a view of what the fathers have done in the attempt to reconcile them has been given by Nie- tneyer (De Evangclistarum in Narrando Christi in Viiam reditu dissensione, 1824). They were first collocated with much acuteness by Morgan, in the work already cited ; and at a later date, by an anonymous writer, whose fragments were edited and supported by Lessing ; the object of which seems to have been to throw uncertainty and doubt VOL. II. RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. 609 over the whole of this portion of Gospel history. A numerous host of theologians, however, rose to com- bat and refute this writer's positions; among whom we find the names of Doderlein, Less, Semler.Teller, Maschius, Michaelis, Blessing, Eichhorn, Herder, and others. Among those who have more recently attempted to reconcile the different accounts is Griesbach, who, in his excellent Prolusio de Fon- tibus wide Evangelista suas de Resurrectione Domini narruliones hauserunt, 1793, remarks that all the discrepancies are trifling, and not of such moment as to render the narrative uncertain and suspected, or to destroy or even diminish the credibility of the Evangelists ; but rather serve to show how extremely studious they were of truth, 'and how closely and even scru- pulously they followed their documents.' Gries- bach then attempts to show how these discre- ]>ancies may have arisen ; and admits that, although unimportant, they are hard to reconcile, as is indeed evinced by the amount of contro- versy they have excited. Lately, Professor Bush has ingeniously main- tained the opinion, that the body of Christ which was raised was not the identical body which was crucified, but another and spiritual body. This view was ibrced upon him by the gene- ral argument of his book (Anastasis ; or, the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body ra- tionally and scripturcdly considered, 1845) ; but it will not be readily admitted by those who remember the fresh prints of the nails, and the, wound in the side of the risen Saviour, coupled with his manifest anxiety to impress the fact of his personal identity upon the minds of his dis- ciples. It may indeed be asked, '■ In what does personal identity consist ?' but that is a question we cannot here argue. The three first Gospels agree in this, that the women who went to the grave saw angels, by whom they were informed tliat Jesus had risen, and who commanded them to give the apostles immediate information -of the fact. But as Mary Magdalene was among those women according to these Gospels, there seems a striking contra- diction to John's narrative, which speaks of her alone. The writers above named, however, har- monise these accounts by supposing that Mary did indeed set out, for the sepulchre with the other women ; but that running before them, and finding the stone rolled away, she was overcome by a sudden impulse of feeling, and hastened back to communicate the intelligence to the apostles, as related by John. In the meantime the other women had arrived at the sepulchre, and there witnessed what is recorded by I he other evangelists. Mary Magdalene returns to the grave with Peter and John ; and after they bail gone away hope- less, she continued to stand weeping in the same place; and while thus engaged, perceived the angels, and immediately after our Lord hifnself. From Him she receives the same commission which the angels had previously given to the other women, namely, to inform the apostles of his resurrection. Matthew (xxviii. 9, 10) seems to relate of all the women what strictly belongs to Mary alone; while Mark (xvi. 9) is more precise in his account. According to this mode of reconciling the Gospel narratives, we are to suppose that the other women were prevented from eoramanicatuog to the apostles what the angels had given them in 2r 510 RESURRECTION OF THE BODY. RESURRECTION OF THE BODY. charge ; and Hess renders it. probable, on topo- graphical grounds, that those who were returning from the grave may have missed the apostles, who were hastily approaching it. If this explanation be admitted, the only re- maining difficulty is that which arises from the Gospel of Luke, which appears to state that the apostles did not visit the sepulchre till all the intelligence had been communicated to them by the women (Luke xxiv. 9-12). We will not at- tempt to get over this difficulty by rejecting the verse which creates it (xxiv. 12), on the ground of its being wanting in one Greek and some an- cient Latin manuscripts ; but would rather sup- pose that in this, as in some other passages, Luke has neglected the order of time, and inserted the incident somewhat out of place. Besides the works already referred to, see Sherlock, Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus, 1729; Benson's Life of Christ, p. 520, sq. ; West, On the Resurrection ; Macknight's Harmony of the Gospels ; Lardner, Observations on Dr. Mack- night's Harmony, 1764; Newcome's Harmony of the Gospels, 1778 ; Tholuck, Comment, zu Johan, xx.; Neauder, Das Leben Jesu, 1839; Hase, Das Leben Jesu, 1840. Since the above was in type we have, seen an excellent paper by Professor Robinson, in the Bibliotheca Sacra for Feb. 1845, in which the writer, with his usual perspicuity, discusses the alleged discrepancies in the Gospel narratives of ' The Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord.' RESURRECTION OF THE BODY. This expression is used to denote the revivification of the human body after it has been forsaken by the soul, or the re-union of the soul hereafter to the body which it had occupied in the present world. It is admitted that there are no traces of- such a doctrine in the earlier Hebrew Scripture. It is not to be found in the Pentateuch, in the historical books, or in the Psalms; for Ps. xlix. 15, does not relate to this subject ; neither does Ps. civ. 29, 30, although so cited by Theodoret and others. The celebrated passage of Job xix. 25, sq., has, indeed, been strongly insisted 'upon in proof of the early belief in this doctrine ; but the most learned commentators are agreed, and scarcely any one at the present day dis- putes, that such a view of the text arises either from mistranslation or misapprehension, and that Job means no more than to express a confident conviction that his then diseased and dreadfully corrupted body should be restored to its former soundness ; that he should rise from the depressed state in which he lay to his former prosperity; and that God would manifestly appear (as was the case) to vindicate his uprightness. That no meaning more recondite is to be found in the text, is agreed by Calvin, Mercier, Grotius, Le Clerc, Patrick, Warburton, Durell, Heath, Ken- nicott, Doderlein, Dathe, Eichhorn, Jahn, De WeUe, and a host of others. That it alludes to .0 a resurrection is disproved thus : — 1. The supposi- tion is inconsistent with the design of the poem and the course of the argument, since the belief which it has been supposed to express, as con- nected with a" future state of retribution, would in a great degree have solved the difficulty On which the whole dispute turns, and could not but have been often alluded to by the speakers. 2. It is inconsistent with the connection of the discourse ; the reply of Zophar agreeing, not with the popular interpretation, but with the other. 3. It is inconsistent with many passages in which the same person (Job) longs for death as the end of his miseries, and not as the introduction to a better life (iii. ; vii. 7, 8 ; x. 20-22; xiv. ; xvii. 11- 16). 4. It is not proposed as a topic of conso- lation by any of the friends of Job ; nor by Elihu, who acts as a sort of umpire; nor by the Almighty himself in the decision of the contro- versy. 5. The later Jews, who eagerly sought for every intimation bearing on a future life which their Scriptures might contain, never re- garded this as such ; nor is it once referred to by Christ or his apostles. Isaiah may be regarded as the first Scripture writer in whom such an allusion can be traced. He compares the restoration of the Jewish people and state to a resurrection from the dead (ch. xxvi. 19, 20) ; and in this he is followed by Ezekiel at the time of the exile (ch. xxxvii.). From these passages, which are, however, not very clear in their intimations, it, may seem that in this, as in other matters, the twilight of spiritual manifesta- tions brightened as the day-spring from on high approached; and in Dan. xii. 2, we-at length arrive at a clear and unequivocal declaration, that ' Those who lie sleeping under the earth shall awake, some to eternal life, and others to ever- lasting shame and contempt.' In the time of Christ, the belief of a resurrec- tion, in connection with a state of future retribu- tion, was held by the Pharisees and the great body of the Jewish people, and was only disputed by the Sadducees. Indeed, they seem to have regarded the future life as incomplete without the body ; and so intimately were the two things — the future existence of the soul and the resurrection of the body — connected in their minds, that any argu- ment which proved the former, they considered as proving the latter also (see Matt. xxii. 31:1 Cor. xv. 32). This belief, however, led their coarse minds into gross and sensuous conceptions of the ■future state, although there were many among the Pharisees who taught that the future body would be so refined as not to need the indulgences which were necessary in the present life; and they assented to our Lord's assertion, that the risen saints would not marry, but would he as the angels of God (Matt. xxii. 30 ; comp. Luke xx, 39). So Paul, in 1 Cor. vi. 13, is conceived to intimate that the necessity of food for subsistence will be abolished in the world to come- In further proof of the commonness of a belief in the resurrection among the Jews of the time of Christ, see Matt, xxii., Luke xx., John xi. 24, Acts xxiii. 6-8. Josephus is not to be relied upon in the account which lie gives of the belief of his countrymen (Antiq. xviii. 2; De Bell. Jud., ii. 7), as he appears to use terms which might suggest one thing to his Jewish readers, and ano- ther to the Greeks and Romans, who scouted the idea of a resurrection. Many Jews believed that the wicked would not be raised from the dead ; but the contrary was the more prevailing opinion, in which St. Paul once took occasion to express his concurrence with the Pharisees (Acts xxiv. 15). But although the doctrine of the resurrection was thus prevalent among the Jews in the time of Christ, it might still have been doubtful and obscure to us, had not Christ given to it the sane- .^,3 JRRECTION OF THE BODY. REUBEN. 611 Hon of his authority, and declared it a constituent part of his religion (e. g., Matt. xxii. ; John v., viii., xi.). He and his apostles also were careful to correct the erroneous notions which the Jews entertained on this head, and to make the sub- ject more obvious and intelligible than it had ever been before. A special interest is also im- parted to the subject from the manner in which the New Testament represents Christ as the person to whom we are indebted for this benefit, which, by every variety of argument and illustration, the apostles connect with him, and make to rest upon him (Acts iv. 2; xxvi. 3; 1 Cor. xv. ; 1 Thess. iv. 14, &c> The principal points which can be collected from the New Testament on this subject are the following : — 1. The raising of the dead is every where ascribed to Christ, and is represented as the last work to be undertaken by him for the salvation of man (John v. 21 ; xi. 25 ; 1 Cor. xv. 22, sq. ; 1 Thess. iv. 15; Rev. i. 18). All the dead will be raised, without respect to age, rank, or character in this world (John v. 28, 29 ; Acts xxiv. 15 ; 1 Cor. xv. 22). o. This event is to take place not before the end of the world, or the general judgment (John v. 21 ; vi. 39, 40 ; xi. 24 ; 1 Cor. xv. 22-28 ; 1 Thess. iv. 15 ; Rev. xx. 11). 4. The manner in which this marvellous change shall be accomplished is necessarily be- yond our present comprehension; and, therefore, the Scripture is content to illustrate it by figura- tive representations, or by proving the possibility and intelligibility of the leading facts. Some of the figurative descriptions occur in John v. ; Matt, ■xxiv. ; 1 Cor. 15. 52; 1 Thess. iv. 16 ; Phil. iii. 21. The image of a trumpet-call, which is re- peated in some of these texts, is derived from the Jewish custom of convening assemblies by sound of trumpet. 5. Tlie possibility of a resurrection is powerfully argued by Paul in 1 Cor. xv. 32, sq., by comparing it with events of common oc- currence in the natural world. (See also ver. 12- 14, and compare Acls iv. 2.) But although this body shall be so raised as to preserve its identity, it must yet undergo certain purifying changes to fit it for the kingdom of heaven, and to render it capable of immortality (1 Cor. xv. 35, sq.), so that it shall become a glorified body like that of Christ (ver. 49 ; Rom. vi. 9; Phil. iii. 21); and the bodies of those whom the last, day finds alive, will undergo a similar change without tasting death (1 Cor. xv. 51, 53; 2 Cor. v. 4 ; 1 Thess. iv. 15, sq. ; Phil. iii. 21). The extent of change consistent, with per- sonal identity is so great, that its limits have been variously estimated, and can never be in this life clearly defined. We are, therefore, not disposed to enter into the subject here. The plain language of Scripture seems to suggest that it will be so great, that the old body will have little more relation to the new one than the seed has to the plant. But that there is no analogy — that the new body will have no connection with, anil no relation to the old ; and that, in fact, the re- surrection of the body is not a doctrine of Scrip- ture,— does not appeal to us to have been satis- factorily proved by the latest writer on the sub- ject (Hush, Anastasis, 1345); and we think so highly of his ingenuity and talent, as to be- lieve that no one else is likely to succeed in an argument in which he has failed (Knapp, Christian Theology, translated by Leonard AVoods, D.D., § 151-153; Hody. On the Resur- rection; Drew, Essay on the Resurrection of the Human Body ; Burnet, State of the Dead; Scliott, Dissert, de Resurrect. Corporis, adv. S. Burnetum, 1763; Teller, Fides Dogmat. de Resurr. Carnis, 1766; Mosheim, De Christ. Restcrr. Alert, &c. in Dissertatt., ii. 520, sq. ; Dassov., Diatr. qua Judicor. de Resurr. Mort. sentent. ex plur. Rabbinis, 1675; Neander, All. K. Geschichte, i. 3, pp. 10S8, 1096 ; ii. 3, pp. 1104-1410; Zehrt, Ueber d. Auferstehung d. Todten, 1835). REUBEN (\2^-],beholdason; Sept. 'Pov/fyV), eldest son of Jacob by Leah (Gen. xxix. 32; xxxv. 23 ; xlvi. S). His improper intercourse with Billiah, his father's concubine wife, was an enormity too great for Jacob ever to forget, and he spoke of it with abhorrence even on his dying bed (Gen. xxxii. 22; xlix. 4). Vet the part taken by him in the case of Joseph, whom he intended to rescue from the hands of his brothers and re- store to his father, and whose supposed death he so sincerely lamented, exhibits his character in an amiable point of view (Gen. xxxvii. 21, 22, 29, 30). We are, however, to remember, that he, as the eldest son, was more responsible for the safety of Joseph than were the others ; and it would seem that he eventually acquiesced in the decep- tion practised upon his father. Subsequently, Reuben oll'ered to make the lives of his own sons responsible for that, of Benjamin, when it was necessary to prevail on Jacob to let him go down to Egypt (Gen. xlii. 37, 38). The fine conduct of Judah in afterwards undertaking the same re- sponsibility, is in advantageous contrast with this coarse, although well-meant, proposal. For his conduct in the matter of Bilhah, Jacob, in his last blessing, deprived him of the pre-eminence and double portion which belonged to his birth- right, assigning the former to Judah, and the latter to Joseph (Gen. xlix. 3, 4 ; comp. ver. 8-10 ; xlviii. 5). The doom. 'Thou shalt not excel,' was exactly fulfilled in the destinies of the tribe descended from Reuben, which makes no figure in the Hebrew history, and never produced any eminent person. At the time of the Exodus, this tribe numbered 40,500 adult males, which ranked it as the seventh in population ; but at the later census before entering Canaan, its numbers had decreased to 43,730, which rendered it the ninth in population (Num. i. 21 ; xxvi. 5). The Reubenites received for their inheritance the fine pasture land (the present Belka) on the east, of the Jordan, which to a cattle-breeding people, as they were, must have been very desirable (Num. xxxii. 1 sq. ; xxxiv. 14; Josh. i. 14; xv. 17). This lay south of the territories of Gad (Dent. iii. 12, 16), and north of the river Anion. Although thus settled earlier than the other tribes, excepting Gad and half Mauasseh, who shared with them the territory beyond the Jordan, the Heubenites willingly assisted their brethren in the wars of Canaan (Num. xxxii. 27, 29: Josh. iv. 12); after which they returned to their own lands (Josh. xxii. 15); and we hear little more of them till the time of Hazael, kin,' of Syria, who ravaged and for a time held possession of their country (2 Kings x. 33). The Heubenites, 2b 2 612 REVELATION, BOOK OF. and the other tribes beyond the river, were natu- rally the first to give way before the invaders from the East, and were the first of all the Israelii es sent into exile by Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria, B.C. 773(1 Chron.v. 26). REVELATION, BOOK OF. The follow- ing topics in relation to this book demand ex- amination : — I. The person by whom it was written. II. Its canonical authority, genuineness, and authenticity. III. The time and place at which it was written. IV. Its unity. V. The class of writings to which it belongs. VI. The object for which it was originally written. VII. Its contents. VIII. Some errors into which the interpreters of it have fallen. I. The author styles himself John, but not an apostle (i. 4, 9; xxii. 8). Hence some have attributed the book to another John, usually designated the presbyter. Formerly, indeed, the existence of such a person was unknown or doubted, the historic grounds adduced in proof of his separate individuality being impugned or otherwise explained, (So Guerike in his Bei.- triige zur Historisch-kritischen Einleit., 1831, 8vo.) But this writer has recently revoked his doubts, contented with affirming that the historic basis on which the existence of the Ephesian presbyter rests, is assuredly feeble. The chief argument for believing that there was another John besides the apostle, exists in a passage from Papiasof Hierapolis, preserved in Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 39). In this fragment, several of the apostles, among whom is John, are mentioned ; while, immediately after, the presbyter John is specified along with Aristion. Thus the presbyter is clearly distinguished from the apostle (see Wieseler, in the Theol, Mitarbeiten , iii. 4. 113, sq.). ■ In addition to Papias, Dionysius of Alexandria (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vii. 2-5), Euse- bius himself (Hist. Eccle3. iii. 39), and Jerome (Catal. Sci'iptor. Ecclesiast.), allude to the pres- byter. We must therefore believe, with Liicke, Bleek, Credner, Neander, Hitzig, and, indeed, all the ablest critics who have had occasion to speak of this point, that there were two JoliRs : owe the apostle, the other the presbyter. It has been much debated which of the two wrote the book before us. On the continent the prevailing current of opinion, if not in favour of the presbyter, is at least against the apostle. In England the latter is still regarded as the writer, more perhaps by a kind of traditional belief, than as the result of enlightened examination. The arguments against assigning the author- ship to the apostle John are the following. 1. The Apocalyptic writer calls himself John, while the Evangelist never does so. So Dionysius of Alexandria, as related by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. vii. 25). De Wette repeats the observa- tion as deserving at least of attention. In addition to this circumstance, it has been affirmed by Ewald, Credner, and Hitzig, that in chaps, xviii. 20, and xxi. 14, the apostle expressly excludes himself from the number of the apostles. 2. The language of the book is entirely dif- ferent from that of the fourth Gospel and the three REVELATION, BOOK OF. epistles of John the Apostle. It is characterized by strong Hebraisms and ruggednesses, by negli- gences of expression and grammatical inaccura- cies ; while it exhibits the absence of pure Greek words, and of the apostle's favourite expressions. So De Wette. 3. The style is unlike that which appears in the Gospel and epistles. In the latter, there is calm, deep feeling; in the Apocalypse, a lively, creative power of fancy. In connection with this it has been asserted, that the mode of representing objects and images is artificial and Jewish. On the contrary, John the son of Zebedee was an illiterate man in the Jewish sense of that epithet ; a man whose mental habits and education were Greek rather than Jewish, and who, in conse- quence of this character, makes little or no use of the Old Testament or of Hebrew learning. So De Wette. 4. It is alleged (hat the doctrinal aspect of the Apocalypse is different from that of the apostle's acknowledged writings. In the latter we find nothing of the sensuous expectations of the Mes- siah and the establishment of his kingdom on earth, which are so prominent in the former. Besides, the views inculcated or implied respect- ing spirits, demons, and angels, are foreign to John. A certain spirit of revenge, too, flows and burns throughout the Apocalypse, a spirit incon- sistent with the mild and amiable disposition of the beloved disciple. Such are the arguments advanced by De Wette. They are chiefly based on the investigations of Ewald and Liicke. Credner, who speaks with the same confidence respecting the non-apostolic origin of the book, has repeated, enlarged, and confirmed them. It will be observed, however, that they are all internal, and do no more than prepare the way for ])roving that John the Presbyter was the writer. Let us glance at the external evidence adduced for the same purpose. In the third century, Dionysius of. Alexandria, ascribed the book to John the Presbyter, not to John the Apostle (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vii. 25\ The testimony of this writer has been so often and so much insisted on, that it is necessary to adduce it at length. ' Some who were before us have utterly rejected'and confuted this book, criticising every chapter, showing it to be throughout uniii- tellrgi'ble and inconsistent; adding, moreover, that the inscription is false, forasmuch as it is not John's; nor is it a revelation which is hidden under so obscure and thick a veil of ignorance ; and that not only no apostle, but not so much as any holy or ecclesiastical man was the author of this writing ; but that Cerinthus, founder of the heresy called after him Cerinthian, the better to recommend his own forgery, prefixed to it an honourable name. For this (they say) was one of his particular notions, that the kingdom of Christ should tie earthly ; consisting of diose things which he himself, a carnal and sensual man, most admired,. — the pleasures of the belly and of concupiscence ■; that is, eating and drinking and marriage ; and for the more decent procurement of these, feastings and sacrifices, and slaughters of victims. But for my part, I dare not reject the book, since many of the brethren have it in high esteem : but allowing it to be above my understanding, I suppose it to contain throughout some ' latent and wonderful meaning ; for though REVELATION, BOOK OF. I do not understand it, I suspect there must be some profound sense in the words ; not measuring and judging these things by my own reason, but ascribing more to faith, I esteem them too sublime to be comprehended by me. Nor do I condemn what I have not been able to understand; but I admire the more, because they are above my reach. And having finished in a manner his prophecy, the prophet pronounceth those blessed that keep it, and also himself. For " blessed is every one," says he, " that keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book ; and I John, who saw and heard these things'' (Rev. xxii. 7, 8). I do not deny then that his name is John, and that this is John's book, for I acknowledge it to be the work of some holy and divinely inspired person. Nevertheless I cannot easily grant him to be the apostle the son of Zebedee, brother of James, whose is the Gospel inscribed according to John and the Catholic epistle ; for I conclude, from the manner of each, and the turn of expression, and from the conduct (or disposition) of the book, as we call it, that he is not the same person. For the Evangelist nowhere puts down \\\s name, nor does he speak of himself either in the Gospel or in the epistle.1 Then a little after he says again, ' John nowhere speaks as concerning himself nor as concerning another. But lie who wrote the Revelation, immediately at the very beginning prefixeth his name : " the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass. And he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John, who bare record of the word of God, and his testimony, the things which he saw " (Rev. i. 1, 2). And then he writes an epistle, "John unto the seven churches in Asia. Grace be unto you and peace" (ver. 4). But the Evangelist has not prefixed his name, no, not to his Catholic epistle ; but without any circum- locution begins with the mystery itself of the divine revelation, " that which was from the be- ginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes" (1 John i. 1). And for the like revelation the Lord pronounced Peter blessed, saying, " Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona ; for flesh and blood has not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven " (Matt, xvi. 17). Nor yet in the second or third epistle ascribed to John, though, indeed, they arc but short epistles, is the name of John prefixed ; for without any name he is called the elder. But this other person thought it not sufficient to name himself once and then proceed, but he repeats it again, " I, John, who am your brother and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in (lie isle called Patmos for the testimony of Jesus" (Rev. i. (J). And at the end he says, "Blessed is he that keepeth the say- ings of the prophecy of this book; and I, John, who saw and heard these things " (eh. xxii. 7, 8). Therefore, that it. was John who wrote these things, ought to be believed because he says SO. But who he was is uncertain ; for he has not said, as in the Gospel often, that lie is •' the disciple whom the Lord loved;" nor that he is lie " who leaned on his breast;" nor the brother of James ; nor that he is one of them who saw and heard the Lord: whereas he would have mentioned some of these things if he had intended plainly to discover him- self. Of these things he says not a word : but he REVELATION, BOOK OF. 613 calls himself our " brother and companion, and witness of Jesus," and " blessed," because he saw and heard those revelations. And I suppose there were many of the same name with John the apostle, who for the love they bore to him, and because they admired and emulated him, and were ambitious of being beloved of the Lord like him, were desirous of having the same name : even as many also of the children of the faithful are called by the names of Paul and Peter. There is another John in the Acts of the Apostles, sur- named Mark, whom Paul and Barnabas took for their companion : concerning whom it is again said, "and they had John for their minister" (Acts xiii. 5). But that he is the person who wrote this book, I would not affirm. But I think that he is another, one of them that belong to Asia; since it is said that there are two tombs at Ephesus, each of them called John's tomb. And from the sentiments and words, and disposition of them, it is likely that he is different (from him that wrote the Gospel and Epistle). For the Gospel and Epistle have a mutual agreement, and begin alike. The one says, " In the beginning was the word;" the other, " That which was from the be- ginning." The former says, " And the word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father." The latter has the same with a slight variation : " That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the word of life. For the life was manifested." He is uni- form throughout, and wanders not in the least from the points he proposed to himself, but prose- cutes them in the same chapters and words, some of which we shall briefly observe : for whoever reads with attention will often find in both '' life;" frequently " light,'' the "avoiding of darkness ; oftentimes " truth, grace, joy, the flesh and the blood of the Lord; judgment, forgiveness of sins, the love of God toward us, the commandment of love one toward another; the judgment of this world, of the devil, of anti-christ ; the promise of the Holy Spirit, the adoption of the sons of God, the faith constantly required of us, the Father and the Sou," everywhere. And, in short, through- out the Gospel and Epistle it is easy to observe one and the same character. But (lie Revelation is quite different and foreign from these, without any affinity or resemblance, not having so much as a syllable in common with them. Nor dues the Epistle (for I do not here insist on the Gospel) mention or give any hint of the Revelation, nor the Revelation of the Epistle. And yet Paul, in his Epistles, has made some mention of his Revela- tions, though he never wrote them in a separate book. Besides, it is easy to observe the difference of the style of the Gospel and the Epistle from that of the Revelation; for they are not only written correctly, according to the propriety of the Greek tongue, but with great elegance of phrase and argument, and the whole contexture of the discourse. Solar are they from all bar- barism or solecism, or idiotisin of language, that nothing of the kind is to be found in them; for he, as it seems, had each of those gilts, the Lord having bestowed upon him both these, knowledge and eloquence. As to the other, I will not deny that he saw the Revelation, or that he had receb ed the gift of knowledge and prophecy. But I do ♦ G14 REVELATION, BOOK OF. not perceive in him an accurate acquaintance with the Greek language : on the contrary, he uses barbarous idioms, and some solecisms, which it is necessary that I should now show par- ticularly, for I do not write by way of ridicule ; let none think so. I simply intend to represent in a critical manner the difference of these pieces.' Here are critical arguments which the mo- derns have not failed to adduce and enlarge. Eu- sebius expresses himself in an undecided way respecting the Apocalypse (Hist. Eccles. iii. 24, 2-5), for which it is difficult to account, on the supposition that prevalent tradition attributed it to the Apostle John. Thus all the external evidence directly in favour of John the Presbyter resolves itself into the authority of Dionysius, who rested his proofs not on the testimony of his predecessors, but on internal argument. Eusebius speaks so hesi- tatingly, that nothing can be determined with respect to his real opinion. On the whole, there is no direct evidence in favour of the opinion that John the Presbyter wrote the Apocalypse. Many internal considerations have been adduced to show that John the Apostle was not the author ; but no direct argument has been advanced to prove that John the Presbyter was the writer. Indeed, our existing accounts of the presbyter are so brief, as to afford no data for associating the writing of this book with his name. All that we know from antiquity is, that both Johns were contemporary, that they are called disciples of the Lord, that they resided in Asia Minor, and that their tombs were shown at Ephe- sus. It is vain to appeal to the second and third epistles of John for comparing the Apocalypse with them, with Credner and Jachmann (Pelt's Mitarbeiten, 1839), who think that they proceeded from the presbyter; since, to say the least, the hypothesis that these epistles were written by John the Presbyter has not. yet been established. Still, however, notwithstanding this deficiency of evidence, Bleek, Credner, and Jachmann, follow- ing Dionysius, attribute the book to John the Presbyter. Others think that a disciple of John undertook to write on a subject which he had received from the apostle ; and that he thought himself justified in introducing his instructor as the speaker, be- cause he wrote in his manner. So Ewald, Liicke, Schott, and Neander. Hitzig has lately written a treatise to prove that the writer is John Mark, the same from whom the second Gospel proceeded. His argu- ments are mainly based on parallelisms of lan- guage and construction ( Ueber Johannes Marcus tmd seine Schriften, oder welcher Johannes hat die Offenbarung verfasst? Zurich, 8vo. 1843j. In stating the evidence in favour of the apostle as the writer, we begin with the external. Justin Martyr is the earliest writer who attri- butes it to John the Apostle (Dial, cum Tryph.). Rettig, indeed, has endeavoured to impugn the genuineness of the passage containing this testi- mony, but he has been well answered by Liicke, and by Guerike (Tholuck's Literarischer Anzei- ger, 1830). Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen, ascribe it to the apostle; and, as De Wette candidly remarks, the testimony of the last two is the more important, as they were not millennarians. When Irenseus says that it was REVELATION, BOOK OF. written by John the disciple of the Lord, it is uncertain whether he meant the apostle or the presbyter, although the former is far more pro- bable. Let us now consider the internal evidence in favour of John the Apostle, beginning with an examination of the arguments adduced on the other side by De Wette. These do not possess all the weight that many assign to them. We shall follow the order in which they have been already stated. 1. We attach no importance to this circum- stance. Why should not a writer be- at liberty to name himself or not as he pleases ; above ally why should not a writer, under the immediate inspiration of the Almighty, omit the particulars which he was not prompted to record? How could he refrain from doing so? The Holy Spirit must have had some good reason for lead- ing the writer to set forth his name, although curiosity is not gratified by assigning the reason. The Old Testament prophets usually prefixed their names to the visions and predictions which they were pgompted to record ; and John does the same. But instead of styling himself an apostle, which carries with it an idea of dignity and official authority, he modestly takes to him- self the appellation of a servant of Christ, the brother and companion of the faithful in tribu- lation. This corresponds with the relation which he sustained to Christ in the receiving of such visions, as also with the condition of the Redeemer himself. In the Gospel, John is mentioned as the disciple whom Jesus loved, for then he stood in an intimate relation to Christ, as the Son of man ap- pearing in the form of a servant ; but in the book before us, Christ is announced as the glorified Redeemer who should quickly come to judgment, and John is his servant, entrusted with the secrets of his house. Well did it become the apostle to forget all the honour of his apostolic office, and to be abased before the Lord of glory. The re- splendent vision of the Saviour had such an effect upon the seer, that he fell at his feet as dead ; and therefore it was quite natural for him to be clothed with profound humility, to designate himself the servant of Jesus Christ, the brother and companion of the faithful in tribulation. Again, in ch. xviii. 20, the prophets are said to be represented as already in heaven in their glorified condition, and therefore the writer could not have belonged to their number. But this passage neither affirms nor necessarily implies that the saints and apostles and prophets were at that time in heaven. Neither is it stated that all the apostles had then been glo- rified. Chapter xxi. 14 is alleged to be inconsis- tent with the modesty and humility of John. This is a questionable assumption. The official honour inseparable from the person of an apostle was surely compatible with profound humility. It was so with Paul; and we may safely draw the same conclusion in regard to John. . In describing the heavenly Jerusalem it was necessary to intro- duce the twelve apostles. The writer could not exclude himself (see Liicke, p. 389 ; and Gue- rike's Beitrcige, p. 37. sq). 2. To enter fully into this argument would re- quire a lengthened treatise. Let us briefly notice the particular words, phrases, and expressions, to which Ewald, Liicke, De Wette, and Credner specially allude. Much has been written by REVELATION, BOOK OF. Ewuld concerning the Hebraistic character of the language. The writer, it is alleged, strongly imbued with Hebrew modes of thought, frequently inserts Hebrew words, as in iii. 14 ; ix. 11 ; xii. 9, 10 ; xix. 1, 3, 4, 6 ; xx. 2; xxii. 20 ; while the influence of cabbalistic artificiality is obvious throughout the entire book, and particularly in i. 4, 5 ; iv. 2; xiii. 18 ; xvi. 14. The mode of employing the tenses is foreign to the Greek lan- guage, and moulded after the Hebrew (i. 7 ,• ii. 5, 16, 22, 23, 27; iii. 9; iv. 9-11 ; xii. 2-4; xvi. 15, 21 ; xvii. 13, 14 ; xviii. 11, 15 ; xxii. 7, 12). So also the use of the participle (i. 16 ; iv. 1, 5, 8; v. 6, 13; vi. 2,5; vii. 9, 10; ix. 11; x. 2; xiv. 1, 14 ; xix. 12, 13 ; xxi. 14) ; and of the infinitive (xii. 7). The awkward disposition of words is also said to be Hebraistic ; such as a genitive appended like the construct state ; the stringing together of several genitives (xiv. §, 10, 19 ; xvi. 19 ; xviii. 3, 14 ; xix. 15 ; xxi. 6 ; xxii. 18, 19); and the use of the Greek cases, which are frequently changed for prepositions (ii. 10 ; iii. 9 ; vi. 1, 8 ; viii. 7 ; ix. 19 ; xi. 6, 9 ; xii. 5 ; xiv. 2, 7) ; incorrectness in appositions (i. 5 ; ii. 20; iii. 12; iv. 2-4; vi. 1 ; vii. 9; viii. 9; ix. 14; xiii. 1-3; xiv. 2, 12, 14, 20, &c.) ; a con- struction formed of an eiv, [xevew, Kadcbs, ws (an adverb of time), oiiv, fxev, fxevroL, k6s, (tkotio, 5o|a£e<70ai, tyovaOai, fai] cuciftos, dirii\\va8at, ovtos (toDto) 'Iva ; the historic present. There are also favourite expressions of the writer of this book, such as do not occur in John's authentic writings : oiKovLievr), vTroLiovrj, KpaTelv rb uvollo,, ttjj/ 5i5ax?V, Tra.yTOKpd.Twp, debs Kal iraTi'ip, SuvafMis, tcpaTos, icrxvs, TlpJ], ttpwt6tokos TWV veKpSlV, ■>) dpxv T-/js KTiVfais tov 6eov, & dpx<»v twv [Sainhecov ttjs 7?} j, a>5e in the beginning of a sentence. The conjunction el, so common in the Gospel, does not occur in the Apocalypse ; but only el /x-i], el Si /x^, and el tis. The frequent joining of a substantive with Lieyas, as (poiu'rj p.eyd\ri, 6\i\pis p.eyd\Tj, , so frequent in the Gospel, is not found in the Revelation ; and, on the contrary, laxvpos, which occurs seven times in the Apoca- lypse, is foreign to the Gospel. The following discrepancies between the lan- guage of the Gospel and that of the epistles have been noticed : d\v,Qw6s is used of God both in the Gospel and Apocalypse, but in different senses ; so also Kvpios, and epyd£op.cu ; instead of iSe the Apocalypse has only ISov ; instead of 'lepoaoKvjxa. only 'lepovo~a\rjp. ; instead of edv tis, as in the Gospel, el tis; irepl, so often used by John, occurs only once in the Apocalypse, and that too in rela- tion to place ; oxAos is used in the plural. Words denoting seeing are differently used in the Gospel and Apocalypse ; thus, for the present we find in the latter fiXeireiv, dewpeiv, opav ; for the aorist of the active elSov, [SKeireiv, and Qewpetv; for the future oTTTeadcu, and for the aorist of the passive also uKTeadai ; p.eveiv has a different meaning from that which it bears in the Gospel ; instead of 6 'dpxwv tov KoaiLov, and 6 Trovqpos, we find 6 ffaTavds, 6 8ia/3oAos, b SpaKcov 6 fieyas. Such is a summary statement of an argument drawn out at great length by Liicke, De Wette, Ewald, and Credner. Some have attempted to turn aside its force by resorting to the hypothesis that the book was originally written in Hebrew, and then translated into Greek. This, however, is contradicted by the most decisive internal evidence, and is in itself highly improbable. The Apocalyse was written in the Greek language, as all antiquity attests. How then are we to account for its Hebraistic idioms and solecisms of language, its negligences of diction, and ungrammatical con- structions? One circumstance to be taken into account is, that the nature of the Gospel is widely different from that of the Apocalypse. The latter is a prophetic book — a poetical composition — while the former is a simple record in prose, of the discourses of Jesus in the days of his flesh. It is apparent, too, that John in the Apocalypse imitates the manner of Ezekiel and Daniel. The New Testament prophet conforms to the diction and symbolic features of the former seers. ' If the question should be urged, why John chose these models ? the obvious answer is, that he conformed to the taste of the times in which he lived. The numerous apocryphal works of an Apocalyptic nature, which were composed nearly at the same time with the Apocalypse, such as the book of Enoch, the ascension of Isaiah, the Testa- ment of the twelve patriarchs, many of the sibyl- line oracles, the fourth book of Ezra, the Pastor of Hennas, and many others which are lost — all testify to the taste and feelings of the times when, or near which, the Apocalyse was written. If this method of writing was more grateful to the time in which John lived, it is a good reason for his preferring it."* In consequence of such imitation, the diction has an Oriental character; and the figures are in the highest style ot' imagery pecu- liar to the East. Rut it is said that John was an illiterate man. Illiterate, doubtless, he was as com- pared with Paul, who was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel; yet he may have been capable of reading the Old Testament, books ; and he was cer- tainly inspired. Rapt in ecstasy, he saw wondrous * Stuart, in the Bibliotheca Sacra, pp. 353, 354. 616 REVELATION, BOOK OF. visions. He was in the Spirit. And when writing the tilings he beheld, his language was to be con- formed to the nature of such marvellous revelations. It was to be adapted to the mysterious disclosures, the vivid pictures, the moving scenes, the celestial beings and scenery of which he was privileged to tell. Hence it was to be lifted up far above the level of simple prose or biographic history, so as to correspond with the sublime visions of the seer. Nor should it be forgotten that he was not in the circumstances of an ordinary writer. He was inspired. How often is this fact lost sigh) of by the German critics ! It is therefore need- less to inquire into his education in the Hebrew language, of his mental culture while residing in Asia Minor, or the smoothness of the Greek lan- guage as current in the place where he lived, before and after he wrote the Apocalypse. The Holy Spirit qualified him beyond and irrespec- tive of ordinary means, for the work of writing. However elevated the theme he undertook, he was assisted in employing diction as elevated as the nature of the subject demanded. We place, therefore, little reliance upon the argument de- rived from the time of life at which the Apo- calypse was composed, though Olshauseu and Guerike insist upon it. Written, as they think, twenty years before the Gospel or epistles, the Apocalypse exhibits marks of inexperience in writiug, of youthful fire, and of an ardent tem- perament. It exhibits the first essays of one ex- pressing his ideas in a language to which he was unaccustomed. This may be true ; but we lay far less stress upon it than these authors seem inclined to do. The strong Hebraized diction of the book we account for on the ground that the •writer was a Jew ; and, as such, expressed his Jewish conceptions in Greek; that he imitated the later Old Testament prophets, especially the manner of Daniel ; and that the only prophetic writing in the New Testament naturally ap- proaches nearer the Old Testament, if not in subject, at least in colouring and linguistic features. These considerations may serve to throw light upon the language of the book, after all the extravagances of assertion in regard to anoma- lies, solecisms, and ruggednesses, have been fairly estimated. For it cannot be denied that many rash and unwarrantable assumptions have been made by De Wette and others relative to the impure Greek said to be contained in the Apocalypse. Winer has done much to check such bold asser- tions, but with little success in the case of those who are resolved to abide by a strong and pre- valent current of opinion. We venture to affirm, without fear of contradiction, that there are books of the New Testament almost as Hebraizing as the Apocalypse; and that the anomalies charged to the account of the Hebrew language may be paralleled in other parts of the New Testament or in classical Greek. What shall be said, for in- stance, to the attempt of Hitzig to demonstrate from the language of Mark's Go-pel, as compared with that of the Apocalypse, that both proceeded from one author, viz., John Mark ? This author has conducted a lengthened investigation with the view of showing that all the peculiarities of language found in the Apocalypse are equally presented in the second Gospel, particularly that the Hebraisms of the one correspond with those of REVELATION, BOOK OF. the other. Surely this must lead to new investi- gations of the Apocalyptic diction, and possibly to a renunciation of those extravagant assertions so often made in regard to the harsh, rugged, Hebraized Greek of the Apoctdypse. Who ever dreamed before of the numerous solecisms of Mark's language ? and yet Hitzig has demon- strated its similarity to the Apocalyptic as plau- sibly as Ewald, Liicke, and others have proved the total dissimilarity between the diction of the Apocalypse and that of John's Gospel. The length allotted to this article will not allow the writer to notice every term and phrase supposed to be peculiar. This can only be done with success by him who takes a concordance to the Greek Testament in his hand, with the deter- mination to test each example; along with a good syntax of classical Greek, such as Bern- hardy^s. In this way he may see whether the alleged Hebraisms and anomalies have not their parallels in classical Greek. Some of the alle- gations already quoted are manifestly incorrect, e. g. that oxovay with the genitive is not found in the Apocalypse. On the contrary, it occurs eight times with the genitive. Other words are ad duced on the principle of their not occurring so frequently in the book before us as in the Gospel and epistles. But by this mode of reasoning it might be shown, that the other acknowledged writings of the Apostle John, for instance his first epistle, are not authentic. Thus p-^/xara, one of the words quoted, though frequently found in the Gospel, is not in any of the three epistles ; there- fore, these epistles were not written by John. It is found once in the Apocalypse. Again, epyd- Co^mi, which is found seven times in the Gospel, and once in the Apocalypse, as also once in each of the second and third epistles, is not in the first epistle ; therefore the first epistle proceeded from another writer than the author of the second and third. The same reasoning may be applied to Beupeoi. Again, it is alleged lhat the regular construction of neuters plural with singular verbs is not found, with the exception of six instances. To say nothing of the large list of exceptions, let it be considered, that th'e plural verb is joined with plural nouns where animate beings, espe- cially persons, are designated. Apply now this principle, which regularly holds good in classical Greek, to the Apocalypse, and nothing peculiar will appear in the latter. Should there still re- main examples of neuters plural designating things without life, we shall find similar ones in the Greek writers. Another mode in which the reasoning founded upon the use of peculiar terms and expressions may be tested, is the following. It is admitted that there are words which occur in the Gospel and epistles, but not in the Apoca- lypse. The adverb Trdvrore is an example. On the same principle and by virtue of the same reasoning, it may be denied, as far as language is concerned, that 1 Timothy was written by Paul, because -rravrore, which is found in his other epistles, does not occur in it. In this manner we might individually take up eacli word and every syntactical peculiarity on which the charge of harshness, or solecism, or Hebraizing lias been fastened. It is sufficient to state, that there are very few real solecisms in the Apocalypse. Al- most all that have been adduced may be paral- leled in Greek writers, or in those of the New REVELATION, BOOK OF. Testament. The words of Winer, a master in this department, are worthy of attention : ' The solecisms that appear in the Apocalypse give the diction the impress of great harshness, but they are capable of explanation, partly from anaco- luthon and the mingling of two constructions, partly in another manner. Such explanation should have been always adopted, instead of ascribing these irregularities to the ignorance of the author, who, in other constructions of a much more difficult nature in this very book, shows that he was exceedingly well acquainted with the rules of grammar. For most of these anomalies too, analogous examples in the Greek writers may be found, with this difference alone, that they do not follow one another so frequently as in the Apocalypse' (Grammatik, fiiul'te Auflage, pp. 273, 4). Should the reader not be satisfied with this brief statement of Winer, he is referred to his Exeget. Studien, i. 154, sq., where the Professor enters into details with great ability. The following linguistic similarities between John's Gospel and the Apocalypse deserve to be cited : /j.era ravra, Apoc. i. 19 ; iv. 1 ; vii! 1, 9 ; ix. 12; xv. 5; xviii. 1; xix. 1 ; xx. 3; Gosp. iii. 22 ; v. 1, 14 ; vi. 1 ; vii. 1 ; xix. 38 ; xxi. I ; (xaprvpia, Apoc. i. 2, 9 ; vi. 9 ; xi. 7 ; xii. 1 1, 17 ; xix. 10; xx. 4. Gosp. fxapTvpico or fj-aprvpla, i. 7, S, 15, 19, 32, 34; ii. 25; iii. 11, 26, 28, 32, 33; iv. 3, 9, 44; v. 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 39; 1 Epist. i. 2: iv. 14; v. 6-11. 'Iva, Apoc. ii. 10, 21 ; iii. 9,'/ 11, 18; vi. 2, 4, 11; vii. 1, &c. &c. Gosp. vi. 5, 7, 12. 15, 28, 29, 30, 38, 39, 40, 50; xi. 4, 11, 15, 16, 19, 31, 37, 42, 50, 52, 53, 55, 57; xii. 9, 10, 20, 23, 35, &c. 1 Epist. of John, i. 3, 4, 9; ii. 1, 19, 27, 28. Styis, Gosp. vii. 24 ; xi. 44. Apoc. i. 16. tvlo.^lv, Apoc. xix. 20. Gosp. vii. 30, 32, 44; viii. 20 ; x. 39; xi. 57; xxi. 3, 10. rr\pfiv tov \6yov, Tas ivroXas, or some similar expression, Apoc. iii. S, 10; xii. 17; xiv. 12; xxii. 7, 9. Gosp. viii. 5], 55; xiv. 15; xxiii. 24, &c. 6 vik&u, Apoc. ii. 7, 11, 17, 26; iii. 5, 12, 21 ; xv. 2 ; xxi. 7. This verb is quite common in the first epistle, ii. 13, 14 ; iv. 4; v. 4, 5. Gosp. xvi. 33. vSaip (wrjs, Apoc. xxi. 6; xxii. 17; com]). Gosp. vii. 38. Compare also the joining together of the present and the future in Apoc. ii. 5 and Gosp. xiv. 3. The assertion of the same thing posi- tively and negatively, Anoc. ii. 2, 6, 8, 13 ; iii. 8, 17, 21 ; Gosp. i. 3, 6, 7, 20, 48 ; iii. 15, 17, 20 ; iv. 42 ; v. 19, 24; viii. 35, 45 ; x. 2S ; xv. 5, 6, 7. 1 Epist. ii. 27, &c. In several places iu the Apocalypse Christ is called the Lamb; so also in the Gospel, i. 29, 36. Christ is called 6 Aoyos tov ®eov, Apoc. xix. 3, and in the Gospel of John only has he the same epithet. Tripeiv e/c tiv6s, Apoc. iii. 10. Gosp. xvii. 15. o-, xii. 31*. (SeeScholz, Die Apo/calgpae des heilig. Johannes vbersetzt, erklart, u. s. w. Frankfurt am Main, 1828, 8vo.; Sehulz, £/€v86fx€vos, iireiaayei \4yoiv, k. t. A. This pass- age has given rise to much discussion, some affirming that the revelations spoken of do not mean the present Apocalypse of John, but in- vented revelations bearing some resemblance to it. We agree with Liicke and De Wette in their view of the meaning, in opposition to Twells, Paulus, Hartwig, and Hug. They refer it lightly to our present book. The 85th of the 'Apostolic Canons,' which are supposed to belong to the fourth century, does not mention the Apocalypse among the apostolic writings. In the 'Constitu- tions' also, which probably originated in Syria and the adjacent regions, there is no notice of the book. It. has been inferred, from the circumstance of the Apocalypse being wanting in the Peshito, that it did not belong to the canon of the Syrian church. It has also been thought that the theo- logians of the Antiocheuian school, among whom are Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Theodore of Mop- suesti.i, omitted it out of the catalogue of ca- nonical writings. But in regard to the first, if we rely on the testimony of Suidas, he received the Apocalypse as divine ; and as to Theodoret, there is no reason for assuming that he rejected it (Liicke, p. 318). Probably Theodore of Mop- suestia did not acknowledge it as divine. It appears also to have been rejected by the theolo- gical school at Nisibis, which may be regarded as a continuation of the Antiochenian. Juuilius does not mention it in his list of prophetic writings. Cyril of Jerusalem has omitted it in his Catecheses ; as also Gregory of Nazianzen, and the 60th canon of the Laodicean Synod. Amphilocbius of Iconium says that some re- garded it as a divine production, but that others rejected it. Eusebius' testimony respecting the Asiatics is, that some rejected the Apocalypse. while others placed it among the acknowledged (bpoAoyovpeva) books. Euthalius, when divid- ing parts of the New Testament stichometrically, says nothing whatever of the book ; and Cosmas Iudicopleustes excludes it from the list of the canonical. In like manner Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople in the ninth century, appears to have placed it among the Antilegomena. The witnesses already quoted to remove the authorship from John the Apostle do not belong here, although many seem to have entertained the opinion of their present appropriateness. At the time of the Reformation, the controversy respecting the Apocalypse was revived. Erasmus speaks suspiciously concerning it, while Luther expresses himself very vehemently against it. ' There are various and abundant reasons,' says he, ' why I regard this book as neither apostolical nor prophetic. First, the apostles do not make use of visions, but prophesy in clear and plain lan- guage (as do Peter, Paul, and Christ also, in the REVELATION, BOOK OF. 019 Gospel) ; for it is becoming the apostolic office to speak plainly, and without figure or vision, respecting Christ and his acts. Moreover, it seems to me far too arrogant for him to enjoin it upon his readers to regard this his own work as of more importance than any other sacred book, and to threaten that if any one shall take aught away from it, God will take away from him his part in the book of life (Rev. xxii. 19). Besides, even were it a blessed thing to believe what is contained in it, no man knows what that is. The book is believed in (and is really just the same to us) as though we had it not ; and many more valuable books exist for us to believe in. But let every man think of it as his spirit prompts him. My spirit cannot adapt itself to the production, , and this is reason enough for me why I should not esteem it very highly.' This reasoning is mani- festly so inconsequential, and the style of cri- ticism so bold, as to render animadversion unne- cessary. The names of Haffenrener, Heerbrand, and John Schroder, are obscure, but they are all ranged against the book. With Sender a new opposition to it began. That distinguished critic was unfavourable to its authenticity. He was followed by Oeder, Merkel, Michaelis, Heinriehs, Bretscbneider, Ewald, De Wette, Scbott, Bleek, Liicke, Neander, Credner, E. Reuss, Hitzig, Tinius, &c. It should, however, be distinctly observed, that most of these recent critics go no farther than to deny that John the Apostle was the writer; which may certainly be done without impugning its indirectly apostolic authority. They do not exclude it from the canon as a divinely inspired writing; although in attacking its direct apostolicity, some may imagine that they ruin its canonical credit. (b.) We shall now allude to the evidence in favour of its canonicity. The earliest witness for it is Papias, as we learn from Andreas #nd Arethas of Cappadocia, in their preface to Com- mentaries on the Apocalypse. According to these writers, Papias regarded it as an inspired book. It is true that Rettig (Studien und Kritiken, 1831), followed by Liicke, has endea- voured to weaken their testimony ; but since the publication, by Cramer, of an old scholion re- lating to the words of Andreas, it is indubitable that Papias's language refers to the present Apo- calypse of John (Ilavernick's Lucuhrationes Criticm ad Apoc. spectantcs, Regiom. 1842, 8vo. No. 1, p. 4, sq.). Melito, Bishop of Sard is, one of the seven apocalyptic churches, wrote a work exclusively on this book. Eusebius thus speaks of his production (Hist. Eccles. iv. 26) : kol to Trepl rod Sia/36\ov KP.I ttjs aTTOKaAvtyiais 'lwavvov. From these words Sender endeavours to show that the books concerning the devil and the Apocalypse were one and the same, a conclusion which, if it were valid, would go to weaken the testimony. But Melito calls it the Apocalypse of John, implying that he regarded it as such ; for had he suspected the book, Eusebius would hardly have omitted that circumstance. Jerome, in his catalogue, of illustrious men, explicitly distinguishes two works, one respecting the devil, the other relative to the Apocalypse. Theopjiilus, Bishop of Antioch (Euseb. iv. 24), in his book against Ilermogenes, drew many proofs and argu- ments from the Revelation; so also Apollouiusol Ephesus, according to the same ecclesiastical 620 REVELATION, BOOK OF. historian (v. IS). The testimony of Irenaeus is most important, because he was in early life ac- quainted with Polycarp, who was John's disciple, and because be resided in Asia Minor, where John himself abode during the latter part of his life. In one place he says, ' It was seen no long time ago, but almost in our age, towards the end of Domitian's reign ;' while he frequently quotes it elsewhere as the Revelation of John, the disciple of the Lord. It is true that Be Wette and Credner seek to cast suspicion on this father's testimony, because he states that it was written under Domitian, which they regard as incorrect ; but this point shall be noticed hereafter. To these may be added the testimony of the martyrs at Lyons, of Nepos (Euseb. vii. 23), Methodius of Tyre, Didymus of Alexandria, Cyprian, Lac- tantius, Augustine, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Epiphanius of Cyprus, Jerome, Ephrem the Syrian, Rufinus the presbyter, Isidore of Pelusium, Hilary of Poicfou, Cyril of' Alexandria, Arethas and An- dreas of Cappadocia, the Synod of Hippo, a.d. 393, canon 36, the Synod of Toledo, a.d. C33, the third council of Carthage, a.d. 397, Victorin of Pettaw in Pannonia, Dionysius the Areopagite, Sulpicius Severus, Joh. Damascenus, CEcume- nius, Amphilochius, Novatus and his followers, the Manich^es, the Donatists, the Arians, the latter Arnobius, Ithaban Maurus, Isidore of Spain, Commodian, and others. It has been disputed whether Chrysostom re- jected the book or not. The presumption is in favour of the latter, as Liicke candidly allows. A similar presumption may be admitted in the case of Theodoret, although nothing very decisive can be affirmed in relation to his opinion. Perhaps some may be inclined to dispute the testimony of Jerome in favour of the canonical authority, because he says in his annotations on the 149th Psalm, ' The Apocalypse which is read and received in the churches is not numbered among the apocryphal books, but the ecclesiastical.'' ' In the strict sense of the term,' says Hug, ' an ecclesiastica scriptura is a book of only secondary rank. It is well known that a contemporary of Jerome "divides the books of the Old and New Testament, together with those which make any pretensions to be such, into canonici, ecclesiastici, et apocryphi. Now if Jerome affixed the same meaning as this writer to the expression liber ecclesiasticus, we have here a very singular fact. The Latins then placed this book in the second class among the disputed books. Thus it will have been assigned to each of the three classes. But Jerome does not attach to this word the strict signification which it bears with his con- temporary ; for, in his Epistle to Dardanus, he says, " If the Latins do not receive the Epistle to the Hebrews among the canonical Scriptures, so, with equal freedom, the Greek churches do not receive John's Apocalypse. I, however, ac- knowledge both, for I do not follow the custom of the times, but the authority of older writers, who draw arguments from both, as being canonical and ecclesiastical writings, and not merely as apocryphal books are sometimes used." Here Jerome has so expressed himself, that we must believe he made no difference between canonical and ecclesiastical, and affixed no stronger signification to the one than to the other' (Hug's Introd., translated by Fosdick, pp. 661-2). REVELATION, BOOK OF. It is also necessary to attend to the testimony of Ephrem definitely ascribing the Revelation to John the Theologian, in connection with the fact of the book's absence from the Peshito, and from Ebedjesu*s catalogue of the books of Scrip- ture received by the Syrians. Certainly its absence from this ancient version does not prove its want of canonicify ; else the same might lie affirmed of John's two epistles, and that of Judev none of which is found in the same version. Probably the Peshito was made, not, as Liicke and others affirm, at the conclusion of the second or commencement of the third century, but in the first, before the Apocalypse was written. The words of Assemanni, in relation to one of the passages in which Ephrem attributes the Revelation to John, are striking : ' In hoc sermone citat s. doctor Apocalypsin Johannis tanquam canoni- cam Scripturam — quod ideo notavi, ut constaret Syrorum antiquissimorum de illius libri aucto- ritate judicium' (see Havernick, p. 8, sq.). That the Syrian church did not reject the book, may be inferred from the fact that the inscription of the current Syriac version assigns it to John the Evangelist. The witnesses already adduced for ascribing the authorship to John the Apostle also belong to the present place, since in attesting the apostolic, they equally uphold the divine origin of the book. At the period of the Reformation, Flacius stre- nuously upheld the authority of the Apocalypse, and since his day able defenders of it have not been wanting. Twells, C. F. Schmid, J. F. Reuss, Knittel, Storr, Liiderwald, Hartwig, Kleuker, Herder, Donker Curtius, Hanlein, Bertholdt, Eichhorn, Hug, Feilmoser, Kolthoff, Olshausen, J. P. Lange (Tholuck's Lit. Anzeig. 1838), Dannemann, Havernick {Evangel. Kirchenseit, 1834, and Lucub. Criticce), Guerike, Schnitzel- (Allgem. Liter aturzeit. 1S41), Zeller {Deutsche Jahrb., 1841), and others. Most of these wriferE seem to rest all the credit and authority of the book on the fact of its being written by John the Apostle, while one or two of the later critics attribute it to the apostle, for the sake of inva- lidating and ruining the fourth Gospel. The external evidence in favour of its authenticity and genuineness is overwhelming. This is par- ticularly the case in regard to the Latin church. In the Greek, doubts were more prevalent, until they were lost in the dark night of the middle ages. Montanism first aroused and drew atten- tion to the question, for the adherents of that false system based their tenets almost exclusively on the Revelation. Hence we may account in some degree for the sentiments of Dionysius of Alex- andria, who contended against the millennariau Nepos. Thus the general tenor of the external evidence is clearly in favour of the canonical authority, while internal circumstances amply confirm it. The style, language, and manner of the book, cannot be mistaken. In dignity and sublimity it is equal to any of the New Testament writings; if not superior to them all. The variety and force of the images impress the mind of every reader with conceptions of a divine origin. Surely no uninspired man could have written in such a strain. III. The time and place at which it was written. — In ascertaining these points there is REVELATION, BOOK OF. considerable difficulty. The prevalent opinion is, that the book was written a.d. 96 or 97, at Patmos or Ephesns, after Domitian's death, i. e. under Nerva. So Mill, Le Clerc, Basnage, Lardner, Woodhouse, and others. This is sup- posed to be in accordance with the tradition, that John was sent into Patmos towards the end of Domitian's reign, and that he there received the Revelation, agreeably to the statement in ch. i. 9. The fact that John was banished to Patmos is attested by antiquity, and seems to be hinted at in ver. 9, in which we must believe, in opposition to Neander, that there is a necessary reference to sufferings on account of the Gospel. It is mentioned by IrenEeus, Clement of Alex- andria, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome. The time, however, is very differently stated. Eu- sebius and Jerome attribute the exile toDomitian ; the Syriac version of the Apocalypse, Theophy- lact, and- the younger Hippolytus, assign it to Nero ; Epiphanius to Claudius ; while Tertullian, Clement, and Origen, give it no name. Jt has been conjectured that Domitius (Nero) and Domitian were early interchanged, and that even the testimony of lrenaeus refers rather to Domi- tius (Nero) than to Domitian. The following is the passage in question ; oi5Se yap -Kpb -koXKov Xp&vov kupadT], aXXh trx^by ivl ttjs i)/j.erepas yeveas, irpbs Tip reXei tTjs Aop.t7ia.vov apxys (Advers. Hcer. lib. v. p. 449, ed. Grabe). If Aop.iTiavov be an adjective formed from the substantive Aofxerios, it will mean ' belonging to Domitius' (see Guerike, Hi.itvrisch-Krit. Einleit. pp. 285, 6). But whatever plausibility there be in this conjecture (and there seems to be none), the language of Tertullian, Clement, and Origen, is more appropriate to Nero than to Domitian. Besides, if Peter and Paul suffered from the cruel tyrant, it is difficult to conceive how John could have eluded notice or persecution. Indeed early ecclesiastical tradition is as favour- able to the assumption that. John was sent into banishment by Nero, as it is to the opinion that he was exiled by Domitian. Thus Eusebius, who in his Chronioon and Ecclesiastical History follows IrenEeus, in his Demon. Evangel., asso- ciates the Patmos-exile with the death of Peter and Paul who suffered under Nero. But we are not left to external grounds on the question before us, else the decision might be uncertain ; for the tradition of the early church in regard to the banishment of John is neither consistent nor valuable : it will not stand the test of modern criticism. Hence the view of those who think that it was manufactured solely from chap. i. 9, is exceedingly probable. Taken from such an origin, it was shaped in various ways. The passage in question certainly implies that John had been a sufferer for the Gospel's sake, and that he either withdrew to Patmos before the fury of persecution burst upon him, or that he teas compelled to betake himself to that lonely island in consequence of positive opposition. The language of the fathers in recording this tradition also shows, that they did not carefully distinguish between the time of writing the visions and the time when they were received. Sometimes it is said that the Apocalypse was written in Patmos, but much more frequently it is simply stated that revelations were there made to the seer. REVELATION, BOOK OF. 621 In the absence of definite external evidence, internal circumstances come to our aid. These show that Jerusalem had not been destroyed. Had such a catastrophe already happened, it would scarcely have been left unnoticed. An event pregnant with momentous consequences to the cause of truth and the fortunes of the early church, would most probably have been men- tioned or referred to. But there are distinct re- ferences to the impending destruction of the city. In chap. xi. 1, it is commanded to measure the temple, obviously pre-supposing that it still stood. In verse 2, the holy city is about to be trodden by the Gentiles forty-two months ; and in the 13th verse of the same chapter, the same event is also noticed. Besides, the sixth emperor was still sitting on the throne when the writer was favoured with the visions (xvii. 1ft). Five kings or emperors had already fallen, one was then reigning, and the other had not come. The most, natural interpretation of the sixth king is that which, beginning the series with Julius Caesar, fixes upon Nero : so Bertholdt and Koehler. Galba is of course the seventh, and agreeably 1o the prophecy he reigned but seven months. That such was the usual mode of com- putation, Koehler has attempted successfully to show from the fourth book of Ezra and Josephus's Antiquities ; which is confirmed by Suetonius's Twelve Ccesars, and by the Sibylline oracles, fifth book.* We are aware that Eichhorn reckons from Augustus, and makes the sixth Vespasian — Otho, Galba, and Vitellius being passed over; and that Ewald, Lticke, and others, begiTining also with Augustus, make Galba the sixth, the em- peror ' that is ;' but it was contrary to the usual method of reckoning among the Jews and Romans to commence with that emperor. Yet the opinion that the sixth emperor was Nero, is liable to objec- tion. The 8th and 11th verses appear to contradict it, for they state that ' he icas, and is not.'' It will be observed that in these verses an explanation re- specting the beast is given, couched in the language of current report. The words amount to this — ' The beast which thou sawest is the emperor, of whom it is commonly believed that he shall be assassinated, recover from the wound, l'O to the East, and return from it to desolate the church and inflict terrible punishments on his enemies.' Nero is described, according to the common belief — a belief that prevailed before his death.' In chap. xiii. 3, it. is not implied that. Nero teas then dead, for the holy seer beheld things a pzAAei yeveadat as well as tilings a etVi; and the passage is descriptive of a vision, not explana- tory of one 2>reviously pourtrayed. We conclude, therefore, that the apostle saw the visions during the reign of the bloody and cruel Nero. Still, however, he may have written the book not at. Patmos, but immediately after his return to Ephesus, if so be that he did return thither before Nero ceased to live. It has been inferred that the book was written after le had been in Patmos, because hy^v6p.r\v is used in chap. i. 9, 10. The use of this tense, however, by no means militates against the view of those who assert that he wrote as well as saw the visions in Patmos, and consequently does not prove that * See Liicke's objections to this view, which cannot be refuted here, at p. 251, notes 1 and 2. 622 REVELATION, BOOK OF. the book was written at Ephesus. The verb in ver. 10 may aptly refer to the commencement of that ecstatic state into which he was thrown for the purpose of receiving mysterious disclosures — to the time when he first began to he iu Trvev/xaTL ; and in ver. 9 it may in like manner allude to the commencement of his exile. In view of all circumstances we are inclined to assume that the Apocalypse was written during the reign of Nero, token persecution had commenced, as many passages imply, and, therefore, at Patmos. It weighs nothing with us that Eichhorn, Bleek, and De Wette conjecturally assume that the place mentioned in i. 9 may be a poetical fiction: even Ewald opposes such a thought. Before leaving this subject it is necessary to glance at the circumstances supposed to show th.it the hook was not written till after Nero's death. The general expectation of his return (xvii. 11), and the allusions to the persecutions of Christians under him (vi. 9 ; xvii. 6), as also the pre-supposed fact of most of the apostles being dead (xviii. 20), are stated by De Wette. But in xvii. 11, the apostle merely describes Nero according to the common report — a report current before his death, the substance of which was, that after reigning a while he should appear again, and make an eighth, though one of the seven. The passages, vi. 9 and xvii. 6, allude to different events, the former to the souls of the martyrs that had been slain by the Jews, the latter to the persecutions of imperial Rome generically. According to the right reading of xviii. 20, it does not imply that most of the apostles were already dead'. In conformity with the testimony of Irenasus, understood in the ordinary acceptation, it has been very generally believed that the book was written under Domitian, a.d. 96 or 97. But the vague report of the apostle's banishment, current among early writers in different and varying forms, must not be allowed to set aside internal evidence, especially the clearly-defined chronological ele- ments of the xi. and xvii. chapters. The arguments adduced in favour of Domi- tian 's reign are the following : — 1. Nero's persecution did not reach the pro- vinces. 2. The Nicolaitans did not form a sect when the book was written, although they are spoken of as such. 3. The condition of the seven churches, as pourtrayed in the Apocalypse, shows that they had been planted a considerable time. 4. Mention is made of the martyr Antipas at Pergamos, who could not have suffered death in Nero's reign, because the persecution did not reach the provinces (Lenfant and Beausobre's Preface sur VApoc. de S. Jean, pp. 613-14; and Yitringa, in Apoc, cap. i. v. 2, p. 9-11). 1. In order to account for John's banishment to Patmos, it is not needful to believe that the spirit of persecution raged at Ephesus. While it was so active at Rome, we may fairly infer that the Christians in the provinces trem tiled for their safety. Whatever affected the capital so fearfully, would naturally affect the distant parts of the empire to a greater or less extent : and John's retirement to Patmos does not necessarily pre-suppose the horrors of fire and sword. The storm was seen to lower ; the heathen magistrates, as well as the Jews, put forth their enmity in various forms, even when the edicts of emperors REVELATION, BOOK OF. forbade violence to the persons of Christians, and the apostle in consequence withdrew for a time from the scene of his labours. 2. The most probable interpretation is, that Nicolaitans is a symbolic name signifying cor- rupters of the people, equivalent to Balaam in Hebrew. It is true that Irenffius speaks of such a sect in his time, deriving the appellation from the deacon Nicolaus (Acts ii.), and representing the allusion in the Apocalypse as belonging to it. The sect called the Nicolaitans, spoken of by Clement, is probably not the same as that men- tioned in the Apocalypse (Neander, Kirchengesch. i. 2, p. 775, sq.). 3. A close examination of the language ad- dressed to each of the seven churches will show that it. may have been appropriate in the year of our Lord 68. It does not by any means imply that there had been an open persecution in the provinces. About a.d. 61 the church of Ephesus is commended, by Paul for their faith and love (Eph. i. 15), which is quite consistent with Rev. ii. 2, 3 ; while both are in agreement with the censure that the members had left their first love. In the lapse of a very few years, and especially in trying circumstances, the ardour of their love had cooled. The patience for which they are commended re- fers, as the context shows, to the temptations which they suffered from wicked and corrupting teachers, and the difficulties attendant upon the faithful exercise of discipline in the church. Similar was the case with the church at Smyrna, their tribulation having chief reference to the blasphemy of Satan's synagogue. 4. In regard to Antipas nothing is known. He suffered at Pergamos, but under what empe- ror, or in what circumstances, is uncertain. It is not at all necessary to our hypothesis to assume that he was put to death during Nero's perse- cution. Individual Christians were put to death even in the provinces before the time of Nero. On the whole, we see no good ground for beliff ing that the book was written in the time c Claudius, or Galba. or Vespasian, or Domitian, or Trajan, or Adrian, though all these have been advocated ; nor is there sufficient reason for sepa- rating the time of the writing from that of the receiving of the visions. In view of all circum- stances we assign it to the time of Nero, and the locality of Patmos, a.d. 67 or 63. Sir Isaac Newton long ago fixed upon the same date. IV. Unity of the book. — A few writers have thought that the Apocalypse was written at differ- ent times by the same author, as Grotius, Ham- mond, and Bleek ; or by different authors, an Vogel. Such dismemberment is now abandoned. Even De Wette allows that no reasonable doubts can be entertained of its unity. The entire book is so regular in its structure, so intimately con- nected is one paragraph with another, that all must have proceeded from the same writer. If the nature of prophetic perspective be rightly un- derstood, all will appear to be natural and easy. John saw tilings past, present, and future at once. He did not need to wait for the progress of events ■ — for events were presented to his vision just as the Spirit willed. Hence the present tense is so much used in place of the future. The hypotheses of Grotius, Vogel, and Bleek, havp been refuted by Lticke ; and that of Hammond requires not now the like examination. REVELATION, BOOK OF. V. The class of writings to which it belongs. — Pareus seems to have been the first who started the idea of its being a dramatic poem. The same opinion was also expressed by Hartwig. But the genius of Eichhoru wrought out the sugges- tion into a theory pervaded by great symmetry and beauty. Hence the opinion that it forms a regular dramatic poem is associated with his name alone. According to him the divisions are: 1. The title, chap. i. 1-3. 2. The pro- logue, i. -1 — iii. 22. 3. The drama, iv. 1 — xxii. 5. Act 1. The capture of Jerusalem, or the triumph of Christianity over Judaism, vii. 6 — xii. 17. Act 2. The capture of Rome, or the triumph of Christianity over Paganism, xii. 18 — xx. 10. Act 3. The new Jerusalem descends from heaven, or the felicity which is to endure for ever, xx. 11 — xxii. 5. 4. The epilogue, xxii. 6-21 ; (a) of the angel, xxii. 6; (b) of Jesus, xxii. 7-16; (c) ot John, xxii. 16-20. The apostolical benediction, xxii. 21. As this theory is now abandoned by all exposi- tors, it needs no refutation. It is exceedingly ingenious, but without foundation. To represent the book as made up of 11 1 tie else than sublime scenery and fiction, is contrary to the analogy of such Old Testament writings as bear to it the greatest resemblance. Something more is intended than a symbolic description of the tri- umph of Christianity over Judaism and Pagan- ism. The book contains historic narrative. It exhibits real prophecies, which must have had their accomplishment in distinct events and indi- viduals. It consists of a prophetic poem. Its diction is, with some exceptions, the diction of poetry. It is not made up of a series of disjointed visions ; it is regular in its structure and artificial in its arrangement. According to the rules of rhetoric, it nearly approaches an epopee. Those who thoroughly examine it with a view to dis- cover the arrangement and connection of parts will observe unity and artificiality in the dispo- sition of the whole. It bears an analogy to the prophetic writings of the Old Testament, espe- cially to those of Daniel. It: is obvious, there- fore, that a deep and thorough study of the Old Testament prophets should precede the study of the Apocalypse. If it bear a close resemblance in many of its features to the inspired productions of a former dispensation; if the writer evidently imitated the utterances of Daniel, Ezekiel, and Zechariah ; if his language be more Hebraistic than that of the New Testament generally, the interpreter of the book should be previously qua- lified by a familiar acquaintance with the sym- bols, imagery, diction, and spirit of the Old Tes- tament poets and prophets. \ I. The object for which it was originally written. — The books of the New Testament, like those of the Old, were designed to promote the in- struction of God's people in all ages. They were adapted to teach, exhort, and reprove 'all man- kind. They do not belong to the class of ephe- meral writings that have Jong since fulfilled the purpose for which they wen' originally composed. Their object was not merely a local or partial one. So of the Apocalypse. It is suited to all. ' Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of (his prophecy.1 But this general characteristic is perfectly consistent with the fact that it arose out of specific circumstances, and REVELATION, BOOK OF. 623 was primarily meant, to subserve a definite end. When first written, it. was destined to suit the peculiar circumstances of the early Christians. The times were troublous. Persecution had ap- peared in various forms. The followers of Christ were exposed to severe sufferings for conscience sake. Their enemies were fierce against them. Comparatively few and feeble, the humble dis- ciples of the Lamb seemed doomed to extinction. But the writer of the Apocalypse was prompted to present to them such views as were adapted to encourage them to steadfastness in the faith — to comfort them in the midst of calamity — and to arm them with resolution to endure all the as- saults of their foes. Exalted honours, glorious rewards, are set before 1 he Christian soldier who should endure to the end. A crown of victory — the approbation of the Redeemer — everlasting felicity; — these are prepared for -the patient be- liever. In connection with such representations, the final triumph of Christianity and the Mes- siah's peaceful reign with his saints, form topics on which the writer dwells with emphatic earnest- ness (See chap. i. 1-3; ii. 1; iii. 22; xxii. 6, 7, 10-17). The suffering Christians of primitive times may have sorrowfully thought that they should never be able to stand the shock of their bitter and blood)' assailants, the power and policy of the world being leagued against them — but the statements of the writer all tend to the conclusion that truth should make progress in the earth, and the church, emerging out of all struggles, wax stronger and stronger. If such be the primary and principal aim of the book, it follows that we should not look in it for a history of the kingdoms of the world. To compose a civil history did not comport with the writer's object. The genius of Christ's kingdom is totally different from that of the kingdoms of the world. It advances steadily and silently, independently of, and frequently in opposition to them. Hence the Apocalypse cannot contain a history of the world. It. exhibits a history of the church, specially of its early struggles with the powers of darkness and the malice of superstition. This last remark leads to another of chief importance to the inter- preter of the book before us, viz., thai it princi- pally relates to events past, present, anil speedily to happen in connection with the Christian reli- gion as viewed from the writer's stand-point. The glances at the past are brief, but references to the circumstances of the church at t he time are numerous ami diversified, while rapidly coming catastrophes and triumphs are pourtrayed in full and vivid colours. Trials impending over the church, and judgments over her enemii s, in the time of the apostle, — these form the burden of the prophecy. This conclusion is fully sus- tained both by the prologue and epilogue, although, strange to say, it lias been overlooked by the ma- jority of expositors. What language can be more explicit than this: 'Blessed is he thai readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, for the time is at hand? ' The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him. to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass.' 'He which testifieth these things eaitli, Surely I come quickly. Amen, even so, come Lord Jesus.' VII. Us contents. — The body of the work is contained in chaps, iv.-xxii. 6, and is almost 624 REVELATION, BOOK OF. entirely a series of symbolic representations. To this is prefixed a prologue (i.-iv). A brief epi- logue is subjoined ( xxii. 6-21). The prologue is of considerable length, embracing separate epistles to the seven churches in Asia Minor. John had lived and laboured for a time in the region where these churches were planted. Probably he was personally known to many of the believers of which they were composed. Now that the other apostles were dispersed or dead, the care of them devolved upon himself. As their spiritual super- intendent, he naturally felt the most intense and lively interest in their growing prosperity and steadfastness in the faith. The storm of persecu- tion had fallen upon the apostles and believers at Rome, striking fear into their brethren in the re- mote provinces of the empire. It is highly pro- bable, from other sources, that the Christians in these regions had been already visited with such trials (see 1st Ep. of Peter). After the prologue or introduction, which is peculiarly fitted to ad- monish and console amid suffering, we come to the body of the work itself, commencing with the fourth chapter. This may be appropriately di- vided into three parts : (1.) iv.-xi. ; (2.) xii.-xix. ; (3.) xx.-xxii. 5. The first narrates the fortunes and fate of Christ's followers to the destruction of Jerusalem, when the coming of the Saviour took place. Here the triumph of Christianity over Judaism is exhibited, as the conclusion demon- strates. The following particulars are comprised in this portion. A vision of the divine glory in heaven, ana- logous to the vision which Isaiah had, as re- corded in the 6th chapter of his prophecies. An account of the sealed book, with seven seals, which none but the Lamb could open ; and the praises of the Lamb sung by the celestial inha- bitants. The opening of the first six seals. Before the opening of the seventh, 44,000 are sealed out of the tribes of the children of Israel, and an innumerable multitude with palms in their hands are seen before the throne. After the opening of the seventh, the catastrophe is delayed by the sounding of seven trumpets, the first six of which cause great plagues and hasten on the judgment. Yet, before the last trumpet sounds, a mighty angel, with a rainbow round his head, appears with an open book in his hanil, announcing that the mystery of God should be finished when the seventh angel should begin to sound. On this he gives the book to the seer, commanding him to eat it up, and to prophesy hereafter concerning many people, countries, and kings. After this the interior of the temple, with its Jewish worshippers, is measured by the prophet, while the outer court is excepted and given over lo the heathen for the space of forty-two months. But, notwithstanding the long-suffering mercy of God, the Jews con- tinue to persecute the faithful witnesses, so that they are punished by the fall of a tenth part of the holy city in an earthquake. Hence 7000 men perish, artd the remainder, affrighted, give glory to God. After this the seventh angel sounds, and the Lord appears, to inflict the final blow on Jerusalem and its inhabitants. The catastrophe takes place ; the heavenly choir gives thanks to God for the victory of Christianity ; and the temple of God is opened in heaven, so that he is accessible to all, being disclosed to the view of the whole earth as their God, without the inter- REVELATION, BOOK OF. vention of priest or solemnity, as in the abrogated economy. Thus tl*e Jewish ritual is done away; the Jews as a nation of persecutors are destroyed ; and free scope is given to the new religion. This portion, therefore, of the prophetic book depicts the downfall of Jerusalem, and the triumph of Christianity over Judaism. The Son of Man came in fearful majesty to punish the guilty nation, as had been predicted. We are aware that some deny the existence of a catastrophe in the 11th chapter. Schott says that it is procrastinated, although the reader here expects it. But Grotius long ago saw the point in its true light, and remarked : ' Solet apostolus mala gravia brevibus verbis, sed efficacibus pra> tervehi, bona eloqui liberaliter." The 21th chapter of Matthew, with the corre- sponding paragraphs of the other two Gospels, treats of the same subject, though in much briefer compass. It may be regarded as the ground- work of chaps, iv.-xi. of the Apocalypse, and should be carefully compared by the interpreter. The second division, chaps, xii.-xix., depicts the sufferings inflicted on the church by the heathen Roman power, and the triumph of Chris- tianity over this formidable enemy also. Here the writer has special reference to the cruel Nero, as ch. xvii. 10, 11, which can only be consistently interpreted of him, demonstrates. This part com- mences with a description of the Saviour's birth, who is represented as springing from the theocracy or theocratic church, and of Satan's malignity against him. Cast out of heaven by Michael and the good angels, Satan turns his rage upon the followers of Christ on earth. Hitherto 1here is no account of the Romish persecuting power ; and it is an inquiry worthy of attention, why John com- mences with the birth of the Saviour and Satan's opposition to the early church, thus reverting to a period prior to that which had been gone over already. Why does not the seer carry on the series of symbolic predictions from the destruction of the Jewish power ? Why does he not commence at the point where, in the preceding chapter, he had left off? The question is not easily answered. It cannot well be doubted that the brief notice of the Saviour's birth, and of Satan's unsuccessful attempt upon heaven and the holy child, is merely introductory to the proper subject. Perhaps John carries the reader back to the origin of Chris- tianity, when Satan was peculiarly active, in order to link his malignant opposition as embodied in the persecuting violence of heathen Rome, to his unceasing attacks upon the truth even from the very birth of Christ. This would serve to keep up in the reader's recollection the memory of Satan's past opposition to religion, and also prepare for a readier apprehension of symbols descriptive of his further malevolence. The second part therefore begins, properly speaking, with the 13th chapter, the 12th being simply preparatory. A beast rises out of the sea with seven heads and ten horns. To it the dragon gives power. The heathen power of Rome, aided by Satan, makes war upon the saints and overcomes them. Presently another beast appears to assist the former, with two horns, as a lamb, but speaking as a dragon. This latter symbolizes the heathen priests assisting the civil power in its attempts to crush the Saviour's adherents. Then comes the vision of the Lamb and the 144,000 elect on REVELATION, BOOK OF. Mount Sion. Doubtless this vision is introduced at the present place to sustain and elevate the hopes of the struggling Christians during the dominance of this power. Such as had passed triumphant through the fiery trials sing a new song of victory, in the undisturbed possession of •everlasting happiness. Three angels are now in- troduced with proclamations of the speedy down- fall of heathenism, and of divine judgments on the persecuting power. The first announces that the everlasting Gospel should be preached ; the second, that the great city Rome is fallen. The third speaks of tremendous judgments that should befall those who apostatized to heathenism ; while, on the other hand, a voice from heaven proclaims the blessedness of such as die in the Lord. But the final catastrophe is yet delayed : it is not fully come. The Saviour again appears sitting on a white cloud, with a sharp sickle in his hand. Three angels also appear with sickles, and the harvest is reaped. The catastrophe rapidly ap- proaches. Seven angels are seen with seven vials, which are successively poured out on the seat of the beast. The first six are represented as tor- menting and weakening the Roman power in different ways, until it should be overthrown. At last the seventh angel discharges his vial of wrath, and heaven resounds with the cry, It is done, while voices, thunders, lightnings, and a mighty earthquake, conspire to heighten the terror and complete the catastrophe. Rome is divided into three parts ; the cities of the heathen fall ; the islands (lee away, and the mountains sink. Men, tormented, blaspheme God. Alter this, the destruction of the Romish power is described more particularly. The writer enters into detail. An angel takes the seer to show him more closely the desolation of the church's enemy. The Roman power then reigning is indicated somewhat myste- riously, though in such a way as would be intel- ligible to the Christians whom John addressed. This power is embodied and personified in Nero, who, though not named, is yet not obscurely de- signated. He is the beast ' that was, and is not, and yet is.' 'The story that Nero was not really dead, but had retired to the Euphrates, and would return again from thence, appears here more fully delineated by a Christian imagination. He is the monster to whom Satan gave all his power, who returns as Antichrist and the destroyer of Rome, who will force all to worship his image. The Roman empire at that time is set forth as the representative of heathenism, and of ungodly power personified ; and in this connection, under the image of the beast with seven heads (the seven emperors which would succeed one another till the appearance of Antichrist), Nero is signified as one of these heads (xiii. 3), which appeared dead, but whose deadly wound was healed, so that to universal astonishment he appeared alive again. Nero, re-appearing after it had been be- lieved that, he was dead, is the beast ' which was, and is not, and shall ascend out. of the bottomless pit — and yet is' (Rev. xvii. 8), (Neander, History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, translated by Ryland, vol. ii. p. 53, note). After this, Babylon or the Roman power, is represented as fallen, and the few remaining believers are exhorted to depart out of her. A mighty angel casts a great stone into the sea, an emblem of the rjiin of thai power. At the cata- VOL. II. REVELATION, BOOK OF. 625 strophe heaven resounds with praises. The mar- riage-supper of the Lamb is announced, and the church is permitted tu array herself in fine linen. But the destruction is not yet completed. Another act in the great drama remains. A battle is to be fought with the combined powers of the empire. Heaven opens. The conqueror on the white horse appears again, and an angel calls upon the fowls to come and eat the flesh of the Lord's enemies, for the victory is certain. Accordingly, the beast and the false prophet are taken and cast alive into the lake of fire and brimstone. The congregated hosts are slain by the word of the Redeemer. Such is the second great catastrophe, the fall of the persecuting heathen power — the triumph of Christianity over paganism. The third leading division of the book reaches from ch. xx. to xxii. 6, inclusive. This is the only portion that stretches to a period far remote from the time of the writer. It is added to com- plete the delineation of Christ's kingdom on earth. Though his main design was accomplished in the preceding chapters, John was reluctant, so to speak, to leave the sublime theme without glancing at distant times, when the triumphs of righteousness should be still more marked atid diffusive, when Satan's power should be remarkably restrained, and the last great conflict of heathen and anti- christian power with the Redeemer should ter- minate for ever the church's existence on earth : ushering in the general judgment, the everlasting woe of the wicked, and the glorified state of the righteous. Here the writer's sketches are brief and rapid. But when we consider the place in which they are introduced, the inconceivable na- ture of the happiness referred to, and the ten- dency of minds the most Christianized to attach sensuous ideas to figures descriptive of everlasting misery and endless felicity, their brevity is amply justified. A glorious period now commences, but how long after the preceding events is not affirmed. That a considerable interval may be assumed we deduce from the description itself. Satan is bound, or his influences restrained, a thousand years, throughout the seat of the beast. Clnis- tianity is spread abroad and prevails in the Roman empire. But after the thousand years are expired, Satan is set free and begins again to practise his deceptions. He incites Gog and Magog to battle. The camp of the saints and the beloved city are invaded by the assembled hosts. But fire from heaven devours the adversaries, while the devil is again taken and cast into the lake of fire. After this (how long is unknown) comes the general resurrection, the last judgment, and the doom of the wicked. For the righteous a new heaven and a new earth are prepared, in which they shall be perfectly free from sin and cor- ruption. With this the visions end, and an epilogue closes up the book. From the preceding outline it will be seen that the body of the work consists of three leading divisions, in which are pourtrayed the proceedings of God towards the Jews; the rise and progress of the Christian church, till through much struggling it possessed the Roman empire, partly by convert- ing and partly destroying the heathen ; the mil- lennium, succeeded by the resurrection and judg- ment, and the glorious felicity of the saints in the heavenly Jerusalem. In this summary view of the contents, it has 2s 626 REVELATION, BOOK OF. been found inconvenient to introduce any thing in the way of exposition beyond general remarks and hints. As to diversities of sentiment in regard to the interpretation of different portions, our limits will not admit of their statement, much less an examination of their respective merit. In opposition to the majority of German writers, as Meek-, Schott, Liicke, Ewald, De Wette, and others, the existence of a catastrophe at the ter- mination of the 11th chapter has been assumed. A primary reason for so doing is the mention of great thunderings (voices) in heaven (xi. 15), which are always the emblems of fearful judg- ments. Accordingly, in the parallel phrase (x. 3), it is said that seven thunders uttered their voices, denoting the signal and complete blow about to be inflicted on Jerusalem — the destruc- tion consummated in the third and last woe (xi. 14). In like manner, at the destruction of heathen Rome there were 'voices and thunders and lightnings' (xvi. 18). It were useless to re- count the different expositions of ch. xvii. 10. We have adopted the only one that appears to be tenable in connection with the surrounding context. Lucke's view is the most plausible, and has therefore gained the assent of Neander, Reuss, and others. Hug's must be regarded as unfortunate. The position of the Millennium is a matter of great difficulty. Professor Bush contends that it should be regarded as commencing somewhere between a.d. 395 and a.d. 450, and terminating not far from the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, a.d. 1453. Not very dissimilar is the opinion of Hammond, viz., that the period in question reaches from Constantine's edict in favour of Christianity to the planting of Moham- medanism in Greece by Othman. In either case the Millennium is past. To the hypothesis so ably supported by Bush we hesitate to accede, because the description given in the 20th chapter is extravagantly figu- rative as appropriated to any period of the church's history already past ; and also because his in- terpretation of the dragon appears inconsistent with the second verse of the 20th chapter. Ac- cording to this ingenious writer, the dragon is the mystic name of Paganism in its leading cha- racter of idolatry and despotism combined, an hypothesis apparently countenanced by the 12th chapter, which the reader is requested to examine. But it will be observed, that in the 20th chapter, the beast and the false prophet are expressly dis- tinguished from the dragon; so that by the dragon Satan alone must be meant as distinct from the civil and ecclesiastical power of heathen imperial Rome. The beast had been already cast into the lake before Satan was thrown into the same place, and by the former is obviously meant the civil despotism of Paganism. In regard to the period described in Rev. xxi., xxii., denoted by the new heavens and the new earth, we are quite aware of the opinion main- tained by Hammond, Hug, Bush, and others, viz., that it comprises an earthly flourishing state of the church. Yet we must freely confess, notwithstanding the very able manner in which it has been advocated by Bush, that there is a degree of unsatisfactoriness about it. The paral- lelism instituted between John's description and Isaiah liv. 11, 12; lx.3-11; lxv. 17, 18, 19, 20, REVELATION, BOOK OF. is striking, but not demonstrative of that for which it is instituted. The imagery indeed is substan- tially the same, and probably the New Testa- ment seer imitated Isaiah; but the strain of the former rises far higher than the sublime vision depicted by the ancient prophet. VIII. Some errors into which the expounders of the book have fallen. — It would not be an easy task to enumerate all the mistakes committed by interpreters in the field- of prophecy as unfolded in the Apocalypse. We shall cursorily glance at a few in connection with their causes. 1. When the historic basis is abandoned, ima- gina4ion has ample range for her wildest, extra- vagances. The Apocalyptic visions are based upon time and' place — elements that ought never to be neglected by the exegetical inquirer. Thus we are informed that the things must shortly come to pass (i. 1), and that the time is at hand (ver. 3). So also in chap, xxii., it is stated, that the things must shortly be done (ver. 6), while the Saviour affirms, ' Behold, I come quickly' (ver. 7, 20). These notices are significant as to the period to which the visions principally refer ; and the coming of Christ, announced to take place within a short time, denotes those re- markable judgments which impended- over his enemies. There are also mentioned three cities forming the theatre of the sublime and terrible occurrences described. 1. Sodom, Egypt, de- signated as the place where our Lord was cruci- fied, and the holy city. This can mean none other place than Jerusalem. 2. Babylon, built on seven hills. This is Rome. 3. The New Jeru- salem. The first two are doomed to destruction. They also depict Judaism and heathenism ; fur when the capitals fell, the empires sank into feeble- ness and decay. The New Jerusalem, the king- dom of the blessed, succeeds the two formeu as a kingdom that shall never be moved. There are also historic personages that appear in the book.' The seven Roman emperors are mentioned, while Nero in particular is significantly referred to. Now, except the interpreter keep to historic ground, he will assuredly lose himself in endless conjectures, as is exemplified in a remarkable manner by the anonymous author of Ilyponoia (New York, 1814, Svo.), who supposes the book to be 'an unveiling of the mysterious truths of Christian doctrine, with an exhibition of certain opposite errors — a revelation made by Jesus Christ of himself — an intellectual manifestation.' 2. Others have fallen into grievous error by seeking a detailed history of the church universal in the Revelation. Some even find an epitome of the church's entire history in the Epistles to the Seven Churches; others, in the rest of the book ; others again in both. Agreeably to such a scheme, particular events are assigned to par- ticular periods, persons are specified, peoples are characterized, and names assigned with the greatest particularity. The ablest interpreters after this fashion are Vitringa, Mede, and Faber ; but the entire plan of proceeding is inconsistent with the writer's original purpose, and leads to endless mazes. 3. It is obvious that we should not look for a circumstance, event, or person, corresponding to every particular in the visions of the seer. ' It is unnecessary to remark,' says Hug, ' that all the particular traits and images in this large work xiEVELATION, BOOK OF. are by no means significant. Many are intro- duced only to enliven the representation, or are taken from the prophets and sacred books for the purpose of ornament ; and no one who has any judgment in such matters will deny that the work is extraordinarily rich and gorgeous for a pro- duction of Western origin' (Fosdick's Transla- tion, p. 668). 4. The principle of synchronisms has been largely adopted by interpreters since the times of Mede and Vitringa. For an explanation and defence of such a system, we refer the reader to Mede's Clavis Apocalyptica (ffrorks, fol. London, 1677, p. 419, sq.), where it is fully drawn out. The method so ingeniously devised by this learned writer has been followed by the great majority of English expositors, especially by Faber in his Sacred Calendar of Prophecy. In this way the same events are said to be represented by a suc- cession of different series of symbols, the symbols being varied, but the things intended by them re- maining the same. Instead, therefore, of the book being progressive continuously, it is progressive and retrogressive throughout. Such a plan, so unlike that of the other prophetic books of Sbrip- ture, is repugnant to the sober sense of every in- telligent student of the Divine word. It intro- duces complication and enigma sufficient to ensure its rejection. Not a hint is given by John of any such method. It was left for the in- genuity of after ages to decipher ; and when dis- covered by the ' father of prophetic interpretation,' as Mede is frequently called, it is difficult to be understood even by the learned reader. There is no good reason for supposing that the series of events symbolized does not progress. The repre- sentation is progressive, just, as the events recorded by history are progressive. 5. On the designations of time which occur so frequently in the Apocalypse, this is not the place to enlarge. The entire subject is yet un- settled. Those who take a day for a year must prove the correctness and Scriptural basis of such a principle. This is quite necessary after the arguments advanced by Maitland and Stuart to show that a day means no more than a day, and a year a year. We do not suppose that all, or most of the numbers are to be taken arithmetically. The numbers seven and three, especially, recur so often as to suggest the idea of their being em- ployed indefinitely for poetic costume alone. Yet there may be special reasons in the context of particular passages for abiding by the exact num- bers stated.* By far the greater number of works on the Apocalypse are of no value, the authors having failed to perceive the primary purpose of the apostle. We shall only mention a few ; to enu- merate all would be impossible. (a.) Works on the literature of the book. (i.) Commentaries. («.) The best book on the literature of the Apocalypse is that of Li'tcke, published in 1832. It is both copious and excellent. In addition to it may be mentioned the Introductions of Mi * Against, the view of Maitland and Stuart, see Birk's First Elements of Sacred Prophecy, and Bush's Hierophant; compare also an article in the Eclectic Review for December, 1844, by the present writer. REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. 627 chaelis, Haenlein, Eichhom, Bertholdt, Hug, Feilmoser, De Wette, Credner, Schott, Guerike; Bleek"s Beitriige zur Kritik der Ojfenbarung Jo- hannis (in the Zeitschrift of Sclileiermacher, De Wette, and Liicke, ii. 252, sq.) ; Kleuker, Ueber Ursprung und Zweck der Offenbar. Jo- hannis ; Steudel, Ucber die richtige Auffassung der Apocalypse (in Bengel's A". Archiv, iv. 2) ; the Treatises of Kolthoff, Lange, and Dannemann, already referred to ; Knittel's Beitriige zur Kritik uber Johannis Ojfenbarung ; Vogel's Commen- tatio de Apoc. Johannis, pt. i vii. ; Neamler's History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church; Olshausen's Proof of the Genuineness of the Writings of the Xeio Testa- ment (translated by Fosdick, Audover, 1838); Lardner's Credibility of the Gospel History, vols. i. and iii. 4to. edition ; Hiivern'ick in the Evangelische Kirchenzeitung, and Lucubra- iiones already quoted. (b.) Pareus, Ghotius, Vitringa. Eichhom, Hein- richs, Scholz, Ewald, Tinius, Bossuet, Alcassar, Hentenius, Salmeron, Herrenschneider, Hagen. Of English works Lowman's Commentary has been highly esteemed, though his scheme is wrong. Mede's Clavis and the Commentary attached to it, have Had great influence on subsequent writers ; Faber's Sacred Calendar of Prophct-y is able and ingenious, but radically wiong; Sir Isaac New- ton's Observations on the Apocalypse, and Bishop Newton's Remarks, are generally incorrect. Cun- ninghame has written various treatises illustrative of the Apocalypse, but his lucubrations are dart and doubtful. Woodhouse's Commentary is per- vaded by commendable diligence and sobriety, though he has greatly deviated from the right mode of interpretation. We specially recom- mend Hammond and Lee(Siz Sermons on the Study of the Holy Scriptures, London, 1830, 8vo.), who have perceived the right principle lying at the basis of a correct exposition ; to which may be added the Latin Notes of Grotius, and the perspicuous German Commentary of Tinius. The latest and largest work on the Apocalypse that has appeared in England is Elliott's Hora Apo- calyptica, in 3 vols. 8vo., characterised by great research and minute investigation, but proceeding on principles essentially and fundamentally er- roneous. Valuable suggestions in regard to the interpre- tation may be found in Stuart's Hints o?i the In- terpretation of Prophecy ; Bush's Hierophant; or, Monthly Journal of Sacred Symbols and Pro- phecy ; as also in the various Introductions and Treatises mentioned under (a.). — S. D. REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS [Apocry- pha]. The Apocalyptic character, which is oc- cupied in describing the future splendour of the Messianic kingdom and its historical relations, presents itself for the first time in the book of Daniel,* which is thus characteristically distin- guished from the former prophetical books. In the only prophetical book of the New Testament, the Apocalypse of St. John, this idea is fully developed, and the several apocryphal revelations are mere imitations, more or less happy, of these two canonical books, which furnished ideas to a * See the able remarks on the age of this book in the Publication of the Christian Advocate (W. H. Mill, D.D.) for 1841. 2s2 628 REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. numerous class of writers in the first ages of the Christian church. The principal spurious reve- lations extant have been published by Fabricius, in his Cod. Pseudep. V.T., and Cod. Apoc. N. T. ; and their character has been still more critically examined in recent times by Archbishop Lau- rence (who has added to their number!, by Nitzsch, Bleek, atid others ; and especially by Dr. Liieke, in his Einleitung in die Offenbarung Johan. unci die gesammte apocalyptische Litte- ratur. To this interesting work we are in a great measure indebted for much of the informa- tion contained in the present article. We shall first treat of the apocryphal reve- lations no longer extant, which are the following, viz. : — 1. The Apocalypse of Elias. 2. The Apoca- lypse of Zephaniah. 3. The Apocalypse of Ze- chariah. 4. The Apjcalypse of Adam. 5. The Apocalypse of Abraham. 6. The Apocalypse of Moses. 7. The Prophecies of Hystaspes. S. The Apocalypse of Peter. 9. The Apocalypse of Paul. 10. The Apocalypse of Cerinthus. 11. The Apo- calypse of Thomas. 12. The Apocalypse of the proto-martyr Stephen. The first three are referred to by St. Jerome (Ep. ad Pammach.), and cited as lost apocryphal books in an ancient. MS. of the Scriptures in the Coislinian Collection (ed. Montfaucon, p. 194). The Apocalypse of Adam, and that of Abraham, are cited by Epiphanius (Hares, xxxi. 8) as gnostic productions. The Apocalypse of Moses, mentioned by Syncellus (Chronog.) and Cedrenus (Comp. Hist), fragments of which have been published by Fabricius (ut supra), is conjectured by Grotius to have been a forgery of one of the ancient Christians. The Prophecies of Hystaspes were in use among the Christians in the second century. This was apparently a pagan production, but is cited by Justin Martyr, in his Apology, as agree- ing with the Sibylline oracles in predicting the destruction of the world by lire. Clemens Alex- andrinus (Strom, vi.) and Lactantius (Instil, vii. 15) also cite passages from these prophecies, which bear a decidedly Christian character. The Apocalypse of Peter is mentioned by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 3. 25), and was cited by dement of Alexandria, in his Adumbrations, now lost (Euseb. I. c. vi. 14). Some fragments of it have, however, been preserved by Clement, in his Selections from the lost Prophecies of Theodotus the Gnostic, and are published in Grabe's Spicilegium (vol. i. p. 74, sq.). From these we can barely collect that this Apocalypse con- tained some melancholy prognostications, which seem to be directed against the Jews, and to refer to the destruction of their city and nation. This work is cited as extant in the ancient fragment of the canon published by Muratori, a document of the second or third century, with this proviso, that ' some of us are unwilling that it be read in the church ;' as is perhaps the signifi- cation of the ambiguous passage, 'Apocalypsis Johannis et Petri tantum recipimus ; quam qui- dam ex nostris legi in ecclesia nolunt.' Eusebius designates it at one time as ' spurious,' and at another as ' heretical.' From a circumstance mentioned by Sozomen (Hist. Eccles. vii. 19), viz., that it was read in* some churches in Palestine on all Fridays in the year down to the REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. fifth century, Lticke infers that it was a Jewish- Christian production (of the second century), and of the same family with the Preaching of Peter. It is uncertain whether this work is the same that is read by the Copts among what they call the apocryphal books of Peter. There was also a work under the name of the Apocalypse of Peter by his Disciple Clement, an account of which was transmitted to Pope Honorius by Jacob, bishop of Acre in the thirteenth century, written in the Saracenic language; but this has been conjectured to be a later work, originating in the time of the Crusades. In the ancient Latin stichometry in Cotelerius (Apostolic Fathers'), the Apocalypse of Peter is said to contain 2070 stichs, and that of John 1 200. It is cited as an apocryphal bock in the Indiculus Scripturarum after the Qnosstiones of Anastasius of Niccea, together with the Apocalypse of Ezra and that of Paul. There is in the Bodleian Library a MS. of an Arabic Apocalypse of Peter, of which Nicoll has furnished an extract in his catalogue, and which may possibly be a transla- tion of the Greek Apocalypse. The Apocalypse of St. Paul is mentioned by Augustine (Tract. 98 in Ev. Joan.), who asserts that it abounds in fables, and was an invention to which occasion was furnished by 2 Cor. xii. 2-4. This appears from Epiphanius (Hceres. xxxviii. 2) to have been an anti-Jewish Gnostic production, and to be identical with the av&pari- kov of Paul, used only by the anti- Jewish sec£ of Gnostics called Cainites. It is said by So- zomen (Hist. Eccles. vii. 19) to have been held ft great esteem. It was also known to Theophylac and GScumenius (on 2 Cor. xii. 4), and to Nic© phorrs in the ninth century (Can. 3, 4). Wh» ther this is the same work which DuPin (Proleg. and Canon) says is still extant among the CopU is rendered more than doubtful by Fabricius (Cod. Apoc. ii. p. 954) and Grabe (Spicileg. i. p. S5). The Revelation of St. Paid, contained in an Oxford MS., is shown by Grabe (I. c.) to be a much later work. Theodosius of Alexandria ('EpajT^yUctTa Trepl rrpoffaSiaiy) says that the Apo- calypse of St. Paul is not a work of the apostle, but of Paul of Samosata, from whom the Pauli- eians derived their name. The Revelation of Paid is one of the spurious works condemned by Pope Gelasius, together with the Revelations of St. Thomas and St. Stephen. The Apocalypse of Cerinthus is mentioned by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 28), and by Theodoret (Fab. Hceret. ii. 3). Eusebius describes it. as a re- velation of an earthly and sensual kingdom of Christ, according to the heresy of the Chiliasts. Of the Revelations of St. Thomas and St. Stephen, we know nothing beyond their con- demnation by Pope Gelashis, except that Sixtus of Sienna observes that, according to Serapion, they were held in great repute by the Manichees ; but in the works of Serapion which we now possess there is no allusion to this. There is, how- ever, an unpublished MS. of Serapion in the Hamburg Library, which is supposed to contain a more complete copy of his work. We now proceed to treat of the extant spurious Revelations. The Ascension and the Vision of Isaiah ('AvafiaTiKbi/ kclL "Opcxris Hcrai'ov), although for a long time lost to the world, was a work well REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. Known to the ancients, as is indicated by the allusions of Justin Martyr, Origen, Tertullian, and Epiphanius. The first of these writers (Dial. c. Tryph. ed. Par. p. 349) refers to the account therein contained of the death of Isaiah, who ' was sawn asunder with a wooden saw ;' a fact, he adds, ' which was removed by tire Jews from the sacred text.' Tertullian also (De Patientid), among other examples from Scripture, refers to the same event ; and in the next (the third) century Origen (Epist. ad African.), after stating that the Jews were . accustomed to remove many things from the knowledge of the people, which they neverthe- less preserved in apocryphal or secret writings, adduces as an example the death of Isaiah, ' who was sawn asunder, as stated in a certain apocry- phal writing, which the Jews perhaps corrupted in order to throw discredit on the whole.' In his Comm. in Matt, he refers to the same events, ob- serving, that if this apocryphal work is not of sufficient authority to establish the account of the prophet's martyrdom, it should be believed upon the testimony borne to that work by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. xi. 37) ; in the same manner as the account of the death of Zechariah should be credited upon the testimony borne by our Saviour to a writing not found in the common and published books (ko'ivois koL SeS^eu- fjiii/oLS fiifiAlois), but probably in an apocryphal work. Origen cites a passage from the apocryphal account of the martyrdom of Isaiah, in one of his Homilies (ed. De la Rue, vol. iii. p. 108). The Apostolical Constitutions also refer to the apocry- phal books of Moses, Enoch, Adam, and Isaiah, as writings of some antiquity. The first writer, however, who mentions the Ascension of Isaiah by name is Epiphanius, in the fourth century, who observes (Hceres. xl.) that the apocryphal Ascension of Isaiah was ad- duced by the Archonites in support of their opi- nions respecting the seven heavens and their archons or ruling angels, as well as by the Egyptian Hieracas and his followers in con- firmation of their heretical opinions respecting the Holy Spirit, at the same time citing the passage from the 'AvafSarMiv to which they refer (Ascens. of Isaiah, ix. 27, 32-36 ; xi. 32, 33). Jerome also (in Esai. lxiv. 4) expressly names the work, asserting it to be an apocryphal production, ori- ginating in a passage in the New Testament (1 Cor. ii. 9). St. Ambrose(0/;/>. i. p. 1124) cites a passage contained in it, but only as a tradi- tionary report, 'plerique ferunt ' (Ascens. Is. v. 4-8) ; and the author of the Imperfect Work on Matt., a work of the fifth century, erroneously attributed to St. Chrysostom (Chrysost. Opp. horn. 1.), evidently cites a passage from the same work (Ascens. i. 1, &c). After this period all trace of the book is lost until the eleventh cen- tury, when Euthymius Zigabenus informs us that the Messalian heretics made use of that 'abo- minable pseudepigraphal work, the Vision of Isaiah.' It was also used (most probably in a Latin version) by (he Cathari in the 'West (P. Moneta, Ado. Catharos, ed. Rich. p. 218). The Vision of Isaiah is also named in a cata- logue of canonical and apocryphal books in a Paris MS. (No. 1789), after the (latest, et liesp. of Anastasius (Cotelerius, P. P. Apost. i. p. 197, 349). Sixtus of Sienna (Bill. Sanct. 1566) states that the Vision of Isaiah, as distinct from REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. 629 the Anavasis (as he calls it), had been printed at Venice. Referring to this last publication, the late Archbishop Laurence observes that he had hoped to find in some bibliographical work a further notice of it, but that he had searched in vain ; concluding at the same time that it must have been a publication extracted from the Ascension of Isaiah, or a Latin translation of the Vision, as the title of it given by Sixtus was, ' Visio admirabilis Esaiae ' prophetae in raptu mantis, quae divinae Tiinitatis arcana, et lapsi generis humani redemptionem conduct.' Dr. Laurence observes also that the mode of Isaiah's death is further in accordance with a Jewish tra- dition recorded in the Talmud (Tract Jebammoth, iv.) ; and he supposes that Mohammed may nave founded his own journey through seven different heavens on this same apocryphal work. He shows at the same time, by an extract from the Raboih, that the same idea of the precise number of seven heavens accorded with the Jewish creed. There appeared now to be little hopes of re- covering the lost Ascension of Isaiah, when Dr. Laurence (then Regius Professor of Hebrew in the University of Oxford) had the good fortune to purchase from a bookseller in Drury Lane an Ethiopic MS. containing the identical book, to- gether with the canonical book of Isaiah and the fourth (called in the Ethiopic the first) book of Esdras. It is entitled the Ascension of the Pro- phet Isaiah, the first five chapters containing the martyrdom, and the six last (for it is divided in the MS. into chapters and verses) the Ascension' or Vision of Isaiah. At the end of the canonical book are the words, ' Here ends the Prophet Isaiah ;' after which follows ' The Ascension,' &c, concluding with the words, ' Here ends Isaiah the Prophet, with his Asceusion.' Then follows a postscript, from which it appears that it was transcribed for a priest named Aaron, at the cost of a piece of fine cloth, twelve measures long and four broad. The Ascension of Isaiah was published by Dr. Laurence at Oxford in 1819, with a new Latin and an English version. This discovery was first applied to the illustration of Scripture by Dr. Gesenius (Comm. on Isaiah). Some time afterwards the indefatigable Dr. An- gelo Mai (Nova Collect. Script. Vet. e Vat. Codd. Rom. 1828j published two Latin fragments as an appendix to his Sermon. Arian. Fragment. Antiquiss., which he conjectured to be portions of some ancient apocryphal writings. Niebuhr, however, perceived them to be fragments of the Ascension and Vision oflsaiah ; and Dr. Nitzsch (Nachweisiing ziceyer B'ruchstiicke, &c, in the Theolog. Stud, und Kritik 1830) was enabled to compare them with the two corresponding por- tions (ii. 1 1-iii. 12; vii. 1-19) of the Ethiopic version. Finally, in consequence of the more complete notice of the Venetian edition of the Latin version given by Panzer (Annul. Typog. viii. p. 473), Dr. Gieseler had a strict search made for it, which was eventually crowned with suc- cess, a copy being discovered in the Library at Munich. This work, the date of whose impression was 1522, contained also the Gospel of JYieo- dewus, and the Letter of Lcntulus to the Roman Senate. The Latin version contains the ]'ision only, corresponding to the last seven chapters of the Ethiopic version. The subject of the first nart is the martyrdom 030 REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. of Isaiah, who is here said to have been sawn asunder in consequence of the vis-ions which he related to Hezekiah, in the twenty-sixth year of the reign of that monarch, and which are recorded in the first four chapters. These relate princi- pally to the coming of 'Jesus Christ the Lord' from the seventh heaven ; his being changed into the form of a man ; the preaching of his twelve apostles ; his final rejection and suspension on a tree, in company with the workers of iniquity, on the day before the Sabbath ; the spread of the Christian doctrine ; the last judgment ; and his return to the seventh heaven. Before this, how- ever, the arch-fiend Berial is to descend on earth, in the form of an impious monarch, the murderer of his mother, where, after his image is worshipped in every city for three years, seven months, and twenty-seven days, he and his powers are to be dragged into Gehenna. The second portion of the work gives a prolix account of the prophet's ascent through seven heavens, each more resplendent and more glorious than the other. It contains distinct prophetical allusions to the miraculous birth of Christ of the Virgin Mary at Bethlehem ; his crucifixion, re- surrection, and ascension ; and the worship of ' the Father, his beloved Christ, and the Holy Spirit.' The mode of the prophet's own death is also an- nounced to him. The whole work, observes its learned translator, is 'singularly characterized by simplicity of narration, by occasional sublimity of description, and by richness as well as vigour of imagination.' Dr. Laurence conceives that the writer had no design of imposing upon the world a spurious production of his own as that of the prophet's, but rather of composing a work, avowedly fictitious, but accommodated to the character, and consistent with the prophecies, of him to whom it is ascribed. As to the age of this work, Dr. Laurence sup- poses, from the obvious reference to Nero, and the period of three years, seven months, and twenty- seven days, and again of three hundred and thirty-two days, after which Berial was to be dragged to Gehenna, that the work was written after the death of Nero (which took place on the 9th June, a.d. 68), but before the close of the year 69. Liicke, however (Einleitung in die Ojfenbarung Joh'an.'), looks upon these numbers as purely arbitrary and apocalyptical, and main- tains that, the dogmatical character of the work, the allusion to the corruptions of the church, the absence of all reference to the destruction of Je- rusalem, and the Chiliastic view, all point to a later period. All that can be considered as cer- tain respecting its date is, that the first portion was extant before the time of Origen, and the whole before Epiphanius. It has been doubted whether the work does not consist of two inde- pendent productions, which were afterwards united into one, as in the Ethiopic version ; but this is a question impossible to decide in the ahsence of the original. The Latin fragments discovered by Mai correspond literally with the Et.hiopic, while they not only differ from the Venetian edi- tion in single phrases, but the latter contains passages so striking as to induce the supposition that it is derived from a later recension of the original text. The author was evidently a Jewish Christian;, as appears from the use made of the Talmudical REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS, legend already referred to, as well as by bis re« presenting the false accuser of Isaiah as a Sama- ritan. The work also abounds in Gnostic, Va- lentinian, and. Ophitic notions, such as the ac- count of the seven heavens, and the presiding angels of the first five, the gradual transmutation of Christ until his envelopment in the human form, and finally the docetic conception of his history on earth. All this has induced Liicke (ut siqora) to consider the whole to be a Gnostic production of the second or third century, of which, however, the martyrdom was first written. Dr. Laurence finds so strong a resemblance be- tween the account of the seven heavens here, and in the Testament of Levi (Twelve Patriarchs), that he suspects the latter to ' betray a little plagiarism.' If this learned divine were right in his conjecture respecting the early age of this pro- duction, it would doubtless afford an additional testimony (if such were wanting) to the antiquity of the belief in the miraculous conception and the proper deity of Jesus, who is here called the Beloved, the Lord, the Lord God, and the Lord Christ. In respect, however, to another passage, in which the Son and Holy Spirit are represented as worshipping God, the learned prelate truly observes that this takes place only in the character of angels, which they had assumed. Dr. Liicke observes that the drapery only of the apocalyptic element of this work is Jewish, the internal character being altogether Christian. But in both form and substance there is an evi- dent imitation, if not of the Apocalypse of St. John, at least of the book of Daniel and of the Sibylline oracles. The use of the canonical Apo- calypse Liicke (I. c. § 16) considers to be un- deniable in viii. 45 (comp. Rev. xxii. 8 9 • vii. 21-23 ; Rev. xix. 10). Of the ancient Greek poems called tne Sibyl- line Oracles (written in hexameter verse), there was formerly a considerable number in use, of which but few have descended to our times. Servius, in the fifth century, mentions a hundred books (sermones, \6yoi) ; and Suidas, who lived most probably in the eleventh, speaks of twenty- four books of the Chaldsean sibyls alone. But eight only were known to the moderns, until the recent discoveries of Angelo Mai, who has recovered and published an eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth book from palimpsests in the Ambrosian and Vatican libraries (Script. Vet. Nov. Collect, vol. iii. p. 3-). The first eight books have been shown to be the compositions of various writers from the commencement of the second century B.C. to a.d. 500. Of these, the earliest in point of date is supposed to be the third book, containing a series of connected pre- dictions written by an Alexandrian Jew in the time of the Maccabees, but containing heathen poems of a still earlier period. The subject is continued by another Alexandrian Jew, who lived about forty years before the Christian era. Notwithstanding the later Christian interpolations by winch this document has been disfigured, it forms a valuable collection of Sibylline oracles respecting the Messiah, anterior to the Christian era. It concludes with another addition, written partly in the third century and partly at a still later period. But before this period, the fourth and fifth books come in, the former of which was REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. written by a Christian about a.d. 80 ; the latter consists of several predictions- from various authors, principally Egyptians, one of whom was an Alexandrian Jew, who wrote in the middle of the second century ; another portion is by a Jew in Asia Minor, about a.d. 20 ; and certain parts by anothei Jewish author, about a.d. 70. Bat the whole book in its present form proceeds most probably from the Jewish Christians residing at Memphis in the commencement of Adrian's reign, who collected tlie greater portion of the oracles of the first part, and united them to the third and fourth books. At least the whole three books were formed into one collection in the middle of the second century, and ascribed to one and the same sibyl. But at the close of the next century these books were completely separated, and were, together with the subsequent books then written (sixth, seventh, and eighth), each attributed to a distinct prophetess. Of these, the earliest in point of date is the eighth book, part of which was composed about a.d. 170-180, and the entire finished at the end of the third century, — when it was united with the others, as we learn from Lac- tantius. The seventh book, separate from its later interpolations, was composed by a Judaizing Christian in the third century. The sixth book appears to have been written at the close of this century by a Christian, for he speaks of Christ as the second Adam. That part called the Acrostics was constructed in the fourth century from earlier Sibylline verses. Some portions of the eighth book were probably written at this period, and intro- duced at a still later among the Sibylline oracles. The latest of all are the first and second books, written by one and the same author, who lived in the West in the middle of the fifth century. Of this motley group, the chief portions only are of an Apocalyptic character, others being purely epic, or in the form of hymns. The sibyl, as the oracle of God, predicts. the destruction of paganism in its wars on both Judaism and Chris- tianity. To this is annexed the Apocalyptic consolation and encouragement to the sufferer and oppressed among God's people. The poetic in- terest, which is a characteristic of Apocalyptic composition, both Jewish and Christian, is not lost sight of. There have been three distinct periods traced in respect to the Sibylline Revelations. The first is the Jewish, commencing at the Maccabaean period. This, observes Liicke, ' belongs to the cycle of Daniel's Apocalypse.' The second period is the Jewish Christian, having a special relation to the Antichristian character of the persecuting Nero, with an admixture of Chiliastic elements. The third period is free from Cbiliasm, and be- longs to the Christian character of the third cen- tury, embracing a species of universal history in the Sibylline form, concluding with the end of all tilings at the final judgment. It is impossible to deny the resemblance be- tween the Apocalypse of John and the Sibylline poems of the second period. ' Besides the Chili- astic elements and the reference to the return of Nero, it is common to both that the destruction of Rome forms the grand crisis of their predic- tions, and that, letters and cyphers are symbol- ically employed. But, on the other hand, what a difference ! The Sibylline oracles are cha- racterized by a dry, monotonous series of mere REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. 631 predictions, threatenings, and promises ; while the Apocalypse of John presents us with an all but dramatic development of the kingdom of God in a living picture. The most important portion for comparison with the Apocalypse is the contem- porary first oracle of the fourth book. The later pieces of this kind may have stood in conscious relation with the Apocalypse, but this is incapable of proof (Liicke, lit supra). The books discovered by Angelo Mai are much of the same character with the former, but have less of the religious element. The eleventh book contains a statement of Jewish, Greek, Macedo- nian, and Egyptian history from the Deluge to Julius Caesar. There are some single passages which resemble the third book, but the author was a different person, and was probably a Jew, who lived a short time before the Christian era. The twelfth book resembles the fifth in its com- mencement, and contains the same series of Roman emperors from Augustus, under whose reign the appearance of Christ is prominently brought for- ward. This series, which in the third book ended with Hadrian, here proceeds as far as Alex- ander Severus, passing over Sulpicius Severus. Its Christian origin is beyond question, and it may have been written after the death of Severus, a.d. 222. The thirteenth book narrates, in the Sibylline form, the wars of the Romans in the East to the middle of the third century, probably com- mencing where the former had ended. It is ob- servable that the author alludes to the mathe- matical fame of Bostra. The most prominent feature of the fourteenth book is the destruction and rebuilding of the city of Rome, which is provisioned for a whole year in expectation of a long period of adversity ; the last prince of the Latin race appears and departs, after whom comes a royal race of long duration. The whole narration points to the period of the' migration and downfall of the Western empire. The author doubtless was a Christian of the fifth century. The book called the Testaments of the twelve Patriarchs is an ancient Apocryphal work (founded most probably on Gen. xlix. 1, sq.), in which the twelve sons of Jacob are represented as delivering their dying predictions and precepts to their posterity. If we are to credit the authority of a manuscript in the Bodleian library, this work was originally written in Hebrew, and translated into Greek by St. Chrysostom. But Dr. Grabe, who first adduced this testimony, considers it very- doubtful. The author of the Latin version (from the Greek) was Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln in the thirteenth century, with the assist- ance of a Greek named Nicholas, Abbot of St. Albans. The bishop's attention was first directed to it by Archdeacon John de Basingstoke, who had seen the work during his studies at Athens. This version, whictt was first printed from very incorrect copies in 14S3, and afterwards in 1532 and 1549, was reprinted in the Orthodoxogra- pha of Grynaeiis, and in the Bibliotheca Patrum. A few specimens of the original were printed at various times by Cotelerius (Xot. in Script. ApostoL), Gale (Annot. in Jamblich.), and Wharton (Auctarium) ; but it was reserved for the learned Dr. G-rabe to give the entire work in 632 REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. tbe original Greek, in 1699, from a Cambridge manuscript on vellum (the identical MS. used by Robert of Lincoln for his translation), a copy of which was made for him by the learned Dr. John Mill, who collated it with a manuscript on paper in the Bodleian, written a.d. 1268, and annexed to it various readings from other manu- scripts. Dr. Grabe was the person who first divided the work into chapters or paragraphs, with num- bers prefixed. He added some valuable notes, which, with the originals, were republished by Fabricius in his Cod. Pseudep. V. T. This work contains many beautiful passages, and, while its form is that of a pretended pro- phecy, bears indirect testimony to the facts and books of the New Testament, the nativity, cruci- fixion, resurrection, ascension, and unblemished character of Jesus, ascribing to him such titles as evidently show that his divinity was fully recog- nised. The author testifies also to the canonical authority of the Acts of the Apostles and St. Paul's Epistles, and seems especially to allude to the four Gospels. The age of this Apocryphal work is, therefore, of considerable importance in sacred criticism. Mr. William Whiston, who has given an English translation of this work in his Authentic Records, considers it to be a genuine production, and one of the concealed (as he interprets the word Apocryphal) books of the Old Testament, maintaining that if this, and (he book of Enoch, were not written after the destruction of Jerisa'em (which he holds to be a wild notion), they are of necessity genuine and divine. Cave {Hist. Liter.) was at first disposed to place the work in the year a.d. 192, but lie subsequently regarded it as more probably written near the commencement of the second century. That the work was extant in the time of Origen appears from his observation, f We find the like sentiment in another little book, called the Testament of the twelve Patri- archs, although it is not in the canon,' viz., that by sinners are to be understood the angels of Satan (Homil. in Jos. comp. with Testament. Reuben., sect 3). Jerome also observes that there had been forged revelations of all the patri- archs and prophets. Tertullian has also been supposed to refer to it. It is cited by Procopius of Gaza, about a.d. 520 ; and in the Stichometry of Nicephorus (about a.d. 800) it is said to con- tain in the Greek 5100, and in the Latin 4800, stichs or verses [Verse]. Dr. Dodwell, from its Hellenistic character, ascribes it to the first century. The recent investigations of Dr. Nitzsch (Z>e Testamentis duodecim Patriarcharum, Wit- tenb. 1810), however, seem to leave no doubt of its having been the work of a Jewish Christian, about the beginning of the second century. The design of the writer was evidently to convert the twelve tribes to the Christian faith. For this object are introduced the Apocalyptic elements. The time of Christ's appearance is predicted. The Messiah is represented «.s both priest and king, and with this view characterized as equally sprung from the tribes of Judah and Levi. He is to appear, after many calamities, as the com- mon Saviour of Jews and Gentiles. It also con- tains revelations purely Christian, as the ever- lasting reign of Christ, the general resurrection, and the last judgment. The Apocalypse of John is referred to, if not expressly cited; and the REVELATIONS, SPURIOUS. Apocalyptical portions have evidently this for their groundwork, together with the book of Daniel, and that of Enoch, which is expressly cited as a work of authority (Levi, 2 ; Naph- thali, 5), and is consequently an earlier produc- tion. There was an altered and interpolated English translation of this book, published (as a genuine work of the twelve patriarchs) in Bristol by Richard Day, in 1813. The Fourth Book of Ezra (the^rs^ accord- ing to the Ethiopic and Arabic) [Esdras] is, from its Apocalyptic character, styled by Nicephorus (Can. 3. 4) the Apocalypse of Ezra (: ' AiroK.a\vi\/is 'RaSpa). Its original language (according to Liicke) was Greek, although it is at present extant only in a Latin, Ethiopic, and Arabic transla- tion, of which the Latin is the most ancient. The main body of the work, viz., chaps, iii.-xiv., con- tains a connected revelation, which is partly an open imitation of Daniel, and partly resembles the New Testament Apocalypse. It contains a mixture of Jewish and Christian elements. This work, as has been formerly observed, was known to Clemens Alexandrinus in the second century; and from the indication in the Introduction (ch. iii. 1), ' In the thirtieth year of" the de- struction of the city I was in Babylon,' Lucke conjectures that the author may have written in the thirtieth year after the destruction of Jerusa- lem, or a.d. 100; and this date is further confirmed by the vision of the eagle (ch. xi. ; xii.), which indicates the time of Trajan. He conceives the author to have been evidently a Jew, who lived out of Palestine, probably in Egypt, but that the variation in the several ancient versions of the work prove it to have been interpolated by a Christian hand. The first two and last two chapters (found only in the Latin, in most MSS. of which they form distinct books, the first two chapters being gene- rally named 2nd and 3rd, and the two last 5th and sometimes 6th Esdras ; see Laurence's 1 Ezra, pp. 283-287) are the work of a Christian, and are unconnected with the main body of the book. In the two first the author has imitated the canonical Apocalypse, and prefixed this portion as a kind of preface to the work ; but there is no internal character which can enable us to form any nearer conjecture as to their date. The author of the last two chapters (xv., xvi.) seems to have lived in the third or fourth century, during the Decian or Diocletian persecutions (chap. xv. 10). Rome, the Apocalyptic Babylon of the author, ap- proaches her downfall (xv. 43, sq.). Several passages of the New Testament are evidently alluded to (com]). 4 Ezra xvi. 29, sq. with Matt, xxiv. 40, 41 ; xvi. 42—45, with 1 Cor. vii. 29, 30; xv. 8, 9, with Rev. vi. 10). The whole chapter seems, indeed, to be an imitation of Malt. xxiv. (comp. also 4 Ezra i. 30 with Matt, xxiii. 37; ii. 11 with Luke xvi. 9; and ii. 12 with Rev. xxii. 2 ; also ii. 42 with Rev. xiv. 1-3 ; and ii. 18 with Rev. xxii. 1, 2). The ancient romantic fiction, entitled the Shep- herd of Hermas, is not without its Apoca- lyptic elements. These, however, are confined to book i. 3, 4 ; but they are destitute of signification or originality [Hermas], REZEPH. The Book op Enoch is one of the most curious of the spurious revelations, resembling in its out- ward form both the book of Daniel and the Apo- calypse ; but it is uncertain whether this latter work or the book of Enoch was first written [Enoch]. Professor Moses Stuart (Biblioth. Sacra, No. 2, p. 363, 1843) is of opinion that the Book of Enoch, the Ascension of Isaiah, the Testa- ments of the Twelve Patriarchs, many of the Sibyl- line Oracles, the fourth Book of Ezra, and the Pastor of Hernias, were composed ' nearly at the same time with the Apocalypse of St. John.' There was an Apocryphal Revelation of St. John extant in the time of Theodosius the Grammarian, the only one of the ancients who mentions it, and who calls it a pseudepigraphal book. It was not known what had become of it, until the identical work was recently published from a Vatican, as well as a Vienna manuscript, by Birch, in his Auctarium, under the title of • The Apocalypse of the Holy Apostle and Evan- gelist John the Divine.' From the silence of the ancients respecting this work, it could scarcely have been written before the third or fourth cen- tury. Liicke has pointed out other internal marks of a later age, as, for instance, the mention of in- cense, which he observes first came into use in the Christian church after the fourth century (al- though here the author of the spurious book may have taken his idea from Rev. v. 8; viii. 3) ; also of images and rich crosses, which were not in use before the 'fourth and fifth centuries.' The name patriarch, applied here to a dignitary in the church, belongs to the same age. The time in which Theodosius himself lived is not certainly known, but he cannot be placed earlier than the fifth cen- tury, which Liicke conceives to be the most pro- bable age of the work itself. Regarding the object and occasion of the work (which is a rather servile imitation of the genuine Apocalypse), in consequence of the absence of dates and of in- ternal characteristics, there are no certain indica- tions. Birch's text, as well as his manuscripts, abound in errors; but Thilo has collated two Paris manuscripts for his intended edition (see his Acta Thomce, Proleg. p. lxxxiii.). Assemann {Biblioth. Orient, torn. iii. pt. i. p 282) states that there is an Arabic version among the Vatican MSS.— -W. W. REZKPH (*)Sn ; Sept. 'Paa, as a city of Palmyrene (Gcog. v. 15); and this again is possibly the same with the Rasapha which Almlfeda places at nearly a day's journey west of the Euphrates. REZIN (rVI ; Sept. 'Pacurativ), the last king of Damascene-Syria, slain by Tiglath-pileser (2 Kings xv. 37; xvi. 5-10; Isa. vii. 1; viii. 4-7) [Damascus]. REZON (fit"), prince ; Sept. 'Pa&v), an offi- cer of Hadadezer, king of Zobah, who established the inde|iendence of Damascus, and made it the seat of the kingdom of Damascene-Syria, so often mentioned in the history of the Hebrew kingdoms (1 Kings xi. 23, 24) [Damascus]. RHKGIUM ('P-ftyiov), a city on the coast of Italy, near its south- western extremity, oppcsite RHODES. 633 Messina in Sicily (Acts xxviii. 13). It is now called Reggio, and is the capital of Calabria. RHODA ('Po'5t?, i. e. Rose), a servant maid mentioned in Acts xii. 13. RHODES QP65os), an island in the Mediterra- nean, near the coast of Asia Minor, celebrated frcm the remotest antiquity as the seat of commerce, na- vigation, literature, and the arts, but now reduced to a state of abject poverty by the devastations of war and the tyranny and rapacity of its Turkish rulers. It is of a triangular form, about forty-four leagues in circumference, twenty leagues long from north to south, and about six broad. In the centre is a lofty mountain named Artemira, which com- mands a view of the whole island ; of the elevated coast of Carmania on the north ; the Archipelago, studded with numerous islands, on the north-west; Mount Ida, veiled in clouds, on the south-west ; and the wide expanse of waters that wash the shores of Africa on the south and south-east. It was famed in ancient times, and is still celebrated for its delightful climate, and the fertility of its soil. The gardens are filled with delicious fruit, every gale is scented with the most powerful fragrance wafted from the groves of orange and citron-trees, and the numberless aro- matic herbs exhale such a profusion of the richest odours that the whole atmosphere seems impreg- nated with spicy perfume. It is well watered by the river Candura, and numerous smaller streams and rivulets that spring from the shady sides of Mount Artemira. it contains two cities — Rhodes, the capital, inhabited chiefly by Turks, and a small number of Jews ; and the ancient LinUus, now reduced to a hamlet, peopled by Greeks, who are almost all engaged in commerce. Besides these there are five villages occupied by Turks and a small number of Jews; and five towns and forty- one villages, inhabited by Greeks. The whole population was estimated by Savery at. 36,500; biit Turner, a later traveller, estimates them only at 20,000, of whom 14,000 were Greeks, and 6000 Turks, with a small mixtuie of Jews residing chiefly in the capital. The city of Rhodes is famous for its huge brazen statue of Apollo, called Colossus, which stood at the mouth of the harbour, and was so high that ships passed in full sail between its legs. It was the work of Chares of Lindus, the disciple of Lysippus; its height, was 126 feet, and twelve years were occupied in its construction. It was thrown down by an earthquake, in the reign of Ptolemy III., Euergetes, king of Egypt, after having stood 56 years. The brass of which it was com- posed was a load for i'00 camels. Its extremities were sustained by sixty pillars of marble, and a winding staircase led up to the top, from whence a view might be obtained of Syria, and the ships proceeding to Egypt, in a large looking-glass sus- pended to the neck of the statue. There is not a single vestige of this celebrated work of art now remaining. St. Paul appears to have visited Rhodes while on Lis journey to Jerusalem, a.b. 58 (Acts xxi. 1). ■ The .Sept. translators place the Illiodiaus among the children of Javan (Gen. x. 4\ and in this they are followed by Eusebius, Jerome, ami Isidore; but Bochart maintains that the Rliodians are too mo- dern robave'been planted thereby any immediate son of Javan, and considers tbal Closes rathe'- ir- 634 RIBLAH. RIDDLE. tended the Gauls on the Mediterranean towards the mouth of the Rhone, near Maiseilles, where there was a district called Rhodanusia, and a city of the same name. They also render Ezek. xxvii. 15, ' children of the Rhodians,' instead of, as in the Hebrew, ' children of Dedan.' Calmet considers it probable that here they read ' children of Redan or Rodan,' but that in Gen. x. 4, they read ' Dedan,' as in the Hebrew. The antiquities of Rhodes reach no farther bacK than the residence of the knights of St. John of Jerusalem. The remains of their fine old fortress, of great size and strength, are still to be seen; the cells of the knights are entire, but the sanc- tuary has been converted by the Turks into a magazine for military stores. In modern times Rhodes has been chiefly cele- brated as one of the last retreats of this military order, under whom it obtained great celebrity by its heroic resistance to the Turks ; but in the time of Solyman the Great a capitulation was agreed upon, and the island was finally surren- dered to the Turks, under whom it has since con- tinued. It is now governed by a Turkish Pacha, who exercises despotic sway, seizes upon the property of the people at his pleasure, and from whose vigi- lant rapacity scarcely anything can be concealed. Under this iron rule the inhabitants are ground to poverty, and the island is becoming rapidly depo- pulated (Coronelli, Isolandi Rodi Geografica ; Clarke's Travels; Turner's Journal; Schubert's Reise ins Morgenl.). — G. M. B. RIBLAH (n??"}; Sept. 'PaPAad/x), a town on the northern border of Palestine, in the dis- trict of Hamath, through which the Babylonians, both in their irruptions and departures, were ac- customed to pass (Num. xxxiv. 11; 2 Kings xxiii. 33; xxv. 26; Jer. xxxix. 5; lii. 10). This place is no where mentioned but in the Bible. The Jewish commentators, exchanging the *1 for "J, supposed it to denote Daphne or An- tioch (Jerome, Onomast. s. v. 'Riblatha;' and on Ezek. xlvii.). This city, however, was too far from Hamath to the north boundary of Palestine. It is perhaps represented by the site called Ribleh, which Buckingham found thirty or forty miles south of Hamath on the Orontes (Arab Tribes, p. 481). RIDDLE (nTH), literally, < something intri- cate or complicated ;' d'hiy/xtx. Gesenius de- rives the Hebrew word from the Arabic J^ ' to bend off, or tie in knots ;' and the immediate etymology usually assigned to the Greek word is ali/iacro/xaL, ' to hint obscurely.' The Hebrew word (Judg. xiv. 12-19) properly means ' a riddle or enigma; 'Sept. irp60\7]/xa ; Vulg. problema and projwsitio ; where Samson proposes to the thirty young Philistines who attended his nuptials, an enigma, derived from the circumstance o'f his having lately found a swarm of bees and honey in the skeleton of the lion, which he had killed some months before, when he had come to espouse his wife [Bee]. This riddle or enigma, though un- fair in regard to those who accepted the pledge to unravel it, because they were ignorant of the par- ticular fact by the knowledge of which alone it could be explained by them, nevertheless answers to the approved definition of an enigma, as con- sisting of an artful and abstruse proposition, put in obscure, ambiguous, and even contrary terms, in order to exercise the ingenuity of others in find- ing out its meaning. The pleasure of the propounder is derived from perplexing his hearers ; and theirs from overcom- ing the difficulty, which is usually renewed by their proposing another enigma. This kind of amusement seems to nave oeen resorted to, especially at entertainments, in all ages among different nations ; and has even been treated as an art, and reduced to rules. The chief writers on this curious subject are, Nic. Reusner (JEnigmatograpk.') and F. Menestrier. The principal rules laid down for the construc- tion of an enigma are the following : that it must be obscure, and the more obscure the better, pro- vided that the description of the thing, however covered and abstract, and in whatever remote or uncommon terms, be really correct ; and it is essential that the thing thus described be well known. Sometimes, and especially in a witty enigma, the amusement consists in describing a thing by a set of truisms, which tell their own meaning, but which confound the hea- er, through his expectation of some deep and difficult mean- ing. The greater enigma is to be rendered more intricate and knotty by a multitude of words ; the lesser may consist of only one or two remote words or allusions. The speech of Lamech to nis wives Adah and Zillah (Gen. xiv. 23, 24) is, possibly, an enig- matic mode of communicating some painful in- telligence. It is recorded (1 Kings x. 1) that the queen of Sheba came to prove Solomon niTTQ ; Sept. iv alviyixacn ; Vulg. in cenigmatibus. Jose- phus relates that Hiram, king of Tyre, tried the skill of Solomon in the same way ; and quotes Dius to attest that Solomon sent riddles to Hiram, and that the Tyrian king forfeited much money to Solomon from his inability to answer them, but redeemed it, upon a man of Tyre named Abdemon being found able to solve them {Antiq. viii. 5. 3). The description of the Messiah under the name of the Branch, 1VJ, when considered in regard to the occasion and context, may be considered as a spe- cimen of the lesser enigma (see Lowth upon the passage). ' The number of the beast ' (Rev. xiii. 18), may be also considered as an enigma. The other instances in which the Hebrew word is used all exhibit more or less of the enigmatic character. They are as follows, with the Sept. and Vulg. readings: — Num. xii. 8, where it means 'an oracle or vision,' Si' a.lviyp.a.Twv, non per cenigmata et figuras (Moses) dominym videt ; Ps. xlix. 5, 'a song,' ■Kp6^Xn)jxa, propositio ; lxxviii. 2, 'dark sayings,' irpoPA-fifxaTa, propositiones ; Prov. i. 6, 'intricate proverbs,' alviyfiara, cenigmata ; Ezra xvii.2, 'a parable,' SiT777j/u.a,Aq.; oXviyyL • in the sense of the Arabic Wady, that is, a ey ROADS. watered by a brook or torrent. Such are the valley of Eshcol (which see) ; the valley of Gerah (Gen. xxvi. 17) ; and as nachal signifies both a brook and the valley in which it flows, the same terms may be understood of either, as in the case of the ' brook' Zered in Deut. ii. 13, 14 ; which is expressed by the same word as the ' valley' of Zered in Num. xxi. 12; and in some cases it is difficult to say which is meant, as in Josh. xv. 7; xix. 14, comp. 1]. The valley of Sorek (Judg. xvi. 4), so called probably from its vine- yards, Eusebius and Jerome place north of Eleu- theropolis, and near to Zorah. The valley of Shittim ('acacias') was in Moab, on the borders of Palestine (Joel iv. 18; comp. Num. xxv. 1; Josh. ii. 1 ; iii. 1 ; Mic. vi. 5). The valley of Zered was in the territory of Moab, east of the Dead Sea (Num. xxi. 12; Deut. ii. 13, 14), pro- bably the same with ' the Brook of Willows.' RIZPAH (HQV1> a coal; Sept. 'Peaecame an oligarchy ; then fell into of the imperial sway. We have not, however, anarchy, from which it was rescued by the strong the intention of entering into an account of the hand of Octavius Caesar, who became sole master rise, progress, and decline of the Roman power, of the world by defeating Antony at Actium on but merely to set forth a few of the more essential the 2nd of September, a. v. 723 (b.c. 31), though facts, speaking a little less briefly of the relations formed and sustained between the Romans and the Jews. The foundations of Rome lie in an obscurity from which the criticism of Niebuhr has done little more than remove the legendary charm. Three tribes, however, formed the earliest popu- lation, namely, the Ramnenses (probably Ro- manenses, still further abbreviated into Ramnes), the Titienses (shortened into Tities, from Titus Tatius, their head), and the Luceres (probably an Etruscan horde, who migrated to Rome from Solonium, under Lucumo). In order to in- crease his population, and with a view to that conquest which he afterwards achieved, and which was only a small prelude to the immense do- minion subsequently acquired, Romulus opened in Rome an asylum, inviting thereto those who, for whatever cause, fled from the neighbouring cities. To Rome accordingly there flocked the discontented, the guilty, the banished, and the aspiring, freemen and slaves. Thus were laid the foundations of the future mistress of the world, according to the ordinary reckoning, 3.c. 753, the number of inhabitants at the first not exceeding, it is supposed, four thousand souls : what it arose to in the period of its greatest extent we have scarcely the means of ascertain 1. [Roman Emperor and Empress, it was not till the year 725 that the senate named Gibbon thus speaks : — ' The number of Octavius Imperator, nor till the year 727 that subjects who acknowledged the laws of Rome, he received the sacred title of Augustus. His of citizens, of provincials, and of slaves, cannot empire had for its limit the Euphrates on the now be fixed with such a degree of accuracy as east, the cataracts of the Nile, the African deserts, the importance of the object would deserve. We and Mount Atlas on the south, the ocean on the are informed that when the Emperor Claudius west, and the Danube and the Rhine on the exercised the office of censor he took an account north. of six millions nine hundred and forty-five thou- The subjugated countries that lay beyond the sand Roman citizens, who, with the proportion of limits of Italy were designated by the general women and children, must have- amounted to name of Provinces. The first provisions necessary about twenty millions of souls. The multitude on the conquest of a country by the Roman arms of subjects of inferior rank was uncertain and were made with a view to secure the acquisition fluctuating. But after weighing with attention by the victorious general, in virtue of the p;>wer every circumstance which could influence the and authority (imperium) intrusted to him by balance, it seems probable that there existed in the government at home. Accordingly the earliest the time of Claudius about twice as many pro- object of attention was the ordering of the mili- vincials as there were citizens, of either sex and \ tary power, and the procuring of suitable resources of every age, and that the slaves were at least for subsisting the troops. These arrangements, equal in number to the free inhabitants of the however, were made not without a regard to the Roman world. The total amount of this im- pacific relations into which the conquerors and perfect calculation would rise to about one hun- the conquered had mutually entered. Acting dred and twenty millions of persons — a degree of on the principle that all unnecessary evil was population which possibly exceeds that of modern gratuitous folly, the general availed himself of ROMAN EMPIRE. the aid afforded by exis'ing institutions, and only ventured to give displeasure by establishing new ones in cases where the laws and customs of a country were insufficient for his purposes The civil government was, however, recognised, mo- dified or remodelled by the conqueror, provision- ally, and only until the Roman senate had made its behests known. Ordinarily, however, (he gene- ral who had conquered the province constituted its government, in virtue of a law, or decree of the senate in which the constitution (forma pro- v incise) was set forth and established, or the pro- visional appointments already made were sanc- tioned and confirmed. In order to complete these structural arrangements, the general received spe- cial aid from ten senators, appointed for the pur- ROMAN EMPIRE. 641 472. [Roman Orator and Youth.] •pose, whose counsel he was obliged to make use of. In thus re-forming the legal and social life of a province, the conquerors had the good sense to act in general with prudence and mildness, having regard in their appointments to local pe- culiarities ami existing institutions, so far as the intended adjunction to the Roman power per- mitted, in order to avoid giving the provincials provocation for opposing their new masters. Under ordinary circumstances the government of the provinces was conducted by authorities sent for the purpose from Rome. Augustus divided (he government of the provinces between himself and (he senate in such a manner that he assigned to the senate the provinces which were so well se- cured and obedient that they needed no army to keep them in allegiance to Rome; while he kept under his own hands, in virtue of his imperium proconsulare, those that were more considerable and more difficult to hold. The government of the senatorial provinces lay between the consuls, for .whom, after they had completed their con- sular office, two provinces were appointed ; the other provinces were allotted to the nraetors. Suetonius adds (Octav. 47) that Augustus some- times made changes in this arrangement. Quses- tors, chosen by lot out of those who were named for the year, went with the proconsuls into the provinces of the senate. Into the provinces of the emperor legati, or lieutenants, were sent, with pro- praetorial power, to act as representatives of their VOL. II. master : 1hey wore the sword as an index of mili- tary authority, and had power of life and death over the soldiers — two distinctions which were not granted to the proconsuls, or governors of the sena- torial provinces. The imperial lieutenants re- mained many years in the provinces ; until, in- deed, it pleased the emperor to recall them. Quaes- tors were not sent into the inqjerial provinces, but their place was supplied by ' procuratores,' called at a later period ' lationales,' who were generally taken from the equestrian order : they raised the revenue for the imperial treasury, and discharged the office of paymaster of the army. There was also in the -senatorial provinces a procurator, who raised the income intended, not for the treasury, but for the emperors privy purse : the smaller provinces, like Judaea, which belonged to Syria, were altogether governed by such. The proconsuls, propraetors, and propraetorial lieutenants, when about to proceed into their se- veral provinces, received instruct ions for their guid- ance from the emperor; and in cases in which these were found insufficient, thev were to apply for special directions to the imperial head of the state. A specimen of such application may be found in Pliny's letter to Trajan, with the empe- ror's rescript, regarding the conduct which was to be observed towards the already numerous and rapidly growing sect of Christians. Theadminis- tration of justice, so far as it did not belong to the province itself, was in tlie governor or lieutenants assembled in a couventus ; an appeal lay from this court to the proconsul, and from him to Caesar. Criminal justice was wholly in the hands of the local governor, and extended not only over the provincials, but the Roman citizens as well : in important cases the governors applied for a deci- sion to tlie emperor. As the Romans carefully attained from making any changes in religious matters, so in Palestine the judging of crimes against religion was left by them fo the high-priest and the Sanhedrim, even so far as condemnation to death; but the execution of the sentence de- ponded on tlie procurator (Joseph. Antiq. xx. 9. 1 ; Mark xiv. 53, 55, 62-65; John xviii. 31). The Jews, at least during the time covered by the Gospels, enjoyed the free exercise of their religion. They had their synagogues or temples of public worship, where thev .served God without molesta- tion, streaming thither at their great festivals from all parts of the hind, and making what offerings or contributions they pleased. On these points the testimony of Josephus is full and clear. The Roman presidents did indeed depose and set up high-] riests as (hey pleased, but they confined their choice to the sacerdotal race. In these inter- ferences they seem to have been guilty of acts of despotism, tor which, as for oilier abuses of their power, they were liable to be called to account by an appeal of the ihjuVed to the Roman em- peror, which was not often made in vain (AtUiq. xviii. 2; a and 3 ; xx. 4, 3 and 4). Dr. Lardner has, in his own minute, accurate, and learned manner, reviewed the civil condition of the Jews during the time before referred to, dividing it into four heads — 1. The period from the preaching of John the Baptist to our Saviour's resurrection : 2. Thence to the time of Herod the king, mentioned Acts xii.; 3. The reign of Herod; 4. From the end of this reign to the conclusion of the evan- gelical history ( Works, London, 1S27, i. 37, sq.). 2t 642 ROMAN EMPIRE. In regard to the first period lie concludes, after a long inquiry, that the Jews practised their own religious rites, worshipped at the Temple and in their synagogues, followed their own customs, and lived very much according to their own laws. They had their high-priests, council or senate, and inflicted lesser punishments ; they could apprehend men and bring them before the council: and if a guard, of soldiers was needful, could be assisted by them upon asking the governor for them ; they could bind men and keep them in custody ; the council could summon witnesses, take examina- tions, and, when they had any capital offenders, carry them before the governor. This governor usually paid a regard to what they offered, and, if they brought evidence of the fact, pronounced sentence according to their laws. He was the proper judge in all capital causes. In the second period the Scriptures do not make it clear that there was any Roman officer in Judaea. In the main the con- dition of the province was not dissimilar to what it was in the first period. The case of Stephen, who was stoned to death, may seem to be an ex- ception ; but it may be considered as the result of offended bigotry and of the outbreak of popular fury. The facts connected with the third period offer no difficulty, and may be found in Acts xii. Every order and act of Herod, here mentioned — his killing James with the sword, imprisoning Peter with intent to bring him forth to the people, commanding the keepers to be put to death — are undeniable proofs of his sovereign authority at this time in Judnea. In the fourth period the main thing is the treatment of Paul in Judaea, so far as there is any appearance of legal procedure. The case was this : a man was in danger of being killed in a popular tumult in Jerusalem ; a Roman officer rescues him, takes him into his own hands, and lodges him in a castle ; afterwards, that, his prisoner might be safer, he removes him to Caesarea, the residence of the governor, before whom there are divers hearings. There was there- fore at the time a Roman governor in Judaea. A Jewish council also appears —one not void of au- thority. The charge was of a religious nature, yet is it heard before Felix and Festus, whose authority is acknowledged on all sides. Paul appealed to the Roman emperor. The general conclusion is, that if causes of a religious nature did not ex- clusively belong to the Romans, they had supreme power over the Jews in civil matters. These de- ductions, made from the Evangelists themselves, Lardner corroborates by an appeal to independent authorities, namely, the opinions of Roman law- yers concerning the power of the governors of pro- vinces ; the statements of historians relating to the condition of Judaea in particular ; and similar in- formation touching the state of the people in other provinces. Before, however, we speak of the con- nection in this period between Rome and Judaea, we must go back a little in order to show under what preliminary circumstances Judaea became a part of the great Roman empire. The Romans and Jews first came into political contact about B.C. 161, when Judas Maccabaeus, being moved by the great and widely-spread military re- nown of the Romans, sent an embassy to Rome, and formed with them a treaty offensive and defensive, but with the special view of obtaining help against ' the Grecians,1 that is, Demetrius, king of Syria (1 Mace. viii. ; Joseph. Antiq. xii. ROMAN EMPIRE. 10. 6 ; Justin, xxxvi. 3). The contests, however, which soon ensued in Syria, for the throne, gave the Jews respite from their neighbours, and even weight in the political scale, so that the treaty was not much called into operation (1 Mace. x. 11). Jonathan renewed and confirmed the connection with the Romans (1 Mace. xii. ; Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 5. 8) ; as did Simon, who 'sent Nu- menius to Rome with a great, shield of gold, of a thousand nqunds weight, to confirm the league with them' (1 Mace. xiv. 24). A very favour- able answer was returned in the name of ' Lucius, consul of the Romans.' The Jews thus attained the honour of being admitted into the rank of friends (socii) of the Roman people — a dangerous distinction, but which seems to have had an im- mediately beneficial influence in restraining the Syrian kings, who at once recognised the high- priest Simon (1 Mace. xiv. 38, sq. ; xiv. 16, sq.). John Hyrcanus, the successor of Simon, aided by these influences, was able to maintain himself as an independent prince during the conflicts which continued in Syria, and had occasion only once to appeal to Rome, namely, on occasion of injury inflicted on his country by Antiochus Sidetes : an embassy was dispatched to the senate, the treaty was renewed, and reparation, as well as immunity from future injury, was readily promised {Antiq. xiii. 9. 2). The Romans gained a nearer an d more de- cided influence in Judaea through the conflicts for power carried on between Hyrcanus II. and Aris- tobulus II. Both these rivals sent an embassy 'to Scaurus, who had been detached by Pompey from the army which he was leading against Tigraues, and had come into Syria. Each of them offered Scaurus 400 talents. The bribe of Aristobulus was accepted, and Scaurus, as the service to be done for the payment, relieved Aristobulus by compelling Aretas, who was in alliance with Hyr- canus, to raise the siege of Jerusalem {Antiq. xir. 2, 3). Shortly after, Pompey himself came to Damascus and marched over Coele-Syria, where lie was met by ambassadors from Hyrcanus and Aristobulus. Pompey heard their rival claims, and the appeal of the Jewish nation against them, which alleged as their crime that they wished to subvert the established form of government, and each to make himself king of the Jews. The Roman chief saw his opportunity, marched to Jerusalem, and captured the city, making Hyrca- nus high-priest and prince of the Jews, restricting his territory, and imposing tribute (Antiq. xiv. 4. 4. ; Flor. iii. 5, 30 ; Tacit. Hist. v. 9). This is the event, (b.c. 63) from which the loss of their liberty by the Jews is to be reckoned. Henceforth they formed a part of the province of Syria, under the protection of whose president they were; and from his avarice they had much to endure. The mo- narchy had passed into a species of aristocracy, which lasted for some time. But though the Jewish people then became subject to the Romans, and from that time forward the rod of Heaven piay be said to have hung over the land, they yet en- joyed many privileges, as well as the freedom of their worship, under the mild government of these masters. When Pompey captured Jerusalem, he and some of his officers entered into the Temple, and the most holy places of it, but they took no- thing away. Julius Caesar, whom political considerations led into the East, confirmed Hyrcanus in the high- ROMAN EMPIRE. priesthood, and showed himself well-disposed to- wards the Jews by several decrees, hut associated with Hyrcanus Antipater, an Idumaean, who, under the title of procurator of Judaea, was in reality the sole governor {Antiq. xiv. 10. 10 ; xiv. 8. 5). The Jews were anew declared friends of the Roman people, being in reality their sub- jects. In the year B.C. 40, the Roman senate declared Herod king of the Jews. Archelaus, Herod's son, being banished by Augustus (a.d. •6 or 7), Judaea was put under the immediate go- vernment of Rome. Jusephus says, ' The domi- nion of Archelaus being reduced to a province, Coponius, a person of the equestrian order among the Romans, is sent thither, invested by Caesar with the power of life and death ' {De Bell. Jud. ii. 8. 1). In his Antiquities (xvii. 13. 5) he adds, * Cyrenius also came into Judaea, it being annexed to I lie province of Syria.' The procurators, under whom Judaea had now fallen, had their official residence at Caesarea. When Cyrenius came into Syria he took an account of ihe substance of the Jews. At first they were unwilling to endure this badge of subjection, but submitted with difficulty {Antiq. xviii. 1. 1). From this time, however, they continued tributary to Rome (Lardner, i. 80). In order to enforce the taxes and generally aid the procurator, a body of Roman soldiers (a cohort) was put at his disposal, which had their quarters permanently in the country, their head station being at Caesarea. In Acts x. 1 mention is made of the Italian band at Caesarea ; which was so termed because composed of Italian soldiers, while the other troops in Syria and Judaea consisted of natives (Schwarz, De Cohorte Italica, Altorf, 1720). A portion of the troops was always sta- tioned in Jerusalem at the Passover, in order to aid in preserving the peace : they had their quar- ters in the citadel Antonia, which commanded the Temple, and. so controlled the city {Antiq. xix. 9. 2; xx. 4. 3; Acts xxi; 31, sq. ; xxii. 24; xxiii. 23). The first procurator entrusted with the government of Judaea was Coponius; he was fol- lowed by Marcus Ambivius ; then came Annius Rufus, in whose time Augustus died, a.d. 14. The next was Valerius Gratus, who was ap- pointed by Tiberius : he continued in the province eleven years, and was then succeeded by Pontius Pilate, whose government lasted ten years. Lard- ner is of opinion that Pontius Pilate left Judaea before the Passover, a.d. 36. During the ensuing four or five years it may be questioned whether the Jews had a procurator residing amongst them with power of life and death, as they had from a.d. 7 to a.d. 36 or 37. They were, however, subject to the Romans. Lardner inclines to the opinion that, they had no procurator residing among them from the time of Pilate's removal to Agrippa's accession. During this time they were immediately under the government, first of Vitel- line, and then of Petronius, presidents of Syria. Hence some degree of license would be assumed by the Jewish authorities; which was manifested in their treatment of the first Christian missionaries, as shown in the stoning of Stephen, and the perse- cution which immediately broke out. In Actsix. 31 a different state of things is recorded — 'Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea, and Galilee, and Samaria.' This appears to have arisen from the Jews themselves being in distress. In Alexandria their houses of prayer were all de- ROMAN EMPIRE. 643 stroyed. In the third year of Caligula, a.d. 39, Petronius was sent into Syria with orders to setup the emperor's statue in the Temple at Jerusalem. This rest of the churches seems to have reached some way into Herod Agrippa's reign. When he ascended the Jewish throne, as we have already intimated, the Jews had a king of their own, but he was a vassal king. The Romans, during their dominion, introduced into Judaea many of their manners and customs ; their money became current ; their weights and measures were adopted ; their mode of reckoning time was employed. Yet none of these things ob- tained more than partial prevalence. The Latin language no longer remained unknown, especially among the higher classes. In judicial proceed- ings and public documents the Latin was used. It must have been extensively spoken in Jerusalem, since (John xix. 20) the title which bore the alle- gation on which our Lord was ostensibly put to death was written in Latin, as well as in Greek and Hebrew (Val. Max. ii. 2. 2). These three tongues were indeed used, but in what proportion cannot now be ascertained. Many Latinisms are found in the diction of the New Testament, though they may not be so numerous as was once sup- posed (Olearius, De Stylo N. T. p. 368, sq. ; Georgi, in the second part of his Hierocrit. N. T., Viterb. 1733; Michaelis, Einleit. N. T., i. 173, sq. ; Winer, Grammalik des Real Sprach., ed. Leip- zig, 1844, Erst. Abschnitt). The language which our Lord spoke has been much disputed. The Latin (Wernsdorf, De Christo Latine loquentc),' has put in its claim. The Greek has done the same (D. Diodati, De Christo Greece loquente, by- Dobbin, London, 1843). There can, however, be little doubt that he ordinarily employed the lan- guage of the people, which was neither Greek nor Latin, but Aramaic, a dialect of the Hebrew. Not only in Judaea, but in other provinces of the Roman empire, the Jews enjoyed full freedom of worship, and were excused from military service on the express ground of their religious observances (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 10 ; xix. 5. 3 ; Philo, De Leg. p. 1036). In Alexandria special favour was shown to the numerous Jews settled there, by their Roman masters. The right of citizenship is spoken of in Acts xxii. 28, where we find the chief captain declar- ing, in relation to Paul's claim of being a Roman, 'With a great sum obtained I this freedom' {■KoMreia, jus civitatis, cicitas). In the preceding twenty-lifth verse we learn that it was unlawful to scourge ' a man that was a Roman, and uncon- demned.' These statements are in strict accord- ance with what we learn from independent sources [Citizenship] (Sigonius, De Antiquo Jure Civ. Rom., Paris, 1572); found also in Graevii The- saurus, i. ; E. Spanheim, Orbis Rom., London, 1703; Cellarii Disscrtatt. p. 715, sq. ; Fabric. Dib/iof/rap/i. Antiq. p. 724, sq.). On the general subject of this article consult Eschenberg's Clas- sical Manual, § Roman Antiquities, 'Wiley and Putnam, London, 1844; Rupert i's Ilandbuch des Romisch. Alterthiimer, Hanover, 1841 — a very- accurate and comprehensive manual, in two vo- lumes, 8vo. ; Maillott and Martin, Rcc!i>:rclies sur les Costumes, les Mwurs, $c. des Ancient Peuples. The first volume exhibits in detail the costume, manners, &c. of the Romans down to the last emperors of Constantinople. The engrav- 2t2 644 ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE. ingg are taken from medals and monuments. Thosi wh;> wish to study the morals of the Ro- mans will find aid in Ruperti (ut supra, 2 Ab- theil, p. 253, sq.) ; see also J. K. Unger, Sitten iind Gebrauche der Homer, Wien, 1805 ; see also Arnold's History of Rome. Much information may he found by the English reader, on the state of manners in the first centuries after Christ, in the following fictions — Lockhart's Valerius ; Bulwer's Pompeii; Ware's Palmyra; and in Milman's History of Christianity. — J. R. B. ROMANS, THE EPISTLE TO THE. This epistle claims our interest more than the other didactic epistles of the Apostle Paul, because it is more systematic, and because it explains espe- cially that truth which became subsequently the principle of the reformation, viz., righteousness through faith. Melanchthon was so fond of this epistle that he made it the subject of constant lectures, and twice copied it out. with his own hand, just as Demosthenes copied Thucydides (comp. Strobel's Litterdrgeschichte der loci Theo- logici des Melanchthon, p. 13): in these lectures he explained the leading dogmatical and ethical ideas, i.e. the loci Theologici, which, at a later period, gave rise to the dogmatical work bearing this title. At the period when the apostle wrote the Epistle to the Romans, he had passed through a lii'e full of experience. About four years after the composi- tion of this letter Paul calls himself Tlpea@vT7)s, ' the aged ' (Philemon, ver. 9). Paul was at this time between fifty and sixty years old. After having spent two years and a half at Ephesus, he planned a journey to Macedonia, Achaia, Jem sulem, and Rome (Acts xix. 21). Having spent about three months in travelling, he arrived at Corinth, where he remained three months (Acts xx. 2) ; and during this second abode at Corinth he wrole the Epistle to the Romans (comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 1 — 3, and 2 Cor. is. with Rom. xv. 25). Paul dispatched this letter by a Corinthian woman, who was just then travelling to Rome (xvi. 1), and sent greetings from an inhabitant of Corinth (xvi. 23 ; comp. 1 Cor. i. 14). The data in the life of the apostle depend upon the year in which his conversion took place. Con- sequently we must have a settled opinion con- cerning the date of this event before we speak about the date of the Epistle to the Romans. The opinions of the learned fluctuate concerning the date of the conversion : some think that this event took place as early as a.d. 31 or 41 ; but it is by far more probable that the epistle was written about the year 58 or 59. The congrega- tion of Christians at Rome was formed at. a very early period, but its founder is unknown. Paul himself mentions two distinguished teachers at Rome, who were converted earlier than himself. According to Rom. i. 8, the Roman congrega- tion had then attained considerable celebrity, as their faith was spoken of throughout the whole world. From chap. xvi. we learn that there were a considerable number of Christian teachers at Rome ; from which we infer that the congregation had existed there for some time ; and it is most likely that the Jews at Rome were first converted to Christianity. Under Augustus there were so many Jews at Rome, that this emperor appointed for them quarters beyond the Tiber. These Jews consisted mostly of freedmen, whom Pompey had ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE. carried to Rome as slaves : some of the early Christians at Rome followed mercantile pursuits. At the time when this epistle was written, there were also Gentile Christians in the Roman church ; and from passages like xi. 13; xv. 16 ; i. 7 and 13, we learn that the Gentile Christians were then more numerous than the converted Jews. It is well known that in those times many heathens embraced Judaism (Tacitus, Annul, xv. 44 ; Juvenal, Sat. xiv. 96). These converts to Judaism were mostly women. Such proselytes formed at that period the point of coalescence for the conversion of the Gentiles. Amongthe converts from Judaism to Christianity, there existed in the days of Paul two parties. The congregated apostles had decreed, according to Acts xv., that the converts from paganism were not bound to keep the ritual laws of Moses. There were, how- ever, many converts from Judaism who were dis- inclined to renounce the authority of the Mosaic law, and appealed erroneously to the authority of James (Gal. ii. 9 ; comp. Acts xxi. 25) : they claimed also the authority of Peter in their favour. Such converts from Judaism, mentioned in the other epistles, who continued to observe the ritnal laws of Moses, were not prevalent in Rome : however, Dr. Bauv of Tubingen sup- poses that this Ebionitic tendency prevailed at that time in all Christian congregations, Rome not excepted. He thinks that the converts from Judaism wei-e then more numerous than the Gentile Christians, and that all were compelled to submit to the Judaizing opinions of the ma- jority (comp. Baur's Abhandlung iiber Zweck mid Veranlassung des Romerbriefs, in der Tii- binger Zeitschrift, 1836). However, we infer from the passages above quoted, that the Gentile Christians were much more numerous at Rome than the converts from Judaism. Neander has also shown that the Judaizing tendency did not prevail in the Roman church (comp. Neander's Pflan- zung der Christlichen Kirclie, 3rd ed. p. 388). This opinion is confirmed by the circumstance, that, according to ch. xvi., Paul had many friends at Rome. Dr. Baur removes this objec- tion only by declaring ch. xvi. to be spurious. He appeals to ch. xiv. in order to prove that there were. Ebionitic Christians at Rome : it appears, however, that the persons mentioned hi ch. xiv. were by no means strictly Judaizing zealots, wish- ing to overrule the Gentile Christians, but, on the contrary, some scrupulous converts from Judaism, upon whom the Gentile Christians looked down contemj)tuously. There were, indeed, some dis- agreements between the converts from Judaism and the Gentile Christians in Rome. This is evident, from ch. xv. 6 — 9, and xi. 17, 18 : these debates, however, were not of so obstinate a kind as among the Galatians ; otherwise the apostle could scarcely have praised the congregation at Rome as he does in ch. i. 8 and 12, and xv. 14. From ch. xvi. 17 — 20, we infer that the Judaizers had endeavoured to find admittance, but with little success. The opinions concerning the occasion and object of this letter, differ according to the va- rious suppositions of those who think that the object of the letter was supplied by the occasion, or the supposition that the apostle selected his subject only after an opportunity for writing was offered. In earlier times the latter opinion pre< Tailed, as, for instance, in the writings of Thomas ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE. Aquinas, Luther, Melanchthon, Calvin. In more recent times the other opinion has generally been advocated, as, for instance, by Hug, Eichhorn, and Flatt. Many writers suppose that the debates mentioned in ch. xiv. and xv. called forth this epistle. Hug, therefore, is of opinion that the theme of the whole epistle is the following — Jews and Gentiles have equal claim to the Kingdom of God. According to Eichhorn, the Roman Jews being exasperated against the dis- ciples of Paul, endeavoured to demonstrate that Judaism was sufficient for the salvation of man- kind; consequently Eichhorn supposes that the polemics of St. Paul were not directed against Judaizing converts to Christianity, as in the Epistle to the Galatians, but rather against Ju- daism itself. This opinion is also maintained by De Wette (Einleitung ins Neue Testa?ne?it, 4th ed. § 138). According to Credner (Einleitung. § 141), the intention of the apostle was to render the Roman congregation favourably disposed before his arrival in the chief metropolis, and he therefore en- deavoured to show that the evil reports spread con- cerning himself by zealously Judaizing Christians were erroneous. This opinion is nearly related to that of Dr. Baur, who supposes that the real object of this letter is mentioned only in ch. ix. to xi. According to Dr. Baur, the Judaizing zealots were displeased that by the instrumentality of Paul such numbers of Gentiles entered the king- dom of God, that the Jews ceased to appear as the Messianic people. Dr. Baur supposes that these Judaizers are more especially refuted in ch. ix. to xi., after it has been shown in (he first eight chapters that it was in general incorrect to consider one people better than another, and that all had equal claims to be justified by faith. Against the opinion that the apostle, in writing the Epistle to the Romans, had this particular polemical aim, it has been justly observed by Riickert (in the seconded, of his Commentar.), Olshausen, and De Wette, that the anostle himself states that his epistle had a general scope. Paul says in the introduction that he had long enter- tained the wish of visiting the metropolis, in order to confirm the faith of the church, and to be himself comforted by that faith (ch. i. 12). He adds (i. 16), that he was prevented from preaching in the chief city by external obstacles only. He says that he had written to the Roman Christians in fulfil- ment of his vocation as apostle to the Gentiles. The journey of Phoebe to Rome seems to have been the external occasion of the epistle : Paul made use of this opportunity by sending the sum and substance of the Christian doctrine in writing, having been prevented from preaching in Rome. ■Paul had many friends in Rome who commu- nicated with him; consequently he was the more induced to address the Romans, although he manifested some hesitation in doing so (xv. 15). These circumstances exercised some influence as well on the form as upon the contents of the letter; so that, for instance, its contents differ considerably from the Epistle to the Ephesians, although this also has a general scope. The especial bearings of the Epistle to the Romans are particularly manifest in ch. xiii. to xvi. ; Paul shows to both Jews and Gentiles the glory of Christianity as being absolute religion, and he especially endeavours to confirm the faith of the converts from Judaism (iv.) ; Paul refers to the ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE. 645 circumstance that in Rome the number of Gen- tile Christians was much greater than that of the converted Jews, and he explains how this was consistent with the counsel of God. He endea- vours to re-establish peace between the contend- ing parties ; consequently he had to produce many arguments which might be converted into pole- mics (Polemik) against the Jews ; but it does by no means follow that such polemics were the chief aim of the apostle. Contents of the Epistle to the Romans. — It belongs to the characteristic type of St. Paul's teaching to exhibit the Gospel in its his- torical relation to the human race. In the Epistle to the Romans, also, we find that peculiar cha- racter of St. Paul's reaching, which induced Schelling to call St. Paul's doctrine a philosophy of the history of man. The real purpose of the human race is in a sublime manner stated by St. Paul in his speech in Acts xvii. 26, 27; and he shows at the same time how God had, by various historical means, promoted the attainment of his purpose. St. Paul exhibits the Old Testament dis- pensation under the form of an institution for the education of the whole human race, which should enable men to terminate their spiritual minority, and become truly of age (Gal. iii. 24, and i". 1-4). In the Epistle to the Romans also, the apostle com- mences by describing the two great divisions of the human raGe, viz., those who underwent the pre- paratory spiritual education of the Jews, and those who did not undergo such a preparatory educa- tion. We find a similar division indicated by Christ himself (John x. 16), where he speaks of one flock separated by hurdles. The chief aim of all nations, according to St.. Paul, should be the SiKaioavvri zvdnrtov tov 0eo£i, righteousness* before the face of God, or absolute realization of the moral law. According to St. Paul, the 1 eathen also have their voixos, law, as well religious as moral internal revelation (Rom. i. 19, 32 ; ii. 15). The heathen have, however, "not fulfilled t! at law which they knew, and are in this respect like the Jews, who also disregarded their own law (ii.). Both Jews and Gentiles are transgressors, or by the law separated from the grace and soniihip of God (Rom. ii. 12; iii. 20); consequently if blessedness could only be obtained by fulfilling the demands of God, no man could be Messed. God, however, has gratuitously given righteous- ness and blessedness to all who believe in Christ (iii. 21 — 31); the Old Testament also recog- nises the value of religions faith (iv.) : thus we freely attain to peace and sonship of Grud pre- sently, and have before us still greater things, viz., the future development of the kingdom of God (v. 1-11). The human race has gained in Christ much more than it lost in Adam (v. 12, 21). This doc- trine by no means encourages sin (vi.) : on the contrary, men who are conscious of divine grace fulfil the law much more energetically than they were able to do before having attained to this knowledge, because the law alone is even apt to sharpen the appetite for sin, and leads finally to despair (vii.); but now we fulfil the law by means of that new spirit which is given unto us, and the full development of our salvation is still before us(viii. 1-27). The sufferings of the present time cannot prevent this development, and must rather work for good to them whom God from eterni'.y 646 ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE. has viewed as faithful believers ; and nothing can separate such believers from the eternal love of God (viii. 2S-39). It causes pain to behold the Israelites themselves shut out from salvation ; but they themselves are the cause of this seclusion, because they wanted to attain salvation by their own resources and exertions, by their descent from Abraham, and by their fulfilment, of the law : thus, however, the Jews have not obtained that salvation which God has freely offered under the sole condition of faith in Christ (ix.); the Jews have not entered upon the way of faith, therefore the Gentiles were preferred, which was predicted by the prophets. However, the Jewish race, as such, lias not been rejected ; some of them obtain salvation by a selection made not according to their works, but according to the grace of God. If some of the Jews are left to their own obduracy, even their temporary fall serves the plans of God, viz., the vocation of the Gentiles. After the mass of the Gentiles shall have entered in, the people of Israel also, in their collective capacity, shall be received into the church (xi.). On the authenticity and integrity of the Epistle to the Romans. — The authen- ticity of this epistle has never been questioned. The Epistle to the Romans is quoted as early as the first and second century by Clemens Romanus and Polycarp. Its integrity has lately been at- tacked by Dr. Baur, who pretends that chs. xv. and xvi. are spurious, but only, as we have ob- served above, because these chapters do not har- monise with his supposition, that the Christian church at Rome consisted of rigid Judaizers. Schmidt and Reiche consider the doxology at the conclusion of ch. xvi. not to be genuine. In this doxology the anacolouthical and unconnected style causes some surprise, and the whole has been deemed to be out of its place (ver.26and 27). We, however, observe, in reply to Schmidt and Reiche, that such defects of style may be easily explained from the circumstance, that the apostle hastened to the conclusion, but would be quite inexplicable in additions of a copyist who had time for calm con- sideration. The same words occur in different passages of the epistle, and it. must be granted that such a fluctuation sometimes indicates an interpo- lation. In the Codex i., in most of the Codices Minusculi, as well as in Chrysostom, the words occur at the conclusion of ch. xiv. In the Codices B.C.D.E., and in the Syrian transla- tion, this doxology occurs at the conclusion of ch. xvi. In Codex A it occurs in both places; whilst in Codex D**, the words are wanting entirely, and they seem not to fit into either of the two places. If the doxology be put at the con- clusion of ch. xiv., Paul seems to promise to those Christians weak in faith, of whom he had spoken, a confirmation of their belief. But. it seems unfit (unpassend) in t (lis connection to call the Gospel an eternal mystery, and the doxology seems here to interrupt the connection between chs. xiv. and xv. ; and at the conclusion of ch. xvi. it seems to be superfluous, since the blessing had been pronounced already in ver. 24. We, how- ever, say that this latter circumstance need not have prevented the apostle from allowing his animated feelings to burst forth in a doxology, especially at the conclusion of an epistle which ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE. treated amply on the mystery of rede-mptioni We find an analogous instance in Ephes. xxiii. 27, where a doxology occurs after the mystery of salvation had been mentioned : we are therefore of opinion that the doxology is rightly placed at the conclusion of ch. xvi., and that it was in some codices erroneously transposed to the conclusion of ch. xiv., because the copyist considered the blessing in xvi. 24 to be the real conclusion of the Epistle. In confirmation of this remark we ob- serve that the same codices in which the doxology occurs in ch. xvi. either omit the blessing alto- gether, or place it after the doxology. Interpreters of the Epistle to the Romans. — Chrysostom is the most important among the fathers who attempted to interpret this' epistle; he enters deeply, and with psychological acumen, into the thoughts of the apostle, and ex- pounds them with sublime animation. Among- the reformers Calvin is distinguished by logical penetration and doctrinal depth. Beza is distinguished by his grammatical and critical knowledge. Since the period of rationalism the interest about this epistle has been revived by the Commentary of Tholuck, the first edition of which appeared in 1824. No other book of the New Testament has, since that period, been ex- pounded so frequently and so accurately. From 1824 to 1S44, there have been published as many as seventeen learned and critical commentaries on it ; and, in addition to these, several practical expositions. In the Commentar von Riickert, 2d ed., 1839, 2 vols., we find copious criticisms of the various interpretations, and a clear and pleasing, although not always carefully weighed, exposition. The Commentar von Fritzsche, 1836 to 1843, 3 vols., exhibits a careful critique of the text, com- bined with philological explanation, but the true sense of the apostle has frequently been missed. The Commentar of Olshausen, 2nd ed., 1840, generally contains only the author's own exposi- tion, but presents a very pleasing development of the doctrinal contents. De Wette manifests on the whole a correct tact (3rd ed., 1841) ; however, his book is too comprehensive, so that the contents of the epistle do not make a clear impression. Latelj there has been published in French also an inter- pretation of the Epistle to the Romans, worked out with much diligence and -ingenuity, by Hugues Oltramare; the first part contains chs. i. to v. 11, and was published at Geneva, 1843. — A. T. [The principal English works on the Epistle to the Romans are — Willet, Hexapla, or a Sixfold Comment on the Epistle to the Romans, 1611 ; Taylor's Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle to the Romans, 1747 ; Jones, The Epistle to the Romans analyzed, from a development of the circumstances by which it was occasioned, 1801 ; Cox, Horce Romance, 1824 (translation with notes) ; Turner, Notes on the Epistle to the Ro- mans, New York, 1824 (exegetical, for the use of students) ; Terrot, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 1828 (Greek text, paraphrase, notes, and useful prolegomena). Stuart's Commentar y on the Epistle to the Romans, Andover, U. S., 1 832, is undoubtedly the greatest work on this Epistle which has been produced in the English language, and may be regarded as next in im- portance to the admirable Commentary by the ROME. writer of (he above article (Dr. Tboluck), a translation of which, by the Rev. R. Menzies, has been given in the Edinburgh Biblical Cabinet. — Ed.] ROME, the famous capital of the Western World, and the present residence of the Pope, stands on the river Tiber, about fifteen miles from its mouth, in the plain of what is now called the Campagna {Felix ilia Campania, Plinv. Hist. Nat. iii. 6), in lat. 41" 54' N., long. 12° 28' E. The country around the city is not a plain, but a sort of undulating table-land, crossed by hills, while it sinks towards the south-west to the marshes of Maremma, which coast the Mediterranean. In ancient geography the country, in the midst of which Rome lay, was termed Latium, which, in the earliest times, comprised within a space of about four geographical square miles the country lying between the Tiber and the Numi- cius, extending from the Alban Hills to the sea, having for its chief city Laurentum. Here, on the Palatine Hill, was the city of Rome founded by Romulus and Remus, grandsons of Numitor, and sons of Rhea Sylvia, to whom, as the originators of the city, mythology ascribed a divine parent- age. The origin of the term Rome is in dispute. Some derive it from the Greek 'Pcofxyj, ' strength,' considering that this name was given to the place as being a fortress. Cicero (lie Repub. ii. 7) says the name was taken from that of its founder Romulus. At first the city had three gates, ac- cording to a sacred usage. Founded on the Palatine Hill, it was extended, by degrees, so as to take in six other hills, at the foot of which ran deep valleys that, in early times, were in part overflowed with water, while the hill-sides were covered with trees. In the course of the many years during which Rome was acquiring to herself the empire of the world, the city under- went great, numerous, and important, changes. Under its first kings it must have presented a very different aspect from what it did after it had been beautified by Tarquin. The destruc- tion of the city by the Gauls (u.c. 365) caused a thorough alteration in it ; nor could the troubled times which ensued have been favourable to its being well restored. It was not. till riches and artistic skill came into the city on the conquest of Philip of Macedon, and Antiochus of Syria (u.c. 565), that there arose in Rome large hand- some stone houses. The capture of Corinth con- duced much to the adorning of the city : many fine specimens of art being transferred from thence to the abode of the conquerors, And so, as the power of Rome extended over the world, and her chief citizens went info the colonies to enrich themselves, did the master-pieces of Grecian art flow towards the capital, together with some of the taste andskill to which they owed their birth. Augustus, however, it was, who did most for embellishing the capital of the world, though there may be some sacrifice of truth in the pointed saying, that he found Rome I'uili of brick, and left, it marble. Subse- quent, emperors followed his example, till the place became the greatest repository of architec- tural, pictorial, and sculptural skill, that the world lias ever seen; a result to which even Nero's incendiarism indirectly conduced, as af- fording an occasion for the city's being rebuilt under the higher scientific influences of the times. The site occupied by modern Rome is not pre- ROME. 647 cisely the same as that which was at any period co- vered by the ancient city: the change of locality being towards the north-west, the city has par- tially retired from the celebrated hills. About two-thirds of the area within the walls (traced by Aurelian) are now desolate, consisting of ruins, gardens, and fields, with some churches, con- vents, and other scattered habitations. Origin- ally the city was a square mile in circumference. In the time of Pliny the walls were nearly twenty miles in circuit ; now, they are from fourteen to fifteen miles round. Its original gates, three in number, had increased in the time of the elder Pliny to thirty-seven. Modern Rome has six- teen gates, some of which are, however, built up. Thirty-one great roads centered in Rome, which, issuing from the Forum, traversed Italy, ran through the provinces, arid were terminated only by the boundary of the empire. As a starting point a gilt pillar (Milliarium Aureum) was set up by Augustus in the middle of the Forum. This curious monument, from which distances were reckoned, was discovered in 1823. Eight prin- cipal bridges led over the Til>er ; of these three are still relics. The four districts into which Rome was divided in early times, Augustus increased to fourteen. Large open spaces were set apart in the city, called Campi, for as- semblies of the people and martial exercises, as well as for games. Of nineteen which are men- tioned, the Campus Martins was the principal. It was near the Tiber, whence it was called Tiberinus. The epithet Martins was derived from the plain being consecrated to Mars, the god of war. In the later ages it was surrounded by several magnificent structures, and porticos were erected, under which, in bad weather, the citizens could go through their usual exercises. It was also adorned with statues and arches. The name of Fora was given to places where the people assembled for the transaction of busi- ness. The Fora were of two kinds — fora venalia, ' markets ;' fora civil ia, ' law courts,' &c. Until the time of Julius Caesar there was but one of the latter kind, termed by way of distinction Forum Romanum, or simply Forum. It lay between the Capitoline and Palatine Hills; it was eight hundred feet wide, and adorned on all sides with porticos, shops, and other edifices, on the erection of which large sums had been expended, and the appearance of which was very imposing, especi- ally as it was much enhanced by numerous sta- tues. In the centre of the Forum was the plain called the Cnrtian Lake, where Curtius is said to have cast himself into a chasm or gull, which closed on him, and so he saved his country. On one side were the elevated seats or suggestus, a sort of pulpits from which magistrates and orators addressed the people — usually called Rostra, be- cause adorned with the beaks of ships which had been taken in a sea-tight from the inhabitants of Aniium. Near by was the part of the Forum called the Comitium, where were held the assem- blies of the people called Comitia Curiata. 'The celebrated temple, bearing the name of Capitol (of which there remain only a few vestiges), StOud on the Capitoline Hill, the highest of the $c\m: it was square in form, each side extending about two hundred feet, and the ascent In il was by a flight of one hundred steps. It was one o£ the oldest, largest, and grandest edifices in the city. Founded 648 ROME. by Tarquinius Priscus, it was at several times enlarged and embellished. Its gates were of brass, and it was adorned with costly gildings ; whence it is termed 'golden' and 'glittering,' aurea, fulgens. It enclosed three structures, the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus in the centre, the temple of Minerva on the right, and the temple of Juno on the left. The Capitol also compre- hended some minor temples or chapels, and the Casa Rornuli. or cottage of Romulus, covered with straw. Near the ascent, to the Capitol was the asylum [Cities of Refuge]. We also mention the Basilica?, since some of them were afterwards turned to the purposes of Christian worship. They were originally buildings of great splendour, being appropriated to meetings of the senate, and to judicial purposes. Here coun- sellors received their clients, and bankers trans- acted their business. The earliest churches, bear- ROME. ing the name of Basilicse, were erected under Con* stantine. He gave his own palace on the Caeliau Hill as a site for a Christian temple. Next in antiquity was the church of St. Peter, on the Vatican Hill, built a.d. 324, on the site and with the ruins of temples consecrated to Apollo and Mars. It stood about twelve centuries, at the end of which it. was superseded by the modern church bearing the same name. The Circi were buildings oblong in shape, used for public games, races, and beast-fights. The Theatra were edifices designed for dramatic exhibitions ; the Amphi- theatra (double theatres, buildings in an oval form) served for gladiatorial shows and the fight- ing of wild animals. That which was erected by the Emperor Titus, and of which there still exists a splendid ruin, was called the Coliseum, from a colossal statue of Nero that stood near it. With an excess of luxury, perfumed liquids were con- 473. [Rome.] veyed in secret tubes round these immense struc- tures, and diffused over the spectators, sometimes from the statues which adorned the interior. In the arena which formed the centre of the amphi- theatres, the early Christians often endured mar- tyrdom by being exposed to ravenous beasts. The connection of the Romans with Palestine caused Jews to settle at. Rome in considerable numbers. On one occasion, in the reign of Tibe- rius, when the Jews were banished from the city by the emperor, for the misconduct of some mem- bers of their body, not fewer than four thousand enlisted in the Roman army which was then sta- tioned in Sardinia (Sueton. Tib. 36; Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 3. 4). These appear to have been emanci- pated descendants of those Jews whom Pompey had taken prisoners in Judffia, and brought captive to Rome (Philo, De Leg. ad Cai., p. 101 4). From Philo also it appears that the Jews in Rome were allowed the free use of their national worship, and generally the observance of their ancestral cus- toms. Then, as now, the Jews lived in a part of the city appropriated to themselves (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 10. 8), where with a zeal for which the na- tion had been some time distinguished, they ap- plied themselves with success to proselytising (Dion Cass, xxxvii. 17). They appear, however, to have been a restless colony ; for when, after their expulsion under Tiberius, numbers had returned to Rome, they were again expelled from the city by Claudius (Suet. Claud. 25). The Roman biographer does not give the date of this event, but Orosius (vii. 6) mentions the ninth year of that emperor"s reign (a.d. 50). The pre- cise occasion of this expulsion history does not afford us the means of determining. The words of Suetonius are, ' Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assi- due tumultuantes, Roma expulit' — ' He expelled ROME. from Rome the Jews continually raising distur- bances under the impulse of Chrestos.' The cause here assigned for their expulsion is, that they raised disturbances, an allegation which, at first view, does not seem to point to a religions, still less to a Christian, influence. And yet we must remember that the words bear the colouring of the mind of a haathen historian, who might easily be led to regard activity for the diffusion of Chris- tian truth, and the debates to which that activity necessarily led, as a noxious disturbance of the peace of society. The Epicurean view of life could scarcely avoid describing religious agitations by terms ordinarily appropriated to martial pursuits. It. must equally be borne in mind that the diffusion of the Gospel in Rome — then the very centre and citadel of idolatry — was no holiday task, but would call forth on the part of the disciples all the fiery energy of the Jewish character, and on the part of the Pagans all the vehemence of passion which ensues from pride, arrogance, and hatred. Had the ordinary name of our Lord been employed by Suetonius, we should, for ourselves, have found little difficulty in understanding the words as intended to be ap- plied to Jewish Christians. But the biographer uses the word Chrestus. The its is^a mere Latin termination ; but what are we to make of the root of the word, Chrest for Christ ? Yet the change is in only one vowel, and Chrest might easily be used for Christ, by a Pagan writer. A slight difference in the pronunciation of the word as vocalised by a Roman and a Jew, would easily cause the error. And we know that the Romans often did make the mispronunciation, calling Christ Chrest (Tertull. Apol. c. 3 ; Lactant. Inst. iv. 17; Just. Mart. Apol. c. 2). The point is important, and we therefore give a few details,, the rather that Lardner has, under Claudius (vol. i., 239), left the question undetermined. Now in Tacitus (Anhal. xv. 44) Jesus is unquestion- ably called Chrest (quos per flagitia invisos vul- gus Christianos appellabat. Auctor nominis ejus Chrestus) in a passage where his followers are termed Christians. Luciati too, in his Philopa- tris, so designates our Lord, playing on the word XpTjarSs, which, in Greek, signifies 'good :' these are his words : el tux0' Ve Xprjarbs i Ua^- And accord- ingly it is recorded in the history, Matt, xxvii. 34, " They gave him vinegar to drink, mingled with gall,'' o^os ixera. xo\?is- But in the parallel passage (Mark xv. 23) it is said to be " wine mingled with myrrh," a very bitter ingredient. From whence I am induced to think that xoA7j,and perhaps &'H,~\, may be used as a general name for whatever is exceedingly bitter; and, conse- quently, when the sense requires, it may be put specially for any bitter herb or plant, the infusion of which may be called £'N~I ^D, " Aquae Rosch." —J. F. R. ROTHEM, written also Rotem (Drh), oc- curs in four passages of the Old Testament, in all of which it is translated juniper in the Auth. Vers., though it is now considered very clear that a kind of broom is intended. Celsius remarks that the Sept. translators seem to have been un- acquainted with the meaning of the word, as, in one passage they introduce it in Greek letters as Vadafx, &c, in another as meaning burning char- coal, and in a third as roots of woods. Some who have perceived that, some plant was intended, have doubted about the genus, translating it oak and terebinth, but more frequently juniper. The last has been the most generally adopted in modern versions ; but travellers in the East have met with a plant or plants, which by the Arabs is called retem, ratam, rehtem, and retem, varying a little perhaps in different dis- tricts ; the variations being probably owing to the modes of spelling adopted by different authors. In the Arabic works on Materia Medica we have the same word Ji retem, signifying a kind of broom, and which, according to Celsius, is so named from *j j, Uganda. The Moors, no doubt, earned the word into Spain, as retama h there applied to a species of genista or broom. In Loudon's Encyclopaedia of I1 hints it is named spariium monospermtim, or white single-seeded broom, and is described as a very handsome shrub, remarkable for its numerous snow-white flowers. Osbeck remarks that it grows like willow- bushes along the shores of Spain, as far as the flying sands reach, wheie scarcely any other plant exists, except the ononis serpens, or creeping rcstharroic. The use of this shrub i^ very great in Mopping the sand. The leaves and young branches furnish delicious food for goats. It con- verts the most barren spot into a fine odoriferous garden by its flowers, which continue a long time. It seems to shelter bogs and goats against the scorching heat of the sun. The twigs are used fur lying bundles ; and all kinds of herbs 652 ROTHEM. RUBY. thai are brought to market are fastened together with them. Forskal found it in Arabia, and Desfontaines in Barbary, on the sandy coast. ^ 475. [Genista monosperma.J The Spaniards call it Retama, from the Arabic name Retetn. It is now referred by all botanists to the genus Genista, and called G. monosperma. It is described by De Can- dolle as a branching and erect shrub, with siender, wandlike, flexible branches ; leaves com- paratively few, linear, oblong, pressed to the branches, pubescent ; inflorescence in few flowered lateral racemes; petals white, silky, nearly equal to one another ; legumes oval, inflated, smooth, membranaceous, one to two seeded. It occurs on the sterile shores of Portugal, Spain, Barbary, and Egypt. It was found by Forskal at Suez, and named by him Genista Sparthtm ? with r esteem as its Arabic name. Bove also found it at Suez, and again in difl'erent parts of Syria. Belon also mentions finding it in several places when travelling in the East. Burckhardt also fre- quently mentions the shrub rethem in the deserts to the south of Palestine, and he thought it to be the same plant as the Genista rcetcem of Forskal. He states that whole plains are sometimes covered with this shrub, and that such places are favourite places of pasturage, as sheep are re- markably fond of the pods. Lord Lindsay again, while travelling in the middle of the valleys of Mount Sinai, says, ' The rattam. a species of broom, bearing a white flower, delicately streaked with purple, afforded me frequent shelter from the sun while in advance of the caravan.' Mr. Kitto on this well observes, ' It is a remarkable, • because undesigned, coincidence, that in travel- ling to the very same Mount of Horeb, the prophet Elijah rested, as did Lord Lindsay, under a rattam shrub.' There can be no reason- able doubt, therefore, that the Hebrew rothem de- notes the same plant as the Arabic retetn, though it has been rendered juniper in the English, and several other translations, as in 1 Kings xix. 4 ; * but he (Elijah or Elias) himself went a day's journey into the wilderness, and came and sat down under a juniper (rothem) tree,' &c. ; ' And as he lay and slept under a juniper tree,' &c. In the other passages the meaning is not so clear, and therefore different interpretations have bepn given. Thus, Job (xxx. 4) says of the half- famished people who despised him, ' who cut up mallows by the bushes, and juniper (rothem') roots for their food.' Though the broom root may perhaps be more suitable for diet than the juniper, yet they are both too bitter and medicinal to be considered or used as nutritious, and, there- fore, some say, that ' when we read that rotem roots were their food, we are to suppose a great deal more than the words express, namely, that their hunger was so violent, as not to refrain even from these roots,' which were neither refreshing ' nor nourishing. Ursinus supposes, that instead of the roots of this broom, we are to understand a plant which grows upon these roots, as well as upon some other plants, and which is well known by the English name of brobm-rape, the oro- banche of botanists. These are sometimes eaters Thus Dioscorides (ii. 136) observes that the oro- banche, which grows from the roots of broom, was sometimes eaten raw, or boiled like asparagus. Celsius again suggests an amendment in the sen- tence, and thinks that we should understand it to mean that the broom roots were required for fuel, and not fox food, as the Hebrew words signifying fuel and food, though very similar to each other, are very different in their derivation: 'Diversse igitur sunt voces Lachmam, panis eorum, et hachmam, ad calefaciendum se, scriptione licet et literis atque punctis exacte conveniant ;' and this sense is confirmed by some of the Talmudical writers, as R. Levi Ben Gerson, who commenting on this passage says : ' ut significet, ad calefacien- dum se ; quia opus habebant, quo calefierent, quod versarentur in locis frigidis, sine ullo perfugio.' The broom is the only fuel procurable in many of these desert situations, as mentioned by several travellers. Thus Thevenot, ' Puis nous nous reposames en un lieu ou il y avoit un peu de genets, car ils ne nous faisoient point reposer, qu'en des lieux ou il y eut de quoi bruler, tant pour se chauffer, que pour faire cuire le cabve et leur mafrouca.' In Ps. cxx. 4, David ob- serves that the calumnies of his enemies were ' like arrows of the mighty, with coals of juniper ' (rothem). The broom, being, no doubt, very com- monly used a3 fuel in a country where it is abundant, and other plants scarce, might re- dily suggest itself in a comparison; but it is also described as sparkling, burning and crackling more vehemently than other wood. — J. F. R. RUBY. The word rendered ' ruby' in the Authorized Version (Job xxviii. 18 ; Prov. iii. 15; viii. 11 ; xx. 15; xxxi. 10 ; Lam. iv. 7) is fr'^'OS penihim, which appears rather to indicate ' pearls.' The ruby is, however, generally sup- posed to be represented by the word 1313 kad-kod, which occurs in Ezek. xxvii. 6, and Isa. liv. 12, where the Authorized Version renders it 'agate.' An Arabic word of similar sound (kadskadsat) signifies ' vivid redness ;' and as the Hebrew word may be derived from a root of like significa- tion, it is inferred that it denotes the Oriental ruby, which is distinguished for its vivid red colour, and was regarded as the most valuable of RUTH. precious stones next after the diamond. This mode of identification, however, seems rather precarious. The Greek translator of Ezelc. xxvii. 16, does not appear to have known what it meant, for he preserves the original word ; and although the translator of Isa. liv. 12 has jasper ('iucttls), he is not regarded as any authority in such matters, when he stands alone. The ruby was doubtless known to t lie Hebrews ; but it is by no means certain that had-kod was its name. Some have supposed that the word mpK ekdach, which from its etymology should signify a sparkling llaming gem, is to be regarded as a species of ruby. It occurs oidy in Isa. liv. 12; hence the Septuagint makes it a carbuncle, as does the Au- thorized Version. RUFUS CPovcpo?). A person of this name was one of the sons of Simon the Cyrenian, who was compelled to bear die cross of Christ (Mark xv. 21) : he is supposed to be the same with the Rufus to whom Paul, in writing to the Romans, sends his greeting in the remarkable words, ' Salute Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine' (Rom. xvi. 13). The name is Roman; but the man was probably of Hebrew origin. He is said to have been one of the seventy disciples, and eventually to have had charge of the church at Tliel.es. RUSH. [Agmon.] RUTH (n-11; Sept. 'PoiO), a Moabitish woman, brought, under peculiar circumstances, into intimate relation with the stock of Israel, and whose history is given in one of the books of the sacred canon which bears her name. The narrative that brings her into the range of inspired story is constructed with idyllic simplicity and pathos, and forms a pleasant relief to the sombre and repulsive shades of the picture which the reader has just been contemplating in the later annals of the Judges. It is the domestic history of a family compelled, by the urgency of a famine, to abandon the land of Canaan, and seek an asylum in the territories of Moab.* Elimelech, the head of the emigrating household, dies in the land of his sojourn, where his two surviving sons 'took them wives of the women of Moab ; the name of the one was Orpah, and the name of the other Ruth.' On the death of the sons, the widowed parent, resolving to return to her country and kindred, the filial affection of the daughters-in-law * The period to which this famine is to be re- ferred is a greatly disputed point among commen- tators. The opinion of Usher, which assigns it to the age of Gideon, and which is a mean between the dales fixed upon by others, carries with it the greatest, probability. The oppression of the Midi- anites, mentioned in Judg. vi. 3-6, which was pro- ductive of a famine, and from which Gideon was instrumental in delivering his people, wasted the land and destroyed its increase, 'till thou come unto Gaza;' and this embraced the region in which Judah and Bethlehem were situated. The territory of Judah was also adjacent, to Moab, and a removal thither wa8 easy and natural. The scourge of Midian endured, moreover, for seven years ; and at the expiration of ten years after the deliverance by Gideon was fully consummated, Naomi re-emigrated to her native land. All the circumstances combined favour, mainly, the hy- pothesis of Usher. RUTH. 653 is put to a severe test, and Ruth determines at all hazards to accompany Naomi. She accord- ingly arrives at Bethlehem with her mother, where, in the extremity of want, she goes to glean after the reapers in the harvest-field of Boaz, a wealthy kinsman of her deceased father-in-law, Elimelech. Attracted by her appearance, and informed of her exemplary conduct towards her mother-in-law, Boaz bade her return from day to day, and directed his servants to give her a courteous wel- come. An omen so propitious could not but be regarded as a special encouragement to both, and Naomi therefore counselled Ruth to seek an op- portunity for intimating to Boaz the claim she had upon him as the nearest kinsman of her deceased husband. A stratagem, which in other circum- stances would have been of very doubtful pro- priety, was adopted for compassing this object ; and though Boaz entertained the proposal favour- ably, yet he replied that there was another person more nearly related to the family than himself, whose title must first be disposed of. Without delay he applied himself to ascertain whether the kinsman in question was inclined to assert his right — a right which extended to a purchase of the ransom (at the Jubilee) of Elimelech's estate. Finding him indisposed to the measure, he obtained from him a release, ratified according to the legal forms of the time, and then prooeeded himself to redeem the patrimony of Elimelech, and espoused the widow of his son, in order ' to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance.' From this union sprang David, the illustrious king of Israel, whose line the writer traces up, in conclu- sion, through Boaz, to Pharez, son of Judah. The Book of Ruth is inserted in the Canon, according to the English arrangement, between the book of Judges and the books of Samuel, as a sequel to the former and an introduction to the latter. Among the ancient Jews it was added to the book of Judges, because they supposed that the transactions which it relates happened in the time of the judges of Israel (Judg. i. 1). Several of the ancient fathers, moreover, make but one book of Judges and Ruth. But the modern Jews com- monly place in their bibles, after the Pentateuch, the five Megilloth — 1. The Song of Solomon ; 2. Ruth ; 3. The Lamentations of Jeremiah ; 4. Ec- clesiastes ; 5. Esther. Sometimes Ruth is placed the first of these, sometimes the second, and some- times the fifth. The true date and authorship of the book are alike unknown, though the current of autho- rity is in favour of Samuel as the writer. That it was written at a time considerably remote from the events it records, would appear from the passage in ch. iv. 7, which explains a custom re- ferred to as having been ' the manner in former time in Israel, concerning redeeming and con- cerning changing' (comp. Deut. xxv. 9). That it. was written, also, at. least as late as the establish- ment of David's house upon the throne, appears from the concluding verse — ' And Obed begat Jesse, and Jesse begat David.' The expression, moreover (ch. i. 1), 'when the judges ruled,' marking the period of the occurrence of the events, indicates, no doubt, that in the writer's days kings had already begun to reign. Add to this what critics have considered as certain Chaldaisms with which the language is interspersed, denoting its composition at a period considerably later than 654 RUTH. that of the events themselves. Thus Eichhom finds a Clialdaism or Syriasm in the use of N for fl in fcOD, tliough the same form occurs elsewhere. He adverts also to the existence of a superfluous Yod in TIDK" and TlTT (iii. 3), and ^13.3^ (ver. 4). As, however, the language is in other respects, in the main, pure, these few Chaldaisms may have arisen from a slight error of the copyists, and therefore can scarcely be alleged as having any special bearing on the era of the document. The same remark is to be made of certain idiomatic phrases and forms of expression which occur else- where only in the books of Samuel and of Kings, as— ' The Lord do so to me, and more also ' (Ruth i. 17; comp. 1 Sam. iii. 17; xiv. 44; xx. 23: 2 Sam. iii. 9, 35 ; xix. 13 ; 1 Kings ii. 23 ; xix. 2 ; xx. 10; 2 Kings vi. 31) : ' I have discovered to your ear,' for ' I have told you ' (Ruth iv. 4 ; comp. 1 Sam. xx. 2; 2 Sam. vii. 27). The canonical authority of Ruth has never been questioned, a sufficient confirmation of it being found in the fact that Ruth, the Moabiless, comes into the genealogy of the Saviour, as distinctly given by the Evangelist (Matt. i. 6). The prin- cipal difficulty in regard to the book arises, how- ever, from this very genealogy, in which it is stated that Boaz, who was the husband of Ruth, and the great-grandfather of David, was the son of Salmon by Rachab. Now, if by Rachab we sup- pose to be meant, as is usually understood, Rahab the harlot, who protected the spies, it is not easy to conceive that only three persons — Boaz, Obed, and Jesse, should have intervened between her and David, a period of near 400 years. But the solu- tion of Usher is not improbable, that the ancestors of David, as persons of pre-eminent piety, were favoured with extraordinary longevity. Or it may be that the sacred writers have mentioned in the genealogy only such names as were distin- guished and known among the Jews. The leading scope of the book has been variously understood by different commentators. Umbreit (Ueber Geist tend Zweck des Buches Ruths, in Theol. Stud, und Krit. for 1834, p. 308) thinks it was written with the specific moral design of showing how even a stranger, and that of the hated Moahitish stock, might be sufficiently noble to become the mother of the great king David, be- cause she placed her reliance on the God of Israel. Bertholdt regards the history as a pure fiction, de- signed to recommend the duty of a man to marry his kinswoman; while Eichhorn conceives that it was composed mainly in honour of the house of David, though it does not conceal the poverty of the family. The more probable design we think to be to pre-intimate, by the recorded adoption of a Gentile woman into the family from which Christ was to derive his origin, the final reception of the Gentile nations into the true church, as fellow-heirs of the salvation of the Gospel. The moral lessons which it incidentally teaches are of the most interesting and touching character : that private families are as much the objects of divine regard as the houses of princes ; that the present life is a life of calamitous changes; that a devout trust in an overruling Providence will never fail of its reward; and that no condition, however adverse or afflicted, is absolutely hopeless, are truths that were never more strikingly illus- trated than in the brief and simple narrative before us. — G. B. SABBATH. S. SABBATH. The original word Q"l2K>) sig- nifies simply rest, cessation from labour or em- ployment. The term, however, became appropriated in a specific religious sense, to signify the dedication of a precise portion of time to cessation from worldly labour, and a peculiar consecration by virtue of which a sanctity was ascribed to the portion of time so set apart, just as a similar sacred character was ascribed to consecrated places, things, and persons : the violation of it was analogous to sacrilege. The character of the institution, as it existed under the Mosaical law, is distinct and mani- fest ; but the subject, as a whole, embraces points on which Christian opinion has been considerably divided. It will be our object briefly to exhibit the different views which have been taken on these points, and to indicate the materials by means of which the subject may be more fully investigated. Was there any Sabbath before the Law ? This is a question which lies at the root of all the dif- ferences of opinion which have been entertained. For the affirmative, it. is alleged on the authority of Gen. ii. 3, that the Sabbath was instituted by God in commemoration of his resting on the seventh day from the work of creation, and given to our first parents. This text has indeed usually been regarded as conclusive of the whole question : but those who Hold that the institution of the Sabbath originated under the Law, observe that this passage contains no express command, addressed to any parties, nor any specific mention of the nature of such implied solemnization ; still less any direct al- lusion to rest from labour, or to religious worship. It is also urged, that some of the ablest divines, even of older times, regard the passage (Gen. ii. 3) as proleptical or anticipatory, and referring to the subsequent institution recorded in Exodus. They conceive that Moses, in recounting this de- scription of the creation, had for at least one prin- cipal object, the introduction of this sanction from the received cosmogony, for the establishment of the Sabbath among the Israelites ; and that, as this narrative was composed after the delivery of the law for their special instruction, so this passage was only intended to confirm more forcibly that institution ; or that it is to be understood as if Moses had said. ' God rested on the seventh day, which he has since blessed and sanctified.'' It is admitted that there is no other direct mention of a Sabbath in the book of Genesis : but there are traces of a period of seven days, which are usually regarded as indicating the presence of a Sabbath. Thus, in Gen. iv. 3, the words rendered ' in process of time,' have been held to signify 'the end of days,' and this supposed to mean a week, — when the offerings of Cain and Abel were made, — and thence the Sabbath. Again, they refer to the periods of seven days, occurring in the history of Noah (Gen. vii. 10; viii. 10); yet tire term 'week' is also used in the contract between Jacob and SABBATH. Laban (Gen. xxix. 27, 28) ; and Job and his friends observed the term of seven days (Job ii. 13) ; all of which, it is alleged, goes to prove that the blessing of a Sabbath was not withheld from the primitive world. The terms in which the appointment of the Sab- bath to the Israelites is made before the delivery of the rest, of the law (Exod. xvi. 23), have also been supposed to imply that it was not a new institution, as also the use of the word ' remember,1 iutroducingtlie injunction in the Decalogue. But, on the other side, it is answered that in giving an injunction, the monitory word 'remember' is as commonly used in reference to the future re- collection of the precejit so given, as to anything past. That there is nothing extraordinary in the institution of one particular observance of the law before the rest of it was delivered : the same argument would show a previous obligation to observe the Passover or circumcision. That with regard to the reckoning of time by weeks, this does not at all necessarily imply any reference to a Sabbath. And that the employment of any particular mode of reckoning by an historian, is no proof that it was used by the people, or in the times he is describing. It is powerfully urged by the believers in a primitive Sabbath, that we find from time im- memorial the knowledge of a week of seven days among all nations — Egyptians, Arabians, In- dians— in a word, all the nations of the East, have in all ages made use of this week of seven days, for which it is difficult to account without admitting that this knowledge was derived from the common ancestors of the human race. On the other side it is again denied that the reckoning of time by weeks implies any reference to a Sabbath. One of our own contributors, who takes this view, remarks— 'The division of time by weeks, as it is one of the most ancient and universal, so is it one of the most obvious inventions, especially among a rude people, whose calendar required no very nice adjustments. Among all early nations the lunar months were the readiest large divisions of time, and though the recurrence of the lunar period in about 20^ days was incompatible with any exact subdivision, yet the nearest whole num- ber of days which could be subdivided into shorter periods, would be either 30 or 28 ; of which the latter would of course be adopted, as admit- ting of division into 4, corresponding nearly to those striking phenomena, the phases or quarters of the moon. Each of these would palpably correspond to about a week ; and in a period of about 5i lunations, the same phases would return very nearly to the same (lays of the week. In order to connect the reckoning by weeks with the lunar month, we find that all ancient nations observed some peculiar solemnities to mark the day of the nr/v moon. Accordingly, in the Mosaic law the same thing was also enjoined (Num. x. 10; xxviii. 11, &c), though it is ■worthv of remark, that while particular dbs'erv- ances are here enjoined, the idea of celebrating the new moot) in some way is alluded to as if already familiar to them. ' In other parts of the Bible we (ind the .Sabbaths and new moons continually spoken of in conjunc- tion ; as (Isa. i. 13, &c.) the division of time by weeks prevailed all over the East, from the SABBATH. 655 earliest periods, among the Assyrians, Arabs, and Egyptians ; — to the latter people Dion Cassius ascribes its invention. It was found among the tribes in the interior of Africa by Oldendorf (Jahn's Arch. Bibl, art, « Week'). The Peru- vians counted their months by the moon, their half- months by the increase and decrease of the moon, and the weeks by quarters, without having any particular names for the week days. Their cos- mogony, however, does not include any reference to a six days' creation (Garcilasso de la Vega, Hist, of the Tncas, in Taylor's Nat. Hist, of So- ciety, i. 291). The Peruvians, besides this, have a cycle of nine days, the approximate third part of a lunation (ib. p. 292), clearly showing the common origin of both. Possibly, also, the " nundinse "' of the Romans may have had a simi- lar origin. ' The Mexicans had a period of 5 days (Antonio de Solis, Conquest of Mexico, quoted by Norman on ' Yucatan,' p. 185). They had also periods of 13 days: their year was solar, divided into 18 months of 20 days each, and 5 added (Laplace, Hist, a" Astron., p. 65). Some writers, as Acosta and Baron Humboldt, have attributed the origin of the week to the names of the primary planets as known to the ancients. It is certain that the application of the names of the planets to the days originated in the astrological notion, that each planet in order presided over the hours of the day; this we learn expressly from Dion Cas- sius (lib. xxvii.). Arranging the planets in the order, of their distances from the earth, on the Ptolemaic system, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, the Sun, Venus, Mercury, the Moon, — then e. g. Saturn presided over the 1st hour of Saturday; and as- signing each planet to an hour in succession, the 22nd hour will fall to Saturn again, the 23rd to Jupiter, the 24th to Mars ; and thus the 1st hour of the next day would fall to the Sun, and so on. This mode of designation was adopted by the Greeks and Romans from the East, and is found among the Brahmins (see Useful Knowledge Society's Life of ' Galileo, p. 12; also Laplace, Precis del' Hist, de I' Astron., p. 16).' Those who take the view adverse to the existence of a primitive Sabbath, regard it as a circum- stance worthy of remark, that in there-establish- ment of the human race, alter the Flood, we find in Gen. ix. a precise statement of the covenant which God is represented as making with Noah, in which, while several particulars are adverted to, no mention whatever is made of the Sabbath. The eaily Christian writers are generally as silent on this subject of aprjmitive Sabbath as on that of primitive sacrifice [Sacrifice]. Such examination as we have been able to institute, has disclosed no belief in its existence, while some in- dications are found of a notion that the Sabbath began with Moses. Thus, Justin Martyr says, thai the patriarchs ' were justified before God not keeping the Sabbaths:' anil again, ' from Abraham Originated circumcision, and from Moses the Sab- bath, and sacrifices and offerings,' &C. (Dial. con. Tnjp])., 23(1.261). Ireiucus observes, 'Abraham, without circumcision, and without observance of Sabbaths, believed in God," &c.(iv. 30). And Tertullian expresses himself to the same effect (Adv. Jud. ii. 4). While, on the other hand, they regard the institution as wholly peculiar to the Israelites. Justin Martyr, in particular, ex- 656 SABBATH. presses himself pointedly to the effect that f it was given to them on account of their lawlessness (avofjilav) and hardness of heart ' {Dial, cum Tn/ph., 235). The Jewish Sabbath. — -Under the Mosaic law itself, the case is perfectly free from all douht or ambiguity. The Sabbath, as consisting in a rigid cessation from every sjiecies of labour, was enjoined expressly ' for a perpetual covenant? and as ' a sign between God and the children of Israel for ever ' (Exod. xxxi. 16). And the same idea is repeated in many other passages ; all showing both the exclusive announcement and peculiar object and application of the institution to the people of Israel ; — as particularly Ezek. xx. 10; Nehem. ix. 13, &c. And this is further manifest in the constant association of this ob- servance with otheisof the like peculiar and posi- tive nature, — as with reverencing the sanctuary (Lev. xix. 30), keeping the ordinances (Ezek. xlv. 17), solemnizing the new moons (Isa. i. 13; lxvi. 23), and other feasts (Hos. ii. 11). And obviously with the same view it was expressly made one of the primary obligations of proselytes who joined themselves to the Lord, as ' taking hold of the covenant' thereby (Isa. lvi. 6). The degree of minute strictness with which it. was to be observed, is laid down in express literal precepts, as against kindling tire (Exod. xxxv. 4) or preparing food (xvi. 5, 22). A man was put to death for gathering sticks (Num. xv. 32). Buving and selling were also unlawful (Nell. x. 31). To these a multitude of more precise in- junctions were added by the traditions of the Rabbis, such as the prohibition of travelling more than twelve miles, afterwards contracted to one mile, and called a Sabbath day"s journey, and not only buying and selling, but any kind of pecuniary transaction, even for charitable pur- poses, or so much as touching money (see Vi- tringa, De Synagogd, translated by Bernard, p. 76). This will be the place also to mention, how- ever briefly, the extension of the idea of a seventh period of rest, in the institution of the Sabbatical Year ; or the injunction of a fallow or cessation of tillage for the land every seventh year. Not only were the labours of agriculture suspended, but even the spontaneous productions of the earth were to be given to the poor, the traveller, and the wild animals (see Lev. xxv. 1-7 ; Deut. xv. l-10j. This prohibition, however, did not extend to other labours or trades, which were still carried on. There was, however, in this year an extraordi- dary time devoted to the hearing of the law read through (see Deut. xxxi. 10, 18). As Moses pre- dicted (Lev. xxvi. 34), this institution was after- wards much neglected (2 Chron. xxxvi. 21). Closely connected with this was the observance of the year following seven Sabbatic years (i. e. the fiftieth year) called the year of Jubilee; but of this we have fully treated under the Art. Jubii.ee. The Christian Sabbath. — The question as to the continued obligation of the Sabbath under the Christian dispensation, is one on which great difference of opinion has been entertained, not only by Christian churches, but by theologians of the same church. The Jewish prophets in several places describe SABBATH. in lofty imagery a future condition of glory and prosperity, connected with the reign of the pro- mised Messiah. These predictions are in a great degree conveyed under the literal representation of temporal grandeur, to be attained by the Jewish nation, and the restoration of their temple and worship to the highest pitch of splendour, while j)roselytes should come in from all nations, until the whole world should own its spiritual sway (as Amos ix. 11; Mich. iv. 1; Zech. viii. 20). In the course of these representations refer- ence is made to the observance of Sabbaths (Isa. lvi. 6, 7 ; lxvi. 23). In the interpretation of these passages some difference of opinion has prevailed. The Jews themselves have always understood them in their strictly literal sense. Among Christians they have been regarded as literally predicting some future restoration of the people of Israel, or per- haps as applying in a first or literal sense to the temporal restitution of the Jews after the cap- tivity (which was to a great degree fulfilled before the coming of Christ), and the extraordinary ac- cession of proselytes from all nations which had at that period taken place, while in a second or figurative sense they refer to the final extension of Christ's spiritual kingdom over the whole world. These passages have been adduced in proof of the continued and permanent obligation of the Sabbath under all circumstances of the church of God ; but those who dispute this, call attention to the fact that in these the Sabbath is always coupled with other observances of the Mosaic law; and they allege that if the whole descrip- tion be taken literally, then by common consis- tency the Sabbaths must be also taken literally as applying to the Jews and the proselytes to their religion : if figuratively, the Sabbaths must by parity of reason be taken figuratively also, as im- plying spiritual rest, cessation from sin, and the everlasting rest of the faithful. The teaching of Christ himself on this subject was of precisely the same kind as on all othei points connected with the law. He was address- ing exclusively Jews living under that law still in force. He censured the extravagant rigour with which the Pharisees endeavoured to enforce it ; he exhorted to a more special observance of its weightier matters, and sought to lead his fol- lowers to a higher and more spiritual sense of their obligations ; but he in no degree relaxed, modified, or abrogated any portion of the Mosaic code. On the contrary, expressly upheld its authority, enlarging indeed on many precepts, but rescinding none (Matt. v. 17, 18; xxiii. 1. 29; xviii. 17, &c). So in regard to the more particular precept of (he Sabbath, while he reproved the excessive strictness of the Pharisaical observance — and to this end wrought miracles upon it, and vindicated works of mercy and necessity by reason of the case, and instances from the Old Testament (as in Matt. xii. 1 ; Luke xiii. 15; John v. 9, &c.) — still he in no way modified or altered the obli- gation beyond what the very language of the law and the prophets clearly sanctioned. He used indeed the remarkable declaration, ' The Sab- bath was made for the man (5;a t b v iivOponroy), not the man (d &vQpoowos~) for the Sabbath,' which is usually regarded as the most conclusive text in favour of the universal obligation of the Sabbath ; SABBATH. SABBATH. 657 and it Trnist have been so regarded by our trans- lators, seeing that they omit the article. It is . commonly understood in the following sense : ' it was made for man, not as he may be a Jew or a Christian, but as man, a creature bound to love, worship, and serve his God and maker, in time and in eternity.' To this it is answered, that we must not overlook the article in the original, where the man must mean ' those for whom it was appointed,' without specifying who they were, much less implying man in general ; that ' the man was not made for it,' as manifestly implies that it was not a duty of an essential and unchange- able nature, such as those for which man is es- pecially constituted and ordained — in other words, that it was an institution -enjoined by way of adaptation to the case of those to whom the precept was given. An intermediate view, which lays no particular stress upon the definite article, is thus expressed in paraphrase by the elder Rosenmiiller {Scholia in Marc, ii. 27) : ' The Sabbath is an institution for the recreation of man ; but man was not tJierefore created that he might on the seventh day rest from all anxious labour.' He adds, ' This being the nature of the Sabbath, what follows in verse 2S will hold true, that it is in the power of the Messiah to dispense with its observance.' In the preaching of the Apostles we find hardly an allusion to the subject. Their ministry was at first addressed solely to the Jews, or to those who were at least proselytes. To these disciples, in the first instance, they neither insisted on the observance of the law, nor on any abrogation of it; though at a later period we find St. Paul, more especially, gradually and cautiously point- ing out to them its transitory nature, and that having fulfilled its purpose, it was to cease (e. g. He!), vii. 18). There is nothing to show directly whether the obligation of the Sabbath did or did not share in the general declaration; and the af- firmative or negative must be determined by the weight of the arguments in behalf of the preser- vation of the moral as distinguished from the ceremonial law. It is however clear from several passages in the New Testament, that it continued to be observed as heretofore by these converts, along with the other peculiarities of the law. Our Saviour adds, 'Therefore the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath-day;' which is on all hands agreed to mean that lie had power to abrogate it partially or wholly, if he thought fit, and it is ad- mitted that he did not then think fit to exercise it. With regard to the Gentile converts (who were the more special objects of St. Paul's labours), we find a totally different state of things prevail- ing. They were taught at first the spiritual re- ligion of the Gospel in all its simplicity. But. (he narrow zeal of their Jewish brethren very early led them to attempt the enforcement of the addi- tional burden of the law upon these Gentile Christians. The result was .the explicit aposto- lic decree contained in Acts xv. 28. The omis- sion of the Sabbath among the few things which are there enforced upon them, is advanced by those who doubt the abiding obligation of the in- stitution, as a very strong circumstance in their favour ; and the freedom of these converts from its obligation is regarded by them as conclusively proved in Col. ii. 16, and clearly implied in Ilom. xiv 6, where the Sabbaths are said to be VOL. II , placed in exactly the same predicament as new moons, distinctions of meats, &c, and all ex- plicitly declared to be shadows. It is also urged that in the discourses of the apostles to the hea- then recorded in the Acts, we find not the slight- est allusion to any patriarchal obligations, of which, if such had existed, it would have been ma- nifestly necessary to have informed their hearers. These last arguments appear to us to be the strongest of any that have yet been advanced in favour of the view indicated ; nor do we see how they can be met but by urging the distinction between the moral and ceremonial law, and the paramount obligation of the former, while the latter is abrogated : for it will then follow, that the whole moral law being of unchangeable obli- gation, it was not necessary to specify the Sabbath in particular, when the general obligation of the whole was understood. This answer does not, however, meet the argument founded on Col. ii. 16, which is alleged to place the Sabbath under the ceremonial law, if the distinction of the moral and ceremonial divisions of the law be admitted. That text is indeed of the utmost importance to the question ; of this the disputants on both sides have been fully aware, and have joined issue upon it. The view of those who are opposed to the sabbatic obligation, has been already given : that of the other side may be expressed in the words of Bishop Horsley (Sermons, i. 357). ' From this text, no less a man than the venerable Calvin drew the conclusion, in which he has been rashly followed by other considerable men, that the' sanctification of the seventh day is no indispen- sable duty of the Christian church ; that, it is one of those carnal ordinances of the Jewish re- ligion which our Lord had blotted out. The truth, however, is, that in the apostolical age, the first day of the week, though it was observed with great reverence, was not called the Sabbath-day, but the Lord's day ; that the separation of the Christian church from the Jewish communion might be marked by the name as well as by the day of their weekly festival ; and the name of the sabbath-days was appropriated to the Satur- days, and certain days in the Jewish church which were likewise called Sabbaths in the law, because they were observed with no less sanctity. The sabbath-days, therefore, of which St. Paul in this passage speaks, were not the Sundays of the Christians, but the Saturday and other sabbaths of the Jewish calendar. The Judaizing heretics, with whom St. Paul was all his life engaged, were strenuous advocates for the observance of these Jewish festivals in the Christian church; ami his (St. Paul's) admonition to the Colossians, is, that they should not be disturbed by the cen- sures of those who reproached them for neglecting to observe these sabbaths with Jewish ceremonies.' To the same effect, see Macknight and Bulkley, on Col. ii. 16. The difference of opinion, then, is this, that f lie passage is alleged, on one side, to abrogate altogether the sabbatic observance ; while on the other it is contended, that it applies only "to that part of it which was involved in the ceremonial law. The question thus becomes further narrowed to the point, whether it is right or not to transfer to the Lord's day the name, the idea, and many of the obligations of the Jewish Sabbadi? The ue- 2 u 658 SABBATH. gative 5s asserted by two very opposite parties ; by the Sabbatarians as a body, and by indivi- duals in different denominations, who take their stand upon the primitive determination of the Sabbath to the seventh day, in commemoration of the creation ; and who therefore bold that the Saturday or seventh day must remain, to all time, the day of rest, unless altered by an authority equal to that by which it was established. They deny that the authority for any such alteration is to be found in the New Testament ; for they understand the passage above referred to (Col. ii. 16), to apply not to the day, but to the pecu- liar observances which (he Jewish law connected with it (Rupp, B-eliff. Denom. pp. 83-91). The right of thus transferring the idea of the Sabbath to the Lord's day, is also denied by those who believe that the Sabbath was entirely a Mosaical institution, and as such abrogated, along with the whole body of the law, at t lie death of Christ, which closed the old shadowy dispensation, and opened the realities of the new. It is admitted that Christ himself did not abrogate it, though he asserted his right to do so; for the old dispensation sub- sisted till his death. But being then abro- gated, it is denied that it was re-enacted through the Apostles, or that they sanctioned the transfer of the Sabbatic obligations to the Sunday, al- though the early Christians did, with their appro- bation, assemble on that day — as the day on which their Lord arose from the dead — for wor- ship, and to partake in the memorials of his love [Lord's Day.]. In answer to this, it is urged, that tiie transfer or change was made under the authority of the Apostles. It is, indeed, allowed, that there is no- express command to that effect ; but as it was done in the apostolic age (which, however, the other side does not admit), the consent of the Apostles is to be understood. More cogent is the argument, that the day itself was not an essential part of the original enactment, which oTdains not necessarily every seventh day, but one day in seven, as holy time. In the primitive ages of man, the creation of the world was the benefac- tion by which God was principally known, and for which he was chiefly to be worshipped. The Jews, in their religious assemblies, had to com- memorate other blessings — the political creation of their nation out of Abraham's family, and their deliverance from Egyptian bondage. Christians have to commemorate, besides the common benefit of the creation, the transcendant blessing of our redemption, — our new creation to the hope of everlasting life, of which our Lord's resurrection on the first day of the week was a sure pledge and evidence. Thus in the progress of ages, the Sabbath acquired new ends, by new manifestations of the divine mercy; and these new ends justify corresponding alterations of the original institution. Horsley, and those who agree with him, allege, that upon our Lord's resurrection, the Sabbath was transferred in me- mory of that event, the great foundation of the Christian's hope, from the last to the first day of the week. ' Tire alteration seems to have been made by the authority of the Apostles, and to have taken place the very day in which our Lord arose ; for on that day the Apostles were assem- bled ; and on that day sevennight they were assembled again. The celebration of these two SABBATH. first Sundays was honoured by our Lord's pre- sence. It was, perhaps, to set a mark of distinc- tion upon this day in particular, that the inter- vening week passed off, as it would seem, without: any repetition of his first visit to the eleven Apostles. From that time, the Sunday was the constant Sabbath of the primitive church. The Christian, therefore, who devoutly sanctifies one day in seven, although it be on the first day of the week, not the last, as was originally ordained, may rest assured, that he fully satisfies the spirit of the ordinance ' (Horsley, i. 334j 335 ; compare Holden's Christian Sabbath, pp. 286, 287). In justification of the change, it has also been well remarked, that the same portion of time which constituted the seventh day from the crea- tion could not be simultaneously observed in all parts of the earth,, and that it is not therefore pro- bable that the original institution expressed more than one day in seven — a seventh day of rest after six days of toil, from whatever point the enume- ration might set out or the weekly cycle begin. I f more had been intended, it would have been neces- sary to establish a rule for the reckoning of days themselves, which has been different, in different nations ; some reckoning from evening to evening, as the Jews do now ; others from midnight to mid- night, &c. Even if this point were determined, the difference of time produced by difference of latitude and longitude would again throw the whole into disorder ; and it is not probable that a law intended to be universal would be fettered with that circumstantial exactness which would render difficult, and sometimes doubtful astrono- mical calculations necessary in order to its being obeyed according to the intentions of the lawgiver. It is true that this very argument might be add uced on the other side, to prove that the obligations of the Sabbatic observance were originally limited to the Jews. It is not, however, our object, nor would it be possible, to exhaust all the arguments which bear upon the subject. Enough has been produced to indicate the bearings of the question, and at the end of the article materials are fur- nished for more minute inquiry. It appears to- us that great confusion and much injustice have arisen from confounding the different shades of opinion respecting the Sabbath. They might be thus discriminated : — 1. Those who believe that the Sabbath is of binding and sacred obligation, both as a primitive institution and as a moral law of the Mosaical' code. These may be divided into : a. Those who contend for the very day of the Mosaical institution. b. Those who believe the obligation to have been transferred to the first day by the Apostles. 2. Those who deny that the Sabbath was a primitive institution, or that its obligation sur- vived the Mosaical dispensation, but who never- theless hold the observance of the Lord's day as an apostolical institution, deriving none of its autho- rity or obligation from the Mosaical dispensation.. 3. Those who both deny the permanent obli- gation of the Sabbath, and that there is any obli- gatory authority in the New Testament for the ob- servance of even the Lord's day. These again may be divided into two classes : — a. Those who hold that, although not of divine obligation, the observance of the first day of the week as a day of rest from toil, and of spiritual SABBATH, SABBATH-DAY'S JOURNEY. 659 edification, is not only salutary but necessary, and is therefore in accordance with the will of God, and ought as such to be maintained. b. Those who assert that, not being a matter of positive injunction, it is not necessary or desirable to observe the day at. all on religious grounds. But even these generally admit that it is com- petent for human legislation to enact its ob- servance as a day of rest, and (hat it then becomes a duty to obey it as the iaw of the land, seeing that it is not contrary to the will of God. c. A mixed view of tire subject, arisingout of the two last, seems to be entertained by the Quakers, and by individuals in different denominations ; namely, that the authorized institution of Moses respecting a weekly Sabbath, and the practice of the first teachers of Christianity, constitute a sufficient recommendation to set apart certain times for the exercise of public worship, even were there no such injunctions as that of Heb. x. 23. Community of dependence and hope dic- tates the propriety of united worship, and worship, to be united, must be performed at intervals pre- viously fixed. But, it is urged, since the Jewish Sabbath is abrogated, and since the assembling together on the first day of the week is mentioned as an existing practice in the New Testament, but not enjoined as a positive obligation, it does not appear why these periods should recur at intervals of seven days any more than of five or ten. Nevertheless, it is added, 'the question whether we are to observe the first day of the week because it is the first clay, is one point — whether we ought, to devote it to religious exer- cises, seeing that it is actually set apart for the purpose, is another. Bearing in mind then that it is right to devote some portion of our time to these exercises, and considering that no objection exists to the day which is actually appropriated, the duty seems very obvious — so to employ it' (Jonathan Dymond, Essays on the Principles of Morality, i. 164-172); This testimony in favour of the observance, from 07ie who utterly denies the religious obli- gation of setting even one day in seven apart, is not unlike that of Dr. Arnold, who seems to have taken the view of the subject represented in 3, w. In a letl or to Mr. Justice Coleridge, he says : — 'Although I think that, the whole law is done away with, so far as it. is the law given in Mount Sinai, yet so far as it is the law of the Spirit, I hold it to be all binding; and believing that our peed of a Lord's day is as great as ever it. was, and that, therefore, its observance is God's will, and is likely, so far as we see, to be so to the end of time; I should think it most mischievous to weaken the respect paid to it' (Life and Corre- spondence, i. 855). We have entered into these details concerning the differences of opinion on this important subject — which concerns one-seventh of man's life — for the sake of defining the exact amount of such differences, and of showing that pious men, Brncerely seeking the truth of God's word, may on the one hand conscientiously doubt the obligation of a Christian Sabbath without deserving to be stigmatised as Antinomians, scoffers, or profane; and on the other, may uphold it without being regarded as Judaizers and formalists. A very gratifying result which arises from the contem- plation of these differences as to the nature and extent of the obligation, will be found in the clearer perception of the agreement to which they all tend, in favour of the observance itself, as in the highest degree conducive to the health of the mind and the nourishment of the soul (Calvin, Instit. Christ. Belig. lib. ii. ch. 8 ; Brerewood, Treatise of the Sabbath; Bp. Prideaux, Doc- trine of the Sabbath ; Abp. Bramhall, Discourses on the Controversy about the Sabbath ; Bp. White, Treatise of the Sabbath Day ; Heylin, History of the Sabbath ; Chandler, Two Sermons on the Sabbath ; Wotton, On the Mishna, i. 205 : Warburton, Divine Legation, iv. 36, note ; Watts' Perpetuity of the Sabbath ; Kennicott, Serm. and Dialog, on the Sabbath ; Porteus, Sermons, vol. i. serm. 9 ; Horsley's Sermons, u.s. ; Paley, Natural and Political Philosophy, b. v. c. 7; Holden's Christian Sabbath ; Butnside, On the Weekly Sabbath ; Burder's Law of the Sabbath; Wardlajv, Wilson, and Agnew, severally, On the Sabbath ; Modern Sabbath Examined, 1 832 ; Archbishop Whately, Difficulties of St. Paul, Essav v. note on Sahhath).* SABBATH-DAYS JOURNEY (ca^irov 686s, Acts i. 12), the distance which the Jews were permitted to journey from and return to their places of residence upon the Sabbath-day (Exod. xvi. 29). The Israelites were forbidden to go beyond ihe encampment (to collect manna) upon the Sabbath-day ; which circumstance seems to have given rise to the regulation — which is not distinctly enjoined in the law, although it might be fairly deduced from the principle on which the ' legislation concerning the Jewish Sabbath was founded — that no regular journey ought to be made on the Sabbath-day (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 8. 4). The intention of the lawgiver in this respect was also indicated by the direction, that beasts should rest on the Sabbath-day (comp. ch. xxiv. 26). The later Jews, as usual, drew a large number of precise and minute regulations from these plain and simple indications. Thus the distance to which a Jew might travel was limited to 2000 cubits beyond the walls of the city or the borders of his residence, because the innermost tents of the Israelites' camp in the wilderness are supposed to have been that distance from the tabernacle (Josh. iii. 4), and because the same distance beyond a city for a Sabbath-day's journey is supposed to be indicated in Num. xxxv. 4, 5 (Lightfoot, llor. Heb. in Luke xxiv. 50; Acts i. 12) ; Targ. on Ruth, i. 16; Jarchi on Josh. iii. 4; Oecum on Acts i. 12). This also is the distance stated in the Talmud (Tract. Erubin), where the mode of measuring is determined, and the lew cases are specified in which persons might venture to exceed the distance of 2000 cubits. Some of the Rabbins, however, distinguish a great (2800 cubits), a middling (2000 cubits), and a lesser (1800 cubits) Sabbath-day's journey. Epipha- nius (Eaer. 6*6 82) estimates the Sabbath-day's* journey by the Greek measure of six .- equal to 750 Roman geographical paces (1000 of which made a Roman mile). In agreement with * In this article the view of the subject to which prevalent ideas are much Opposed h is be n furnished by a contributor (B. P.); and the arguments which it appeared necessary to insert on the other side have, with his concurrency been subjoined by the Editor. J 2u2 660 SACKCLOTH. this is the statement of Josephus (Bell. Jud. v. 2. 3), who makes the Mount of Olives to be about six stades from Jerusalem ; and it is the distance between these two places which in Acts i. 12 is given as a Sabbath-day's journey. It is true that Josephus elsewhere determines the same distance as five stades (Antiq. xx. 8. 6) ; but both were probably loose statements rather than measured distances ; and both are below the ordinary esti- mate of 2000 cubits. Taking all circumstances into account, it seems likely that the ordinary Sabbath-day's journey was a somewhat loosely determined distance, seldom more than the whole and seldom less than three-quarters of a geogra- phical mile (Selden, De Jure Nat. ct Gent. iii. 9; Frischmuth, Dissert, de Itin. Sabbat. 1670; Walther, Dissert, de Itin. Sabbat.; both in The- saurus Theolog. Philog., Amsterd. 1720). SABBATIC YEAR. [Jubilee.] SABvEANS. [Sheba.] SACHAFH. [Cuckoo; Gull.] SACKCLOTH. The Hebrew word for sack- cloth, or sack-'mg, is p& sak ; in the Sept. and New Testament, crdnKos ; and as it has been pre- served in most languages (our own included) to denote the same thing, much ingenious specula- tion has been brought to bear upon it — chiefly as a venerable monument of the primitive language, from which it is supposed to have been derived by all the nations in whose vocabularies it has been found. The sackcloth mentioned in Scripture was, as it is still in the East, a coarse black cloth, com- monly made of hair (Rev. vi. 12), and was used for straining liquids, for sacks, and for mourning garments. In the latter case it was worn instead of the ordinary raiment, or bound upon the loins, or spread under the mourner on the ground (Gen. xxxvii. 31 : 1 Kings xxiii. 2 ; Isa. lviii. 5 ; Joel i. 8; Jon. iii. 5) [Mourning]. Such garments were also worn by prophets, and by ascetics gene- rally (Isa. xx. 2; Zech. iii. 4; comp. 2 Kings i. 8 ; Matt. v. 4) [Prophecy]. SACRIFICES. The sacrifices and other offer- ings required by the Hebrew ritual have been enu- merated under Offering ; and in this place it is only requisite to offer a few remarks upon the great and much controverted questions — Whether sacri- fice was in its origin a human invention, or a divine institution ; and whether any of the sa- crifices before the law, or under Ihe law, were sacrifices of expiation. Eminent and numerous are the authorities on both sides of these questions ; but the balance of theological opinion preponde- rates greatly for the affirmative in each of them. On the latter point, however, most of those who deny that there was any expiatory sacrifice be- fore the law, admit its existence under the law : and on the first, those who hold that sacrifice was of Divine origin, but became much corrupted, and was restored by the Mosaic law, do not in substance differ much from those who hold it to have been a human invention, formally recog- nised, and remodelled by the law of Moses. From the universality of sacrifice, it is ob- vious that the rite arose either from a common source, or from a common sentiment among na- tions widely dispersed, and very differently con- stituted. Remembering that Noah, the common ancestor of the post-diluvian nations, offered sa- SACRIFICES. crifice, we are enabled to trace back the custom through all nations to him ; and he doubtless derived it through the antediluvian fathers, from the sacrifices which the first men celebrated, of which we have an example in that of Abel. The question concerning the divine or human origin of sacrifices, therefore, centres upon the conclu- sions which we may be able to draw from the circumstances and preliminaries of that transac- tion. Abel brought for sacrifice one of the lambs of his fiock, for he was a shepherd ; and with his offering God was well pleased : Cain brought of the fruits of the ground, for he was a husband- man ; and with his offering God was not well pleased. Now out of this arise the questions — Was this the first animal sacrifice? and if it was, Was it offered by Abel from the spontaneous im- pulse of his own mind, or by command from God? and if not by divine command, How was it that his offering was more acceptable than his bro- ther's ? That this was not the first sacrifice is held by many to be proved by the fact, that ' unto Adam and his wife the Lord made coats of skin, and clothed them' (Gen. iii. 21) ; for, it is urged, that as animal food does not appear to have been used before the deluge, it is not easy to understand whence these skins came, probably before any animal had died naturally, unless from beasts offered in sacrifice. And if the first sacrifices had been offered by Adam, the arguments for the di- vine institution of the rite are of the greater force, seeing that it was less likely to occur spontane- ously to Adam than to Abel, who was a keeper of sheep. Further, if the command was given to Adam, and his sons had been trained in observance of the rite, we can the better understand the merit of Abel and the demerit of Cain, without further explanation. Apart from any considerations arising out of the skin-vestures of Adam and his wife, it would seem that if sacrifice was a divine institution, and, especially, if the rite bore a piacu- lar significance, it would have been at once prescribed to Adam, after sin had entered the world, and death by sin, and not have been post- poned till his sons had readied manhood. W animal sacrifice was the invention of Abel, testifying his thanks to God. by offering that which was most valuable to him, the question comes, Where was the offence of Cain, and why was his offering despised? It is suggested that Abel brought the best of his flock, and Cain only the refuse of his produce ; or, that Abel believed, and Cain disbelieved, that his offering would be accepted. This latter explanation is thought to be borne out by the allegation of the Apostle (Heb. xi. 4), that it was ' by faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain.' If, how- ever, sacrifice had been divinely commanded, this faith was that manifested in obeying the com- mand; and if it was also piacular, it might be even referred to a belief in the doctrine of atone- ment for sin, which the rite in that case must have adumbrated. One of the most recent writers on the subject, the Rev. J. Davison, in his Inquiry into the Origin and Intent of Primitive Sacrifice, adduces (on the authority of Spencer and Outram) the consent of the fathers in favour of the human origin of primitive patriarchal sacrifice ; and alleges, that the notion of its divine origin is c a mere modem SACRIFICES. figment, excogitated in the presumptively specu- lative age of innovating Puritanism.' This as- sertion has been ably, arid we think successfully, met by the Rev. G. S. Fabcr, in his Treatise on the Origin of Expiatory Sacrifice. He shows that the only authorities adduced by Outram and Spencer are Justin Martyr, Chrysostom. the au- thor of the work called Apostolical Constitu- tions, and the author of the Questions and Answers to the Orthodox, commonly printed with the works of Justin Martyr. Of the early theologians thus adduced, the three last are posi- tive and explicit in their assertion; while the sentiments of Justin Martyr are gathered rather by implication than in consequence of any direct avowal. He says, ' as circumcision commenced from Abraham, so the sabbath, and sacrifices, and oblations, and festivals, commenced from Moses ;' which clearly intimates that he consi- dered primitive sacrifice as a human invention until made by the law a matter of religious obli- gation. The great body of the fathers are silent as to the origin of sacrifice : but a considerable number of them, cited by Spencer (T>e Legib. Heb. p. 646, sq.), held that sacrifice was admitted into the law through condescension to the weak- ness of the people, who had been familiarised to it in Egypt, and if not allowed to sacrifice to God, would have been tempted to sacrifice to the idols of their heathen neighbours. The ancient writers who held this opinion are Justin Martyr, Origen, Tertullian, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Cyril of Alexandria, Epiphanius of Salamis, Ireneeus, Jerome, Procopius, Euclierius, Anastasius, and the author of the Ap>ostolical Constitutions. But out of the entire number, only the four already mentioned allege incidentally the human origin of primitive sacrifice : the rest are silent on this point. Outram indeed (De Sacrif. lib. i. cap. 1, § 6, pp. 8, 9) thinks, that in giving this opinion, they virtually deny the. divine origin of sacrifice. But it is fairly answered, that the assertion, be it right or be it wrong, that sacrifice was introduced into the law from condescension to the Egyptian- izing weakness of the people, furnishes no legiti- mate proof that the persons entertaining this opinion held the merehuman origin of primitive patriarchal sacrifice, and affords no ground for alleging the consent of Christian antiquity in favour of that opi- nion. Such persons could not but have known, that the rite of sacrifice existed anterior to the rise of pagan idolatry: and hence the notion whicli they entertained leaves the question, as to the jirimitivc origin of sacrifice, entirely open, so far as they are concerned. Paganism, whether in Egypt or elsewhere, merely borrowed the rite from pure Patriarchism, which already possessed it : and unless a writer expressly declares such to be his opinion, we are not warranted in conclud- ing that he held the human origin of primitive patriarchal sacrifice, simply because he conceives that a system of sacrificial service hail been immediately adopted into the law from Paganism out of condescension to the weakness of the people. Besides, some of these very lathers held language with respect to primitive sacrifice, not much in favour of the interpretation which has on this ground been given to their sentiments. Thus, according to Cyril, ' God accepted the sacrifice of Abel and rejected the sacrifice of Cain, because it was fitting that posterity should learn from SACRIFICES. 661 thence, how they might blamelessly offer unto God his meet and due honour.' If, then, these authorities be taken as neutral on the question, with the four exceptions al- ready indicated, we shall find whatever au- thority we ascribe to these more than counter- balanced by the testimony of other ancient wit- nesses in favour of the divine origin of primitive sacrifice. Philo-Judasus says, ' Abel brought neither the same oblation as Cain, nor in the same manner ; but instead of things inanimate, he brought tilings animate; and instead of later and secondary products, he brought the older and the first : for he offered in sacrifice from the first- lings of his flock, and from their fat, according to the most holy command (kcito rb Upwrarbv StaTay/xa: — De Sacrif. Abel, et Cain. Opp. p. 145). Augustine, alter expressly referring the origin of sacrifice to the divine command, more distinctly evolves his meaning by saying-: ' The prophetic immolation of blood, testifying from the very commencement of the human race the future passion of the Mediator, is a matter of deep antiquity : inasmuch as Abel is found in Holy Scripture to have been the first who offered up this prophetic immolation ' (Cont. Faust. Munich. Opp. vi. 145). Next we come to Atha- nasius, who, speaking of the consent of the Old Testament to the fundamental doctrines of the New, says : ' What Moses taught, these things his predecessor Abraham had preserved : and what Abraham had preserved, with those things Enoch and Noah were well acquainted ; for they made ' a distinction between the clean and the unclean, and were acceptable to God. Thus also in like manner Abel bore testimony ; for he knew what he had learned from Adam, and Adam himself taught only what he had previously learned from the Lord (Synod. Nicen. contr. Hcer. Arian. de- cret., Opp. i. 403). Eusebins of Caesarea, in a passage too long for quotation, alleges, that ani- mal sacrifice was first of all practised by the ancient lovers of God (the patriarchs), and that not by accident, but through a certain divine con- trivance, under which, as taught by the Divine spirit, it became their duty thus to shadow forth the great and venerable victim, really acceptable to God, which was, in time then future, destined to be offeied in behalf of the whole human race (JDemonst. Evang. i. S. pp. 24, 25). These testimonies certainly vindicate the opinion of the divine origin of primitive sacrifice from (he charge of being a modern innovation, with no voice of antiquity in its favour. Among the considerations urged in support of the opinion, that sacrifice must have originated in a divine command, it has been suggested as ex- ceedingly doubtful, whether? independently of such a command, and as distinguished from vegetable oblations, animal sacrifice, which involves the practice of slaughtering and burning an innocent victim, could ever, under any aspect, have been adopted as a rile likely to gain the favour of God. Our own course of scriptural education prevents us, perhaps, from being competent judges on this point : but. we have means of judging how so sin- gular a rite must strike the minds of thinking men, not in the same degree prepossessed by early associations. The ancient Greek masters of thought not (infrequently expressed their astonish- ment how and upon what rational principles, so 662 SACRIFICES. strange an institution as that of animal sacrifice could ever have originated ; for as to the notion of its being pleasing to the Deity, such a thing struck them as a manifest impossibility (Jamblic. DeVit.Pythag.yy. 106-118; Porphyv. De Abstin. p. 96 ; Theophrast. et Porphyr. apud Euseb. Praep. Evang. pp. 90, 91). Those who do not believe that sacrifices were of divine institution, must dispose of this difficulty by alleging, that, when men had come to slay animals for their own food, they might think it right to slay them to satisfy their gods: and, in fact, Grotius, who held the human origin of sacrifices, and yet be- lieved that animal food was not used before the Deluge, is reduced to the expedient of contending that. Abel's offering was not an animal sacrifice, but only the produce — the milk and wool — of his best sheep. This, however, shows that he believed animal sacrifice to have been impossible before the Deluge, without the sanction of a divine com- mand, the existence of which he discredited. A strong moral argument in favour of the divine institution of sacrifice, somewhat feebly put by Hallet (Comment, on Heb. xi. 4, cited by Magee, On the Atonement), has been reproduced with increased force by Faber (Prim. Sacrifice, p. 183). It amounts to this : — Sacrifice, when uncommanded by God, is a mere act of gratuitous superstition: Whence, on the principle of St. Paul's reprobation of what he denominates will-worship, it is. neither acceptable nor pleasing to God. But sacrifice, during the patriarchal ages, was accepted by God, and was plainly honoured with his approbation. Therefore sacrifice, during the patriarchal age, could not have been an act of superstition uncom- manded by God. W, then, such was the character of primitive sacrifice ; that is to say, if primitive sacrifice was not a mere act of gratuitous superstition uncom- manded hi God, — it must, in that case, in- dubitably iiave been a divine, and not a human institution. If it be held that any of the ancient sacrifices were expiatory, or piacular, the argument for their divine origin is strengthened ; as it. is hard to conceive the combination of ideas under which the notion of expiatory sacrifice could be worked out by the human mind. This difficulty is so great, that, the ablest advocates of the human origin of primitive animal sacrifice, feel bound also to deny that such sacrifices as then existed were piacular. It' is strongly insisted that the doctrine of an atonement by animal sacrifice cannot be deduced from the light of nature, or from the principles of reason. If, therefore, the idea existed, if. must either have arisen in the fer- tile soil of a guessing superstition, or have been divinely appointed. Now we know that God cannot approve of unwarranted and presumptu- ous superstition : if therefore he can be shown to have received with approbation a species of sa- crifice undiscoverable by the light of nature, or from the principles of reason, it follows that it must have been of his own institution. Here, however, the argument again divaricates. Some are unable to see that piacular sacrifices existed under, or were commanded by, the law of Moses ; while others admit this, but deny that animal sacrifice, with an expiatory intent, existed SACRIFICES. before the law. It appeats to us, that the differ- ence of opinion as to the existence of expiatory sacrifice under the law, is more apparent than real, and arises from the different senses in which the term ' expiatory sacrifice ' is understood. It will often transpire, that those who deny its ex- istence have an idea of such a sacrifice different from that, of the persons whom they think them- selves opposing, but from whom they do not, in fact, materially differ. In general, those who do not admit the doctrine of the atonement through the death of Christ, do not see that, certain sacrifices of the law were piacular : and on their own premises, they reason justly ; for unless expiatory sacrifice prefigured the atonement of- fered by Jesus Christ, there appears no adequate reason for the existence of expiatory sacrifice as a divine institution, and it is difficult to believe that it could (as piacular) have been a human invention. In fact, apart from the doctrine of the atonement, the subject of expiatory sacrifice ceases to be of any material interest. The question, of the existence of expiatory sa- crifice before the law, is more difficult, and is de- nied by Outram, Ernesti, Doederlin, Davison, and many others, who believe that it was revealed under the law ; as well as by those who doubt its existence under the Mosaical dispensation. The arguments already stated in favour of the divine institution of primitive sacrifice, go equally to support the existence of piacular sacrifice ; the idea of which seems more urgently to have re- quired a divine intimation. Besides, expiatory sacrifice is found to have existed among all na- tions, in conjunction with eucharistic and im- petratory sacrifices ; and it lies at the root of the principle on which human sacrifices were offered among the ancient nations. The expiatory view of sacrifice is frequently produced by heathen writers : — ' Cor pro corde, precor, pro fibra sumite fibras ; Hanc animam vobis pro meliore damus.' Ovid. Fccsti, vi. 161. This being the case, it is difficult to believe but that the idea was derived, along with animal sacrifice itself, from the practice of Noah, and preserved among his various descendants. This argument, if valid, would show the primitive origin of piacular sacrifice. Now there can be no doubt that the idea of sacrifice which Noah transmitted to the post-diluvian world, was the same that he had derived from his pious an- cestors, and the same that was evinced by the sacrifice of Abel, to which we are, by the course of the argument, again brought back. Now if that sacrifice was expiatory, we have reason to conclude that it was divinely commanded : and the supposition that it was both expiatory and divinely commanded, makes the whole his- tory far more clear and consistent than any other which has been or can be offered. It amounts then to this — that Cain, by bringing an eu- charistic offering, when his brother brought one which was expiatory, denied virtually that his sins deserved death, or that he needed the blood of atonement. Some go further, and allege that in the text itself, God actually commanded Cain to offer a piacular sacrifice. The. argument does not require this additional circumstance ; but it is certainly strengthened by it. When Cain be-- SACRIFICE, HUMAN. •came angry that Abel's offering was regarded with Divine complacency, and his own refused, God said to him, 'Why art thou wroth; and why is thy countenance fallen ? If thou doest well, shalt thou not he accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.'' Now the word i"INDn chattah, translated 'sin,' denotes in the law a ' sin-offering ;' and the word j'21 translated 'lieth,' is usually applied to the re- cumbency of a beast. It is therefore proposed to translate the clause, 'a sin-offering coucheth at the door :' which by paraphrase would mean, ' an animal fit for a sin-offering is there, couching at the door, which thou mayest offer in sacrifice, and thereby render to me an offering as accejDt- able as that which Abel has presented.' These are the principal considerations which seem suitable to this place, on a subject to the complete investigation of which many large vo- lumes have been devoted. See Outram, De Sacrificiis ; Sykes, Essay on the Nature, Origin, and Design of Sacrifices; Taylor, Scripture Doctri?ie of the Atonement, 1758 ; Ritchie, Criticism upon Modern Notions of Sacrifices, 1761 ; Magee, Discourses on Atonement and Sacrifices ; Davison, Inquiry, &c, 1825 ; Faber, Primitive Sacrifices, &c, 1827. SACRIFICE, HUMAN. The offering of hu- man life, as the most precious thing on earth, came in process of time to be practised in most countries of the world. All histories and tra- ditions darken our idea of the earlier ages with human sacrifices. But the period when such prevailed was not the earliest in time, though probably the earliest in civilization. The prac- tice was both a result and a token of barbarism more or less gross- In this, too, the dearest object was primitively selected. Human life is the most precious thing on earth, and of this most precious possession the most precious portion is the life of a child. Children therefore were offered in fire to the false divinities, and in no part of the world with less regard to the claims of natural affection than in the land where, at a later period, the only true God had his peculiar worship and highest honours. It is under these circumstances a striking fact that the Hebrew religion, even in its most rudi- mental condition, should be free from the conta- mination of human sacrifices. The case of Isaac and that of Jephtbah's daughter cannot impair the general truth, that the offering of human beings is neither enjoined, allowed, nor practised in the Bi- blical records. On the contrary, such an offering is strictly prohibited by Moses, as adverse to the will of God, and an abomination of the heathen. ' Thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Moloch : defile not yourselves with any of these things' (Lev. xviii. 21 ; see also ch. xx. 2; Deut. xii." 31 ; Ps. cvi. 37; Isa. lxvi. 3; Jer. xxiii. 37). Yet in an age in which, like the present, all manner of novelties are broached, and, in some cases, the greater the paradox broached with the more promptitude, and main- tained with the greater earnestness, these very clear positions have been withstood, and human sacrifices have been charged confidently on the Hebrew race. In the year IS 12, Cliilhmy, pro- fessor at Niirnberg, published a book (Die Men- schcnopfer der alien Hebriier), the object of which was to prove that, as the religion of the SADDUCEES. 663 ancient Hebrews did not differ essentially from that of the Canaanites, so that Moloch, who had been originally a god common to both, merely in the process of time was softened down and passed into Jehovah, thus becoming the national deity of the people of Israel: so did their altars smoke with human blood, from the time of Abra- ham down to the fall of both kingdoms of Judah and Israel. In the same year appeared in Ger- many another work, by Daumer (Der Feuer und Molochdienst der alien Hebriier), intended to prove that the worship of Moloch, involving his bloody rites, was the original legal and orthodox worship of the nation of Abraham, Moses, Samuel, and David. To these works a reply was put forth in 1843, by Lowengard (Jehovah, nicht Moloch, war der Gott der alten Hebriier), in which he defends the worship of Jehovah from the recent imputations, and strives, by distin- guishing between the essential and the unessen- tial, the durable and the temporary, to prepare the way for a reformation of modern Judaism. We do not think that it requires any deep re- search or profound learning to ascertain from the Biblical records themselves, that the religion of the Bible is wholly free from the shocking abomi- nations of human sacrifices ; and we do not there- fore hesitate to urge the fact on the attention of the ordinary reader, as not least considerable among many proofs not only of the superior cha- racter, but of the divine origin, of the Hebrew worship. It was in Egypt where the mind of Moses and of the generation witli whom he had primarily to do, was chiefly formed, so far as' heathen influences were concerned. Here offer- ings were very numerous. Sacrifices of meat- offerings, libations and incense, were of very early date in the Egyptian temples. Oxen, wild goats, pigs, and particularly geese, were among the ani- mal offerings ; besides these there were presented to the gods wine, oil, beer, milk, cakes, grain, oint- ment, flowers, fruits, vegetables. In these, and in the case of meat, peace and sin offerings (as well as others), there exists a striking resemblance with similar Hebrew observances, which may be found indicated in detail in Wilkinson (Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, v. 35S; sq. ; see also ii. 378), who, in agreement with He- rodotus, maintains, in opposition to Diodorus, that the Egyptians were never accustomed to sacrifice human beings : a decision which has a favourable aspect on our last position, namely, that the religion of the Israelites, even in its earliest days, was unprofaned by human blood. A remarkable instance of disagreement between the observances of the Egyptians and the Jews, in regard to sacrifices, is, that while the Egyptians received the blood of the slaughtered animal into a vase or basin, to be applied in cookery, the eat- ing of blood was most strictlv forbidden to the Israelites (Deut. xv. 23).— J. R. B. SADDUCEES : one of the three sects of Jewish philosophers, of which the Pharisees and the Essenes were the others, who had reached their highest state of prosperity about the commence- ment of the Christian era. In every highly developed social system the ele- ments are found to exist which led to the forma- tion of the sect of Sadducees. Hut these elements were in fuller amplitude and more decided energy among the post-exilian Jews than in most ancient SADDUCEES. SADDUCEES". nations. The peculiar doctrines and practices of the Pharisees naturally begot the Sadduceean system. The first embodied the principle of vene- ration, which looted on the past with so much regard as to become enamoured of its forms as well as its substance, its ivy as well as its columns, its corruptions no less than its excellences, taking and maintaining the whole with a warm but blind and indiscriminate affection ; the second, alienated by the extravagances .of the former, were led to seize on the principle of rationalism, and hence to investigate prevalent customs, and weigh received opinions, till at length investiga- tion begot, scepticism, and scepticism issued in the positive rejection of many established notions and observances. The principle of the Sadducee is thus obviously an offshoot from the rank growth of conservatism and orthodoxy. Corruption brings reform. And as it is not possible for the same individuals, nor for the same classes of men, to perform the dissimilar acts of conservatism and reformation, so must there be, if Pharisees, Sad- ducees also in society. It is for the good of men that the latter should come into being, seeing that the principle represented by the former arises, in- evitably, in the actual progress of events. True wisdom, however, consists in avoiding the extremes peculiar to both, and aims to make man possessor of all the good which the past can bestow and all the good which the present can produce, uniting in one happy result the benign results of conser- vatism and improvement, retention of the past and progress in the present. It would be easy to show how the several par- ticulars which were peculiar to the Sadducee arose out of Pharisaic errors. As, however, we wish to give to this necessarily brief notice an his- torical character, we shall content ourselves with one instance — the doctrine of tradition. By an excessive veneration of .the Mosaic institutions and sacred books, the Pharisees had been led to regard every thing which concerned them as sacred. But if the text, and the observance were holy, holy also was that, which explained their meaning cr unfolded their hidden signification. Hence the exposition of the ancients came to be received with respect equal to that with which the very words of the founders and original writers were regarded. Tradition was engrafted on the vine of Israel. But all exposition is relative to the mind of the expositor. Accordingly various expositions came into being. Every age, every doctor gave a new exposition. Thus a diverse and contradictory, as well as a huge, mass of opinions was formed.which overlaid and hid the law of God, Then a true reverence for that law identified itself with the principle of the Sadducee. and the Pharisee was made to appear as not only the author but the patron and advocate of corruption. The time when the sect of the Sadducees came into existence, history doe3 not define. From what lias been advanced it appears that they were pos- terior to the Pharisees. And although so soon as the Pharisaic elements began to become excessive, there existed in Judaism itself a sufficient source for Sadduceeism, yet, as a fact, we have no doubt that Grecian philosophy lent its aid to the development of Sadduceeism. Whence we are referred for the rise of the latter to the period when the conquests and the kingdoms which ensued from the expedition of Alexander had diffused a very large portion of Grecian civilization over the soil of the East, and especially over Western Asia. As little is historically known respecting the author of this sect ; there are various statements, but their very variety shows that nothing certain is known. The Rabbins have a story which makes one Zadok, a pupil of Antigonus Jocho, the founder ; who, under the instructions of his master, was, in company with one Baithos, a fellow disciple, led to the conclusion that there is- no future life, and, of course, no retribution aftev death (Pirke Abothti. 3). It has also been said, that the name Sadducee is descriptive — |1p"I^, ' the just ones,' that is, men who were just to the law, to God as, the author of the law and the source of truth, just in their own conceptions and their mode of thinking in contradistinction lothe excesses of the Pharisees ; just every way in tht sense in which our word just is sometimes used — exact, without superfluities, the thing itself apart from accessories, the truth and nothing but the truth. Nor can it be denied that such a view of the sect embodies their peculiar and fundamental principle (Epiphan. Hce?-es. i. 14). A modern critic, Koster (Studien und Kritiken, 1 837, vol. i» p. 1 84), deduces the word, as well as the doctrines- which it represent Si, from the Grecian stoics, which is more ingenious than solid. As may be inferred from what has been ad- vanced, the Sadducees stood in direct opposition to the Pharisees. So they are described by Jose- plras (Antiq. xiii. 10. 6), and so they appear in the New Testament. Hostile, however, as these two sects were, they united for the common purpose of opposing our Lord (Matt. iii. 7 ; xvi. 1,6, lly sq. ; xxii. 23, 34 ;. Acts iv. 1 ;. v. 17). In opposing the Pharisees the Sadducees- were led to impeach their principal doctrines, and so to deny all the ' traditions of the elders,' holding that the law alone was the written source of religious truth (Antiq. xviii. 1. 4). By more than one consi- deration, however, it, might be shown that they are in error who so understand the fact now stated, as if the Sadducees received no other parts of the Jewish canon than the Pentateuch; for in truth they appear to have held the common opinion regarding the sacred books— a fact of some con- , sequence,iuasmuch as we thus gain the determina- tion, on the point- of the Jewish canon, of the cri- tical scepticism of the day. The Sadducees taught that the soul of man perished together with- his body, and that of course there was neither re- ward nor punishment after death (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. ii. 8. 14 ; comp. Matt. xxii. 23). Indeed they appear to have disowned the moral philosophy which obtrudes the idea of recompense. ' Be not as those slaves' — so runs an injunction derived, it is said, from Zadok himself — * who serve their master on this condition, namely, that they receive a reward ; but let the fear of heaven be in you ' (Pirke Aboth, i. 3, and Rabbi Nathan on the pas-age). Were they consistent in this view, they may have held high and worthy ideas of duly, its source and its motives ; ideas, however, which are obviously more suited for men of cultivation like themselves than for the great bulk of human beings. And in views such as this may probably be found a chief cause why they were far less acceptable with the common people and far less influential in the slate than their rivals, the Pha> SADDUCEES. risees. The cold self-reliance and self-sufficiency which sits apart in the enjoyment of the satisfac- tions resulting from its own resources, and aims at nothing beyond its own sphere and nothing higher than its own standard, may possess pecu- liar attractions for the philosophic few, or for the contemptuous scoffer, but is too alien from ordi- nary sympathies, and too unkindling and too tranquil to find general acceptance in any con- dition of society that the world has yet known. It was a position with the Sadducees, that the Scriptures did not contain the doctrine of a future life. In this opinion they have had many fol- lowers in modern times. Yet Jesus himself finds a proof of that doctrine in the Pentateuch (Matt. xxii. 31, 32), and the astonishment which his teaching on the point excited seems to show that it was not an ordinary inference of the Rabbins, but a new doctrine that Jesus then deduced : this makes against the mode of interpretation which would represent this as a sort of argumentum ad hominem, a shaft from the quiver of Christ's ene- mies. That, however, the species of exegesis to which this proof belongs prevailed among the Jews in the time of our Lord there can he no doubt ; for from the period of the return from Babylon it had been gaining ground, was very prevalent in the days of Christ, and abounds in the Talmudical writings. Being, however, a kind of exegetical spiritualism, it was disallowed by the Sadducees, who accordingly rejected the doctrines which by its means had been deduced from the sacred writings. Sadduceeism appears to have been to some ex- tent a logically deduced and systematically formed set of ideas. Making this life the term of our being, and man his own beau ideal, it was naturally led to assert for man all the attributes that he could reasonably claim. Hence it taught the absolute freedom of the human mind. The words of Josephus are emphatic on this point : ' The Pharisees ascribe all to fate and to God, but the Sadducees take away fate entirely, and sup- pose that God is not concerned in our doing or not doing evil ; and they say that to act what is good or what is evil is in man's own choice ; and that all ihings depend on our own selves' (2)e Bell.Jud. ii. 8, 14; Antiq. xiii. 5, 9). An inference injurious to them has been deduced from this position, as if they denied divine Providence alto- gether ; but their reception of the canonical books, and their known observance of the usages for divine worship therein prescribed, are incompa- tible with such a denial. Indeed we have here the same difficulty which has presented itself over and over again ten thousand times to thinking minds, namely, how to unite in harmony the moral freedom of man with the arrangements and behests of the will of Him — '6s rfSrj rd t' iovra, rd t £ffffi[.iwa, Trpo t' tovra. As the Sadducees denied a future state, so also they were led to deny the existence of angels and spirits (Acts xxiii. ft) ; for they appear to have con- cluded that since there were no human spirits in heaven, there could be no oilier beings in the in- visible state hut God. Yet if we allow the force of this deduction, we cannot well understand how, receiving as they did at any rate the five books of Moses, they could bring themselves to disown angel-existences, unless, indeed, it was under the SALACH. 665 influence of a strong repellant influence which came from the extravagant notions entertained on the point by their antagonists the Pharisees. It must, however, be said that this denial, whence- soever it came, shows how entirely theirs was a system of negatives and of materialism; and being such it could, with all its elevated moral conceptions, do very little for the improvement of individuals and the advancement of society. A very natural consequence was, that their doctrine held sway over but comparatively few persons, and those mostly men distinguished by wealth or station {Antiq. xviii. 1. 4; xiii. 10.6). They were the freethinkers of the day, and free- thinking is ordinarily the attribute only of the cultivated and the fortunate. Least of all men are those of a sceptical turn gregarious. They stand on their own individuality ; they enjoy their own independence ; they look down on the vulgar crowd with pity, if not with contempt. They may serve quietly to undermine a social system, but they rarely assume the proselyting character which gave Voltaire and Diderot their terrible power for evil. It has been reserved for modern infidelity to be zealous and enthusiastic. What Josephus says of the repulsi veness of their manners (De Bell.Jud. ii. 8.14) is in keeping with their general principles. A sceptical mate- rialism is generally accompanied by an undue share of self-confidence and self-esteem, which are among the least sociable of human qualities. The Sadducees, equally with the Pharisees, were not only a religious but apolitical party. Indeed as long as the Mosaic polity retained an influ- ence, social policy could hot be sundered from religion ; for religion was everything. Accord- ingly the Sadducees formed a part of the Jewish parliament, the Sanhedrim (Acts xxiii. 6), and sometimes enjoyed the dignity of supreme power in the high-priesthood. Their possession of power, however, seems to have been owing mainly to their individual personal influence, as men of superior minds or eminent position, since the general current of favour ran adversely to them, and their enemies, the Pharisees, spared no means to keep them and their opinions in the back ground. Accordingly in the Rabbinical writings they are branded with the name of heretics, D*1)1^, (Othon. Lex. Rabb. p. 270; see also Trigland, Syntagma de Tribus Sectis ; Ugolini, Triltcere- slum, in vol. xxii. of his Thesaurus ; St'iudlin, Gesch. der Sittenlchre Jesu, i. 443, sq. — J. R. B. SAIL. [Ship.] SAIT. [Zait.] SALACH (llW, Lev. xi. 17 ; Dent, xiv. 17), in common with the usual Greek version KaTapanrris, is considered to have reference to darting, rushing, or stooping like a falcon; and accordingly has been variously applied to the eagle, the jerfalcon, the gannet, the great gull, and the cormorant. Of the Hebrew Salach nothing is known but that it was an unclean bird. The Greek Karapdnriis, associated with Che last mentioned, though noticed by several authors, is not. referred always to the same genus, some making it a minor gull, others a diver. Cuvier considers Gesner to be right in con- sidering it to denote a gull, and it might certainly be applied with propriety to the black-backed gull, ' Larus marinus,' 01 to the glaucous, ' Laru& glaucus ;' but although birds of such powerful 666 SALACH. SALOMK wing and marine habitat are spread over a great part of the world, it does not appear that, if known at tlie extremity of the Mediterranean, they were sufficiently common to have been clearly indicated by either the Hebrew or Greek names, or to have merited being noticed in the Mosaic prohibition. Both the above are in gene- ral northern residents, being rarely seen even so low as the Bay of Biscay, and the species now called '■ Lestris cataractes ' is exclusively Arctic. 476. [Caspian Tern.] With regard to the cormorant, birds of that genus are no doubt found on the coasts of Palestine, where high cliffs extend to the sea-shore: such, for example, as the ' Phalacrocorax pygmams ;' but all the species dive, and none of them rush flying upon their prey, though that habit has been claimed for them by commentators, who have mixed up the natural history of 'cormorants' with that of the 'sula' or 'gannet," which really darts from great elevations into the sea, to catch its prey, rising to the surface sometimes nearly half a minute after the plunge, as we ourselves have witnessed. But the gannet (solan goose) rarely comes farther south than the British Chan- nel, and does not appear to have been noticed in the Mediterranean. It is true that several other maiine birds of the north frequent the Levant; but none of them can entirely claim Aristotle and Oppian's characters of • cataractes.' for though the wide throat and rather large head of the dwarf cormorant, may be adduced, that bird exceeds in stature the required size of a small hawk ; and fishes, it may be repeated, swimming and diving, not by darting down on the wing, and is not suffi- ciently numerous or important to have required the attention of the sacred legislator. Thus reduced to make a choice where the objections are less, and the probabilities stronger, we conclude the salach to have beenaspecies of ' tern,' considered to be identical with the ' Sterna Caspica,' so called because it is found about the Caspian Sea ; but it is equally common to the Polar. Baltic, and Black Seas, and if truly the same, is not only abundant fur several months in the year on the coast of Palestine, but frequents the lakes and pools far inland ; flying across the deserts to the Euphrates, and to the Persian and Red Sea-, and proceeding up the Nile. It is the largest of the tern or sea- swallow genus, being about the weight of a pigeon, and near two feet in length, having a large black naped head; powerful, pointed crimson bill; a while and grey body, with forked tail, and wings greatly exceeding the tips of the tail : the feet are very small, weak, and but slightly webbed, so that it swims perhaps only accidentally, but with suflicient power on land to spring up and to rise from level ground. It flies with immense velocity, darting along the surface of the sea to snap at mollusca or small fishes, or wheel- ing through the air in pursuit of insects; and in calm weather, after rising to a great height, it drops perpendicularly down to near the surface of the water, but never alights except on land ; and it is at all times disposed to utter a kind of laughing scream. This tern nestles in high cliffs, sometime; at a very considerable distance from .the sea. 'Sterna Nilnfica' appears to be the young bird, or one nearly allied. Thus the species is not likely to have been un- known to the Israelites, even while they were in the desert; and as the black tern, ' Sterna nigri- cans,' and perhaps the • Procellaria obscura' of the same locality, may have been confounded with it, their number was more than sufficient to cause them to be noticed in the list of prohibited birds. Still the propriety of the identification of salach with the 'great tern' must in some measure rest upon the assumption that the Greek KarapdicTys is f lie same. We figure one that was shot among a flight of these birds, some distance up the river Orontes.— C. H. S. SALAH (rw, a shoot; Sept. and New Test. Sc.Aa), a son, or grandson, of Arphaxad (Gen. x. 24; xi. 13; Luke iii. 35). SALAMIS (2a\a/xis), one of the chief cities of Cyprus on the south-east coast of the island (Acts xiii. 5). It was .afterwards called Constanlia, and in still later times Famagusta [Cyprus]. SALATHIEL. [Shealtiel.] SALEM (PT&, peace; Sept. SaA^i), the ori ginal name of Jerusalem (Gen. xiv. 18; Heb. vii. 1, 2), and which continued to be used poeti- cally in later times (Ps. lxxvi. 2) [Jerusa- lem]. SALIM (SsAerfu), a place near ^non, where John baptized (John iii. 23). Jerome places it ei_;ht Roman miles from Scythopolis (Bethshan), which is the same distance southward that he and Eusebius assign to vEnon. Nothing is known of this site. Some have been led by the name to conceive that here, and not at Jerusalem, we should seek the Salem of Melchizedek (Gen. xiy. 18) [^.non ; Salem]. SALLONIM. [Sii.lon and Thorns.] SALMON Qtibp, clothed; Sept. and New- Test. ~Zahn. 16S); as was certainly the case with the Greeks and Romans (Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxi. 44; Ovid, Fast. i. 337; Spencer, De Leg. Bit. iii. 2. 2 ; Lukemacher, Antiq. Grcec. Sacr. p. 350 ; Hottinger, De Usu Salis in Cultu Sacro, Mar- burg, 170S; Schickeclanz, De Salis tisu in Sa- crific. Servest. 1758). The incense, ' perfume,' was also lo liavo salt as an ingredient (Exod. xxx. 35 ; marginal reading 'salted'), where it appears to have been symbolical, as well of the divine good- ness as of man's gratitude, on the principle that of every bounty vouchsafed of God, it became man to make an acknowledgment in kind. As sail thus entered into man's food, so, to eat sail with any one, was to partake of his fare, toshare his hospitality : and hence, by implication, to en- joy his favour, or to be in his conlidence. Hence, also, salt bee, line an emblem of fidelity and of inti- mate friendship. At the present hour the Arabs regard as their friend him who has eaten salt with them, that is, has partaken of their hospitality (Niebuhr, Besckr. p. 48; Rosenmiiller, Morgenl., SALUTATION. 667 ii. 150) ; in the same way as. in Greece, those re- garded each other as friends even to distant gene- rations, between whom the rites of hospitality had been once exchanged. The domestic sanctity which thus attached itself to salt was much en- hanced in influence by its religious applications, so that it became symbolical of the most sacred and binding of obligations. Accordingly ' a covenant of salt ' rf?Q TVQ, was accounted a very solemn bond (Num. xv'iii. 19 ; 2 Chron. xiii. 5 ; Lev. ii. 13) : a signification to which force would be given by the preservative^ quality of salt (Bahrdt, De Fcedere Salis ; Zerbech, De Fozdere Salis). But salt, if used too abundantly, is destructive of vegetation and causes a desert. Hence arose another class of figurative applications. Destroyed cities were sown with salt to intimate that they were devoted to perpetual desolation (Judg. ix. 45) ; salt became a symbol of barrenness (Deut. xxix. 23; Zeph. ii. 9; Virg. Georg. ii. 238); and ' a salt land ' (Jer. xvii. 6) signifies a sterile and unproductive district (Job xxxix. 6 ; Alt- maim, Meletem. Philolog. Exeg. i. 47). By ex- posure to the influence of the sun and of the atmosphere, salt loses its savoury qualities (Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxi. 34 ; xxxi. 39 ; Maundrell, R. 162); whence the striking and forcible language of our Lord in Matt. v. 1 3. We have reserved to the end reference to a sin- gular usage among the Israelites, namely, wash- ing new-born infants in salt water; which was regarded as so essential that those could have hardly any other than an ill fate who were1 de- prived of the rite (Ezek. xvi. 4). The practice obviously arose from a regard to the preserving, the domestic, the moral, and the religious uses to which salt was applied, and of which it became the emblem (Richter, De Usu Salis apud Pris- cos Profano et Sacro, Zettan, 1766). — J. R. B. SALUTATION. The frequent allusion in Scripture to the customary salutations of the Jews, invests the subject with a higher degree of interest than it might otherwise claim : and it is therefore fortunate that there are few Scriptural topics, which can be better understood by the help of the illustrations derivable from the existing usages of the East. Most of the expressions used in salutation, and also those which were used in parting, implied, that the person who employed them interceded for the other. Hence the word "]~Q bara/c, which originally signified 'to bless,' meant also 'to sa- lute,' or 'to welcome,' and 'to bid adieu ' (Gen. xlvii. 8-11; 2 Kinsrs iv. 29 ; x. 13; 1 Chron. xviii. 10). The forms of salutation that prevailed among the Hebrews, so far as can be collected from Scripture, are the following : — 1. ' Blessed be thou of the Lord,' or equivalent phrases. 2. The Lord be with thee. 3. ' Peace be unto thee,'' or ' upon thee,' or 'with thee.' In countries often ravaged, and among people often ruined by war, ' peace ' im- plied every blessing of life; and this phrase had therefore the force of • Prosperous be thou.' This was the commonest of all salutations (Judg. xix. 20 ; Ruth ii. 4 ; 1 Sam. xxv. 6; 2 Sam. xx. 9 ; Ps. cxxix. 8). 4. 'Live, my lord' (*2"1K T\!\T\\ was a com- 668 SALUTATION. mon salutation among the Phoenicians, and was also in use among the Hebrews, but was by them only addressed to their kings in the extended form of ' Let the king live for ever !' (1 Kings i. 31) ; which was also employed in the Babylonian and Persian courts (Dan. ii. 4 ; iii. 9; v. 10 ; vi. 7, 22 ; Neh. ii. 3). This, which in fact is no more than a wish for a prolonged and prosperous life, has a parallel in the customs of most nations, and does not differ from the ' Vivat !' of the Latin ; the ' Vive le Roi !' of the French ; or our own ' for ever !' 5. Xcupe, xa'lPeTe> 3°y io* thee ! joy to you ! rendered by Hail! an equivalent of the Latin Ave ! Salve ! (Matt, xxvii. 29 ; xxviii. 9 ; Mark xv. 18; Luke i. 28; John xix. 3). The usages involved in these oral salutations, seem not only similar to, but identical with, those still existing among the Arabians. These indeed, as now observed, go upon the authority of religious precepts. But it is known that such enactments of the Koran and its commentaries, merely em- body such of the previously and immemorially existing usages as the legislature wished to be retained. Their most common greeting, as among the Jews, is, 'Peace be on you!' to which the re- ply is, ' On you be peace !' to which is commonly added, ' and the mercy of God, and his blessings !' This salutation is never addressed by a Moslem to one whom he knows to be of another religion ; and if he find that he has by mistake thus sa- luted a person not of the same faith, he generally revokes his salutation : so also he sometimes does if a Moslem refuses to return his salutation, usu- ally saying, ' Peace be on us, and on (all) the right worshippers of God!' This seems to us a striking illustration of Luke x. 5, 6 ; 2 John xi. Va- rious set compliments usually follow this salam; which, when people intend to be polite, are very much extended, and occupy considerable (ime. Hence they are evaded in crowded streets, and by persons in haste, as was the case, for the same reason doubtless, among the Jews (2 Kings iv. 29 ; Luke x. 4). Sjjecimens of this conventional intercourse are given by Lane {Mod. Egyptians, i. 253), who says, that to give the whole would occupy a dozen of his pages. There are set an- swers, or a choice of two or three answers, to every question ; and it is accounted rude to give any other answer than that which custom prescribes. They are such as those by which the Israelites probably prolonged their intercourse. If one is asked, ' How is your health ?' he replies, ' Praise he to God !' and it is only from the tone of his voice that the inquirer can tell whether he is well or ill. When one greets another with the common inquiry, ' Is it well with thee ?' (see 2 Kings iv. 26), the answer is, ' God bless thee !' or ' God preserve thee !' An acquaintance on meeting another whom he has not seen for several days, or for a longer period, generally says, after the salam, ' Thou hast made us desolate by thy absence from us ;' and is usually answered, ' May God not make us desolate by thy absence !' The gestures and inflections used in salutation varied with the dignity and station of the person saluted ; as is the case with the Orientals at this day. It is usual for the person who gives or returns the salutation, to place at the same time his right hand upon his breast, or to touch his lips, and then his forehead or turban, with the same hand. SALUTATION. This latter mode, which is the most respectful, is often performed to a person of superior rank, not only at first, with the salam, but also frequently during a conversation. In some cases the body is gently inclined, while the right hand is laid upon the left breast. A person of the lower or- ders, in addressing a superior, does not always give the salam, but shows his respect to high rank by bending down his hand to the ground, and then putting it to his lips and forehead. It is a common custom for a man to kiss the hand of his superior instead of his own (generally on the back only, but sometimes on both back and front), and then to put it to his forehead in order to pay more particular respect. Servants thus evince their re- spect towards their masters : when residing in the East, our own servants always did this on such little occasions as arose beyond the usage of their ordinary service ; as on receiving a pre- sent, or on returning fresh from the public baths. The son also thus kisses the hand of his father, and the wife that of her husband. Very often; however, the superior does not allow this, but. only touches the hand extended to take his; whereupon the other puts the hand that has been touched to his own lips and forehead. The custom of kissing the beard is still preserved, and follows the first and preliminary gesture; it usually takes place on meeting after an absence of some dura- tion, and not as an every-day compliment. In this case, the person who gives the kiss lays the right I SAMARIA. SAMARIA. 6C9 hand under the beard, and raises it slightly to his lips, or rather supports it while it receives his kiss. This custom strikingly illustrates 2 Sam. xx. 9. In Arabia Petrasa, and some other parts, it is more usual for persons to lay the right sides of their cheeks together. Among the Persians, persons in saluting under the same circumstances, often kiss each other on the lips; but if one of the individuals is of high rank, the kiss is given on the cheek instead of the lips. This seems to illustrate 2 Sam. xx. 9 ; Gen. xxix. 11, 13; xxxiii. 4; xlviii. 10 — 12; Exod. iv. 27; xviii. 7. Another mode of salutation is usual among friends on meeting after a journey. Joining their right hands together, each of them compli- ments the other upon his safety, and expresses his wishes for his welfare, by repeating, alternately, many times th% words selamat (meaning ' I congra- tulate you on your safety"), and teiyibeen (' I hope you are well'). In commencing this, ceremony, which is often continued for nearly a minute before they proceed to make any particular in- quiries, they join their hands in the same manner as is usually practised by us; and at each al- ternation of the two expressions, change the posi- tion of the hands. These circumstances further illustrate such passages as 2 Kings iv. 19 ; Luke x. 4. Other particulars, more or less connected with this subject, may be seen in Attitudes ; Kiss. SAMARIA (pipt^, watch-height; ^a/xapeia), a city, situated near the middle of Palestine, built by Omri, king of Israel, on a mountain or hill of the same name, about B.C. 925. It was the metropolis of the kingdom of Israel, or of the ten tribes. The hill was purchased from the owner, Shcmer, from whom the city took its name (1 Kings xvi. 23, 24). The site of the capital was therefore a chosen one ; and all travellers agree that it would be difficult to find in the whole land a sil nation of equal strength, fertility, and beauty combined. ' In all these particulars,' says Dr. Robinson, ' it lias greatly the advantage over Jerusalem' (Bibl. Researches, iii. 146). Samaria continued to be the capital of Israel for two cen- turies, till the carrying away of the ten tribes by Shalmaneser, about B.C. 720 (2 Kings xvii. 3, 5). During all this time it was the seat of idolatry, and is often as such denounced by the prophets, sometimes in connection with Jerusalem. It was the seat of a temple of Baal, built by Ahab, and destroyed by Jehu (1 Kings xvi. 32, 33; 2 Kings x. 18-28). It was the scene of many of the acts of the prophets Elijah and Elisha, connected with the various famines of the land, the unexpected plenty of Samaria, and the several deliverances of the city from the Syrians. After the exile of the ten tribes, Samaria appears to have continued, for a time at least, the chief city of the foreigners brought to occupy their place; although Shechem soon became the capital of the Samaritans as a religious sect. John Hyrcanustook the city after a year's siege, and razed it to the ground (Joseph. Antiq., xiii. 10. 3 ; Be Bell. Jud., i. 2. 7). Yet it must soon have revived, as it is not long after men- tioned as an inhabited place in the possession of the Jews. Pompey restored it to its former pos- sessors ; and it was afterwards rebuilt by Gabinius (Joseph. Antiq., xiii. 5. 4 ; xiv. 4. 4 ; xiv. 5. 3). Augustus bestowed Samaria on Herod ; who eventually rebuilt the city with great magni- ficence, and gave it the name of Sebaste (which is the Greek translation of the Latin name or epithet Augustus), in honour of that emperor {Antiq., xv. 7. 3 ; lie Bell. Jud., xv. 7. 7 ; xv. 8. 5). Here Herod planted a colony of 6000 persons, composed partly of veteran soldiers, and partly of people from the environs; enlarged the circumference of the city ; and surrounded it with a strong wall twenty sfades in circuit. In the midst of the city — that is to say, upon the summit of the hill — he left a sacred place of a stade and a half, splendidly decorated, and here he erected a temple to Augustus, celebrated for its magnitude and beauty. The whole city was greatly ornamented, and became a strong fortress (Joseph. Antiq., xv. 8. 5 ; De Bell. Jud., i. 21. 2 ; Strabo, xvi. 2. 13). Such was the Samaria of the time of the New Testament, where the Gospel was preached by Philip, and a church was gathered by the apostles (Acts viii. 5, 9, sq.). Nothing is known of Sebaste in the following centuries, except from the coins, of whicli there are several, extending from Nero to Geta (Eckhel, iii. 440; Mionnet, Med. Antiq., v. 513). Septimius Sevevus appears to have esta- blished there a Roman colony in the beginning of the third century (Cellarius, Not. Orb., ii. 432). Eusebius scarcely mentions the city as extant ; but it is often named by Jerome and other writers of the same and a later age (adduced in Reland's Palcestina, pp. 979-981). Samaria was early an .episcopal see. Its bishop, Marius, or Marinus, was present at the council of Nice in a.d. 325 ; and Pelagius, the last of six others whose names are preserved, attended the council of Jerusalem in a.d. 536. The city, along with Nabulus, fell into the power of the Moslems during the siege of Jerusalem ; and we hear but little more of it till the time of the Crusades. At what time the city of Herod became desolate, no existing accounts si ate ; but all the notices of the fourth century and later lead to the inference that its destruction had already taken place. The crusaders established a Latin bishopric at Sebaste; and the title was continued in the Romish church till the fourteenth century (Le Quien, Oriens Christ, iii. 1290). Saladin marched through it in a.d. 1184, after his repulse from Kerak (Abulfed. Annal. a.h. 580). Benjamin of Tudela describes it as having been ' formerly a very strong city, and situated on the irount, 670 SAMARIA. in a fine country, richly watered, and surrounded by gardens, vineyards, orchards, and olive groves.' He adds that, no Jews were living there (Itiner. ed. Asher, p. 66). Phocas and Brocardus speak only of the church and tomb of John the Baptist, and of the Greek church and monastery on the summit of the hill. Notices of the place occur in the travellers of the fourteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries ; nor are they all so meagre as Dr. Robinson conceives. That of Morison, for instance, is full and exact (Voyage du Mont Sinai, pp. 230-233). Scarcely any traces of the earlier or later Samaria could then be perceived, the materials having been used by the inhabitants for the construction of their own mean dwellings. The then residents were an ex- tremely poor and miserable set of people. In the eighteenth century the place appears to have been left unexplored ; but in the present century it has often been visited and described. 480. [Samaria: Church of St. John.] The Hill of Samaria is an oblong mountain of considerable elevation, and very regular in form, situated in the midst of a broad deep valley, the continuation of that of Nabulus (Shechem), which here expands into a breadth of five or six miles. Beyond this valley, which completely isolates the hill, the mountains rise again on every side, forming a complete wall around the city. They are terraced to the tops, sown in grain, and planted witli olives and figs, in the midst, of which a number of handsome villages appear to great, advantage, their white stone cot- tages contrasting strikingly with the verdure of the trees. 'The Hill of Samaria' itself is culti- vated from its base, the terraced sides and sum- mits being covered With corn and with olive- trees. About midway up the ascent the hill is surrounded by a narrow terrace of level land, like a belt; below which the roots of the hill spread off more gradually into the valleys. Higher up, too, are the marks of slight terraces, once occupied, perhaps, by the streets of the ancient city. The ascent of the hill is very steep, and the narrow footpath winds among the moun- SAMARIA. tains through substantial cottages of the modern Sebustieh (the Arabic form of Sebaste), which appear to have been constructed to a great extent of ancient materials, very superior in size and quality to anything whirh could at this day be wrought into an Arab habitation. The first object which attracts the notice of the traveller, and at the same time the most, conspicuous ruin of the place, is the church dedicated to John the Baptist, erected on the spot which an old tradilion fixed as the place of his burial, if not of his martyrdom. It is said to have been built by the Empress He- lena; but the architecture limits its antiquity to the period of the crusades, although a portion of the eastern end seems to have been of earlier dale. There is a blending of Greek and Saracenic styles, which is particularly observable in the interior, where there are several pointed arches. Others are round. The columns follow no regular order, while the capitals and ornaments present a motley combination, not to be found in any church erected in or near the age of Constantine. The length of the edifice is 153 feet long inside, besides a porch of 10 feet, and the breadth is 75 feet. The eastern end is rounded in the common Greek style ; and resting, as it does, upon a precipitous elevation of nearly 100 feet immediately -above the valley, it is a noble and striking monument. Within the enclosure is a common Turkish tomb ; and beneath it, at a depth reached by 21 stone steps, is a sepulchre, three or four paces square, where, according to the tradition, John the Baptist was interred after he had been slain by Herod. This tradition existed in the days of Jerome; but there is no earlier trace of it : and if Josephus is correct, in stating that John was beheaded in the castle of Machserus, on the east. oLthe Dead Sea (Antiq. xviii. 5. 2), his burial m Samaria is very improbable. On approaching the summit, of the hill, the traveller comes suddenly upon an area, once sur- rounded by limestone columns, of which fifteen are still standing and two prostrate. These columns form two rows, thirty-two paces apart, while less than two paces intervene between the columns. They measure seven feet nine inches in circum- ference; but there is no trace of the order of their architecture, nor are there any foundations to indicate the nature of the edifice to which they belonged. Some refer them to Herod's temple to Augustus, others to a Greek church which seems to have once occupied the summit of the hill. The descent of the hill on the W.S.W. side brings the traveller to a very remarkable colonnade, which is easily traceable by a great number of columns, erect or prostrate, along the side of the hill for at least one-third of a mile, where it ter- minates at a heap of ruins, near the eastern ex- tremity of the ancient site. Thecolumns are sixteen feet high, two feet in diameter at the base, and one foot eight inches at. the top. The capitals have disappeared ; but the shafts retain their polish, and, when not broken, are in good preservation. Eighty-two of these columns are still erect, and the number of those fallen and broken must be much greater. Most of them are of the lime- stone common to the region ; but some are of white marble, and some of granite. The mass of ruins in which this colonnade terminates toward the west is composed of blocks of hewn stone, covering no great area on the slope of the hill, many feet lower SAMARITANS. SAMARITANS. 671 than the summit. Neither the situation nor extent of this pile favours the notion of its having been a palace; nor is it easy to conjecture the design of the edifice. The colonnade, the remains of which now stand solitary and mournful in the midst of ploughed fields, may, however, with little hesita- tion, be referred to the time of Herod the Great, and must be regarded as belonging to some one of the splendid structures with which he adorned the city. In the deep ravine which bounds the city on the north, there is another colonnade, not visited bv Dr. Robinson, but fully described by Dr. Olin (Travels, ii. 371-373). The area in which these columns stand is completely shut, in by hills, with the exception of an opening on the north-east ; and so peculiarly sequestered is the situation, that it is only visible from a few points of the heights of the ancient site, by which it is overshadowed. The columns, of which a large number are entire and several in fragments, are erect, and arranged in a quadrangle, 196 paces in length, and 61 in breadth. They are three paces asunder, which would give 170 columns as the whole number when the colonnade was complete. The columns resemble in size and material those of the colon- nade last noticed, and appear to belong to the same age. These also probably formed part of Herod's city, though it is difficult to determine the use to which the colonnade was appropriated. Dr. Olin is possibly right in bis conjecture, that this was one of the places of public assembly and amusement which Herod introduced into his do- minions (Robinson, Researches, iii. 136-149; Olin, Travels, ii. 366-374; Buckingham, 'Tra- vels in Palestine, pp. 512-517; Richardson, 'Travels, ii. 409-413 ; Schubert, Morgenland, iii. 156-162; Raumer, Paldstina, p. 158; Mauu- drell, Journey, pp. 78, 79). SAMARITANS. In the books of Kings there are brief notices of the origin of- the people called Samaritans. The ten tribes which re- volted from Rehoboam, son of Solomon, chose Jeroboam for their king. After his elevation t.0 the throne he set up golden calves at Dan and Bethel, lest repeated visits of 1 1 is subjects to Jerusalem, for the purpose of worshipping the true God, should withdraw their allegiance from him- self. Afterwards Samaria, built by Omri, became the metropolis of Israel, and thus the separation between Judah and Israel was rendered complete. The people look t lie name Samaritans from the capital city. In the ninth year of Hosea, Samaria was taken by the Assyrians under Shalmaneser, who carried away the inhabitants into ca.pti.vity, and introduced colonies into their place from Babylon, Cuthah, Ava, Hamath, and Sephar- vaim. These new inhabitants carried along with them their own idolatrous worship; and on being infested with lions, sent 'to Esarhaddon, king of Assyria. A priest of the tribe of Levi was accord- ingly dispatched to them, who came and dwelt in Bethel, teaching the people how they should tear the Lord. Thus it appears that the people were a mixed race. The greater part, of the Israelites had been carried away captive by the Assyrians, in- cluding the rich, the strong, and such as weir able to bear arms. But the poor and the feeble had been left. The country had not been so entirely depopulated as to possess no Israelite whatever. The dregs of the populace, particularly those who ap- peared incapable of active service, were not taken away by the victors. With them, therefore, the heathen colonists became incorporated. But the latter were far more numerous than the former, and had all power in their own hands. The rem- nant of the Israelites was so inconsiderable and insignificant as not to afl'ecf, to any important extent, the opinions of the new inhabitants. As the people were a mixed race, their religion also assumed a mixed character. In it the worship of idols was associated with that of the true God. But apostacy from Jehovah was not universal. On the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, the Samaritans wished to join them in rebuilding the Temple, saying, ' Let us build with you ; for we seek your God, as ye do ; and we do sacrifice unto him since the days of Esarhaddon, king of Assur, which brought us up hither' (Ezra iv. 2). But the Jews declined the proffered assist- ance; and from this time the Samaritans threw every obstacle in their way. Hence arose that inveterate enmity between the two nations which afterwards increased to such a height as to become proverbial. In the reign of Darius Nothus, Ma- nasses, son of the Jewish high-priest, married the daughter of Sanballat the Samaritan governor ; and to avoid the necessity of repudiating her, as the law of Moses required, went over to the Sama- ritans, and became high-priest in the temple which his father-in-law built for him on Mount Gerizim. From this time Samaria became a refuge for all malcontent, Jews; and the very name of each people became odious to the other. About the year B.C. 109, John Hyrcanus, high-priest of the Jews, destroyed the city and temple of the Sama- ritans ; but, n. c. 25, Herod rebuilt them at great expense. In their new temple, however, the Sa- maritans could not be induced to offer sacrifices, but still continued to worship on Gerizim. At the present day they have dwindled down to a few families. Shechevn, now called Nabulus, is their place of abode. They still possess a copy of the Mosaic law. A different account, of (he origin of this people has been given by Hengstenberg, whom Haver- nick and Robinson follow. According to this learned writer, all the inhabitants were carried away into Assyria. None were left in the land by the conquerors. Shalmaneser greatly weakened the ten tribes, but. did not extinguish the king- dom of Israel, because at his invasion many of the people took refuge in the most inaccessible and retired parts of their country, or fled into Judah. Afterwards they returned by degrees; and when Esarhaddon came against them, they were carried away entirely. From the time of Esarhaddon there were none bid heathens in the land. The Samaritans were wholly of heathen origin. Hence they requested the Assyrian king to send them an Israelite priest (Beitruge zur Eiulelt. ins alte Testam. i. 177; ii. 3, &c). Want of space prevents us from detailing the grounds of this view, or from entering into its refutation. It has been ably combated by Kalkar (in Pelt's JMitarbeitcn for 1840, drittes Heft, p. 24, &c), to whom the reader is referred. We cannot but reject the novel hypothesis, notwith- standing the ability with winch it has been put forward. With the remnant, above referred to a corre- spondence was formerly maintained by several learned Europeans, but without leading to any im- 672 SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. portant result. It was commenced by Joseph Scaliger, in 1559; and resumed, after a century, by several learned men in England, in 1675 ; and by the great Ethiopic scholar, Job Ludolf, in 1684. The illustrious Orientalist, De Sacy, also held correspondence with them. All their letters to England and France, and all that was then known respecting them, he published in a work entitled, Correspondance des Samaritains, &c. in Notices et Extr. des MSS. de la Biblioth. du Roi, torn. ' xii.). The best accounts of them given by modern travellers are by Pliny Fisk (American Mission- ary Herald for 1824), who visited them in 1823; anil by Robinson and Smith, who visited them in 1838 (see Biblical Researches and Travels in Palestine, iii. 113-116). — S. D. SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. The Sa- maritan Pentateuch was mentioned by the fathers Eusebius, Cyril of Alexandria, Procopius of Gaza, Diodorus, Jerome, and others. After it bad lain concealed for upwards of a thousand years, its existence began to be doubted. At length Peter Delia Valle, in 1616, procured a complete copy, which De Sancy, then French ambassador at Constantinople, sent to the library of the Oratoire at Paris, in 1623. It was first described by Morin, and afterwards printed in the Paris Polyglott. Not long after, Archbishop Ussher procured six copies from the East; and so great was the number in the time of Kennicott, that he collated sixteen for his edition of the He- brew Bible. In regard to the antiquity of the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the source from which the docu- ment came, various opinions have been entertained. m 1st. The hypothesis maintained by Ussher was, v that the Samaritan Pentateuch was the production '■ of an impostor named Dositheus, the founder of a sect among the Samaritans, and who pretended to be the Messiah. It is thought that he compiled this copy of the Pentateuch from the Hebrew and the Septuagint, adding, expunging, and altering, ac- cording to his pleasure. Ussher appeals to Origen and Photius, whose testimony, however, when examined, affords no evidence of the truth of this statement. It is well known that the Alexan- drian Samaritans opposed Dositheus, and would not have received such a compilation. Besides, had he corrupted any passages, it is natural to think that he would have perverted those relating to the Messiah, that they might be more easily referred to himself. But places of this nature in the Samaritan copies agree with the Hebrew ; and we may be farther assured, that the Jews would not have failed to mention such a fact as a just ground of accusation against the Samaritans. 2ndly. Le Clerc and Poncet imagined, that this copy of the law was made by the Israelitish priest who was sent by the king of Assyria to in- struct the new inhabitants in the religion of the country. This is a mere hypothesis, unsupported by historical testimony. It was not necessary for the priest to compose a new system, but to instruct the people out of the Pentateuch as it then existed. When the existing copy was sufficient for his purpose, he would ij.ot have undertaken the labour of preparing an entirely new work. 3rdly. It was the opinion of Hottinger, Pri- deaux, Fitzgerald, and others, that Manasseh transcribed one of Ezra's corrected copies which he took with him from Jerusalem, into the old SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. character to which they were accustomed. In proof of tli is hypothesis it has been affirmed, that the variations in the Samaritan copy from the Hebrew are such as were occasioned in the tran- scription by mistaking letters similar in Hebrew, but unlike in the Samaritan. This supposition has been completely set aside by Kopp, in his Bilder und Schriften der Vorzeit; and by Hup- feld, in his Beleuchtung dunkler Stellen, u. s. w. (Studien and Kritiken, 1830), in which it is convincingly shown that the present Hebrew square character had no existence till long after Ezra; and that, so far from owing its origin to Chalda3a and having been introduced by Ezra, it was merely the gradual work of time. When Manasseh fled from Jerusalem, the Samaritan and Hebrew characters must have been substan- tially the same. 4thly. Others are of opinion that copies of the Pentateuch must have been in the hands of Israel from the time of Rehoboam, as well as among Judah; that they were preserved by the former equally as by the latter. This hypothesis, first advanced by Morin, has been adopted by Houbi- gant, Cappellus, Kennicott, Michaelis, Eichhorn, Bauer, Bertholdt, Stuart, and others, and appears to be the true one. The prophets, who frequently inveigh against the Israelites for their idolatry and their crimes, never accuse them of being destitute of the law, or ignorant of its contents. It is wholly improbable, too, that the people, when carried captive into Assyria, took with them all the copies of the law. Thus we are brought to the conclu- sion, that the Samaritan, as well as the Jewish copy, originally flowed from the autograph of Moses. The two constitute, in fact, different recensions of the same loork, and coalesce in point of antiquity. If this account of the Samaritan codex be cor- rect, it is easy to perceive the reason why the Samaritans did not receive all the Jewish books previously written. When the schism of the tribes took place, the Pentateuch was commonly circulated, and usually regarded as a sacred national collection, containing all their laws and institutions. Though David's Psalms and some of Solomon's compositions may also have been written at that time ; yet the former were chiefly in the hands of the Levites who regulated the Temple music, and were employed in the public service of Jehovah ; while the latter were doubt- less disliked by the ten tribes on account of their author, who lived at Jerusalem, and were rare from" the non-transcription of copies. The pro- phets must have been unwelcome to the Israelites, because they uttered many things against them, affirming that Jehovah could not be worshipped with acceptance in any other place than Jeru- salem. This circumstance was sufficient to prevent that people from receiving any of the prophetical writings till Ezra's time, when their hatred to him and his associates was so great, that they would not have admitted any collection of the Scriptures coming through such hands. Whatever other books, besides the Pentateuch, were written in the time of Rehoboam must have been comparatively unknown to the mass of the people. This fact, in connection with political considerations, was suf- ficient to lead the Israelites to reject most, except those of Moses. In addition to the Pentateuch, the Samaritans SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 673 have the hook of Joshua, but it did not always form part of their canon. Their Joshua does not appear to he the same as the Old Testament book. Ou the contrary it must, have been composed long after, out of the inspired records of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel, to which have been added fables and Oriental traditions. Such a compilation can have no claim to be regarded as the authentic Jewish writing. But, it may be asked, what is the reason why this people have not the books of Joshua and Judges, in addition to the Mosaic ? The question is of difficult solution. Hengsteuberg affirms that the problem is inexplicable on the common hypo- thesis. If the people were a mixed race, he sup- poses that no rational account can be given why Joshua and Judges should not have been always received by them along with the Pentateuch. These books had been written and were current among the people long before the separation of the tribes. We do not see, however, that Hengsten- berg's own view materially lessens the difficulty. If the heathen Samaritans received the Pentateuch from the kingdom of the ten tribes, or rather from these tribes in Assyrian captivity, why did they ask for no more than the Pentateuch, or why was it alone sent to them? For the solution of the question it should be considered, that the priests, or such as were in possession of the sacred books, had been carried away, together with the persons best acquainted with such writings, who may be supposed to have had the great majority of the copies then current. The holy books, too, were not generally circu- lated among the jieople, many of whom may have been unable to read them. The lower orders in particular were dependent for their religious in- formation on the prophets and priests; for parents had not fulfilled the Mosaic law in diligently teaching their children. Besides, the same cir-. cumstance that, led them to reject the subsequent books would incline them, at least, to reject Joshua and Judges. There was in the latter too much of the historical, and that closely connected with the succeeding events of Jewish history, all which centred in Jerusalem. Whatever copies, therefore, of these historical books may have been among the remnant, and these could have been but few-j were so tiered to fall into neglect, so that they became almost unknown when the heathen majority introduced their idolatrous worship. It was far more natural to stop with the Pentateuch when it was deemed necessary to reject some Jewish books, than to stop after Judges. In this way their canon, imperfect as it would be, would have the appearance of greater completeness in itself, than if they had arbitrarily and abruptly terminated it after Judges. In addition to these remarks it may be affirmed with Ilengstenberg, that, the Samaritans could not be contented with the fact. that. Joshua and Judges contained nothing which directly testified against them. Their pa- triotic fabrications, if the phrase be allowable, began with Joshua; and had they admitted the two books, they could have ventured to forge nothing except what they should be able to prove out. of them. Hence it was thought more desir- able to allow the few copies current among them to go into oblivion in the first instance, while it was afterwards deemed a politic measure not to admit them at all iuto their canon. VOL. II. It thus appears that the Samaritan Pentateuch cannot be ascribed to a later period than that of the schism between the tribes. All the argu- ments adduced by Gesenius (in his Commentatio de Ventateuchi Samaritani Oriyine, Indole, et Auctoritate) are not sufficient to disprove its truth. For opposite and convincing statements we refer to the last, edition of Eichhorn's Intro- duction to the Old Testament, and Professor Stuart's review of Gesenius, in the second volume of the American Biblical Repository. The name Samaritan was first given to that, mixed multitude composed of the heathen introduced by Slialma- neser into the kingdom of Israel, and of the lower classes of the ten tribes which had not been car- ried away. Whatever civil jealousies may have previously existed between them and the Jews, their religious animosities were first excited when Ezra and his countrymen, returning from exile, refused to allow their co-operation in building the Temple. Subsequent events, far from allaying their mutual hatred, only raised it to a higher pitch, giving it that jiernianent, durable form in which it was continued through succeeding cen- turies. With respect to the authority and value of the Samaritan Pentateuch, there has been mucn va- riety of sentiment. Gesenius. however, has very ably shown that little value should be assigned to the characteristics of its text. He has proved that no critical reliance can be placed on it, and that it is wholly unjustifiable to use it as a source of correcting the Hebrew text. He has divided the various readings it exhibits into different classes, under each of which numerous examples are ad- duced. By a most minute investigation of par- ticulars he has shown that it cannot be employed in emendation, as Kennicott, Morin, and Bauer supposed. This masterly dissertation has ruined the credit of the Samaritan codex in the critical world. The purity of the Hebrew is not to be corrupted by additions or interpolations from such a document. The original text of the Old Testament cannot be established by any weight attaching to it. The various peculiarities of the Samaritan text have lieen divided into the following classes : — 1. The first class consists of such readings as exhibit emendations of a merely grammatical nature. Thus in orthography the matr es lectionis are supplied, the full forms of verbs substituted for the apocopated, the usual forms of the pro- nouns given instead of the unusual, lu forming a noun, the paragogic letters yod and van affixed to the governing noun are almost always omitted. In construing a noun, the Samaritan transcribers make frequent mistakes in relation to gender, by changing nouns of the common gender into the masculine, or into the feminine alone. In the syntax of verbs the infinitive absolute is often altered. 2. The second class consists of glosses received into the text. These glosses furnish explanations of more difficult terms by such as are more intel- ligible. 3. The third class comprehends those readings in which plain modes of expression are substituted in place of such as appeared difficult or obscure. 4. The fourth class consists of those readings in which the Samaritan copy is corrected or supplied from parallel passages, lo this class 2x 874 SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. belongs Gen. 1. 25, where the Samaritan adds with you, reading — ' Ye shall carry up my bones with you i'rom hence.' The addition is taken from Exod. xiii. 19, and does not belong, as Gerard thinks, to the present place. 5. The fifth class consists of larger additions or repetitions respecting things said or done, which are interpolated from parallel places and again recorded in the same term's, so as to make the readings in question. 6. Corrections framed to remove what, was offensive in sentiment, or whatever conveyed ideas improbable in the view of the correctors. Thus in the antediluvian genealogies, none is repre- sented by the Samaritan Pentateuch as having begotten his first son after he is one hundred and fifty years old. On the contrary, in the post- diluvian genealogies, none is allowed to have begotten a son until after he is fifty years old. In the former case, the Samaritan codex usually takes a hundred years from the genealogies as found in the. Hebrew ; while in the latter one hun- dred years are commonly added, at least to all whom the Hebrew copy represents to have chil- dren under fifty years of age, except to Nahor. Such changes could not have been accidental. They are manifestly the effect of design. To this class belongs Gen. xxix. 3. 8: 'And thither were all the flocks gathered ; and they rolled the stone, &c. And they said, We cannot, until all the flocks be gathered together, and till they roll the stone, &c.' Here the subject of the verb roll is understood not expressed — ' the shepherds rolled." But because the preceding subject \sall the flocks, and therefore they are apparency said to roll away the stone, and to water, the word D'myn. flocks, was altered into D^IH, shep- herds. The Sept. follows the reading of the Sa- maritan ; and strange to say, Houbigant and Kennicott contend that it is the true reading. It is very usual with the Old Testament writers to change the subject, and leave the new nominative to be supplied from the context. As an example of this Gesenius (p. 51) adduces Isa. xxxvi. 36. 7. The seventh class consists of those words and forms of words in which the pure Hebrew idiom is exchanged for that, of the Samaritan. This respects many cases of orthography, and some of the forms belonging to verbs. 8. The eighth class embraces such passages as contain alterations made to produce con- formity to the Samaritan theology, worship, or exegesis. Thus, where the Hebrew has a plural verb with elohirn, the Samaritan has substituted a verb in the singular (Gen. xx. 13; xxxi. 53; xxxv. 7; Exod. xxii. 9), lest there should be an appearance of infringing on the divine unity. So also voces honestiores have been put where there was a fancied immodesty. To this head Gese- nius has referred the notable passage in Dent, xxvii. 4, where the Samaritans changed Ebal into Gerizim, to favour their own temple built on the latter mountain. Some, indeed, as Whiston and Kennicott, have endeavoured to show that, the cor- ruption ought to be charged on the Jews ; but they have not been successful in recommending their opinion to general acceptance. Various writers of ability have refuted this notion, especially Ver- scbuir (in the third of his Disscrtatlones Philolog- exeget. Leovard. et Francq. 1773, 4to), who com- pletely set aside the attempted reasoning of SAMARITAN PENTATKu^xi. • "Kennicott. Of all the peculiar readings in the Samaritan Pentateuch, four only are considered by Gesenius as preferable to the Hebrew ; these are Gen. iv. 8; xxii. 13; xlix. 14; xiv. 14 Perhaps even these should be reckoned infe- rior to the corresponding Hebrew readings. We shall notice them individually. Gen. iv. 8 ; the Hebrew text, literally trans- lated, reads thus — ' And Cain said to Abel his brother ; and it came to pass when they were in the field,' &c. Here the Samaritan supplies what ap- pears to be wanting by inserting the words ' let us go into the field,' il'iETl i"!3?l So also the Sep- tuagint, Vulgate, and Syriac versions. Aquila is doubtful. Perhaps, however, this clause was borrowed from' 1 Sam. xx. 11. If the verb "1DN be put absolutely for "Dl, the meaning will be that Cain spoke to his brother Abel, viz. what God had previously said to the former. Gen. xxii. 13: instead of ~li"!N the Samaritan reads ITttt : ' And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked ; and behold a ram caught,' &c. in- stead of '.Behold a ram behind him,' &c. The Samaritan reading is sanctioned by the Septna- gint and Syriac, and all the versions except Jerome's, by forty-two manuscripts, ,and two printed editions. Onkelos, Saadias. and the Per- sian have both readings together. This use, how- ever, of the numeral adjective for the. indefinite article, belongs rather to the later than the earlier Hebrew. In Exod. xxix. 3, the use of iriN is scarcely similar, though quoted as such by Gese- nius. On the whole we are inclined, with Nol- dins and Ravius, to abide by the common read- ing, notwithstanding the circumstances adduced against it by Gesenius. Gen. xlix. 14; in this passage the Hebrew has D")j "ID!"!, the ass of a bone, i. e. 'a strong ass.' Instead of D"|J the Samaritan has D1|"13 ; the sense is the same. Gen. xiv. 14; instead of pi?1) the Samaritan reads pTM. The meaning of the former is — he led forth his trained servants ; of the latter, he surveyed or numbered. The former is equally good as the latter. The Samaritan codex cannot be put in compa- rison with the Hebrew. The difference between the two recensions chiefly consists in additions to the Samaritan text. An omission may be made inadvertently, but an insertion evinces design. When, therefore, we usually meet with words and clauses in the Samaritan that are not found in the Hebrew, it is much more probable that they should have been inserted in the one, than pur- posely omitted in the other. In all cases, perhaps, the Samaritan should be placed below the Hebrew in the value of its readings. Where other autho- rities concur with the former against the latter, there may be reason for following it ; but this does not rest on the ground that it is superior to the Hebrew. We might also mention, in favour of this esti- mate of the two codices, the general character of Israel and Judah. The one was far more wicked than the other. Wickedness is usually associated with forgetfulness or corruption of the inspired writings, and inattention to their contents. . But the New Testament writers usually quote from the Sept., which version agrees with the Sa- maritan, in preference to the Hebrew codex. Does LxviTAN PENTATEUCH. SAMOTHRACE. 675 not this attach a superior value to the Samaritan? In reply to such a question it may be observed, that the New Testament dues not coincide with the Samaritan and Septuagint in opposition to the Hebrew. There are indeed two, or, at the most, three instances of this nature ; hut the vari- ation is so slight in these, that nothing can be built, upon it. There is one reading of the Samaritan to which we deem it right to allude, because it is generally preferred to the Hebrew. ItisinExod. xii. 40 : 'Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was 430 years.' The Samaritan has ' The sojourning of the children of Israel and of their fathers who dwelt in the land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt was 430 years.' The Hebrews abode 215 years in Egypt ; and from the call of Abraham to the exodus was 430 years. This passage presents no real difficulty in the way of chronology, although the Samaritan corrector thought, that, as it stands in (lie Hebrew codex, it is not true. Yet it is not said that the sojourning of the children of Israel in Egypt was 430 years. It is simply stated that their sojourning continued for that period. The clause ' who dwelt in Egypt,' is incidental, not essential to the sentence. The sojourning of the Israelites in various places lie- ginning at the time when Abraham was called of Jehovah, and ending with the departure of his posterity out of Egypt, occupied 430 years. Had the words stood thus, 'the sojourning of the chil- dren of Israel who dwelt in Egypt was 430 years in that country! there would have been a chrono- logical difficulty. At present, however, there is none. This example is discussed by Gesenius, under the sixth class. Thus the Samaritan Pentateuch is not a source of emendation. Other independent authorities, provided they he sufficient, may and ought to he taken as means of emendation ; but this codex by itself cannot he used in correcting the text, nor can it be employed for the same purpose along with versions or quotations manifestly borrowed from it. The utility of the copy consists in confirming the authenticity of a reading when it agrees with the Hebrew. In such a case there are two inde- pendent witnesses. It also dissipates the rigid notions entertained by the Buxtorfs and others respecting the vowel- points and letters. It proves that the jtoiuts and accents were not coeval with the consonants. Besides the works referred to in the course of this article, the reader may consult the Introductions of Jalin, Eichhorn, Bertholdt, De Wette, and Havernick ; Steudel's treatise in Bengel's Archiv. iii. 326, sq. ; Mazade, Sw VOrigine, V Age, et I ' Etat Critique du Pent. Sam. Genf. 1830, 8vo; Tholack's Lit. Anzeig. for 1833, p. 303, sq. : Lee's Prolegomena to Baxter s Polyglott ; Professor Stuart, in the North American Review for 1S26, and Biblical Repository for 1832; and Davidson's Lectures on Biblical Criticism Samaritan Vkksion ok the Pentateuch. — The author and date of this version are both unknown. Probably it belongs to the first or second century of the Christian era. It follows the Hebiveo-Samaritan text word for word, gene- rally furnishing the same additions and pecu- liarities a, its parent exhibits. To this, however, there are several exceptions. Its agreement with Onkelos is remarkable. Winer and De Wette, however, deny that the translator used Onkelos, because tire hatred subsisting between the Jews and Samaritans renders that circumstance im- possible; yet it may be questioned whether the national enmity was participated in by every single individual of the Samaritans or of the Jews. To say that it has been interpolated from Onkelos will scarcely account for the peculiar character of the version, although it is probable that it has passed through several hands, and- has consequently been altered from its original form. This version has been printed in the Parts and London Polyglotts : more accurately in the latter than in the former, but yet with many imperfec- tions and errors. The Latin version in botlt is of no utility. (Winer, De Versionis Pentateuchi Sam&fitani Indole, Lips. 1817, 8vo. ; Walton's Prolegomena; Gesenius, DePentat. Somas', Ori- gine, &;c. p. 18; the Introductions of Eichhorn, Bertholdt, Havernick, De Wette ; and Davidson's Lectures on Biblical Criticism.) Tb ^aixaptiriKov. This name has been given to the fragments of a supposed Greek version of the Samaritan Pentateuch. It is not certain, however, whether they he the remains of an old Greek translation, or glosses made upon the Sep- tuagint by Origen. These fragments have been collected by Morin, Hottinger, and Montl'aucon, out of the Greek fathers. It is probable that they are the remains of a real Greek version from the Samaritan, although from their paucity they are of little use. (See the Introductions of Eich- horn, Havernick, and De Wette ; Gesenius, De Pentat. Samarit.. , note e). Scarcely any of those more recent or Chaldaic forms occur in Samuel. Some peculiarities of form are noted by I)e YVette (§. ISO), but they are not so nume- rous or distinctive as to give a general character to the treatise (Hirzel, De Chaldaismi Bill, oriyine, 1830). Many modes of expression, com- SAMUEL, BOOKS OF. 683 mon in Kings, are absent from Samuel [Kings, Books of]. 5. The concluding chapters of the second book of Samuel are in the form of an appendix to the work — a proof of its completeness. The connection between Samuel and Kings is thus interrupted. It appears, then, that Samuel claims a distinct authorship from the Books of Kings. Stiihelin, in Tholuck's Literal-. Anz., 1838, supposes that the division between the two treatises has not been correctly made, and that the two commencing chapters of 1 Kings belong to Samuel. This he argues on philological grounds, because the terms TTPDni ^msm \l Kings i. 38), B>B3 D^>D (i. 12), and £>B3 HIS (i. 29), are found nowhere in Kings but in the first two chapters, while they occur once and again in Samuel. There is cer- tainly something peculiar in this affinity, though it may be accounted for on the principle, that the author of the pieces or sketches which form the basis of the initial portions of 1 Kings, not only composed those which form the conclusion of Samuel, but also supervised or published the whole work which is now called by the prophet's name. Thus the books of Samuel have an authorship of their own — an authorship belonging to a very early period. While their tone and style are very different from the later records of Chronicles, they are also dissimilar to the books of Kings. They bear the impress of a hoary age in their language, allusions, and mode of composition. The insertion of odes and snatches of poetry, to enliven and verify the narrative, is common to them with the Pentateuch. The minute sketches and vivid touches with which they abound, prove that their author 'speaks what lie knows, and testifies what he has seen.' As if the chapters had been extracted from a diary, some portions are more fully detailed and warmly coloured than others, according as the observer was himself impressed. Many of the incidents, in their artless and natural delineation, would forma fine study for a painter; so truly does De Wette (Einleit. § 178) remark, that the book abounds in 'lively pictures of character.' Besides, it is certainly a striking circumstance, that the books of Samuel do not record David's death, though they give Ins last words — his last inspired effusion (Haveruick, Einleit. §. 167). We should reckon it natural for an author, if he had lived long after David's time and were writing his life, to finish his history with an account of the sovereign's death. Had the books of Samuel and Kings sprung from the same source, then the abrupt conclusion of one portion of the work, containing David's life down to his last days, and yet omitting all notice of his death, might be asciibed to some unknown capricious motive of the author. But we have seen that the two trea- tises exhibit many traces of a different authorship. What reason, then, can be assigned for the writer of Samuel giving a full detail of David's life, and actions, and government, and yet failing to record his decease'? The plain inference is, that th« document must have been composed prior to the monarch's death, or at least about that jieriod. If we should find a memoir of George the Third, entering fully into his private and family history, as well as describing l$s cabinets, councillors, 684 SAMUEL, BOOKS OF. and parliaments, the revolutions, and wars, and state of feeling' nnder his government, and ending with an account of the appointment of a regent, and a reference to the king's lunacy, our con- clusion would be, that the history was composed before the year 1820. A history of David, down to the verge of his dissolution, yet not including that event, must, have been written before the monarch ' slept with his fathers.' We are therefore inclined to think that the books, or at least the materials out of which they have been formed, were con- temporaneous with the events recorded ; that the document out of which the sketch of David's life was compiled was composed and finished before his death. Against this opinion as to the early age of the books of Samuel various objections have been brought. The phrase 'unto this day' is often em- ployed in them to denote the continued existence of customs, monuments, and names, whose origin has been described by the annalist (1 Sam. v. 5 ; vi.18; xxx, 25). This phrase, however, does not always indicate that a long interval of time elapsed between the incident and such a record of its dura- tion. It was a common idiom. Joshua (xxii. 3) uses it of the short time t.liat Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, had fought, in concert with the other tribes in the subjugation of Canaan. So, again, he (xxiii. 9) employs it to specify the time that intervened berween the entrance into Canaan, and his resignation of the command on account of his approaching decease. Matthew, in his Gospel (xxvii. S, and xxviii. 15), uses it. of the period between the death of Christ and the composition of his book. Reference is made' in Samuel to the currency of a certain proverb (1 Sam. x. 12), and to the disuse of the term seer (1 Sam. ix. 9), but in a manner which by no means implies an authorship long posterior to the time of the actual circumstances. The pro- verb, ' Is Saul also among the prophets V was one which for many reasons would obtain rapid and universal circulation : and if no other hypothesis be considered satisfactory, we may suppose that the remark about the term ' seer ' becoming obsolete may be the parenthetical insertion of a later hand. Or it may be that in Samuel's days the term X^SJ came to lie technically used in his school of the prophets. More opposed to our view of the age of these books is the statement made in 1 Sam. xxvii. 6 — ' Ziklag pertainefh unto the kings of Judah unto this day' — a form of language, according to De Wette (§ 180), which could not. have been em- ployed before the separation of the nation into the kingdoms of Judah and Israel. Hiivernick remarks, however (6 1<>9 , that Ziklag belonged first to Judah, and then to Simeon, ere it fell into (lie hands of the Philistines ; and the expression de- notes not that the city reverted to its former owners, but that it became the property of David, and of David's successors as sovereigns of the territory of Judah. Judah is not used in opposition to the ten tribes; and the writer means to say that Ziklag became a royal possession in consequence of its being a gift to David, and to such as might have regal power over Judah. The names Israel and Judah were used in the way of contrast even in David's time, as De Wette himself admits (1 Sam. xviii. 16 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 1 : v. 15 ; xix. 41-43; xx. 2). f SAMUEL, BOOKS OF. It is said in 1 Chron. xxix. 29, ' Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer.' The old opinion as to the authorship of Samuel, to which we have already alluded, was founded on this quotation. The prophets were wont to write a history of their own times. That Samuel did so in reference to the great events of his life, is evident from the state- ment that he ' wrote the manner of the kingdom in a book, and laid it up before the Lord' (1 Sam. x. 25). The phrase, ?X1tDw^ **fl"7, may not refer to our present Samuel, which is not so compre- hensive as this collection seems to have been. It does not, like the treatise to which the author of Chronicles refers, include 'the acts of David, first and last' The annals which these three seers compiled were those of their own times in succession (Kleinert, Aechtheit d. Jes. Pt. I. p. 83); so that there existed a history of contemporary events written hy three inspired men. The portion written by Samuel might include his own life, and the greater part of Saul's history, as well as the earlier portion of David's career. Gad was a contemporary of David, and is termed his seer. Probably also he was one of his associates in his various wanderings (1 Sam. xxii. 5). In the latter part of David's reign Nathan was a prominent counsellor, and assisted at the coro- nation of Solomon. We have therefore prophetic materials for the books of Samuel. Havernick (§ 161) supposes there was another source of in- formation to which the author of Samuel might resort, namely, the annals of David's reign — a conjecture not altogether unlikely, as may be seen by his reference to 2 Sam. viii. 17, com- pared with 1 Chron. xxvii. 24. The accounts of David's heroes and their mighty feats, with the estimate of their respective bravery, have the appearance of a contribution by Seruiah, the scribe, or principal secretary of state. We do not affirm that the various chapters of these books may be definitely portioned out among Samuel, Gad, and Nathan, or that they are a composition proceeding immediately from these persons. We hold them to be their production in the sense of primary authorship, though, as we now have them, they bear the marks of being a compilation. Another evident source from which materials have been brought, is a collection of poetic com- positions— some Hebrew anthology. We have, first, the song of Hannah, the mother of Samuel, which is not unlike the hymn of the Virgin re- corded by Luke. That song is by no means an anachronism, as has been rashly supposed by some critics, such as Hensler (Erlauter d. 1 B. Sam. 12), aud the translator of De Wette (ii. 222). The latter considers it entirely inappropriate, and regards its mention of King and Messiah, as be- traying its recent and spurious birth. The Song is one of ardent gratitude to Jehovah. It pourtrays his sovereign dispensations, asserts the character of his government to be, that he ' resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble,' aud concludes witli a prophetic, aspiration, in pious keeping with the spirit of the theocracy, and with the great pro- mise, which it so zealously cherished (Hengsten- berg, Die Authentie des Pentat. ii. 115). 2 Sam. SAMUEL, BOOKS OF. i. 18, also contains an extract from the book of Jasher, viz. a composition of the sweet singer of Israel, named 'the Song of the Dow.' Besides, there is the chorus of a poem which was sung on David's return from the slaughter of the Philistine giant (1 Sam. xviii.7). There are also three hymns of David (2 Sam. vii. 18-29), in which the king offers up his grateful devotions to Jehovah (2 Sam. xxii.); a triumphal ode, found with some altera- tions in the 18th Psalm and in 1 Sam. xxiii. 1-7, which preserves the last words of the 'anointed of the God of Jacob.' To these may be added the remains of a short elegy on the death of Aimer (2 Sam. iii 33-1). Whether all these effusions, as well as the lament over David and Jonathan, were taken from Jasher, we know not. It may be that they were drawn from this common source, this national collection of the Hebrew muse. At least, some critics, who compare the long hymn found in 2 Sam. xxii., and which forms the eighteenth psalm, and note the variations of the text, are inclined to think that the one has not been copied from the other, but that both have been taken from a very old common source : a conjec- ture far more natural than the ordinary hypothesis, namely, that David either published a second edition of his poem, or that the varice leetiones are the errors of transcribers. At all events the com- piler of the Iwoks of Samuel has evidently used as one of his sources some collection of poetrj* Such collections often contain the earliest history of a nation, and they seem to have abounded among the susceptible people of the East. Thus, from such sources, public and acknow- ledged, lias the compiler fetched his materials, in the shape of connected excerpts. The last of the prophetic triumvirate might be the redactor 0/ editor of the work, and we would not date its publication later than the death of Nathan, while the original biographies may have been finished at the period of David's decease. But, after all, certainty on such a subject is not to be attained. We can hope only for an approximation to the truth. Probability is all that we dare assert. But in apposition to our hypothesis it has been argued, that in the-e books there are traces of several documents, which have been clumsily and inconsiderately put together, not only by a late, but a blundering compiler. The German critics are fond of a peculiar species of critical chemistry, by which they disengage one portion of a book from the surrounding sections. They have ap- plied it to Genesis, to the Pentateuch generally, and to the books of Joshua and Judges. The .elaborate theory of Eichhorn on the present sub- ject {Einleit., iii. p. 476), is similar to that which he has developed in his remarks on Chronicles, viz., that the basis of the second book of Samuel was a short life of David, which was augmented by interpolated additions. The first book of Samuel is referred by him to old written sources, but in most parts to tradition, both in the life of Samuel and Saul. Bertholdt (Einleit. p. S9-1) mollifies this opinion by affirm- ing that in the first book of Samuel there are three independent documents, chaps, i.-vii., viii.-xvi., xvii.-xxx., containing respectively Samuel's his- tory, Saul's life, and David's early biography ; while in reference to the second book of Samuel, he generally admits the conjecture ol Eichhorn. Oraunberg (.Die Chronik, vol. ii. p. 80) is in fa- SAMUEL, BOOKS OF. 685 vour of two narratives, named by him A. and B., and Staheliu partially acquiesces ia his view. Such theories have nothing else to recommend them but the ingenious industry which framed them. It is said, however, that there are evident, vestiges of two different sources being used and intermingled in Samuel ; that the narrative is not. continuous ; especially, that it is made up of duplicate and contradictory statements. Such vestiges are alleged to be the following : in 1 Sam. x. 1, Samuel is said to have anointed Saul, whereas in x. 20-25 the prophet is described as having chosen him by lot. The reason of this two- fold act we have already given in our remarks 011 Samuel in the preceding article. The former was God's private election, the latter his public theocratic designation. Again, it is affirmed that two different accounts are given of the cause why the people demanded a king, the one (1 Sam. viii. 5; being the profligacy of Samuel's sons, and the other (xii. 12-13) a menaced invasion of the Ammonites. Both accounts perfectly harmonize. The nation feared the inroads of the children of Ammon, and they felt that Samuel's sons could not command the lespect and obedience of the various tribes. It was necessary to tell the old judge that his sons could not succeed him ; for he might have pointed to them as future advisers and governors in the dreaded juncture. The accounts of Saul's death are also said to differ from each other (1 Sam. xxxi.2-6, and 2 Sam. i. 2-12). We admit the dii'erence, the first account being the correct one, and the second being merely the invention of the cunning Ama- lekite, who framed the lie to gain the favour of Saul's great rival, David. It is recorded that twice did David spare Saul's life (1 Sam. xxiv. and xxvi.). The fact of the repetition of a similar deed of generosity can never surely give the narrative a legendary character. The miracle which mul- tiplied the loaves and the fishes was twice wrought by Jesus. The same remark may be made as to the supposed double origin of the proverb, ' Is Saul also among the prophets?1 In I Sam. x. 11 its real source is given, ami in xix. 24 another reason and occasion areassigned for its national currency. Especially has great stress been laid on what are supposed to be different records of David's intro- duction to Saul, contained in 1 Sam. xvi. 1S-22, and in the following chapter. That there is diffi- culty here cannot be denied, but to transpose the passages, on the supposition that David's encounter with Goliath was prior to his introduction to Saul as musician, will not remove the difficulty. For if Saul became so jealous of David's popularity as be is represented, no one of his domestics would have dated to recommend David to him as one possessed of high endowments, and able to charm away his melancholy. The Vatican MS. of the Sept. omits no less than twenty-live verses in these chapters. Yet the omission does not effect a reconciliation. Some critics, such as Houbigant, Michaelis, Datlie, and Kennicott, regard the en- tire passage as ail interpolation. We arc inclined to receive the chapters as they stand. David is first spoken of as introduced to Saul as a min- strel, as becoming a favourite of the sovereign, and being appointed one of his aid-de-camps. Now the fact of this previous introduction is al- luded to in the very passage which creates tlie difficulty; for after, in minute Oriental fashion, 686 SAMUEL, Buuivd Ur. (Ewald, Komposition der Genes., p. 148) David and his genealogy are again brought before the reader, it is said, 'and David went and returned from Saul to feed his father's sheep at Bethlehem.' The only meaning this verse can have, is, that David's attendance at court was not constant, especially as Saul's evil spirit may have left him. The writer who describes the combat with Goliath thus distinctly notices that David had already been introduced to Saul; nay, farther, specific allusion is again made to David's standing at court. ' And it came to pass on the morrow, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the midst of the house ; and David played with his hand, as at other times' (1 Sam. xviii. 10). The phrase, ' as at other times,' must refer to the notices of the former chapter. Yet, after the battle, Saul is represented as being igno- rant of the youth, and as inquiring after him. And Abner the general declares that he does not know the youthful hero. Can we imagine any ordinary writer so to stultify himself as this author is supposed to have done, by intimating that David had been with Saul, and yet that Saul did not know him ? No inconsistency must have been apparent to the annalist himself. It is therefore very probable that David had left Saul for some time before his engagement with Goliath; that the king's tits of gloomy insanity prevented him from obtaining correct impressions of David's form and person, the period of David's life, when the youth passes into the man, being one which is accompanied with considerable change of ap- pearance. The inquiry of Saul is more about the young warrior's parentage than about himself. It has sometimes struck us that Abner's vehement profession of ignorance is somewhat suspicious : 'As thy soul liveth, O king, I cannot tell ;'— a response too solemn for a question so simple. We cannot pursue the investigation farther. We would not in such a passage positively deny all difficulty, like ILivernick (§ 166) : we only venture to sug- gest that no sane author would so far oppose himself in a plain story, as some critics suppose the author of Samuel to have done. Appeal has also been made to David's two visits to Achish, King of Gath : but they happened in circumstances very dissimilar, and cannot by any means be regarded as a duplicate chronicle of the same event. Lastly, attention is called to 1 Sam. xv. 35 where it is said, that ' Samuel came no more to see Saul again till the day of his death,' as if the Statement were contradictory of xix. 24, where Saul met with Samuel^ and 'lay naked all day and all night before him.' De Wette's translator before referred to (vol. ii. p. 222) dishonestly affirms that the first verse says, ' Samuel did not see Saul till his death,' that is, he never saw him again ; whereas the language is, ' Samuel came no more to see Saul,' that is, no longer paid him any visit of friendship or ceremony, no longer sought him out to afford him counsel or aid. This decla- ration cannot surely be opposed to the following portion of the record, which states that Saul ac- cidentally met Samuel; for he pursued David to Ramah, where the prophet dwelt, and so came in contact with his former benefactor. May we not therefore conclude that the compiler has not i'oined two narratives of opposite natures very oosely together, or overlapped them in various places ; but has framed out of authoritative docu- SAMUEL, BOOKS OF. ments a consecutive history, not dwelling on all events with equal interest, but passing slightly over some, and formally detailing others with national relish and delight? Scope. — The design of these books is not very different from that of the other historical treatises of the Old Testament. The books of Kings are a history of the nation as a theocracy ; those of Chronicles have special reference to the form and ministry of the religious worship, as bearing upon its re-establishment after the return from Babylon. Samuel is more biographical, yet the theocratic element, of the government is not overlooked. It is distinctly brought to view in the early chapters concerning Eli and his house, and the fortunes of the ark ; in the passages which describe the change of the constitution ; in the blessing which rested on the house of Obed-Edom; in the curse which fell on the Bethshemites, andUzzah and Saul, for intrusive interference with holy things. The book shows clearly that God was a jealous God ; that obedience to him secured felicity ; that, the nation sinned in seeking another king ; that Saul's spe- cial iniquity was his impious oblivion of his station as only Jehovah's vicegerent, for he con- temned the prophets and slew the priesthood ; and that David owed his prosperity to his careful culture of the sacred principle of the Hebrew administration. This early production contained lessons both for the people and for succeeding monarchs, bearing on it the motto, ' Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning.' Relation to Kings and Chronicles. — Samuel is distinctly referred to in Kings, and also quoted. (Compare 1 Sam. ii. 33 with 1 Kings ii. 26 ; 2 Sam. v. 5 with 1 Kings ii. 11 ; 2 Sam. vii. 12 with ] Kings ii. 4, and 1 Chron. xvii. 24, 25). The history in Kings presupposes that contained in Samuel. The opinion of Eichhorn and Bertholdt, that the author of Chronicles did not use our books of Samuel, appears contrary to evident fact, as may be seen by a comparison of the two his- tories. Even Keil (Apologetischer Versuch iiber die Ckronik, p. 206) supposes that the chronicler, Ezra, did not use the memoirs in Samuel and Kings ; but Movers (Kritisch Untersuch. uber die Bill. Chronik) proves that these books were, among others, the sources which the chronicler drew from in the formation of a large portion of his history. Credibility. — The authenticity of the history- found in the books of Samuel rests on sufficient grounds. Portions of them are quoted in the New Testament (2 Sam. vii. 14, in Heb. i. 5; 1 Sam. xiii. 14, in Acts xiii. 22). References to them occur in other sections of Scripture, es- pecially in the Psalms, to which they often afford historic illustration. It has been argued against them that they contain contradictory statements. The old objections of Hobbes, Spinoza, Simon, and Le Clerc, are well disposed of by Carpzovius, (Introduction p. 215). Some of these supposed contradictions we have already referred to, and for a solution of others, especially of seeming con- trariety between the books of Samuel and Chro nicies, we refer with satisfaction to Davidson's Sacred Hermeneutics, p. 544, &c. Some of the objections of Vatke, in his BM. Theol., — cujus mentio est refutatio — are summarily disposed of by Hengstenberg (Die Authentic des Pentat., vol. SANBALLAT. SANDAL. 687 ii. p. 1 15), who usually chastises such adversaries with a whip of scorpions. Discrepancies in num- bers, and sometimes in proper names, are the most common ; and it is well known that textual errors in numeration are both most frequently and most easily committed, [David; Ghro- Nlcr.Es;- Saui..] Commentaries. — Yictorini Strigelii Comni. in quatuor Libr. Reg. et Faralipp., 1624, folio ; N. Serrarii Comm. in libr. Josuce, Jud., Ruth, Reg., et Paralipp., 1609, folio; Seb. Schmidt, In Lib. Sam. Comm. 1684-S9, 4to ; Jac. Bon- frerii Comm. in libr. quat. Reg., &c., 1643; Clerici Comm. in libr. Sam.; Opera, T. ii.; Jo. Drusii Annotat. in Locos diffic. Jos., Jud., Sam., 1618; Hensler, Erliiuterungen des I. B. Sam. &c. 1795 ; Maurer, Comment. Critic, p. 1 ; Exeyetische Handbuch des A. T. st. iv. v.; Chan- dler's Critical History of the Life of David, 2 vols. 1786.— J. E. SANBALLAT (B^P ; Sept. Swa/SaAiVcSr), a native of Horonaim, beyond the Jordan (Neh. ii. 10), and probably also a Moabitish chief, whom (probably from old national hatred) we find united in council with the Samaritans, and active in attempting to deter the returned exiles from fortifying Jerusalem (Neh. iv. 1, sq. ; vi. 1, sq.). Subsequently, during the absence of Nehemiah in Persia, a son of Joiada, the high priest, was married to his daughter (Neh. xiii. 28). Whether Sanballat held any public office as governor over the Moabites, or over the Samaritans, the record does not state. Such a character is usually ascribed to him on the supposed authority of a passage of Josephus. who speaks of a Sanballat, a Cuthean by birth, who was sent by the last Darius as governor of Samaria (A?itiq. xL 7. 2). The time assigned to this Sanballat is 120 years later than that of the Sanballat of Nehemiah, and we can only identify the one with the other by supposing that Josephus was mistaken both in the age and nation of the individual whom he mentions. Some admit this conclusion, as Jose- phus goes on to state how this person gave his daughter in marriage to a son of the high-priest, which high-priest, however, he tells us was Jaddua, in accordance with the date he has given. The son of the high-priest thus married to the daughter of Sanballat was named Manasseh, and is further stated by Josephus to have become the high-priest of the schismatical temple, which his father-in-law established fur the Samaritans in Mount Gerizim [Samaritans]. Upon the whole, as the account in Josephus is so circumstantial, it. seems probable that, notwithstanding the similarity of name and other circumstances, his Sanballat is not to be understood as the same that obstructed the labours of Nehemiah. It is just possible that the Jewish historian, who does not mention this contemporary of Nehemiah purposely, on account of some similar circumstance, transferred the history and name of Nehemiah's Sanbalbil to fill up the ac- count of a later personage, of whose name and origin he may have been ignorant. But there is much obscurity and confusion in that part of his work in which he has lost the guidance of the canonical history, and has not acquired that of the books of Maccabees. SANDAL (hvA ; Sept. and N. T., MS-opa, a-avSaKiov), a covering for the feet, usually de- noted by the word translated ' shoe ' in the Authorized Version. It was usually a sole of hide, leather, or wood, bound on to the toot by thongs; but it may sometimes denote such shoes and buskins as eventually came into use. Thus the word uirSSrifjLa, which literally means 'what is bound under,' i. e. the foot, and certainly in the first instance denoted a sandal, came to be also applied to the Roman calccus, or shoe co- vering the whole foot. Josephus (De Bell. Jud. vi. 1-8) so uses it of the caliga, the thick nailed shoe of the Roman soldiers. This word occurs in the New Testament (Matt. iii. 11; x. 10; Mark i. 7; Luke iii. 10; x. 4 ; John i. 27 ; Acts vii. 33; xiii. 25), and is also frequently used by the Sept. as a translation of the Hebrew term ; but. it appears in most places to denote a sandal. Hence the word rendered 'shoe-latchet' (Gen. xiv. 23, and in most of the texts just cited), means properly a sandal thong. Ladies of rank appear to have paid great, atten- tion to the beauty of their sandals (Cant. vii. i); though, if the bride in that book was an Egyptian princess, as some suppose, the exclamation, ' How beautiful are thy feet with sandals, O prince's daughter!' may imply admiration of a luxury properly Egyptian, as the ladies of that country were noted for their sumptuous sandals (Wilkin- son, Anc. Egypt, iii. 364). But this taste was probably general; for, at the present day, the dress slippers of ladies of rank are among the richest articles of their attire, being elaborately embroidered with flowers and other figures wrought in silk, silver, and gold. It does not seem probable that the sandals of the Hebrews differed much from those used in Egypt, excepting, perhaps, that from the greater roughness of their country, they weie usually of more substantial make and materials. The Egyptian sandals varied slightly in form : those worn by the upper classes, and by women, were usually pointed and tinned up at the end, like our skates, and many of the Eastern slippers at the 481. [Ancient Egyptian Sandals.] present day. They were made of a sort of woven or interlaced work of palm-leaves and papyrus- stalks, or other similar materials, and sometimes ot leather; and were frequently lined with cloth. on which the figure of a captive was painted ; that humiliating position being considered suited to the enemies of their country, whom they hated and despised. It is not likely that the Jews adopted this practice : but the idea which it ex- pressed, of treading their enemies under their feet, was familiar to them (Josh. x. 24.) Those of 6S8 SANDAL. the middle classes who were in the habit of wear- ing sandals, often preferred walking barefooted. Shoes, or low boots, are sometimes found at Thebes ; but these are believed by Sir J. G. Wil- kinson to have been of late date, and to have belonged to Greeks, since no persons are repre- sented in the paintings as wearing them, except foreigners. They were of leather, generally of a green colour, laced in front by thongs, which passed through small loops on either side, and were principally used, as in Greece and Etruria, by women (Wilkinson, iii. 374-367). 482. [Greek and Roman Sandals.] In transferring a possession or domain, it was customary to deliver a sandal (Ruth iv. 7), as in our middle ages, a glove. Hence the action of throwing down a shoe upon a region or territory, was a symbol of occupancy. So Ps. lx. 10: ' Upon the land of Edom do I cast, my sandal ;' *'. e. I possess, occupy it, claim it as my own. In Ruth, as above, the delivering of a sandal sig- nified that the next of kin transferred to another a sacred obligation; and he was hence called ' sandal-loosed.' A sandal thong (Gen. xiv. 23), or even sandals themselves (Amos ii. 6; viii. 6), are put for anything worthless or of little value; which is perfectly intelligible to those who have witnessed the extemporaneous manner in which a man will shape two pieces of hide, and fasten them with thongs to the soles of his feet — thus fabricating in a few minutes a pair of sandals which would be dear at a penny. It was undoubtedly the custom to take off the sandals on holy ground, in the act of worship, and in the presence of a superior. Hence the com- mand to take the sandals from the feet under such circumstances (Exod. iii. 5 ; Josh. v. 15). This is still the well-known custom of the East — an Oriental taking off his shoe in cases in which a European would remove his hat. The shoes of the modern Orientals are, however, made to slip off easily, which was not the case with sandals, that required to be unbound with some trouble. This operation was usually performed by servants ; and hence the act of unloosing the sandals of another became a familiar symbol of servitude (Mark i. 7 ; Luke iii. 16 ; John i. 27 ; Acts xiii. 25). So also when a man's sandals had been removed, they were usually left, in charge of a servant. In some of the Egyptian paintings servants are represented with their master's sandals on their arm : it thus became SANHEDRIM. another conventional mark of a servile con* dition, io bear the sandals of another (Matt, iii. 11). SANHEDRIM, more properly Sanhedrin (PTlD^P" crvveSpiof), the supreme judicial coun- cil of the Jews, especially for religious affairs. It was also called |H JT^, House of Judgment ; and in the Apocrypha and New Testament the appellations yepovaia and TrpetrP'JTtpwv seem also to be applied to it (comp. 2 Mace. i. 10 ; iv. 44 ; Acts v. 21; xxii. 5 ; 1 Mace. vii. 33 ; xii. 35, &c). This council consisted of seventy members. I Some give the number at. seventy-two, but for ithis there appears no sufficient authority. To this number the high priest was added, 'provided he was a man endowed with wisdom' (flTl DK nmra ilKI, Maimonid. Sanhed. c. 2). Re- garding the class of the Jewish people from which these were chosen, there is some uncertainty. Maimonides (Sanhed. c. 2) tells us, that this council was composed ' of Priests, Levites,and Israelites, whose rank entitled them to be as- sociated with priests.' Dr. Jost, the learned his- torian of his nation, simply says : 'the members of the council were chosen from among ihe peo- ple ;' and more particularly in another place he re- marks : 'these judges consisted of the most eminent priests, and of the scribes of the people, who were chosen for life, but each of whom had to look to his own industry for his support' (Geschichte der Israeliten seit der Zeit der Makkabder, th. i. s. 49 ; iii. 86). The statement in this latter passage corresponds with the terms used in Matt, ii. 4, where the council convened by Herod, in consequence of what the wise men of the East had told him, is described as composed of 'all the chief priests and scribes of the people ;' the former of whom Lightfoot (Hor. Heb. et Talm. in loc.) explains as the clerical, the latter as the laical members of the Sanhedrim. In other passages of the New Testament we meet with the threefold enumeration, Priests, Elders, and Scribes (Matt. xvi. 21; xxvi. 2, 57, &c.) ; and this is the description which most frequently occurs. By the first are to be understood, not such as had sustained the office of high-priest, but the chief men among the priests ; probably the presidents of the twenty-four classes into which the priest- hood was divided (1 Clirom xxiv. 6; comp. the use of the phrase D^HDH "HE> in 2 Chron. xxxvi. 14). By the second, we are probably to under- stand the select men of the people — the Alder- men,— persons whose rank or standing led to their being raised to this distinction. And by the last are designated those, whether of the Levitical family or not, who gave themselves to the pursuit of learning, especially to the interpretation of Scripture, and of the traditions of the fathers. To this general description we may add what Maimonides lays down as to the qualifications required in those who were eligible to this office. These were — 1. that they should possess much and varied learning ; 2. that they should be free from every bodily defect, such as lameness, blindness, &c. ; 3. that they should be of such age as should afford them experience, and yet not expose them to the feebleness of dotage ; 4. that they should not be eunuchs; 5. that they should be fathers, 6. that they should possess the moral qualities SANHEDRIM. set forth in Exod. xviii. 21 ; Deut. i. 13-16 (Sanhed. c. 2). A number of persons were al- ways in the condition of candidates for admission into this honourable body, from among whom vacancies were supplied as they occurred. The new member was installed by the imposition of hands, the company chauntiug the words ' Lo ! a hand is upon thee, and the power is given thee of exercising judgment, even in criminal cases ' (Sanhed. c. 4). In the council the office of president belonged to the high priest, if he was a member of it ; when he was not, it is uncertain whether a sub- stitute was provided, or his place occupied by the person next in rank. He bore the title of JOEW, chief or president ; and it was his prerogative to summon the council together, as well as to preside over its deliberations. When he entered the assemhly, all the members rose, and remained standing until he requested them to sit. Next in rank to him was the vice-president, who bore the title of jH IT1} 2N, Father of the House of Judgment; whose duty it was to supply the place of the president in case he should be prevented by any accidental cause from discharging his duties himself. When the president was present, this officer sat at his right hand. The third grade of rank was that of the DDH, or sage, whose bu- siness was to give counsel to the assembly, and who was generally selected to his office on ac- count of his sagacity and knowledge of the law ; his place was on the left hand of the president. The assembly, when convened, sat in the form of a semi-circle, or half-moon, the .president occu- pying the centre. At each extremity stood a scribe, whose duty it was to record the sentence pronounced by the council. There were certain officers, called D'HtDIK', whose business seems to have been somewhat analogous to that of our policemen: they were armed with a baton, kept order in the street, and were under the direction of the Sanhedrim. The meetings of this council were usually held in the morning. Their place of meeting was a ball, close by the great gate of the temple, and leading from the outer court of the women to the holy place ; from its pavement of polished stone, it was called rVWl VBsfc.* A Talmudic tradition affirms that, forty years before the de- struction of Jerusalem, the Sanhedrim were com- pelled by the Romans to forsake this hall, and hold their meetings in caves on the east side of the bill on which the temple stood; but as the Mischna is silent in regard to this, and as the New Testament history seems incompatible with its truth, we must resolve this tradition into the generalization of some solitary case into a regular practice. In cases of urgency the Sanhedrim might be convened in the house of the high priest (Matt, xxv i. 3). The functions of the Sanhedrim were, accord- ing to the Jewish writers, co-extensive w'fh the civil and religious relations of the people. In their hands, we are told, was placed the supreme authority in all things; they interpreted the law, * This must not be confounded with the A.i0JcrT/jaiTOs, where Pilate sat in judgment on Christ, and which was evidently a place in his own dwelling (John xix. 13). VOL. II. SANHEDRIM. 689 they appointed sacred rites, they imposed tri- butes, they decreed war, they judged in capital cases ; in short, they engrossed the supreme au- thority, legislative, executive, and judicial. In this there is no small exaggeration; at least, none of the historical facts which have come down to us confirm this description of the extent of the powers of the Sanhedrim ; whilst some of these facts, such as the existence of civil officers armed with appropriate authority, seem directly opposed to it. In the notices of this body, contained in the New Testament, we find nothing which would lead us to infer that their powers extended beyond matters of a religious kind. Questions of blas- phemy, of sabbath-breaking, of heresy, are those alone which we find referred to their judicature (comp. Mat;, xxvi. 57-fi5 ; John v. 11, 18; Matt, xii. 14, sq. ; Acts v. 17, sq., &c). On those guilty of these crimes they could pronounce sentence of death; but, under the Roman government, it was not competent for them to execute this sentence : their power terminated with the pronouncing of a decision, and the transmission of this to the pro- curator, with whom it rested, to execute it or not as he saw meet (John xviii. 31 ; Matt, xxvii. 1, 2). Hence the unseemly readiness of this council to call in the aid of the assassin for the purpose of de- stroying those who were obnoxious to them (Acts v. 33; xxiii. 12-15). The case of Stephen may seem to furnish an objection to this statement ; but as his martyrdom occurred at a time when the Roman procurator was absent, and was altogether a tumultuous procedure, it cannot be allowed to stand for more than a casual exceptiou to the general rule. Josephus informs us, that alter the death of Festus, and before the arrival of his suc- cessor, the high priest Ananus, availing himself of the opportunity thus afforded, summoned a meeting of the Sanhedrim, and condemned James the brother of Jesus, with several others, to suffer death by stoning. This licence, however, was viewed with much displeasure by the new procurator, Albinus, and led to the deposition of Ananus from the office of high priest (Antiq. xx. 9. I, 2). At what period in the history of the Jews the Sanhedrim arose, is involved in much uncer- tainty. The Jews, ever prone to invest witli the honours of remote antiquity all the institutions of their nation, trace this council to the times of Moses, and find the origin of it in the appoint- ment of a body of elders as the assistants of Moses in the discharge of his judicial functions (Num. xi. 16, 17). There is no evidence, how- ever, that this was any other than a temporary arrangement for the benefit of Moses ; nor do we, in the historical books of the Old Testament, detect any traces whatever of the existence of this council in the times preceding the Babylonish captivity, nor in those immediately succeeding the return of the Jews to their own land. The earliest mention of the existence of this council by Josephus, is in connection with the reign of Hyrcanus II., B.C. 69 (Antiq. xiv. 9. 3). It is probable, however, that it existed before this time — that it arose gradually after the cessa- tion of the prophetic office in Judah, in conse- quence of the felt want of some supreme direction and judicial authority — that the number of its members was fixed so as to correspond with that of the council of elders appointed to assist Moses — ■ 2x 690 SAPPHIRA. and that it first assumed a formal and influential existence in the later years of the Macedo-Grecian dynasty. This view is confirmed by the allusions made to it in the Apocryphal books (2 Mace, i. 10; iv. 44; xiv. 5 ; Judith xi. 14, &c); and perhaps, also, by the circumstance that the use of the name ffvveSpiov, from which the Hebrews formed their word Sanhedrim, indicates a Mace- donian origin (comp. Livy, xlv. 32). The Talmudical writers tell us, that, besides the Sanhedrim properly so called, there was in every town containing not fewer than one hundred and twenty inhabitants, a smaller Sanhedrim (t"Ot2p pYirUD), consisting of twenty-three members, before which lesser causes were tried, and from the decisions of which an appeal lay to the supreme council. Two such smaller councils are said to have existed at Jerusalem. It is to this class of tribunals that our Lord is supposed to allmle, under the term Kpicris, in Matt. v. 22. Where the number of inhabitants was under one hundred and twenty, a council of three adjudi- cated in all civil questions. What brings insu- perable doubt upon this tradition is, that Josephus, who must from his position have been intimately acquainted with all the judicial institutions of his nation, not only does not mention these small- er councils, but says, that the court next below the Sanhedrim was composed of seven members. Attempts have been made to reconcile the two accounts, but without success ; and it seems now very generally agreed, that the account of Josephus is to be preferred to that of the Mischna ; and that, consequently, it is to the tribunal of the seven judges that our Lord applies the term Kpicris, in the passage referred to (Tholuck, Berg- predigt, in loc, Eng. Transl. vol. i. p. 241 ; Kui- noel, in loc). Comp. Otho, Lexicon Rabbinico-Philolog. in voce ; Selden, De Synedriis Veterum Ebraiorum, ii., 95, sq. ; Reland, Antiq. ii. 7 ; Jahn, Archee- ologie, ii. 2. § 186; Pareau, Antiq. Heb. iii. 1.4; Lightfoot, Works, plur. locis ; Hartmann, Enqc Verbindung des Alien Test, nvitdem Neuen, s. 166, if., &c— W. L. A. SAPPHIRA (Scnr^efpij), the wife of Ananias, and his accomplice in the sin for which lie died (Acts v. 1-10). Unaware of the judgment which had befallen her husband, she entered the place about three hours after, probably to look for him; and being there interrogated by Peter, repeated and persisted in the 'lie unto the Holy Ghost,' which had destroyed her husband ; on which the grieved apostle made known to her his doom, and pro- nounced her own — 'Behold, the feet of those who have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.' On hearing these awful words, she i'ell dead at his feet. The cool ob- stinacy of Sapphira in answering as she did the questions which were probably designed to awaken her conscience, deepens the shade of the foul crime common to her and her husband ; and has suggested to many the probability that the plot was of her devising, and that, like another Eve, she drew her husband into it. But this is mere conjecture [Ananias]. SAPPHIRE (TSP ; Sept. and N. T. ai.iz- termed an adversary ; and in Nuna.xxii. 22, wher the angel 'stood in the way for an adversary (|DK^) to Balaam,' i. e.tooppose him when he weir with the princes of Moah. See also Ps. cix. 6. In Zech. iii. 1, 2, the word occurs in its specif t sense as a proper name : ' And he showed nit Joshua the high-priest standing before the ange of the Lord, and Satan Qd&F!) standing at hit right, hand to resist ' (IJDKVj ' to satanize him '.) ' And the Lord said unto Satan (p&n), Th« Lord rebuke thee, O Satan.' Here it. is manifest both from ihe context and the use of the article that some particular adversary is denoted. In the 1st and 2nd chapters of Job, the same us*: of the word with the article occurs several times The events in which Satan is represented as the agent confirm this view. He was a distinguished adversary and tenaipter. See also 1 Chron. x\i. 1, When we pass from theOld to the New Testament, this doctrine of an invisible evil agent becomes more clear. With the advent of Christ and the opening of the Christian dispensation, the great opposer of that, kingdom, the particular adversary and antagonist of the Saviour, would naturally become more active and more known. The anta- gonism of Satan and his kingdom to Christ and his kingdom runs through the whole of the New Testament, as will appear from the following passages and their contexts : Matt. iv. 10 ; xii. 26v. Personality of Satan. — We determine the per- sonality of Satan by the same criteria that we use in determining whether Caesar and Napoleon were real, personal beings, or the personifications of abstract ideas, viz., by the tenor of history con- cerning them, and the ascription of personal attri- butes to them. All the forms of personal agency are made use of by the sacred writers in setting forth the character and conduct of Satan. They describe him as having power and dominion, messengers and followers. He tempts arid resists ; he is held accountable, charged with guilt ; is to be judged, and to receive final punishment. On the supposition that it was the object of the sacred writers to teach the proper personality of Satan, they could have found no more express terms than those which they have actually used. And on the supposition that they did not intend to teach such a doctrine, their use of language, incapable of communicating any other idea, is wholly inex- plicable. To suppose that all this semblauce of a real, veritable, conscious moral agent, is only a trope, a prosopopeia, is to make the inspired pen- men guilty of employing a figure in such a way that, by no ascertained laws of language, it could be known that it was a figure, — in such a way that it could not be taken to be a figure, without violence to all the rhetorical rules by which they on other occasions are known to have been guided. A personification, protracted through such a book as the Bible, even should we suppose it to have been written by one person — never dropped in the most simple and didactic portions — never explained when the most grave and im- portant truths are to be inculcated, and when men the most ignorant and prone to superstition are to be the readers — a personification extending from Genesis to Revelation, — this is altogether ane- malous and inadmissible. But to suppose that the several writers of the different books of the hible, diverse in their style and intellectual habits, writing under widely differing circum- stances, through a period of nearly two thousand years, should each, from Moses to John, fall into the use of the same personification, and follow it, too, in a way so obscure and enigmatical, that not one in a hundred of their readers would escape the error which they did not mean to teach, or apprehend the truth which they wished to set forth, — to suppose this, is to require men to believe that the inspired writers, who ought to have done the least violence to the common laws of language, have really done the most. Such uniformity of inexplicable singularity, on the part of such men as the authors of the several books of the Bible, could be accounted for only on the hypothesis that they were subject to an evil as well as a good inspiration. On the oilier hand, such uniformity of appellations and imagery, and such identity of Characteristics, protracted through such a series of writings, go to confirm the received doctrine of a real personality. But there are other difficulties than these gene-al 694 SATAN. SATAN. ones, by which the theory of personification is encumbered. This theory supposes the devil to be the principle of evil. Let it be applied in the interpretation of two or three passages of Scripture. ' Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness, to he tempted of the devil' (Matt, iv. 1-11). Was Jesus tempted by a real, personal being? or was it by the principle of evil ? If by the latter, in whom or what did this principle reside ? Was it in Jesus ? Then it could not be true that in him was no sin. The very principle of sin was in him, which would have made him the tempter of himself. This is bad hermeneutics, producing worse theology. Let it also be remem- bered that this principle of evil, in order to be moral evil, must inhere in some conscious moral being. Sin is evil, only as it implies the state or action of some personal and accountable agent. Who was this agent of evil in the Temptation? Was it to a mere abstraction that the Saviour said, ' Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God ;' ' Get thee behind me, Satan T Or was it to a real person, having desires and purposes and volitions, — evil, because these desires and purposes and volitions were evil? There is but one intelligible answer to such questions. And that answer shows how perfectly untenable is the position that the devil, or Satan, is only the personification of evil. Again : ' He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth : he is a liar and the father of it' (John viii. 44). With what pro- priety could these specific acts of guilt be charged upon an abstraction ? An abstraction a murderer ! a liar! The principle of evil abode not in the truth ! Seriously to affirm such things of the mere abstraction of evil is a solemn fiction; while, to assert them of a fallen angel, who beguiled Eve by falsehood, and brought, death upon all the race of man, is an intelligible and affecting truth, What necessity for inspired men to write that the devil sinned from the beginning, if he be only the principle of evil ? What con- sistency, on this hypothesis, in their saying that he transforms himself into an angel of light, if lie has no volition, no purpose, no craft, no ends or agency? If there are such ihings as personal attributes, it must be conceded that, the sacred writers do ascribe them to Satan. On any other supposition, the writers of the New Testament could more easily be convicted of insanity than believed to be inspired. The principle of inter- pretation by which the personality of Satan is discarded, leads to the denial of the personality of the Deity. Natural History. — The class of beings to which Satan originally belonged, and which constituted a celestial hierarchy, is very numerous : ' Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him ' (Dan. vii. 10). They were created and dependent ( John i. 3). Analogy leads to the conclusion that there are different grades among the angels as among other races of beings. The Scrips tines warrant the same. Michael is described as one of the chief princes (Dan. x. 13); as chief captain of" the host of Jehovah (Josh. v. 14). Similar distinctions exist among the fallen angels (Col. ii. 15 ; Eph. vi. 12). It. is also reasonable to suppose that they were created susceptible of improvement in all respects, except moral purity, as they certainly were capable of apostacy. As to the time when they were brought into being, the Bible is silent ; and where it is silent, we should be silent, or speak with modesty. Some suppose that they were called into existence after the crea» tion of the world ; among whom is Dr. John Dick. Others have supposed that they were created just anterior to the creation of man, and for purposes of a merciful ministration to him. It is more probable, however, that as they were the highest in rank among the creatures of God, so they were the first in the order of time ; and that they may have continued for ages in obedience to their Maker, before the creation of man, or the fall of the apostate angels. The Scriptures are explicit as to the apostacy of some, of whom Satan was the chief and leader. ' And the angels which kept not their first estate or principality, but left their own habitation,' &c. (Jude, ver. 6). ' For if God spared not the angels that sinned,' &c. (2 Pet. ii. 4). Those who fol- lowed Satan in his apostacy are described as belonging to him. The company is called the devil and his angels (t<£ Aic/BoAw koL toIs ayye- Kots avTov, Matt. xxv. 41 ). The relation marked here denotes the instrumentality which the devil may have exerted in inducing those called his angels to rebel against Jehovah and join them- selves to his interests. How Satan and his fol- lowers, being created so high in excellence and holiness, became sinful and fell, is a question upon which theologians have differed, but which they have not settled. The difficulty has seemed so great to Schleiermacher and others, that they have denied the fact of such an apostacy. They have untied the knot by cutting it. Still the difficulty remains. The denial of mystery is not the removal of it. Even philosophy teaches us to believe sometimes where we cannot understand. It. is here that the grave question of the introduc- tion of evil first meets us. If we admit the fact of apostacy among the angels, as by a fair inter- pretation of Scripture we are constrained to do, the admission of such a fact in the ease of human beings will follow more easily, they being the lower order of creatures, in whom defection would be less surprising. As to what constituted the first sin of Satan and his followers, there has been a diversity of opinions. Some have supposed that it was the beguiling of our first parents. Others have believed that the first sin of the angels is mentioned in Gen. vi. 2. The sacred writers intimate very plainly that the first trans- gression was pride, and that from this sprang open rebellion. Of a bishop, the apostle says (1 Tim. iii. 6), ' He must not be a novice, lest, being puffed up with pride, he fall into the condemnation of the devil.' From which it appears that pride was the sin of Satan, and that for this he was con- demned. This, however, marks the quality of the sin, and not the act. In his physical nature, Satan is among those that are termed spiritual beings ; not as excluding necessarily all idea of matter, but as opposed rather to the animal nature. It is the irvevpariKo?, in opposition to the i|/i>xi/cos. The good angels are all ministering spirits, irvevpara (Heb. i. 14). Satan is one of the angels that kept not their first principality. The fall produced no change in his physical or metaphysical nature. Paul, in warn- ing the Ephesians against the wiles of the devil (tccs pedoSeias toO SiafioAov), tells them (Eph. vi. 12) that they contended not against flesh SATAN. and blood, mere human enemies, but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places ; irpbs to TryevfMXTiKa ttjs irovTjplas iv tois iirovpaviois, in which the contrast is between human and superhuman foes, the t. ii. 18). He is the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience (Eph. ii. 2) ; and he deceivelh the whole world (Rev. xii. 'J). The means which he uses are variously called wiles, darts, depths, snares, all deceivableuess of unrighteousness. He darkens the understandings of men, to keep them in ignorance. He perverts their judgments, that he may lead them into error. He insinuates evil thoughts, and thereby awakens in them unholy desires. He excites them to 696 SATAN. SAUL. pride, anger, and revenge ; to discontent, re- pinings, and rebellion. He labours to prop up false systems of religion, and to corrupt and overturn the true one. He came into most direct and determined conflict with the Saviour in the temptation, hoping to draw him from his allegiance to God, and procure homage for himself: but he failed in his purpose. Next, he instigated the Jews to put him to death, thinking thus to thwart his designs and frustrate his plans. Here too he failed, and was made to subserve the very ends which lie most wished to prevent. Into a similar conflict does he come with all the saints, and with like ultimate ill success. God uses his temptations as the means of trial to his people, and of strength by trial, and points them out as a motive to watchfulness and prayer. Such are the nature and mode of his moral influence and agency. But his efforts are directed against the bodies of men, as well as against their souls. That the agency of Satan was concerned in producing physical diseases the Scriptures plainly teach (Job ii. 7 ; Luke xiii. 16). Peter says of Christ, that he went about doing good and healing (Id/xevos) all that were oppressed of the devil (rod StafioXov) (Acts x. 38). Hymeneus and Alexander were delivered to Satan, that they might learn not to blaspheme (1 Tim. i. 20); where physical suffering by the agency of Satan, as a divine chastisement, is manifestly intended. Farmer seems to have been among the first in modern times who adopted the rationalistic, or accommodation principle of interpretation, upon the subject of demoniacal possessions. Semlei introduced his work on Demoniacs into Germany, and the German neologists adopted substantially his view. For a refutation of this system of inter- pretation, see Twesten's Dogmatik, Olshausen's Commentar, Storr and Flatt's Biblical Theol., and Appleron's Lectures ; and for a general state- ment of the arguments on both sides see the articles Demon; Demoniacs. Whatever the demons may have been, they were considered by the New Testament writers as belonging to the kingdom of Satan. They are called unclean spirits, evil demons. They are conscious of being under condemnation (Matt. viii. 29). Christ came to destroy the works of Satan ; and he refers to his casting out demons by the finger of God as proof that he was exe- cuting that work. And when charged with cast- ing them out by the prince of demons, he meets the charge by the assertion that this would be dividing the kingdom of Satan — Satan casting out Satan, i. e. casting out his own subjects; — the irresistible inference from which is, that Satan and the demons are one hotcse, pertain to one and the same kingdom. It is of no avail that there are difficulties connected with the agency ascribed to Satan. Objections are of little weight when brought against well-authen- ticated facts. Any objections ra'sed against the agency of Satan are equally valid against his existence. If he exists, he must act; and if he is evil, his agency must be evil. The fact of such an agency being revealed, as it is, is every way as consonant with reason and religious consciousness as are the existence and agency of good angels. Neither reason nor consciousness could by them- selves establish such a fact; but all the testimony they are capable of adducing is in agreement with the Scripture representation on the subject. If God communicates with good men without their consciousness, there is no apparent reason why Satan may not, without their consciousness, com- municate with bad men. And if good men be- come better by the influence of good beings, it is 'equally easy to suppose that bad men may become worse by the influence of evil beings. Such an influence no more militates against the benevo- lence of God, than does the agency of wicked men, or the existence of moral evil in any form. Evil agents are as really under the divine control as are good agents. Arid out of evil, God will cause good to come. He will make the wrath of devils as well as of men to praise him, and the remainder He will restrain. — E. A. L. SAUL (^1NK>; Sept. and New Test. SaovA), son of Kish, of the tribe of Benjamin, was the first king of the Israelites. The corrupt adminis- tration of justice by Samuel's sons furnished an occasion to the Hebrews for rejecting that theo- cracy, of which they neither appreciated the value, nor, through their unfaithfulness to it, en- joyed the full advantages (1 Sam. viii.). An in- vasion by the Ammonites seems also to have con- spired with the cause just mentioned, and. with a love of novelty, in prompting the demand for a king (1 Sam. xii. 12) — an officer evidently alien to the genius of the theocracy, though contem- plated as an historical certainty, and provided for by the Jewish lawgiver (1 Sam. xii. 17-20; Deut. xvii. 14-20 ; on which see Grotius's note ; also De Jure Belli, &c. i. 4. 6, with the remarks of Gronovius, who (as Puflendorf also does) con- troverts the views of Grotius). An explanation of the nature of this request, as not only an instance of ingratitude to Samuel, but of rebellion against Jehovah, and the delineation of the manner in which their kings — notwithstanding the restric- tions prescribed in the law — might be expected to conduct themselves (~[?fii\ EQ5J*D, Sept. Sucaioofxa rod f}a3, 'for song with psalteries and harps' (ver. 7) by "Y[$> HD?C ' instructed in song ;' so that N32il, * prophet,' (ver. 2, 3) may also be rendered singer, j 2. That the places where these prophets or in- spired singers (who among other people would have been called thinkers or philosophers) met, wereRamah(l Sam. xix. 18-24), Bethel (2 Kings ii. 3), Jericho (ii. 5), Gilgal (iv. 38 : vi. 1). By comparing 1 Kings xviii. 30 widi 2 Kings ii. 25, there seems to have been another such place some- where in Mount Carmel. 3. That the schools of the prophets, or assem- blies of the wise, were unions of men| distin- guished by learning and wisdom, or who strove for that distinction, and were competent to appear as public orators or singers, animated declama- tion and song being identical in their origin. 4. That these institutions were chiefly in- tended— a. To rouse, develope, and strengthen the powers of thought, by mutual instruction, commu- nication, criticism, and controversy. b. To hear public teachers, counsellors, arid leaders of the people and the monarchs. c. To save from oblivion the sayings and speeches of ancient times, by collecting them in proper order ; and, d. To rear from among them teachers and writers for the public. 5. That the subjects treated of in these schools or assemblies, comprised everything that might appear important to the philosophers of those times and that country, and, more especially, songs of praise to Jehovah, observations on man and nature, exhortations to morality and viitue, warn- ings against idolatry and enmity towards their fellow-citizens, &c. 6. That the form of those discourses, in both the schools of the prophets and assemblies of the icise, may be divided into — * Quintilian observes, that in the early stages of civilization, the performers -on musical instru- ments (as such are first described the 'prophets,' 1 Sam. x.) were identical with wise men, inspired singers, and seers. Quis ignorat musicen tautum jam illis autiquis temporihus, noil studii ntodo verum etiam venerationis habuisse, ut iidetn Musici et Vates et Sapientes judicarentur, (mit- tam alios) Orpheus et Linus (Inst. i. 10). f Even the Chaldee translates 1X33JV, ' they prophesied,' in 1 Sam. xix. 2(1, ' they sang songs of praise." In the same sense must we also take irpoipr)T€veiv, in 1 Cor. xi. 4. o. I That the so-called (sons) pupils of the pro- phets were not boys, bul grown men, is evident from 1 Kings xx. 35, sq.; 2 Kings ii. 15, 16; where mention is made of fifty strong men (7*n ,J3),the pupils of the prophets, who had assembled at Jericho ; as also from 2 Kings iv. 40. 704 SCHOOLS, EDUCATION. a. Sayings of the wise. b. Songs and counter-songs (JTljy? DI|,,W, Ps. lxxxviii. I ; Sept. crrpcHpal \6ywv, Prov. i. 3) ; containing thoughts leading to reflection and further investigation (iTtf^Dl ^D, (TKoreivbs \6yos). c. Obscure questions (JTlTTI, alvly/xara), and their solutions. 7. That the president of the assembly opened the meeting with a sentence or question, which was left to the various speakers to develope or discuss. SCHOOLS, EDUCATION. 8. That the members of these literary unions comprised also laymen — ex. rjr. Saul and David — though Levites were frequently not only mem- bers but even founders of such schools — ex. gr. Samuel, &c. To judge, however, from many passages where censure is passed on the too strict observance of outward ceremony as demanded by the priests, as also on their arrogance of de- spotic power, it would seem that such unions were just forming a sort of opposition to those evils, trying to out-argue them, and showing by their own example, in the selection of a president and other distinguished members, that more re- 484. [Turkish School.] ect is due to personal merit than to hereditary right, as advocated by the priests.* Specimens of the form and style of the objects treated in those early periods in the schools of the prophets, may probably be contained in the hymns in many of the Psalms, assisted by a. chorus, such as Ps. viii., xlii., xliii., xlix., civ. ; as also the coun- ter-songs in Ps. lxxxviii., lxxxix.,lx.,lxi., lxv.,and ciii. 1-18 ; as also cxxxix., where three singers seem to have performed successively, after the finale of the chorus. Nor can we fail to discover, in Canticles and Proverbs, numerous passages be- longing to those assemblies or schools at various periods (vide the superscriptions of ch. x., xxv., xxx., and xxxi.). — E. M. [It would appear that elementary instruction among the mass of the people became mure com. mon after the Exile than it had been previously * It is a curious fact, that among the places named as rendezvous for the sons of the prophets, not one Levitical town is found (comp. Josh. xxi. and 1 Chron. vi. 54, sq.). though such places may seem to have been the most appropriate for literary purposes. when the ability to read was regarded as a mark of learning (Isa. xxix. 12); and in the time of Christ reading and writing seem to have been at- tainments common to every class above the very lowest. We know that several of the apostles, who were fishermen, could read and write, and may assume that others of the same class of life could do the same ; yet they were certainly consi- dered ' unlearned' men (Acts iv. 13). The state of common education about that period appears to us to have been in all probability as nearly as pos- sible similar in almost every respect to that which now prevails in Moslem countries. Here also a further and very striking resemblance arises out of the prominence given to instruction in the sacred books. Among Moslems persons quite unable to read or write can nevertheless repeat a large part, and sometimes the whole, of the Koran by rote ; and there is reason to think that among the Jews a similar acquaintance with the law, and with partsof ihe psalms and prophets, as well as a general know- ledge of the historical and other books, existed by means of oral instruction even among those who had not learned to read and write. The Moslems make it, indeed, their first object to instil into the SCRIBES. minds of their children the principles of their religion, and then submit them, if they can afford the small expense, to the instruction of a school- master. Most of the children of the higher and middle classes, and many of the lower also, are taught by the schoolmaster to read, and to recite the whole or certain portions of the Koran by memory. They afterwards learn the common rules of arith- metic. Schools are numerous in every large town, and there is one at least in every considerable village. There are also schools attached to mosques and other public buildings, in which children are instructed at a very trifling expense. The lessons are generally written upon tabids of wood painted white, and when one is learnt, the tablet is washed and another written. Writing is also practised on the same tablet. The master and pupils sit on the ground, and each boy has a tablet in his hand, or a copy of the Koran, or of one of its thirty sections, on a kind of small desk of palm- sticks. All who are learning to read recite their lessons aloud at the same time, rocking their bodies incessantly backwards and forwards : which is thought to assist the memory. Boys who mis- behave are beaten by the master on the soles of the feet with a paim-stick. It is to be observed that these schools teach little more than reading and learning by heart, the reading lessons being written on tablets not by the boys themselves but by the master; and one who can read well, and recite a good deal of the Koran, is considered to have had a fair education. Those who learn to write are such as are likely to require that ait in the em- ployments for which they are designed ; and as few schoolmasters teach writing, they learn it of a person employed in the bazaars. Some parents employ a master to teach their boys at home; and those who intend to devote themselves to a learned or religious life, pursue a regular course of study in the colleges (Medras- seh — the same name as the Hebrew for similar institutions) connected with the great mosques. Females are seldom taught to read or write, or even 10 say tneir prayers ; but there are many schools in which they are taught needlework, em- broidery, &c. (Lane, Mod. Egypt, i. C2-6D ; ■Schubert, Morgenlande, pp. 72-74). The Jews, while they paid equal attention to their sacred books, appear to have made, in the later Scriptural times, writing more generally a part of common education than the Moslems now do; and the religious education of females was less neglected by them, as appears in the case of almost every woman named in the New Testament. In other respects the state of things seems to have been very similar to the present.] SCRIBES CJQEO,. a learned body of men, otherwise denominated lawyers, whose influence with the Jewish nation was very great at the time when our Saviour appeared. The genius of a social or religious system may be ascertained even from the signification of the nai ies borne by its high functionaries. The title Consul, which directs the thoughts to consultation as the chief duty of the officer who bore it, could have had no existence in any of the Oriental despotisms. Harnspices, soothsayers, determines the degree of religious enlightenment to which Rome, the mistress of the world, h.id been able to VOL. II. SCRIBES. 705 attain. The feudal designation Marshall (Master of the Horse) points to a state of society in which brute force had the mastery. Our Saxon title of a ruler, namely, king(kbnig, that is, 'the knower,' ' the skilful man"), shows that the very basis of our social institutions was laid in superior know- ledge and ability, and not in mere physical pre- eminence. In the same way the word 'scribe' of itself pronounces a eulogy on the Mosaic institu- tions. Writers at an early jieriod held a high rank in the Hebrew polity, and in consequence that polity must have been essentially of a libe- ral character, and of a refining tendency. ' Scribe,' indeed, has reference to ' law,' and of itself it suggests the idea ; and the social institutions that are founded on law, and not on force — on law, and not on the will of one man — take a high rank even in their origin, and may presumably merit high praise. If now we invert the remark, intimating that law, as the foundation of social institutions, im- plies scribes, we shall see at once that the learned caste of which we speak must have taken their rise contemporaneously with the commencement of the Mosaic polity. In a system so comp1 . as was that polity, there were no means but lepeated transcripts which could make the law sufficiently known for it to be duly observed by the nation at large. It i6 true that at first the function of the scribe may have been ill-defined, and his services have been only occasionally demanded ; but as the nation became settled in their terri- torial possessions, and the provisions of Moses' began to take efiect, the scrilie would be more and more in demand, till at last the office became a regular and necessary part of social life, and grew finally into all the dignity, order, and co- herence of a learned caste. And this growth would be accelerated or retarded in the same manner and degree as the idea of law was honoured, out of which it sprang. In seasons of national depression, when might prevailed against right, law was silenced and scribes were oppressed. When, however, the Mosaic law was honoured; when, as in the reign of David, law had triumphed over force, and laid the foundations of a nourish- ing empire, then the scribe stood at the king's right hand, and the pen became at once the sym- bol and the instrument of power. So, too, when the exile, with its weighty penalties, had taught the people to value, respect, and obey the law of God, the law of their forefathers, then the scribe is raised to the highest offices of civil society, and even an Ezra is designated by the name. But. law, in the Mosaic institutions, had a religious as well as a civil sanction. With the Hebrews, indeed, social was lost in religious life. There was but one view of society, and of man individually, and that was the religious view'. Education, politics, morals, even the useful arts, were only religion in different exercises and manifestations. Hence writing was a sacred art, and writers (scrilies) holy men; and that the rather, because scribes were engaged immediately about the law, which was the written will of God, and so the embodiment of all knowledge, truth and duty. The scribes, therefore, were not only a learned but a sacred caste. In the same manner may we learn what, in general, the functions of the scribes were. A writer at the present day is frequently used as 2« 706 SCRIBES. I synonymous with an author, and an author is necessarily a teacher. The scribes then had the care of the law ; it was their duty to make tran- scripts of it ; they also expounded its difficulties, and taught its doctrines, and so performed several functions which are now distributed among dif- ferent professions, being keepers of the records, consulting lawyers, authorized expounders of holy writ, and, finally, schoolmasters — thus blending together in one character the several elements of intellectual, moral, social, and religious influence. It scarcely needs to be added that their power was very great. A few details drawn from individual passages of Scripture will confirm and enlarge these ob- servations. So early as the events recorded in Judg. v. 14, we find mention of those 'who handle the pen of the writer,' as if the class of scribes were then well known. Zebulun seems to have been famous as a school for scribes. Among the high officers of the court of David mention is made of ' Seraiah the scribe,' as if he stood on the same footing in dignity as the chief- priests and the generalissimo (2 Sam. viii. 16-18). By comparing this with other passages (2 Kings xxv. 19 : 1 Chron. ii. 55 ; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 13 ; 1 Chron. xxvii. 32) we learn that in the time of the kings the scribes constituted a learned, organ- ized, much esteemed, and highly influential body of men, recognised and supported by the state. When, however, the regal power had been over- turned, and force of arms had been found insuf- ficient to preserve the integrity of a nation that could not be wholly weaned from idolatry ; and when at length sorrow had wrought what pros- perity had failed to achieve, then in the downfall of external pomp and greatness, and the rise and predominance of God's will, as enshrined in the law, the scribe rose to a higher eminence than ever, and continued to hold his lofty position, with some slight variations, till letters were again compelled to yield to arms, and the holy city was trodden down by the hoof of heathen soldiery (Ezra vii. 6, 11 ; Neh. viii. 1 ; xii. 26 ; Jer. viii. 8 ; xxxvi. 12, 26 ; Ezek. is. 2). And thus 'Cap- tain Sword' appeared to have gained a final victory over ' Captain Pen ;' but the power of the new knowledge which Jesus, 'the light of life,' had recently brought into the world, soon altered the face of society, and took the laurel's from the ensanguined hand that held them boastfully. 'Twas only for many-soul'd Captain Pen To make a world of swordless men. In the New Testament the scribes are found as a bod)' of high state functionaries, who, in con- junction with ihe Pharisees and the high-priests, constituted the Sanhedrim, and united all the resources of their power and learning in order to entrap and destroy the Saviour of mankind. The passages are so numerous as not to need citation. It may be of more service to draw the reader's attention to the great array of influence thus SfT brought to bear against 'the carpenter's son.' That influence comprised, besides the supreme power of the state, the first legal functionaries, who watched Jesus closely in order to detect him in some breach of the law ; the recognised ex- positors of duty, who lost no opportunity to take exception to his utterances, to blame his conduct, and misrepresent his morals ; also the acutest intellects of the nation, who eagerly sought to SCRIPTURE, HOLY. entangle him in the web of their sophistries, or to confound him by their artful questions. Yet even all these malign influences failed. Jesus' was triumphant in argument i he failed only when force interposed its revengeful aim. The * passage found in Luke xx. 19-17 is full of instruction on this subject. At the close of this striking Scripture our Lord thus describes these men(ver. 46) : 'Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts; which devour widows' houses, and for a show make long prayers.' Their opportunity of assailing our Lord was the greater from their constant vigil- ance. Winer (^Real-ioorterb.) thinks that they, in union witli the high-priests, formed a kind of police, who were on duty in the Temple and the synagogues (Luke xx. 1 ; Acts vi. 12). Nor was their influence limited to the capital ; from Luke v. 1 7, we learn that members of the body were found in every town of Galilee and Jnda?a. Like the learned castes of most nations, they, were attached to the traditions of the elders (Matt. xv. 1) ; had ample influence with the people (Luke xx. 46) ; and though some of them belonged to the free-thinking and self-satisfied Sadducees, they were for the most part of the predominant sect of Pharisees (Luke xi. 45 ; Acts xxiii. 9; Matt. v. 20 ; xii. 38 ; xv. 1). ■It may serve to read a lesson to those who- reason as if they had a right to expect to find every thing in Josephus, and who are ready to make his silence an argument conclusive against the evangelists, that very little appears in the Jewish historian touching this class of men. lis his Antiquities (xvii. 6. 2) two are incidentally mentioned as engaged in education, Judas and Matthias, 'two of the most eloquent men among the Jews, and the most celebrated interpreters of the Jewish laws, men well beloved by the people, because of the education of their youth -T for all those that were studious of virtue fre- quented their lectures every day.' This descrip- tion calls to mind the sophists and philosophers of Greece ; indeed, these same persons are termed by Josephus in another part (Be Bell. Jud. i. 33. 2) out a.d. 180, the term Holy Scriptures (at ayiat ypa.cpai) is used by Theophilus (Ad Autolyc. iii. 12) to incluite the Gospels. Irenaeus (ii. 27) calls the whole collection of the hooks of the Old and New Testament, the Divine Scriptures (Beiui ypafpai), and the Lord's Scriptures (Dominica? Scriptun*', v. 20. 2). By Clement of Alexandria (Strom, vii,) they are called the Scriptures (ypcwpal), and the inspired Scriptures (at BeoirvzixTTOi ypacpai.) From the end of the second and beginning of the third century, at which time a collection of the New Testament writings was generally received, the tv the editions of Gerhard von Maestricht and Boeder, in 1711, 1745 and 1760. Wal- ton, however, in (he Polyglott, adhered to the third edition of Stephens, adding the various readings of the Codex Alexandrinus (1657). Bishop Fell's edition (if 1625 prepared the way for that of Dr. John Mill, the first truly critical edition (1707), the basis of which was the third of Stephens, whose text he adopted. He furnished the various readings of many MSS. hitherto uncoliated, making use of all the ancient, versions and the citations of the fathers. He prefixed valuable Prolegomena, but only survived a few days the publication oi bis work, which commenced an entirely new SCRIPTURE, HOLY. 711 era in sacred criticism. A new edition was published by Kiister, who himself collated for the work the Codex Bcernerianus of St. Paul's Epistles (1710). [See Vulgate.] The first of the Germans who engaged in the laudable undertaking of giving a more correct text of the New Testament, was the excellent and conscientious Bengel, a man of great genius in this department, who simplified criticism by classifying all the manuscripts into two distinct families, the African and the Asiatic, to which Griesbach afterwards gave the name of recensions. The chief value of his work consists in his ' Apparatus,' for he made no change in the Textus Receptus, and makes a merit of intro- ducing no reading which had not been already in print. His edition was printed at Tiibingen in 1734. Our limits will not allow us to dwell on the pe- culiar merits of John James Wetstein, whose splen- did edition appeared in 1751. He collated all the MSS. used by his predecessors, together with many others, including C, or the Codex Ephra?mi. His Prolegomena furnish a rich treasure to the Biblical student. Herein he first denominated the various MSS. by the letters of the alphabet, by which they are still known. He made, however, no alteration in the old printed text. The first who successfully entered this field was the celebrated J. J. Griesbach, whose edition, published in 1775- 1777, ushered in the 'golden age' of criticism. Whatever difference of opinion exists as to the correctness of his text, all are agreed in com- mending his untiring zeal and strict conscien- tiousness in this department. The various read- ings which he had collected rendered his edition the most perfect of its kind which had yet ap- peared. ' With this work,' observes Hug, ' he adorned the evening of a laborious and praise- worthy life, and left behind him an honourable memorial, which may perhaps be surpassed in respect to the critical materials it contains (for these are daily increasing), but hardly in regard to elaborate and accurate criticism.' The pecu- liarity of Griesbach's text (as distinct from his edition) consists in the preference he gives to what he considers the Alexandrian or Oriental read- ings. In this be has met with a zealous antagonist in the indefatigable Professor Scholz, of Bonn, an eminent critic of the Roman church, who has, in his edition of 1830-35, represented the so-called Constantinopolitan or common text of the modem MSS., to which he attaches a decided preference. To the 674 MSS. of Griesbach he has added no less than Gt>7, which he has the honour of having first made known, but which he has but cursorily and superficially inspected, rendering further in- vestigation, more indispensable than ever. The Constantinopolitan text, which he merely assumes, from what he considers its internal excellence, as well as from its being the public and authorized text of the Greek church, to correspond with the autographs of the sacred writers, approaches to that of Elzevir, from the accidental circumstance that the earlier editors made use of materials chiefly of this class. Many, who are disposed to adopt his theory from its simplicity, and its satisfactory explanation of the phenomena of the case, are unwilling to commit themselves to all his details. An English scholar and divine, the latest who has treated of this subject, although disposed to favour 712 SCRIPTURE, HOLY. Scholz's theory, conceives that his historical de- monstration of the truth of has system is likely to carry conviction to few who really know what historical demonstration means, and that on the point of internal evidence his edition is a decided failure. He concludes his valuable observations with expressing his regret that Scholz's edition should have been received in England with a degree of consideration to which it has slender claims. 'I folly,1 he adds, 'admit the value of this clitic's exertions as a collator of MSS. I admire his diligence, and venerate his zeal. His theory of recensions I conceive to approximate very near to the truth. But he seems disqualified by a lack of judgment for the delicate task of selecting from the mass of discordant readings the genuine text of Holy Scripture' (Supplement io the Authorized English Version of the New Tes- tament, by the Rev. F. H. Scrivener, M.A., London, 1845). An edition of Scholz's text, but without the appa ratns, was published by Mr. Bagster, in his Hex- apla, in 4to., in 1841 ; and another neat edition in 12rno., accompanied with the English version, and the principal variations of Griesbach's text (without a date) in 1843. The anonymous editor of this Testament has, however, departed from Scholz's punctuation and divisions into para- graphs. 'Comp. 1 Tim. iii. 15). Scholz's system of recensions has met with a powerful antagonist in Tischendorf, in his Prole- gomena to his portable and comprehensive edition of the New Testament, published at Leipsic, in 1841. Tischendorf has furnished the Alexan- drian text with the most remarkable various readings, and an excellent critical apparatus. His work is considered by De Wette to be hastily executed. He was the first to apply the St. Gall MS. to the criticism oi' the Gospels. The theories and criticisms of Yater,Tittmann, Lachmann and others have been referred to in another article. Lachmann rejects all former theories, and admits no MS. which does not represent the text of the first four centuries. He has added to his edition a most valuable text of the Vulgate, which he has formed 1'or himself from two ancient MSS. ; and agreeing with Eichhorn and Dr. "Wise- man, that the first Latin version was made in Africa, he devotes a large share of attention to the collection of its fragments. We may now reasonably hope, from the vast accession which is daily making to our stock of materials, that we are approaching the means of forming a more correct estimate of the true state of the text than it has been hitherto our lot to enjoy. We shall next treat of the divisions and marks of distinction in the several books. The divisions of the Hebrew text, as they are now found in the printed Bibles, have descended from a very remote antiquity. The sections called parashes (nVJJHS), or paragraphs, are noticed in the Talmud, and were therefore in existence anterior to the times of the Masoretes, whose textual labours, it will be recollected, com- menced in the sixth century. Of these par ashes {divisions) the Pentateuch contains 669. They are of two sorts, greater and smaller, or open and shut paragraphs. The open paragraphs (flinijlQ peluehoth) are so called because they commenced SCRIPTURE, HOLY. the line ; and the others lYlftiriD. or shut, because they were separated within the line by a space or break. They are also marked in the common MSS. with the initials Q or D, and the former by a triple space. In the synagogue rolls they are dis- tinguished by spaces merely (which was probably the only aboriginal note of division), and not by those initial letters, and they are fn the Talmud referred to Moses himself as their author. There is a similar division, marked by spaces only, in the Prophets and Chethubim, which are also re- ferred to in the Talmud. These divisions (some- times called pisqud) are found even in some of the hymns which are stichometrically arranged, viz. Judg. v.; 2Sam. xxii.: Exod. xv. ; but they are wanting in those contained in 1 Sam. xxiv. and 2 Sam. i ;' and they sometimes even occur in the middle of the verse. Each separate psalm is also called in the Talmud a parash, as well as each portion of the cxixth Psalm. In the book of Job the transitions from prose to verse, as well as the commencement of Elihu's speech, are mark- ed in the MSS. by a larger space, and everywhere else in the same book the change of speakers is marked by a smaller (Hupfeld, Ausfiirliche Grammatik). In addition to these there are found in the MSS. of the Pentateuch larger sec- tions, of which there are fifty-four in number, and of which one is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath Day. These are sometimes called sidarim (QH1D) ; they are not mentioned in the Talmud, and appear to have had their origin in the Masora. The smaller sections have been made use of as far as possible for the purpose of di- viding the Sabbath lessons among several read- ers. They have sometimes been considered as subdivisions "of the larger sections. When the Sabbath lessons coincide in their commencement with the pa7nshes, they are marked with a triple S2S or D D D, according as these are opien or shut. There is one only (Gen. xlvii. 28) which has no space before it. There is also another division, into sidarim, found in the Rabbinical Bible of Ben-chaijim, printed in 1525, the num- ber of which amounts in the whole Bible to 447. There is some diversity in the MSS. in the use of the initial letters for marking open and shut sec- tions (see Leusden, Phil. Heb., diss, iv.), and there are further divisions of the text marked by spaces only, several of which are identical with the mo- dern or Latin chapters of the thirteenth century. These- sections were divided into D^plDiD, short sentences, or verses, regulated by the sense [Veiise], and the number of sidarim or larger sections in each book, together with the number of verses in each, was noted at the end of the book in the Masoretic copies. In Buxtorfs Rabbinical Bible the number of verses is marked at the end of each section. There is also, in the prophetical books, a corresponding division into, or rather selection of, nilJOSil (Jlaphtarotli) or Sabbath lessons, from niDSD, a word nearly synonymous with the Latin ntissa, or dismissal, because the people were dismissed when these were read. These ni'TDDr! are also mentioned in the Mishna Thev are written each on a separate roll. The divisions found in the MSS. of the an- cient Greek, Latin, and other versions are dif- ferent from these, and more resemble the Am- monio - Eusebian Kecpahcaa or capitula of the MSS. of the New Testament, which we shaU SCRIPTURE, HOLY. presently refer to. We find traces of these in the Old Testament in the Codex Alexandrinus, where, however, they are confined to the former part of Deuteronomy, and the middle of the book of Joshua. Thus Deut. i. 9 is marked with a 6, denoting the second capitulum, commencing with teal elire; the third capitulum commences with our 19th verse; the fourth with our 40th; the fifth with ch. ii. 1 ; the sixth with ch. ii. ver. 7; the seventh with ver. 14, and the eighth with ver. 24. The numbers are placed in the margin, and the capitula commence the line with a capital letter. That such divisions were very ancient is further evident from Tertullian (Scorpiac. 2), who, after reciting Deut. xiii. 1-5, proceeds to cite the passage commencing with the next verse, as 'another chapter' (capitulum). And Jerome observes that a capitulum had ended in the Sept. where it began in the Hebrew (in Mic. vi. 9 ; Soph, iii. 14; and Qucest. Heb. Gen. xxv. 13-18). In the Monument. Eccles. of Cotelerius, Deut. xxv. S is cited as the ninetv-third capitulum ; from which it appears that there were more than one hundred of these short sections in the book of Deuteronomy. Exod. xx. 1 is, in the same docu- ment, cited as the sixty-third capitulum, and xx. 22 as the sixty-eighth; also Lev. xxv. as the hundred and twentieth, and Num. xxxv. as the hundred and thirty-seventh. This latter book, therefore, was divided into about one hundred and forty chapters. In the Cod. Alex, the first number noted in Joshua is 12 (i€), coinciding with our ch. ix 3; the thirteenth commences with ch. x. 1 ; the four- teenth with ch. x. 16; the fifteenth with ch. x. 29; the sixteenth with ch. x. 31 ; the seventeenth with ch. x. 34 ; the eighteenth with ch. x. 36 ; and the nineteenth with ch. x. 38. The twen- tieth corresponds with the commencement of our chapter xi.; the twenty-second .with our ch. xi. 16 ; the twenty-third with ch. xi. 21 ; the twenty-fourth with ch. xii. 1 ; the twenty- fifth with ch. xii. 4; the twenty-sixth with ch. xii. 7 ; the twenty-seventh with ch. xiii. 1 ; the twenty- eighth number is omitted; the twenty-ninth corre- sponds with ch. xiii. 24 ; the thirtieth with ch. xiii. 29 ; the thirty-first with ch.xiv. 1 ; the thirty- second with cli. xiv. 6 ; the thirty-third with ch. xviii. 1 ; the thirty-fourth number is omitted ; the thirty-fifth answers to ch. xviii. 8 ; the thirty-sixth is omitted ; the thirty-seventh answers to our ch. xviii. 10; the thirty-eighth to ch. xix. 17; and here the numeration of this ancient codex ends. The above comparison will probably serve to convey to the reader a correct view of the ancient system of capitulation, which appears to be suffi- ciently unequal and arbitrary, some chapters being comparatively long, and others not exceed- ing in length one of our present verses. The only other numbers in this codex are those of the Decalogue, in Exod. xx., of which the fourth, fifth, and sixth commandments only (according to the Origenian or Greek division), are numbered, with the letters y, 5, and e (3, 4, and 5), as in the Latin and Lutheran communions. In the Vatican MS. there exist only the remains of a very obscure division, which is confined to the four prophets (see Pref. to Roman cd.) [Decalogue]. In the Aldine edition Or the Sepluftgint and Greek Testament the only capitulated portions are the books of Ezra, Esther, Tobit, Judith, and SCRIPTURE, HOLY. 713 Job, the first of which is divided into 80 chapters (Kccrfj.aTa, or church lessons, marked in the margin, but not a prima inanu. Z, or the Dublin Palimpsest, corresponds with C in having the Ammonian sections without the canons ; it has the titles or larger chapters, of which, however, but a few reminiscences have escaped the ravages of time.. There remains, in- deed, but one of the Ammonian numbers, viz., in plate xxxiii., No. poi\, [ch. xvii.], and of the titles, the No. AZ at the same place ; in pJate xvii., at the top of the page, the twentieth title, viz. k. irepl tov yevofievov priixaros irpb . . . 'iccdv- vr\v ; and in plate lix. the title irepl rwv 5e'/ca ■irapOevoii/, but without the number; in plate lxvii. the title rviros jj-wtikAs ; and in plate Ixiv. dpvrjcris IleTpoi'. B, or the celebrated Vatican MS., contains neither the Ammonian nor the larger chapters, but has divisions peculiar to itself, distinguished only by red numerals in the margin ; of which Matthew contains 170, Mark 72, Luke 152, and John 80 ; Acts 79, James 9, 1 Peter 8, 1 John 11, and Jude 2. St. Paul's Epistles in this MS. have a peculiar and unique numeration, being; capitulated in one continued series, as if they made one book. Ttwire are ninety-three chap- ters, of which fifty-nine extend to the close of the Epistle to the Galatians ; then Ephesians imme- diately commences with ch. lxx., the ten omitted numbers being applied to the margin of the Epistle to the Hebrews, which is placed after those to the Thessalonians. The last part of Hebrews is wanting in this MS., together with the Epis- tles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, and the Apocalypse (Zacagni, Monumenta). The Codex Cyprius, and the Codex Regius 62 (Stephens's 7)), both MSS. of the eighth century, have the Am- monio- Eusebian divisions, and the Kes, not dels, was the original reading of the Codex Alexandrinus in the same passage. SCRIPTURE, HOLY. lius. the deacon, afterwards bishop of Sulca. Euthalius was not himself the author, but, as he in- forms us, a Syrian bishop, ' one of the wisest of the fathers,' who also wrote an £/c0ecns, or summary of the contents of each chapter. The anonymous author is conjectured by Mill, with much pro- bability, to have been no other than the celebrated commentator, Theodore of Mopsuestia. This edition had been completed on the 29th June, a.d. 396. The following are the divisions which it contains: — Romans 19 chapters, 1 Cor. 9, 2 Cor. 11, Gal. 12, Eph. 10, Phil. 7, Col, 10, 1 Thess. 7, 2 Thess. 6, Heb. 22, 1 Tim... 12, 2 Tim. 18, Titus 6, Philem. 2. Euthalius himself, at a later period, published his stichometrical edition of the Acts and. Catholic Epistles, at the desire of Athanasius the younger, bishop of Alexandria, in which he himself introduced a similar divi- sion and summary of the contents of each chapter. The Acts contained 1 1 chapters, the Epistles of James 6, 1 Peter 8, 2 Peter 4, 1 John 7, 2 and 3 John 1 each, and Jude 4. Euthalius also sub- divided his chapters by marking them with as- terisks in rubric, and distinguished the chapters by numeral letters, as we still find them in MSS. of the Euthalian chapters. He also marked the citations from the Old Testament by numerals, as well as by including them in parentheses, and placing the references to the books in the margin. This edition of Euthalius was completed in the year 458. Another very ancient division, probably the most ancient of all, was that into church lessons, dva.yvcio-iJ.ara. It was probably introduced in imitation of the divisions of the Law and the Prophets, which were read in the first Christian assemblies. Euthalius, in his edition, has given the division into church lessons as follows : — Acts contains 16 lessons, James 2, 1 Peter 2, 2 Peter 1, 1 John 2, 2 John 1, 3 John 1, Jude 1, Rom. 5, 1 Cor. 5, 2 Cor. 4, Gal. 2, Eph. 2, Phil. 2, Col. 2, 1 Thess. 1, 2 Thess. ], Heb. 3, 1 Tim. 1, 2 Tim. 1, Titus 1, Philem. 2. These lessons, or Pericopa, as they are called, in speaking of the lessons of the prophets, by Justin Martyr (Dial. c. Trypk."), were regulated by the number of Sun- days, to which the additional three were for the festivals of Easter, Whitsuntide, and Christmas. The Gospels had a similar division ; but, according as church festivals increased, the number of church lessons increased also, and these were therefore proportionably brief. These divisions are the foundation of our present Epistles and Gospels. At the close of the fifth century, Lectionaries were published in the Western Church, which were divided into Epistolaria and Evangelaria, gene- rally in the order in which the church lessons were read ; but these books were not introduced among the Greeks before the eighth century. All these divisions (viz., the longer and shorter chapters, and the church lessons) are marked in the MSS. by a space or point, and sometimes by both, in the middle of the line, and frequently by commencing the line with a capital letter ex- tending into the margin. But the section itself, in order to save parchment, often commences with a small letter after a point or space in the middle of the line, the line still commencing with a capital letter, which, therefore, is some- times placed in the middle of a word. The church lessons are also distinguished by the word SCRIPTURE, HOLY. dpx^i or sometimes A, at the commencement, and reAos or T. at. the end. At the close of the fifth century, Andrew, bishop of Cappadocia, intro- duced an imitation of the ancient capitular divi- sions into the Apocalypse, distinguishing it into twenty-four hoyoi, or sermcmes, and seventy-four titles. The former were, except in two instances, identical with our present chapters. The ancient divisions are marked in some of the early printed editions, especially those of Erasmus and Robert Stephens. In the Aldine edition of the New Testament, there is no capi- tular, nor any division whatever, of either the Gospels or Acts, except occasionally short spaces generally within the line; but some of St. Paul's Epistles are divided into short chapters, with numbers annexed, of which Romans contains 14, 1 Cor. 67, and 2 Cor. 26, where the numeratioa and division cease. But all these divisions were superseded in the middle of the thirteenth century by the present division into chapters, the origin of which is involved in some obscurity. Inasmuch as in some of the books of the New Testament, these sections tally with some of the more ancient divisions, Croius (Observat.) is anxious to ascribe to them all a more ancient date than is justi- fied by the historical evidence. Among other arguments, he adduces the index to each Gos- pel ascribed to Theophylact, which contains the present chapters, but this index is evidently a later addition. Bale, Bishop of Ossory, the celebrated antiquarian, with great appearance of probability ascribes these divisions to Stephen Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury in the thir- teenth century (Hist. Eccles. Cent. xiii. c. 7, 10). Genebrard (Chron. iv. p. 644) says that the au- thors of our present chapters were the scholastics who were perhaps the authors of the Concordance as- cribed to Cardinal Hugh of St. Cher, who at this period (a.d. 1262) published his Biblia cum Pos- tilla, wherein the cferences are for the first time made to these divisions. It is certain that their application to this Concordance brought them into repute, and from this period we may date the prac- tice of citing by chapters, which had been hitherto done merely by a reference to (he book (see Heb. iv. 7), as was the custom of the Fathers, or to the subject, or some remarkable word therein, as was the case with the Jews and Samaritans. An example of this appears in Mark ii. 26, where 1 Sam. xxi. xxii. is referred to as 'Abi- athar,' and xii. 26, ' the bush' refers to Exod. iii. ; also Rom. xi. 2, Ihe word ' Elias' refers to 1 Kings xvii. — xix. [See also Hagiographa.] In this Concordance, however, there was no re- ference to a division of verses, as Professor Moses Stuart, supposes (Bib. Sac. No. ii. 1843, p. 2ii4).* The subordinate references were indi- cated in Hugh's Bible by the capital letters A, B, C, D, E, F, G, placed at equal distances from each other in the margin when (lie chapters were long, or by a proportionally lesser number of capitals according to the size of the chapters. The references to the verses by their number had its origin at a much later period, viz. in a.d. 1438-45, when Rabbi Nathan wrote his Con- * Notice of Halm's ed. of Titmann's text of the New Testament, stereotyped at New York, 1842, under the care of Professor Robinson. SCRIPTURE, HOLY. 717 cordance to the Hebrew Bible, which he named 2.TI3 TND, the illuminator of the path, 1TQTI3 D?iy, the path of the world, and jniT T1K, the light soicn. Those Jews who wished to avail themselves of this Concordance must have marked the references thereto in their MSS. of the Hebrew Scriptures. Dean Prideaux observes that ' the first publishing of Nathan's Concordance happen- ing about the time that printing was invented [1440], it hath since that time undergone several editions,' and Mr. Home (Introd.) follows Pri- deaux in stating that Nathan, instead of adopting the marginal letters of Hugo, marked every fifth verse with a Hebrew numeral ; but we conceive this to be an error. Rabbi Nathan's Concordance, which was an adaptation of the Latin Concordance of Peter Arlot, was not printed before a.d. 1523 or 1524, when it issued from Bomberg's press at Venice. It afterwards indeed passed through several editions, and was published in a Latin translation by Anthony Reuchlin, in 1556, fol. at the press of Henry Peter, in Basel. There is also a translation in MS. by Nicholas Fuller, in the Bodleian Library. Now in all these the reference is to the chapter, and to each single verse ; or, as Nathan himself expressed it in his preface, 'As I observed that the Latin translation has each book divided into a certain number of sections and chapters, which are not in our [Hebrew] Bibles, i have therefore marked all the verses, according to their numbers, together with the number of each chapter; I have also marked the numbers of the verses, as they exist in our [Hebrew] Bibles, for the greater facility of finding each passage referred to.' We have examined ourselves attentively all the early printed editions of the Hebrew Bible, and While we find the Latin chapters marked with Hebrew letters in all those editions, commencing with Bomberg's of 1518 (for Jahn is mistaken in stating (Introd. 6. 102) that the chapters were first marked in Bom- berg's edition of 1525), we yet find no edition of the Hebrew Bible in which there is any reference to the verses by their numbers before the edition of the Pentateuch, Megilloth, and Haphtaroth, pub- lished at Sabionetta in Italy in 1557, 12mo. In this edition every fifth verse is marked with a Hebrew numeral, and De Rossi observes of it, ' Me quidem judice prima omnium ha;c est editio, saltern primorum una in quibus hoc obvium est' (Annales Typog. Sabionet., 17S8). And every fifth verse is equally marked throughout the whole Bible in the edition of Plantin, printed in 1366. Sebastian Munster, in his edition (1534), marked the number of the chapters in Latin as well as Hebrew numerals in the margin. The chapters were first separated in Hebrew in Plautin's beau- tiful edition of 1574. In this edition each sepa- rate verse of the first twelve chapters of Genesis is also marked in the margin with an Arabic nume- ral, except the fifth verse, which is indicated as before by a Hebrew letter, after which the Latin numeration of verses is discontinued throughout the whole of the Old Testament. Pagninus, however, had long before, viz. in 1528, marked all the verses in his translation of the Bible witli an Arabic figure in the margin opposite each verse. Although this practice had, after Robert Stephens's edition of the Latin Vulgate in 1555, become general both in this and the modern ver- sions, it was not until the year 1601 that the whole 718 SCRIPTURE, HOLY. Hebrew Bible was thus marked, when Athias introduced the Arabic figures opposite each verse, at the instigation of Leusden (see his Philol. Heb.) in his accurate edition published at Antwerp in that year., The Latin chapters were not adopted by the Greeks before the fifteenth century, when they were first introduced by those Greeks who fled into the west after the taking of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453. It was in this century, and ge- nerally in Italy, that most of the MSS. now extant of the Greek Testament, were written, and this fact is of material importance in fixing the date of MSS. Thus we have already observed [John, Epistles of] that the Codex Montfortianus (which most suppose to be the Cod. Britannicus of Erasmus ; see Davidson's Lectures on Bib- lical Criticism) contains the Latin chapters; but. we are enabled to add, on the authority of a letter which we have received from Dr. Todd, the libra- rian of Trinity College, Dublin, that these divi- sions are not marked by their number, but only by a space left in the text for an initial letter, which letter does not appear to have been in any one case inserted. The numbers of the chapters, indeed, are added in a clumsy way by a recent band, but the Eusebian numbers are marked with Greek numerals in a coeval hand in good rubric in the margin, as far as Matt, x., and in bad red ink as far as Luke xii., but thenceforward they are discontinued. The paragraphs into which the text of the New Testament lias been divided by Bengel, Vater, and others, are a decided improve- ment on the Latin chapters. Language of the Scriptures. The old Testa- ment is written in Hebrew [Hebrew Language], with the exception of parts of the books of Ezra, Nenemiah, and Daniel, which are in Chaldee [Chaldee]. The New Testament is written in Greek, or rather in what has been called Hellen- istic or Hebraizing Greek. The most Hebraizing book is the Apocalypse, and the most correct Greek the Epistle to the Hebrews ; but. the voice of antiquity favours the opinion that this was origin- ally wrtten in Hebrew or Aramaic (Prcelectio Theologica, auctore Gul. Hodge Mill, S. T. P., 1843). A Hebrew original ^ of St. Matthew"s Gospel has been also contended for. Polyglotts, &c. Among the most useful aids to the study of Biblical Literature must be reckoned the diglott, triglott, and polyglott edi- tions. These are accurately described in Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, and Simon's Histoire Critique. We shall confine ourselves to a brief notice of the Polyglotts. Although the earliest specimen of a Polyglott was that of a projected work of the celebrated printer Aldus Manutius, of which one page only was published, the first of this kind was the Comtlutensian Polyglott, entitled Biblia Sacra Polyglotta, nunc primum impressa, &c, comprised in 6 vols. fol. We are indebted for this work to the celebrated Cardinal, Statesman, and General, Francis Ximenes de Cisneros, who pub- lished it at his own expense, at the cost of 50,000 ducats. It was commenced in 1502, completed in 1517, and published in 1522. The editors were iElius Antonius, Ducas, Pincianus, Stunica, Zamora, Coronellus, and Johannes de Tergera. The three last were originally Jews. The first SCRIPTURE, HOLY. four volumes contain the Old Testament, with the Hebrew, Latin, and Greek, in three columns, the Targum, and a Latin version of the same. The fifth volume contains the Greek Testament, with the Latin Vulgate. The last volume consists of Vocabularies, Indexes, &c. &c. The Greek Tes- tament, as has been already -observed [John's Epistles], was finished m 1517; but the MSS. were modern, and not of much critical value. (See Dr. Bowring's letter, Monthly Repository for 1S'27, p. 572). There is little doubt that the celebrated text of the three witnesses in this edi- tion was translated from the Latin. There were 600 copies only printed of this splendid work, of which three were on vellum. One of these was sold in England, in 1829, for 600 guineas. The Antwerp Polyglott was published in 1569- 72, in 8 vols, fob, at the expense of Philip II., King of Spain. It contains, in addition to the Complutensian texts, a Chaldee Paraphrase, the Syriac version, and the Latin translation of Arias Montauus, which was a correction of that of Pag- niuus. It also contains lexicons and grammars of the various languages of the originals and ver- sions. The Paris Polyglott, in addition to the con- tents of the former works, has a Syriac and Arabic version of both the Old and New Testaments, with the Samaritan Pentateuch, now published for the first time, and edited by J. Morinus. This Polyglott also contains the Samaritan version of the same. It was published in 1645, in 10 vols, large folio. The editor of this valuable, but unwieldy work, was Michael le Jay, who W3£ ruined by the publication. The London Polyglott, edited by Brian Wal- ton, afterwards Bishop of Chester, is much more comprehensive than any of the former. It was published in 1657, in 6 vols. fol. The first vol., besides prolegomena, contains the Pentateuch, exhibiting on one page the Hebrew text, with the interlinear Latin version of A. ;as Monfanus, the Latin Vulgate of the Clementine edition, the Sep- tuagint of the Roman edition, and the various readings of the Cod. Alex., the Latin version of Flaminius Nobilius, the Syriac, with a Latin version, the Targum of Onkelos, with a Latin ver- sion, the Samaritau Pentateuch, with the Sama- ritan version of the same, and a Latin translation serving for both, and the Arabic, with a Latin version. The second volume comprises the his- torical books, with the Targums of Jonathan. The third volume contains the books from Job to Malachi, and, besides the versions in all the former languages, the Psalms in Ethiopie, and a Latin translation. The fourth volume has all the Dutero-canonical books in Greek, Latin, Arabic, and Syriac : the two Hebrew texts of Tobit [Tobit], and two Chaldee and a Persian Targum on the Pentateuch, with Latin versions. The fifth volume has the New Testament, with Arias Montanus's translation ; the Syriac, Persic, Latin Vulgate, Arabic, and Ethiopie versions. These, with separate Latin versions of the oriental trans- lations, are all given on one page. The sixth vo- lume contains various readings and critical re- marks. The whole of this stupendous labour was completed in four years. It was published by subscription, under the patronage of Oliver Crom- well, who died before its completion. This gave occasion to the cancelling of two leaves of the pre- SCYTHIAN. face, in order to transfer to King Charles II. the compliments addressed to Cromwell. There are, in consequence, both Republica,7i and Royal copies, the former of which are the most scarce and valu- able. For the variations between these, see But- ler's Horee Biblicce and Adam Clark's Snccessio?i of Sacred Literature. This Polyglott was ac- companied by Castell's Heptaolott Lexicon, in 2 vols. fol. Mr. Bagster'a Polyglott, fol., London, 1831, contains in one volume the Hebrew text, the Sa- maritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint, Vulgate, and Syriac versions, the Greek text of Mill in the New Testament, together with Luther's German, Diodati's Italian, Ostervald's French, Scio's Spa- SEA. 719 rush, and the English authorized versions of the Bible. The quarto edition, part of the impression of which was destroyed by fire, contains the Hebrew and Samaritan texts, the Greek text of the New Testament, with the Sentuagint, Vulgate, and English versions. There are valuable Prole- gomena by Dr. Lee. There are also Polyglotfs of several portions of the Bible, of which one of the most valuable is that published at Constantinople, in Hebrew, Chaldee, Persian, and Arabic, in 154(3. For the interpunction of the Bible, see Verse. For Writing Materials, see Writing. Scripture Chronology, see Chronology.* — W. W. 485. [A Scythian Family.] SCYTHIAN (2ki507)s). a name which occurs The Scythians were, in fact, the ancient representa- only in Col. iii. 11. It vvas anciently applied tives of the modern Tartars, and like them moved sometimes to a particular people, and sometimes from place to place in carts drawn by oxen. It to all the nomade tribes which had their seat to is from this circumstance that thev, or a tribe the north of the Black and Caspian seas, stretching nearly allied to them, may be recognised on the monuments of Egypt. About seven centuries be- fore Christ, the Scythians invaded South-Western Asia, and extended their incursions as far a3 Egypt (Herodot. i. 103). In doing this they could not but have touched on or passed through Palestine : and it is even supposed that Bethshan derived its classical name of Scythopolis from them [Bethshan]. It is singular, however, that the Helnew writers take no notice of this transac- tion ; for we cannot admit that the prophecies of Joel and Zephaniah have reference to it, as some writers have imagined. SEA. The term D1* yam, or 'sea,' was used by the Hebrews more extensively than with us, being applied generally to all large collections of water, as they had not a set of terms such as we employ (defectively, indeed) to discriminate the * The following important works on this sub- ject have appeared since this article went to press : A Chronological Introduction to the Histun/ of 486. [1. A Scythian. 2. A Scythian General.] indefinitely eastward into the unknown regions of the Church, §c, by the Rev. S. F. Jarvis, D.D.. Asia. It. had thus much the same latitude as Historiographer of the [Protestant Episcopal] 'Tartars,' and was in like manner synonymous Church of the U. S., and The Times of Daniel, with Barbarian, Bapfiapos. The name also occurs Chronological and Prophetical, by George, Duke in 2 Mace. iv. 47, and Joseph. Cont. Apion. ii. 37. of Manchester, London, 1845. 720 SEA. different kinds. 'Sea' for large collections, and ' pool ' for smaller, formed the extent of their vocabulary ; although, indeed, pools were distin- guished into DJN agom, a natural pool or pond (Ps. cvii. 35 ; cxiv. 8 ; Isa. xxxv. 7 ; xli. 1 8, &c), and HD^S bereekah, the same as the Arabic beerkeh, an artificial pool or reservoir (2 Sam. ii. 13; iv. 12; Nah. ii. 9). The term 'sea' is ap- plied to various parts of the ocean, and also to lakes, for C is used for these in Job xiv. 11. 1. The Mediterranean, being on the west, and therefore behind a person facing the east, is called in Scripture the Hinder Sea (|1"infr?n DTl, Deut. xi. 21; Joel ii. 20), that is, Western Sea; and also, ' the Sea of the Philistines ' (Exod. xxiii. 31), as that people possessed the largest proportion of its shore in Palestine. Being also the largest sea with which the Hebrews were ac- quainted, they called it by pre-eminence, 'the Great Sea' (Num. xxxiv. 6, 7; Josh. i. 4; ix. 1 ; Ezek. xlvii. 10, 15, 20); or simply 'the sea' (Josh. xv. 47). 2. The Red Sea.— This gulf of the Indian Ocean is called in Hebrew f]1D D* Yam Suph (Exod. x. 19; xiii. 18; Ps. cvi. 7, 9, 22), which is also its Egypt ian name, and is supposed to mean ' weedysea' (Michaelis, Suppl. p. 1726 ; Jablonsky, Opuscul. i. 2C6). This designation has been by some supposed to refer to the quantity of sea-weed found in it. But Bruce, who traversed its whole extent, declares that he never saw any sort of weed in it, and gives it as his opinion that it is from the large trees or plants of white coral, spread every where over the bottom of the sea, and greatly re- sembling plants on land, that it derived its name. It is also called 'the Egyptian sea' (Isa. xi. 15). In other places, where the context plainly indi- cates what sea is intended, it is called simply ' the sea.' In the New Testament n bears its usual Greek name, r\ ipvdph 8d\aacra (Acts vii. 36 ; Heb. xi 29; also 1 Mace iv. 9; Herudor. i. 1 ; Diod. Sic. iii. 18), whence our ' Red Sea.' How it came by the name of Red Sea is not agreed. Prideaux assumes (Connection, i. 14, 15) that the ancient inhabitants of the bordering countries called it Yam Edom, or, ' the sea of Edom ' (it is never so called in Scripture), as its north-eastern part washed the country possessed by the Edom- ites. Now Edom means red (Gen. xxv. 30), and the Greeks, who borrowed the name from the Phoe- nicians, mistook it for an appellative instead of a proper name, and rendered it by epvOpa BaXacrcra, that is, ' the Red Sea.' Some information in cor- rection of this notion seems, however, to have been afterwards acquired : for Strabo (xvi. p. 766), Pliny (Hist. Nat. vi. 23), Mela (iii. 8), Agathar- cides (p. 2, ed. Oxon.), Q. Curlius (viii. 9 ; x. 1), Philostratus (iii. 15), and others, distinctly admit that the sea obtained this name, not from any redness in its waters, but from a great king called Erythrus, who reigned in the adjacent country. The word Erythrus means the same in the Greek that Edom does in the Phoenician and Hebrew languages; which seems to prove that this king Erythrus was no other than Edom, whose name was given to the country over which his descendants reigned. This explanation seems satisfactory ; but Prideaux, from whom we take it, by a very strange confusion of ideas, in an im- mediately preceding page (i. 10), ascribes the name Red Sea, as applied to another part of the SEA. ErythiEeanSea,to 'the waters appearing of a reddish colour by reason of the fierceness of the sunbeams, constantly beating upon it in that hot climate.' Such a fancy needs no answer, as neither water nor the rays of the sun are the more red for beino- more hot. Others have conjectured that the Ara- bian Gulf derived its name from the coral rocks and reefs in which it abounds ; but the coral of the Red Sea is white, not red. In so large a tract of shore and water it would be strange if some red objects did not appear, and minds on the watch for some physical cause for the name would na- turally refer to circumstances which would net otherwise have engaged attention. Some of the mountains that stretch along the western coast have a sjngularly red appearance, looking, as Bruce expresses it, as if they were sprinkled with Havannah or Brazil snuff, or brick-dust; and from this a notion is derived that these mountains, presenting their conspicuous sides to the early na- vigators of the sea, induced them to give it a name from that predominant colour. Salt indi- cates a fact which affords a basis for another con- jecture as to the origin of the name. He says — ' At one o'clock on the 7th of February, the sea for a considerable distance around the ship became so extremely red. . . .As we were anxious'to ascer- tain the cause of this very singular appearance, a bucket was let down into the water, by which we obtained a considerable quantity of the substance floating on the surface. It proved to be of a jelly-like consistence, composed of a numberless multitude of very small mollusca, each of which having a small red sp;it in the centre, formed, when in a mass, a bright body of colour nearly allied to that produced by a mixture of red lead with water.' This account lias been more recently confirmed by Ehrenberg. The ancients applied the name of Erythraean Sea not only to tlie Arabian Gulf, but to that part of the Indian Ocean which is enclosed be- tween the peninsulas of India and Arabia; but in modern usage the name of Red Sea is restricted to the Arabian Gulf, which enters into the land from the Indian Ocean in a westerly direction, and then, at the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, turns N.N. W., maintaining that direction till it makes a near approach to the Mediterranean, from which its western arm is only separated by the isthmus of Suez. It thus separates the western coast of Arabia from the eastern coast of the north-eastern part of Africa. It is about 1400 miles in length from Suez to the straits, and on an average 150 miles in breadth. On approaching its northern termination the gulf divides into two branches," which enclose between them the peninsula of Sinai. The western arm, which terminates a little above Suez, is far more extensive than the other, and is that which was crossed by the Israelites in their escape from Egypt. An account of this im- portant transaction has been given under another head [Exodus]. This arm, anciently called Heroopoliticus Sinus, and now the Gulf of Suez, is 190 miles long by an average breadth of 21 miles ; but at one part (Birket el-Faroun) it is as wide as 32 miles. The eastern arm, which terminates at Akabah, and bears the name of the Gulf of Akabah, was anciently called jElaniticus Sinus, from the port of A\Aa.na., the Scriptural Elath, and is about 112 miles long by an average breadth of 15 miles. Towards its extremity were the portf SEA ©f Elath and Eziongeber, celebrated in the history of tlie attempts made by the Hebrew kings to establish a maritime traffic with the East [see the several words] . 3. The Sea of Chinneueth, 1YT3? D! (Num. xxxiv. 11). called in the New Testament ' the Sea of Galilee ' (Matt. iv. 18), the 'Sea of Tiberias ' (John xxi. 1), and 'the sea' or 'lake of Geune- sareth ' (Matt. xiv. 34 ; Mark vi. 53 ; Luke v. 17) ; which last is but a variation of the Hebrew name. This lake lies very deep, among fruitful hills and mountains, from which, m the rainy season, many rivulets descend : its shape will be seen from the map. The Jordan enters it on the north, and quits it on the south ; and it is said that the river passes through it without the waters mingling. Its extent has been greatly over -rated : Professor Robinson considers that its length, in a straight line, does not exceed eleven or twelve geographical miles, and that its breadth is from live to six miles. From numerous indications it is inferred that the bed of this lake was formed by some ancient volcanic eruption, which history has not recorded : the waters are very clear and sweet, and contain various kinds of excellent fish in great abundance. It will be remembered that several of the apostles were fishermen of this lake, and that it was also the scene of several transac- tions in the life of Christ : it is thus frequently mentioned in the New Testament, but very rarely in the Old. The borders of the lake were in the time of Christ well peopled, being covered with numerous towns and villages ; but now they are almost desolate, and the lish and water-fowl are but little disturbed. The best descriptions of the lake of Tiberias are those of Bnrckhardt {Syria, p. 332), Buck- ingham {Palestine, ch. xxvi.), Irby and Mangles (p. 295), Jowett (pp. 172-176), Hardy (pp. 237- 211), Elliott (ii. 342-350), Schubert (iii. 231- 240), Robinson (ii. 372-402), Olin (iii. 253, 261-265), Lord Nugent {Lands, Classical and Sacred, ii. 209). 4. The Dead Sea, called in Scripture the Salt Sea, rhttn CD) (Gen. xiv. 3), the Sea of the Plain, or the Arabah, ^2"$% DJ (Deut. iv. 40), and the Eastern Sea, ^12i1pT\ D>il (Joel ii. 20 ; Ezek. xlvii. 18; Zech. xiv. 8). It is not named or alluded to in the New Testament. It is called by Josephus {De Bell. Jud. iii. 10. 7) \{/xvn 'A< 488. [Petra, from above the Amphitheatre.] The ruined city lies in a narrow valley, sur- rounded by lofty, and, for the most part, perfectly precipitous mountains. Those which form its- southern limit are not so steep as to he impassable ; and it is over these, or rather through them, along an abrupt and difficult ravine, that travel- lers from Sinai or Egypt usually wind their labo- rious way into the scene of magnificent desolation. The ancient and more interesting entrance is on the eastern side, through the deep narrow gorge of Wady Syke. It is not easy to determine the precise limits of the ancient city, though the pre- cipitous mountains by which the site is encom- passed mark with perfect distinctness the bound- aries beyond which it never could have extended. These natural barriers seem to have constituted the real limits of the city ; and they give an ex- tent of more than a mile in length, nearly irom north to south, by a variable breadth of about half a mile. Several spurs from the surrounding mountains encroach upon this area; but, with inconsiderable exceptions, the whole is fit for building on. The sides of the valley are walled up by perpendicular rocks, from four hundred to six or seven hundred feel high. The northern and southern barriers are neither so lofty nor so steep, and they both admit of the passage of camels. A great many small recesses or side valleys open into the principal one, thus enlarg- ing as well as varying almost infinitely the out- line. With only one or two exceptions, however, they have no outlet, but come to a speedy and abrupt terminal ion among the overhanging cliffs, as precipitous as the natural bulwark that bounds the principal valley. Including these irregula- rities, the whole circumference of Petra may be four miles or more. The length of this irregular outline, though it gives no idea of the extent of the area within its embrace, is perhaps the beat SELAH. SELAH. 723 measure of the extent of the excavations. A small stream, or rather mountain torrent, enters the valley from the east through the Wady Syke, and after a course of less than half a mile, passes out nearly opposite to the point of entrance on the western side. This pretty brook flows with a scanty stream within the gorge of Wady Syke, but is usually quite dry after entering the valley. Two smaller streams flow in the season of rain from the gorges of the northern mountain, and join the principal torrent along courses nearly at right angles with it. The bottom of this river, as for distinction it may be called, was paved for the better preservation of its water from waste and filth, and its sides were faced with a wall of' hewn stone. Considerable remains of the waj-l and pavement, and some large flagstones belong- ing to a paved way that ran along the side of the liver, still remain ; as do the foundations of several bridges which spanned its channel. The chief public buildings occupied the banks of the river and the high ground further south, as their ruins sufficiently show. One sumptuous edifice remains standing, though in an imperfect and dilapidated state. It is on the south side of the river, near the western side of the valley, and seems to have been a palace, rather than a temple. It is called Pharaoh's house, and is thirty-four paces square. The walls are' nearly entire, and on the eastern side they are still surmounted by a handsome cornice. The front, which looks toward the north, was ornamented witli a row of columns, four of which are standing. An open piazza, behind the colonnad-e, extended the whole length of the building. In the rear of this piazza are three apartments, the principal of which is en- tered under a noble arch, apparently thirty-five or forty feet high. It is an imposing ruin, though not of the purest style of architecture, and is the more striking as the only edifice now standing in Petra. A little east of this, and in a range with some of the most beautiful excavations in the mountain on the east side of the valley, are the remains of what appears to have been a triumphal arch. Under it were three passages, and a number of pedestals of columns, as well as other fragments, would lead to the belief that a magnificent colon- nade was connected with it. A few rods south are extensive ruins, which probably belonged to a temple. The ground is covered with fragments of columns five feet in diameter. Twelve of these, whose pedestals still remain in their places, adorned either side of this stately edifice. There were also four co- lumns in front and six in the rear of the temple. They are prostrate on the ground, and Dr. 01 in counted thirty-seven massive frusta, of which one of them was composed. Still further south are oilier piles of ruins — columns and hewn stones — parts no doubt of im- portant public buildings. The same traveller counted not less than fourteen similar heaps of ruins, having columns and fragments of columns intermingled with blocks of stone, in this part of the site of ancient Petra. They indicate the great wealth and magnificence of this ancient capital, as well as its unparalleled calamities. These sumptuous edifices occupied what may be called the central parts of Petra. A large surface on the north side of the river is covered with substructions, which probably belonged to private habitations. An extensive region still farther north retains no vestiges of the buildings which once covered it. The same appearances are ob- servable in Thebes, Athens, and Rome. Public wealth was lavished on palaces and temples, while the houses of the common people were slightly and meanly built, of such materials as a few years, or at most a few centuries, were suffi- cient to dissolve. 489. [Ruined Temple.] The mountain torrents which, at times, sweep over the lower parts of the ancient site, have un- dermined many foundations, and carried away many a chiselled stone, and worn many a finished specimen of sculpture into unshapely masses. The soft texture of the rock seconds the destruc- tive agencies of the elements. Even the accu- mulations of rubbish, which mark the site of all other decayed cities, have mostly disappeared ; and the extent which was covered with human habitations can only be determined by the broken pottery scattered over ihe surface, or mingled with the sand — the universal, and, it would seem, an imperishable memorial of populous cities that exist no longer. These vestiges, the extent, of which Dr. Olin took great pains to trace, cover an area one-third as large as that of Cairo, excluding iis large gardens from the estimate, and very sufficient, he thinks, to contain the whole population of Alliens in its prosperous days. The attention of travellers has however been chiefly engaged by the excavations which, having more successfully resisted the ravages of time, constitute at present the great and peculiar at- traction of the place. These excavations, whether formed for temples, tombs, or the dwellings of living men, surprise the visitor by their incredible number and extent. They not only occupy the from of the entire mountain by which the valley is encompassed, hut of the numerous ravines am! recesses which radiate on all sides from this en- closed area. They exist too in great numbers in the precipitous rocks which shoot out from the principal mountains into the southern, and still more into the northern part of the site, and they are seen along all the approaches to the place, which, in the days of its prosperity, were perhaps the 726 SELAH. suburbs of the overpeopled valley. Were these excavations, instead of following all the sinuosi- ties of the mountain and its numerous gorges, ranged in regular order, they probably would form a street not less than five or six miles in length. They are often seen rising one above another in the face of the cliff, and convenient steps, now much worn, cut in the rock, lead in all directions through the fissures, and along the sides of the mountains, to the various tombs that occupy these lofty positions. Some of them are apparently not less than from two hundred to three or four hundred feet above the level of the valley. Conspicuous situations, visible from below, were generally chosen ; but sometimes the opposite taste prevailed, and the most secluded cliffs, fronting towards some dark ravine, and quite hidden from the gaze of the multitude, were preferred. The flights of steps, all cut in the solid rock, are almost innumerable, and they ascend to great heights, as well as in all direc- tions. Sometimes the connection with the city is interrupted, and one sees in a gorge, or upon the face of a cliff, fifty or a hundred feet above him, a long series of steps rising from the edge of an inaccessible precipice. The action of winter torrents and other agencies have worn the easy ascent into a channel for the waters, and thus interrupted the communication. 490. [Interior of a Tomb.] The situations of these excavations are not more various than their forms and dimensions. Mere niches are sometimes cut in the face of the rock, of little depth and of various sizes and forms, of which it is difficult to conjecture the object, unless they had some connection with votive offerings and religious rites. By far the largest number of excavations were manifestly designed as places for the interment of the dead; and thus exhibit a variety in form and size, of interior arrangement and external decorations, adapted to the different fortunes of their occu- pants, and conformable to the prevailing tastes of the times in which they were made. There are many tombs consisting of a single chamber, ten, fifteen, or twenty feet square by ten or twelve in height, containing a recess in the wall large enough to receive one or a few deposits ; some- ' lines on a level with the floor, at others one or two feet above it, and not unfrequenfly near the ceiling, at the height of eight or ten feet. Occa- sionally oblong pits or graves are sunk in the recesses, or in the floor of the principal apartment. SELAH. Some of these are of considerable depth, but thej are mostly choked with stones and rubbish, so that it is impossible to ascertain it. In these plebeian tombs there is commonly a door of small dimensions, and an absence of all architectural decorations ; in some of larger dimensions there are several recesses occupying two or three sides of the apartment. These seem to have been formed for family tombs. Besides these una- dorned habitations of the humble de#d, there is a vast number of excavations enriched with various architectural ornaments. To these unique and sumptuous monuments of the taste of one of the most ancient races of men with whom history has made us acquainted, Petra is indebted for its great, and peculiar attractions. This ornamental architecture is wholly confined to the front, while the interior is quite plain and destitute of all decoration. Pass the threshold, and nothing is seen but perpendicular walls, bearing the marks of the chisel, without mouldings, columns, or any species of ornament. But the exteriors of these primitive and even rude apartments exhibit some of the most beautiful and imposing results of ancient taste and skill which have remained to our times. The front of the mountain is wrought into facades of splendid temples, rivalling in their aspect and symmetry the most celebrated monuments of Grecian art. Columns of various orders, graceful pediments, broad rich entabla- tures, and sometimes statuary, all hewn out of the solid rock, and still forming part of the native mass, transform the base of the mountain into a vast splendid pile of architecture, while the over- hanging clills, towering above in shapes as rugged and wild as any on which the eye ever rested, form the most striking and curious of contrasts. In most instances it is impossible to assign these beautiful fagades to any particular style of archi- tecture. Many of the columns resemble those of ttie Corinthian order ; but they deviate so far both in their forms and ornaments from this ele- gant model, that it would be impossible to rank them m the class. A few are Doric, which are 'precisely those that have suffered most from the ravages of time, and are probably very ancient. But nothing contributes so much to the almost magical effect of some of these monuments as the rich and various colours of the rock out of which, or more properly in which, they are formed. The mountains that encompass the vale of Petra are of sandstone, of which red is the predominant hue. Their surface is a good deal burned and faded by the elements, and is of a dull brick colour, and most of the sandstone formations in this vicinity, as well as a number of the excavations of Petra, exhibit nothing re- markable in their colouring which does not be- long to the same species of rock throughout a considerable region of Arabia Petrsea. Many of them, however, are adorned with such a pro- fusion of the most lovely and brilliant colours as it is scarcely possible to describe. Red, purple, yellow, azure or sky blue, black and white, are seen in the same mass distinctly in successive layers, or blended so as to form every shade and hue of which they are capable — as brilliant and as soft as they ever appear in flowers, or in the plumage of birds, or in the sky when illuminated by the most glorious sunset. The red perpetually shades into pale, or deep rose or flest colour, and SELEUCIA. I again approaches tne hue ot the lilac or violet. The white, which is often as pure as snow, is occasionally just dashed with blue or red. The blue is usually the pale azure of the clear sky, or of the ocean, but sometimes has the deep and peculiar shade of the clouds in summer when agitated by a tempest. Yellow is an epithet oi'ten applied to sand and sandstone. The yellow of the rocks of Petraea is as bright as that of saffron. It is more easy to imagine than describe the effect of tall, graceful columns, exhibiting these exquisite colours in their succession of regular horizontal strata. They are displayed to still greater advantage in the walls and ceil- ings of some of the excavations where there is a slight dip in the strata. We have thus endeavoured to give the reader a general idea of this remarkable place. Detailed descriptions of the principal monuments have been furnished by Laborde [Voyage en Arabia Petrcea), Robinson [Biblical Researches), and QYm (Travels in the East, from which the above description has been chiefly taken). Interesting notices of Petra may also be found in the re- spective Travels, Journeys, &c. of Burckhardt, Macmichael, Irby and Mangles, Stephens, Lord Lindsay, and Schubert. SELEUCIA (SeAewcem), a city of Syria, situated west of Antioch on the sea-coast, near the mouth of the Orontes ; sometimes called Se- leucia Pieria, from the neighbouring Mount Pierus : and also Seleucia ad Mare, in order to distinguish it from several other cities of the same name, all of them denominated from Se- leucus Nicanor. Paul and Barnabas on their first journey embarked at this port for Cyprus (Acts xiii. 4 ; see also 1 Mace. xi. 8 ; Josejjh. Antiq. xviii. 9. 8). SENEH (H3P) occurs in the well known passage of Exod. iii. 2, where the angel of the Lord appeared unto Moses in a flaming fire, out of the midst of a bush (seneh), and the bush was not consumed. It occurs also in vers. 3 and I, and in Deut. xxxiii. 16. The Septuagint trans- lates seneh by the Greek word fidros, which usually signifies the Rubies or Bramble ; so in the New Testament fiaros is employed when re- ferring to the above miracle of the burning bush. The monks of the monastery of St. Catherine, on Mount Sinai, have a species of rub us planted in their garden, near their Chapel of the Burning Bush ; but this cannot be considered as any proof of its identity with the seneh, from the little atten- tion which they have usually paid to correctness in such points. Bove says of it, ' C'est inie es- pece de Rubus, qui est voisin de notre R. iiu- ticosus.' The species of rubus are not common either in Syria or Arabia. Rubus sanclus, the holy bramble, is found in Palestine, and is men- tioned by Dr. Russell as existing in the neigh- bourhood of Aleppo, and Hassehpiist found a rubus among the ruins of Scanderetta, and ano- ther in the neighbourhood of Seide. It is also found among the ruins of Petra (?) (Calcott). Celsius and others quote Hebrew authors as stating that. Mount Sinai obtained its name from the abundance of these hushes (seneh), ' D ictus est mons Sinai de nomine ejus.' But no species of rubus seems to have been discovered in a wild state on this mountain. This was observed SENNACHERIB. 727 by Pococke. He found, however, on Mount Horeb several hawthorn bushes, and says that the holy bush was more likely to have been a hawthorn than a bramble, and that this must have been tire spot where the phenomenon was observed, being a sequestered place and affording excellent pas- ture, whereas near the chapel of the holy bush not a single herb grows. Shaw states that the Oxyacantha arabica grows in many places on St. Catherine's mountain. Bove says, on as- cending Mount Sinai, ' J'ai trouve entre les rochers de granit un mespilus voisin de l'oxy- acantha.' Dr. Robinson mentions it as called zarur ; but it is evident that we cannot have anything like proof in favour of either plant. — 1 F R SEN1R. [Hermon.] SENNACHERIB, king of Assyria, who, in the fourteenth year of King Hezekiah (b.c. 713), came up against all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them ; on which Hezekiah agreed to pay the Assyrian monarch a tribute of three hundred talents of silver, and thirty talents of gold. This, however, did not satisfy Sennacherib, who sent an embassy with hostile intentions, charging He- zekiah with trusting on ' this bruised reed Egypt.' The king of Judah in his perplexity had recourse to Isaiah, who counselled confidence and hope, giving a divine promise of miraculous aid. Meanwhile ' Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia,' and of Thebes in Egypt, had come out to right against the Assyrians, who had threatened Lower Egypt with an invasion. On learning this, Sennacherib sent another deputation to Hezekiah, who thereon applied for aid to Jehovah, who promised to defend the capital. ' And it came to pass that night that the angel of the Lord went out and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand ; and when they arose early in the morning, behold they were all dead corpses' (2 Kings xviii. 13, sq.). On this, Sennacherib returned to Nineveh, and was shortly after murdered by two of his sons as he was pray- ing in the house of Nisroch his god (2 Kings xix. 36, sq. ; 2 Chron. xxxii. ; Isa. xxxvii.). With this narrative other authorities (as given in Wilkinson's Ancient Egypt, i. HO, sq.) are found to agree. The Tirhakah mentioned in the Bible, as given above (2 Kings xix. 9), was king of Upper Egypt at the time that Sethos, a priest of Pthah, ruled the lower country (b.c. 710 to 689). During Tirhakah's reign Sennacherib threatened to invade Lower Egypt. Sethos, from his sacerdotal predilections, was averse to the soldiery, whom he treated with indignity. They therefore were ill-affected towards their priest- king, whose dominions were consequently in great danger of being overrun. Indeed the troops refused to march against, the enemy, when their effeminate master reined to the shrine of his god to bewail his misfortunes. There sinking into a profound sleep, he saw the Deity in a dream, who promised him safety if he put him- self at the head of his troops, and marched to meet the enemy. Sethos thereu] on proceeded to Pelusium, the key of Lower Egypt, with an army made up solely of tradesmen and artisans. The promised assistance soon came. Tirhakah had heard of the approach of Sennacherib, aud at once came down the country, entered Palestine, and 728 SEORAH. defeated the Assyrian monarch, thus delivering the territory of Sethos as well as that of Hezekiah, The priests of Memphis, however, who were the informants of Herodotus, gave this event a colour- ing which suited their own purposes. According to their account, the victory was owing to the miraculous interposition of the god Pthah. Keep- ing out of sight the effective aid rendered by Tirhakah, these priests told Herodotus that when the Assyrians and the feeble army of Sethos stood over against each other, a prodigious number of rats entered the enemy's camp by night, and gnawed in pieces their quivers and bows, as well as the handles of their shields, so that the Assy- rians in the morning finding themselves without arms, tied in confusion, and suffered considerable loss of men. In order to commemorate the event, a marble statue of Sethos was erected in the temple of Pthah, at Memphis, representing the king, holding a rat in his hand, with this inscrip- tion, ' Whoever thou art, learn from my fortune to reverence the gods.' The rationalistic school would put these two accounts on the same footing, and so reduce the miracle of Scripture to a level with the fiction or the legend recorded in Herodotus. A less pre- judiced state of mind will think it very probable that what is common in the two narratives rests on, as it intimates, some extraordinary event, or, in other words, some unusual and special display of the power of Him whose will is law, and whose word is either life or death. A comparison of the two narratives in the original sources and statements would serve to illustrate the value, as well as the credibility, of the Biblical records.— J. R. B. SEORAH (X\"}VW, said to be derived from n*li?^, 'hair'), by some written also shoreh, de- rives its name in Hebrew, according to Lexi- cographers, from its long awns, or beards, as they are also called, somewhat resembling hair. The word is very similar to the Arabic shair, which means the same thing, and has already been treated of under the head of Barley J. F. R. SEPHAR (lap ; Sept. 2a and •liTOb', 'warrior of Jehovah;' Sept. 2apaias). There are several persons of this name in Scripture. 1. Serai ah, the scribe or secretary of David (2 Sam. viii. 17). This person's name is in other places corrupted into W&, Auth. Vers. Sheva (1 Sam. xx. 25), $&$, Shisha (1 Kings iv. 3), and KIW, Shavsha (1 Chron. xviii. 16). 2. Seraiah, the father of Ezra (Ez. vii. 1). 3. Seraiah, the high priest at the time that Jerusalem was taken by the Chaldaeans. He was sent prisoner to Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah, who put him to death (2 Kings xxv. 18 ; 1 Chron. vi. 14 ; Jer. lii. 24; Ez. vii. 1). 4. Seraiah, son of Azriel, one of the persons charged with the apprehension of Jeremiah and Baruch (Jer. xxxvi. 26). 5. Seraiah, son of Neriah, who held a high office in the court of King Zedekiah, the nature of which is somewhat uncertain. In the Auth. Vers, we have, ' This Seraiah was a quiet prince,' where the word? rendered ' quiet prince' are rtniJD IK', which, according to Kimchi, means 'a chamberlain,' or one who attended the king- when he retired to rest ; but better, perhaps, according to Gesenius, 'chief of the quarters' for the king and his army, that is quarter-master- general. This Seraiah was sent by Zedekiah en an embassy to Babylon, probably to render his submission to that monarch, about seven years before the fall of Jerusalem. He was charged by Jeremiah to communicate to the Jews already in exile a book, in which the prophet had written out his prediction of all the evil that should come SERAPHIM. upon Babylon. It is not. stated how Seraiah ac- quitted himself of his task ; but that he accepted it at all, shows such respect for the prophet as may allow us to conclude that he would not neglect the duty which it imposed. 6. Seraiah, son of Tanhumeth, an accomplice of Ishmael in the conspiracy against Gedaliah (2 Kings xxv. 23 ; Jer. xl. 8). SERAH (■TIB', ' abundance ;' Sept. 2apa), daughter of Asher, named among those who went down into Egypt (Gen. xlvi. 17; Num. xxvi. 46 ; 1 Chron. vii. 30). The mention of a female in a list of this kind, in which no others of her sex are named, and contrary to the usual practice of the Jews, seems to indicate something extra- ordinary in connection with her history or circum- stances. This has sufficed to excite the ever active imaginations of the Rabbins, and Serah shares with the princess of Egypt who saved Moses, with Jochebed his mother, and with De- borah, the honour of occupying a prominent place in their fables. SERAPHIM (CPS-^; Sept. Zepaflu), or Seraijhs, the plural of the word S]"!^ saraph, f burning,' or ' fiery :' celestial beings described in Isa. vi. 2-6, as an order of angels or ministers of God, who stand around his throne, having each six wings, and also hands and feet, and praising God with their voices. They were therefore of human form, and, like the Cherubim, furnished with wings as the swift messengers of God. Some have indeed identified the Cherubim and Seraphim as the same beings, but under names descriptive of different qualities; Se- raphim denoting the burning and dazzling ap- pearance of the beings elsewhere described as Cherubim. It would be difficult either to prove or disprove this ; but there are differences between the cherubim of Ezekiel, and the sera- phim of Isaiah, winch it does not appear easy to reconcile. The 'living creatures' of the former prophet had four wings; the 'seraphim' of the latter, six; and while the cherubim had four faces, the seraphim had but one (comp. Isa. vi. 2, 3 ; Ezek. i. 5-12). If the figures were in all cases purely symbolical, the difference does, not signify ; and whether they were so, or not, must be determined by the considerations which have been indicated under Cherubim.. There is much symbolical force and propriety in the attitude in which the Seraphim are described as standing; while two of their wings were kept ready for instant flight in tbe service of God, with two others they hid their face, to express their unworthiness to look upon the divine Majesty (comp. Exod. iii. 6), and with two others they covered their feet, or the whole of the lower part of their bodies — a practice which still prevails in the East, when persons appear in a monarch's presence. It may be seen in the article Sekfent, that a species of serpent was called Saraph j and this has led some to conceive that the Seraphim were a kind of basilisk-headed Cherubim (Bauer, Theolog. A. T. p. 189); or else that they were animal forms with serpents" heads, such as we find figured in the ancient temples of Thebes (Gesen. Comment, in Jes.). Hitzig and others identify the Seraphim with the Egyptiai Serapis ; for although it is true that the worship of Serapis was SERGIUS PAULUS. not introduced into Egypt till the time of the Ptolemies, it is known that this was but a modi- fication of the more ancient worship of Kneph, who was figured under the form of a serpent of the same kind, the head of which afterwards formed the crest of Serapis. SERGIUS PAULUS (Sepytos Uad\os), a Roman proconsul in command at Cyprus, who was converted by the preaching of Paul and Bamab.is (Acts xiii. 7). The title given to this functionary exhibits one of those minute accu- racies which, apart from its inspiration, would substantiate the sacred book as a genuine and contemporary record. Cyprus was originally a prcetorian province ((rTpar7]yiK7i), and not pro- consular; but it was left by Augustus under the Senate, and hence was governed by a pro- consul ia.vQv-KO.Tos), as stated by the Evange- list (Acts xiii. 6, S, 12; Dion Cass. liv. p. 523 ; Kuinoel, on Acts xiii. 7 ; see also the art. Cyprus). Sergius is described by the Evangelist as a ' discreet' or ' intelligent' man ; by which we are probably to understand that, he was a man of large and liberal views, and of an inquiring turn of mind. Hence lie had entertained Ely- mas, and hence also he became curious to hear the new doctrine which the apostle brought to the island.. Nothing of his history subsequent to his conversion is known from Scripture. There is no reason to suppose that he abandoned his post as governor of Cyprus ; but the legends as- sert that he did so, and followed Paul ; and that eventually he went with the apostle into Spain, and was left by him at Narbonne in France, of which he became the bishop, and died there. SERPENT (tJ>m nachash). Systematical nomenclators and travellers enumerate consi- derably more than forty species of serpents in Northern Africa, Arabia, and Syria. Of these it is scarcely possible to point out with certainty a single one named in the Bible, where very few "de- scriptive indications occur beyond what in scien- tific language would now be applied genetically. If is true that, among the names in the list, several may be synonyms of one and the same species; still none but the most recent, researches give characters sufficient to be depended upon, and as yet nothing like a complete erpetology of the regions in question has been established ; for snakes being able to resist a certain degree of cold, and also the greatest heat, there are in- stances of species being found, such as the hai/cs, precisely the same, from the Ganges to the Cape of Good Hope; others, again, may be traced from Great Britain to Persia and Egypt, as is instanced in the common viper and its varieties. Instead therefore of making vain efforts at iden- tifying all the serpents named, it will be a preferable course to assign them to their proper families, with the exception of those that can he pointed out with certainty; and in so doing it will appear (hat even now species of import- ance mentioned by the ancients are far from being clearly established. Serpents may be di- vided generally into two very distinct sections, — the first embracing all those that are provided with moveable tubular fangs and poison-bags in the upper jaw ; all regarded as ovoviviparuus, and called by contraction vipers : they con- stitute not quite One-fifth of the species hitherto SERPENT. 735 noticed by naturalists. The second section, much more numerous, is the cotv.brine, not so armed, but not therefore always entirely innocuous, since there may be in some cases venomous secretions capable of penetrating into the wounds made by their fixed teeth, which in all serpents are single points, and in some species increase in size as they stand back in the jaws. The greater part, if not all, the innocuous species are oviparous, including the largest or giant snakes, and the pelamis and kydrophis, or water-serpents, among which several are venomous. 491. [1. Shephiphon : Cerastes. 2. Peten : Coluber J>ebatina. 3. Python tigris Albicans; probably Thf.ibanne.] ' Scriptural evidence attests the serpent's influ- ence on the early destinies of mankind ; and tins fact may be traced in the history, the legends, and creeds of most ancient nations. It is far from being obliterated at this day among the pagan, barbarian, and savage tribes of both continents, where the most virulent and dangerous animals of the viviparous class are not uncommonly adored, butmore generally respected, from motives originating in fear; anil others of the oviparous race are suffered to abide in human dwellings, and are' often supplied with food, from causes not easily determined, excepting that the ser- pent is- ever considered to be possessed of some mysterious superhuman knowledge or power. Hence, beside real species, ideal forms, taken from the living, but combining other or additional pro- perties, occur, at the most early perioys, as me- taphorical types, in fable anil history, and in the hieroglyphics and religious paintings of many nations. Such are the innumerable fables in Hindu lore of Nagas and Naga Kings ; the primaeval astronomy which placed the serpent in the skies, and called the milky way by the name of Ananta and Sesha Naga,; the Pagan obscure yet almost universal record of the deluge typified by a serpent endeavouring to destroy the ark; which astronomy has likewise transferred to the skies in the form of a dragon about to devi nr the moon, when, in an eclipsed state, it appears in the form of an amphipromnos or crescent- boat; and, strange as it may seem, lunar eclipses still continue to be regarded in tins character, and to excite general apprehension in Central Africa, as well as in China ; in the South Sea Islands, as well as in America [DkagonI. The nations of the North once believed in the .lor- munds Gander, or Katev serpent of the deep; 736 SERPENT. and they, together with the Celts and Basques, and all Asia, had legends of the Orm, the Paystha, the dragon-guardian of riches, brooding on gold in caverns deep below the surface of the earth, or lying in huge folds on dreary and extensive heaths. These fables were a residue of that antique dragon worship which had its temples from High Asia and Colchis to the north of Great Britain, and once flourished both in Greece and Northern Africa — structures with avenues of upright stones of several miles in length, whereof the ruins may still be traced at Carnak in Brit- tany, Abury in Wiltshire, and Redruth in Corn- wall— the two last mentioned more particularly showing their connection with the circle consti- tuting a. form of the mundane egg, which again was an emblem of the deluge and the ark. The Hesperian, Colchian, and Lernsan dragons are only Greek legends of the same doctrine, still more distorted, and affording ample proof how far the Pagan world had departed from the sim- plicity of Scriptural truth, from the excessive use of metaphorical descriptions and fanciful symbols. In Egypt, the early centre of Ophiolatry, this debasing service was so deeply rooted, that a Christian sect of heretics, called Ophitse, or ac- cording to Clemens Alexandrinus, Ophiani, arose in the second century of our era. As an ema- nation of the Gnostics their errors are particularly noticed by Tertullian, and form a signal- in- stance of human perverseness ingeniously mis- leading itself and others by the abuse of sym- bols ; yet when the anguine type did not pass into long distorted legends, it is evident, from the brazen serpent raised by Moses in the wilder- ness, that it was correctly appreciated by the people as a sign, not in itself a power, of Divine aid ; and that its true symbolical meaning did not even escape Pagan comprehension appears from profane history, in Meissi, the good ser- pent, being likewise properly understood by the Egyptians, until idolatry distorted all the na- tional reminiscences, and the promise of what was not fully revealed till the Saviour appeared on earth was obliterated. Ob, Oub, the Coptic Hof, Obion in Kircher, was, however, the general name for serpents in Egypt; and Kneeph, or Cuuphis, or Ihh-Nuphi, the good genius, always figured as the Nachash or Thermuth, is there- fore the same as Naga Sahib, or lord-serpent of India [Adder], and still a personification of' the vanquisher of the deluge — Vishnu, with many others, being Pagan denominations of Noah. In this sense the good genius Cnuphis was a type of the Saviour of men, and called by them the spirit pervading nature, the creator from whose mouth proceeded the mundane egg : being referred, after the loss of the true interpretation, to any typical form of the patriarch, the events of the deluge and the creation, thus confounding the operations of the Almighty with the ministry of his servant. There was, however, another idolized snake of the great destroyer Python tribe, which devour even each other ; it is represented on Egyptian monuments bearing a mummy figure on its tail, and gliding over a seated divinity with an egg on the head, while human sacrifice by decapitation is performed before it. This serpent is so carefully drawn that we recognise the Thaibanne, The- banns Ophites, which grows to twelve or more SERPENT. feet in length, is still found in Upper Egypt, and is a congener, if not the same as Python Tigris Albicans, the great snake even at present worshipped in Cutch : it may be the Aphophis of the Egyptians. To descant further on this subject would lead us too far from our purpose ; but the Egyptian Python here noticed, changing its character from being a type of the deluge to that of an emblem of the ark carrying the spirit of human life within or upon it, was not without its counterpart in England, where lately, in digging out the deep black mud of a ditch, a boat-shaped Python, carrying the eight Eones (Yj or Noachida?, has been discovered, with emblems that, denote them to be the solar regenerators of mankind. Parts of these' objects, in hard black wood, are now in possession of Sir Samuel R. Meyrick. Thus, as is ever the case in polytheistical legends, the type disappears through multiplied transitions and the number of other symbols and personifications characterized by the same emblem : it was so in this instance, when the snake form was conferred also on abstractions bearing the names of divinities, such as Rauno, Hoph, Bai, Hoh or Hill, and others. The asserted longevity of the serpent tribe may have suggested the representation of the'barmless house-snake biting its tail as typical of eter- nity; and this same quality was no doubt the cause why this animal, 'entwined round a staff, was the symbol of health, and the distinctive attribute of the classical ^sculapius and Hygia. There are species of this genus common to Pales- tine and the southern parts of continental Europe ; they were domesticated in Druidical and other Pagan sanctuaries, and were employed for omens and other impostures ; but the mysterious Ag or Hagstone was asserted to be produced by the venomous viper species. It is indeed with the section of noxious serpents that Biblical research has most to do. In the article Adder we have already noticed those of the present genus Haye, the hooded snake, or Cobra de Capello, which in one or move of its species is generically included in the Hebrew 5STD nachash, and 21D>i>y achsub, the first being a general appellation, and the se- cond probably confined to the Haye3 proper, or to one of the species or varieties. Ppt^ sara-jjh, the supposed winged serpent, we take also to be a Haye. one of the more eastern species or varieties, which have the faculty of ac- tually distending the hood, as if they bad wings at the side of the head, and are the same as, or nearly- allied to, the well known spectacle-snake of India; and this interpretation seems to accord with the words of Moses, CQID'H D^fUn iian-nechashim has-seraphim (Num. xxi. 6). The serpent may exhibit this particular state of irritation when it stands half erect with its hood distended, or it may be that variety which is possessed of this faculty to the greatest extent. Naga Refiecfrix, the Pof or Spooch adder of the Cape colonists, is reported by Dr. Smith to be scarcely distinct from the Egyptian Naga Haye. With regard to the faculty of flying, the lengthened form, the mus- cular apparatus, the absence of air-cells, and the whole osteological structure, are all incompatible with flight or the presence of wings : hence Hero- dotus, in his search for flying serpents at Buto, may have observed heaps of exuviae of locusts cast on shore by the sea — a phenomenon not un- SERPENT. frequent on that coast — but most assuredly not heaps of bones and ribs of serpents. As for those of Plutarch, they may have been noxious sand- flies. Flying serpents are only found represented in the symbolical pictures of Egypt, where they occur with birds' wings. Those of history, and of barbarous nations excessively habituated to figurative forms of speech, are various, some being so called because of their rapid motion, others on account of a kind of spring they are said to make at their victims, and a third class because they climb trees, and are reported to swing themselves from thence upon their victims, or to other trees. Now, many species of serpents are climbers ; many hang by the tail from slender branches of low trees in highly heated glens, snapping at insects as they wheel around them ; but all are deli- cately jointed ; and if any should swing further than merely to change their hold, and should miss catching a branch, they would most certainly be dislocated, and, if not killed, very seriously in- jured. From personal experiments we can attest that serpents are heavy in proportion to their bulk, and without the means of breaking their fall; that few, large or small, could encounter the shock of twelve or fourteen feet elevation without fracturing many spinous processes of their verte- brae, and avoid being stunned fdr a length of time, or absolutely crushed to death. Being instinct- ively conscious of the brittleness of their structure, nearly all snakes are timid, and desirous of avoid- ing a contest, unless greatly provoked. This remark applies, we believe, to all innoxious ser- pents, the great boas perhaps excepted, and to most of the poisonous, exclusive of several species of viper and cobra de capello. Of the so-called flying, or rather darting ser- pents, Niebuhr found, near Basra, a venomous species called Heie Sursurie, and Heie Thiare, that is, ' flying serpent,' because it was said to fling itself from one tree to another. Admiral Anson heard, at the island of Quibo, of snakes flying without wings : we may notice the Acontias and Prester, that fell like arrows from the tops of trees, and the green ./Etula of Ceylon, said to spring from trees at the eyes of cattle — an accusation repeated of more than one species in tropical America. Next we have the Uler Tampang Hari, seen in a forest near the river Pedang Bessie, somewhere, we believe, in the Austral-Asian islands, under circumstances that most certainly require confirmation ; since this fiery serpent, so called from the burning pain and fatal effect of its bite, swung itself from one tree to another, 210 feet distant, with a declination to the horizon of only about fifteen degrees! We find Lell'ah and Boatan, both conjectured to be the Saraph and Tsimmaon, without being able to point out the species in natural history, where, nevertheless, it seems most likely that va- rieties or perhaps different species of the common viper may be meant, as is likewise assumed of Acontias and Prester, since that family, in hot and dry climates, is far more virulently noxious than in Europe. The Lefi'ah, though little more than a foot long, regarded by Shaw at least as the most, formidable serpent of Northern Africa, is one of this genus, and may be the njJSN Ephoeh, Arabic Epha, and Persian Mar-ief'y ; but as there is some difference in dimensions and markings, as well as a still greater extent VOL. II. SERPENT. 737 of region assigned to these, more than one species of viper is most likely included in the above names. But that the Ephoeh is a name of most ancient date is plain from its being employed in Job xx. 16, and Isaiah xxx. fi; while under the form of e^iSpa, that is, ' viper,' it occurs in the New Testament, Matt. iii. 7 ; xii. 31 ; xxiii. 33 ; Luke iii. 7; and Acts xxviii. 3. The last of these texts confirms the common superstitious be- lief of antiquity, which regarded the bite of one of these serpents as a punishment directly inflicted by Heaven. jflQ pethen (Deut. xxxii. 33; Job xx. 14, 16, Ps. lviii. 4; xci. 13; Isa. xi.8) is more properly the Bsetan of Forskal : the Coluber (vipera) Lebe- tlna of Linn., and by him characterized as one foot in length, the body spotted with -black and white, and oviparous {?), though excessively poisonous. The learned author evidently never saw this spe- cies in a living state, and appears to have derived all he knew upon the subject from the literati of Cyprus, who call it Asp, and the vulgar Kufi (icovipri), 'deaf.' Such an authority is of little weight : a serpent of Cyprus may not belong to Palestine or Egypt, and an oviparous species may not be poisonous. It is referred to the Aspis of the ancients, as to which it is still in dispute whether it should be identified with Vipera Ammodytes, Vipera Berus, or Vipera Prester, all ovovivi- parous, and as such strikingly illustrative of the words of Isaiah (lix. 5). It may liere be remarked that the so-called ' deaf adder' (Ps. lviii. 5, 6) is not without hearing, but is only not obedient to ' the musical notes which the serpent-charmers produce in order to make their captured snakes vibrate in a particular erect posture as if they were dancing; and it is asserted of some, that while in a free state they are actually enticed to come tt, and follow the musician. |1NQ^ tzimmao7i (Deut. viii. 15) appears to be the 'Drought' of some versions, so called be- cause of the intolerable thirst occasioned by its bite. If this translation be correct, it will form in modern nomenclature one of the genus Hurria, and sub-genus Dipsas or Bongarus. But no species of this division of snakes has yet been found in Western Asia, albeit there are several in India; and Avicenna locates the Torrida Dipsas in Egypt and Syria : whereupon Cuvier remarks that Ges- ner's figure of Dipsas belongs precisely to the sub- genus here pointed out. As one of the Colubrine family it should not be venomous ; but the last- mentioned writer remarks that several of these are regarded in their native localities with great dread; and on examination it is found that, al- though they have no erectile tubercular fangs, with a poison-bag at the roots, there is on the long back teeth a groove, and a large gland at the base of the maxilla, which it is not unlikely con- tains, in some at least, highly venomous matter. It may be further observed, that when the Acon- tias, or darting serpent, perhaps the Turreiki of Shaw, is mentioned, it must be considered as be- longing to the oviparous section, for a character- istic of the venom snakes is to be slow in their mo- tions, and to watch being attacked rather than to court hostilities. This character may be sup- posed to exist even in the JJSJf tzepha, or *JV3V tziphoni, translated 'cockatrice' in Prov. xxiii. 32, and Isa. xi. 8. This is an indefinite English name, which belongs to no identified serpent, and 3b 7as SERUG. SEVEN. now appears only in the works of ancient com- pilers and heralds, where it is figured with a crest, though there is no really crested or frilled species known to exist in the whole Ophidian order. Crested serpents occur, it is true, on Greek and Etruscan vases; but they are invariably mytholo- gical representations, probably derived from de- scriptive rumours of the hooded Nagas, Cerastes, and perhaps Muraenae : the first of these having what may be likened to a turbaned, the other to a coronated head, and the third fins at the oper- culum. But it is from the apparently crowned form that the denominations of Basilisk and Re- gulus were derived. There are, however, two very distinct species of horned serpents in Egypt, and Northern Africa, probably extending to Syria and Arabia. They are of different genera; for the Cerastes, supposed to be the pS^StJ' shephiphon of the Bible, is a viper with two scales on the head, one above each eye, standing erect somewhat in the form of horns. This is a dangerous species, usually burrowing in sand near the holes of jerboas, and occasionally in the cattle paths ; for there are now few or no ruts of cart-wheels, where it is pretended they used to conceal themselves to assault unwary passers. It is still common in Egypt and Arabia. The other species is the Eryx Cerastes of Daudin, also small, having no moveable poison-fangs, but remarkable for two very long back teeth in the lower jaw, which pass through the upper jaw, and appear in the shape of two white horns above its surface. It is known to the Egyptian Arabs by the name of Harbagi, which may be a distortion of Ovficuos in Horapollo, and is classed by Hassel- quist among slow-worms, because in form the tail does not taper to a point. Its colours are black and white marblings, and the eyes being lateral and very near the snout, the species has an exceed- ingly sinister aspect, which may be the cause of the ancient opinion that the H3?0 melekah, or basilisk, for we take it for this species, killed with its looks, and had. a pointed crown on the head : now serpents in the form of slow-worms, reputed to kill by their sight, are evidently not rapid in their movements. In conclusion, we may observe again with refer- ence to the figurative form of the Semitic tongues, that the proper names of objects, and particularly of animals, are very often descriptive of characters which are not exclusively applicable to specific individuals, and consequently that the same sounds or names readily suggest themselves when the property which distinguishes the appellative term recurs in another object. Thus we have on one or two occasions ' young lions ' for 'venom- snakes,' Tseboa (hyaenas) likewise for serpents, probably because in the first case the idea of slaughter or destruction is associated with both, and because in the second the notion of striped or varied is predominant. So also in Achsub, either a serpent striking backwards, or a scorpion, , ' or a tarantula doing the same thing, may be under- stood, from the same faculty being ascribed to them all.— C. H. S. SERVANT. [Slave.] SERUG (11"lb, shoot, tendril; Sept. and New Test. 2epoi$x), son of Reu, and father of Nahor the grandfather of Abraham (Gen. xi. 20 ; 1 Chron. i. 6). He was 130 years old at the birth of Nahor, and died at the age of 330, The name occurs in the genealogy of Christ (Luke iii. 35). The Jewish traditions affiim that Serug was the first of his line who fell into idolatry; and this seems to be sanctioned by, and is probably built upon, the charge of .idolatry brought against Terah and the fathers beyond the Euphrates in Josh. xxiv. 2. SETH (H^, compensation; Sept. 2^#), the third son of Adam, to whom Eve gave this name in consequence of regarding him as sent to re- place Abel, whom Cain had slain (Gen. iv. 25, 26 ; v. 3, sq.). SEVEN, &c. (Heb. J?3^, whence the Greek eirrd. the aspirate breathing being substituted for the sibilant letter, as in e£ for &&, &c, which, however, appears again in the Latin septem, and English seven''). This word is used to express the number 6 + 1. Thus Balaam said unto Balak, ' Build me here seven altars, and prepare me here seven oxen and seven rams ; and Balak and Balaam offered on every altar a bullock and a ram ' (Num. xxiii. I, 2. Sept. kirr£). The Vul- gate reads, ' vEdiflcamihi hie septem aras et para totidem vitulos, ejusdem numeri arietes.1 (In the New Test, see Matt. xv. 34-36 ;. xxih 25, &c.) The Lexicons generally, both ancient and modern, also assign to the word and its derivatives the farther office of a round or indefinite number, to express a small number, in the sense of several (as we use ten or a dozeii). Thus Suidas says, ' eirra iirl irAridovs raTTerai.' And Gesenius says the same; but his first reference under this head to Gen. xli. 2, &c, is inappropriate ; for there the word certainly denotes the particular number, namely, the ' seven well-favoured k'ine of Pharaoh's dream, which ate up the seven ill- favoured, and the seven thin ears of ccrn which ate up the seven good ones,' and which are re- spectively interpreted by Joseph to mean seven years of plenty and seven years of famine, and are recorded to have been numerically fulfilled (comp. 2-7 ; 25-3(1; 47-54). It appears to us pos- sible to resolve all the other passages referred by Gesenius and others to this class, into the idea of sufficiency, satisfaction, fulness, completeness, perfection, abundance, &c. intimated in the Hebrew root. y3£*, from which the numeral in question is derived. For instance, Gesenius refers to 1 Sam. ii. 5, ' The barren hath bom seven,' that is. hath been blessed with an ample family (Vulg. Sterilis peperit plurimos); to Isa. iv. 1, 'Seven women shall take hold of one man,' where the idea seems to be that of abundance of females compared with the men, so many of the latter having been, slain in the war (see Lowth in foe); to Ruth iv. 15, ' Better to thee than seven sons,' i. e. an abund- ance of them ; to Prov. xxvi. 25-. ' There are seven abominations in his heart,' i. e. completeness of depravity (comp. Prov. vi. 31), where the thief is- said to make a ' sevenfold,' that is, complete resti- tution (comp. Exod. xxii. 1-4). Thus also the phrase, ' To flee seven ways' (Deut. xxviii. 7), denotes a total overthrow ; to 'punish seven timesr (Lev. xxvi. 24), to punish completely ; ' Six and. seven troubles,' a very great and entire cala- mity (Job v. 19); ' Give a portion to seven, also to eight,' be not only duly liberal, but abundant; ' Silver purified seven times,' perfectly purified (Psa. xii. 6) ; ' Seven times a day do I praisa SEVEN. SHAKED. 739 thee,' T fully perform the dlity of thanksgiving (Psa. cxix. 164). Rabbi Solomon, however, con- tends for the literal interpretation of this passage, which seems to have been acted upon by certain Jews and Christians. Some of theGreek versions in Montfaucon's Hexapla render the Hebrew word by ir\ticrra.Kis, 'often,' 'frequently.' The above ex- planation applies to Gesenius's instances of ' poet- ical fictions/ viz., Job's seven sons and seven thou- sand sheep (i. 2, 3), and the seven days and seven nights during which his friends sat with him in silence on the ground (ii. 13). The word is used in t lie New Testament to express the same idea of abundance or completeness; thus, ' Mary Mag- dalene, out of whom Jesus cast seven devils' (Mark xvi. 9) ; where we must either suppose the Evangelist to give by inspiration a numerical statement, or that his words mean a most, entire case of extraordinary and not understood disease. Our Lord's comparison of the men of that genera- tion to the case of the demon which had gone out of a man, returning with seven other spirits more wicked than himself, seems to mean that if Jesus were to grant the sign demanded by the Pharisees, no other result would ensue than a momentary conviction, followed by consummate unbelief (Matt. xii. 43). ' The seven spirits before the throne' would seem to be a periphrasis of perfec- tion, denoting the Holy Spirit (Rev. i. 4). Mul- tiples of this number convey the idea of super- abundance. Thus, Gen. iv. 24, ' If Cain be avenged sevenfold [that is abundantly], surely Lamech seventy and sevenfold,' whose guilt from accidental homicide is so much less. Similar is St. Peter's question respecting the forgiveness of injuries, and the answer he received. It is most likely that the idea of sufficiency and complete- ness became originally associated with the num- ber seven, from the Creator having finished, com- pleted, or made sufficient, all his work on the seventh day; and that lience also it was adopted as a sacred number, or a number chiefly employed in religious concerns, in order. to remind mankind of the creation and its tine author. Thus there were seven offerings in making a covenant (Gen. xxi. 28) ; seven lamps in the golden candlestick (Exod. xxxvii. 23); the blood was sprinkled seven times (Lev. iv. 16, 17); every seventh year was sab- batical, seven sabbaths of years in the jubilee (xxv. 8); seven trumpets, seven priests that sounded them seven days round Jericho, seven lamps, seven seals, &c. &e. We also find, as might na- turally be expected, the number seven introduced into forms of superstition, &c. Thus Samson said, 'If they bind me with seven green withs, if thou weavest the seven locks of my head,' from which it may be inferred that the Nazarite bound up his lmii in this number of curls or plaited locks (Judg. xvi. 7-13). Balaam ordered seven altars to I"- erected. It was considered a fortunate number among the Persians (Esth. i. 10-14; ii. 9). Cicero calls it the knot and cement of all things, as being that by which the natural and spiritual world are comprehended in one idea (2'roc. Queest. i. 10). Nor is this subject de- void of practical utility. The references which occur in the patriarchal history to the num- ber seven, as denoting a week or period of seven days, sufficiency, .Vc, and a sacred number, afford a minute, indirect, but not an inconsider- able argument, that the institution of the Sabbath was both established and observed from the com- mencement ; and not, as Paley thinks, during the wandering in the wilderness : an argument abun- dantly confirmed by the regard to the seventh day which has prevailed too far and wide among various nations, to be attributed to their com- paratively late intercourse with the Jews (Jose- phus, Cunt. Ap. ii. 39). — J. F. D. SHAALBIM (D^n^y^, city of foxes ; Sept. 2aAc./3iV), called also Shaai.bin, a city of the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 42), but of which it could not for a long while dispossess the Amorites (Judg. i. 35). In the time of Solomon it was the station of one of the twelve officers or intend- ants appointed to regulate the collection of pro- visions for the court (1 Kings iv. 9). One of David's worthies belonged to this place (2 Sam. xxiii. 32 ; 1 Chron. xi. 32). SHAALIM (P7St£ foxes' region; Sept. Se-yaAi'itt), a district named in 1 Sam. ix. 4 ; probably that in which Shaalbim was situated. SHAASHGAZ QM?V& ; Sept. Tat), the appro- priate name (meaning in Persian, servant of the beautiful) of a Persian eunuch, the keeper of the women in the court of Ahasuerus (Esth. ii. 14). SHADDAI Cl^ ; Sept. iravroicparoip ; Vulg. in Pentateuch, Omnipotens), an epithet or name applied to Jehovah, sometimes with (Gen. xvii. 1 ; Exod. vi. 3), anil sometimes without (John v. 7 ; vi. 4 ; viii. 3, 13 ; Gen. xlix. a ; Ruth i. 20, 21, and elsewhere), the prefix ?K El. In the Authorized Version the name is given as El-Shad- dai where it first occurs ; but is everywhere else rendered by 'Almighty.' which is the true signi- fication, the word being a pluralis exrelleutis from the singular "IE', ' mighty,' ' powerful.' SHADRACH, one of the three friends of Daniel, who were delivered from the burning, fiery furnace [Abednego]. SHAIT. [Thorns.] SHAKED Of?.E/) occurs in several passages of Scripture, and is generally acknowledged to mean the almond; as in Gen. xliii. 11, where Jacob desires his sons to take into Egypt of the best fruits of the laud almonds (shakedvni), &c. In Exod. xxv. 33, 34 ; xxxvii. 19, bowls are di- rected to be made like unto almonds. In Num. xvii. 8, the rod of Aaron is described as having ' brought forth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and yielded almonds ' (shakedim). The word occurs in the singular in Kccles. xii. 5, and in Jer. i. 11. In the article Luz, we have already stated, that from the similarity of that word to the Arabic' Louz, there could be no doubt of the former having the same meaning as the latter, both denoting the almond. There is nothing remarkable in a tree like this, so conspicuous from its early dowering, showy appearance, and useful fruit, Having two names; one (/«-) applicable to the tree, and the other (shaked), to trie fruit. Rosenmuller says, ' The difference between luz and shaked seems to fie, that the former word designates the '• wiUl," the latter the '■ cultivated "' free.' The almond tree is said to be called shaked, because it flowers earlier in the spring than other trees. R. Solomon, on Kccles. xii. J. as translated by Celsius (Hierobot. i. p. 297). savs, ' Shaked est 3b2 740 SHARED. arbor Amygdalarum, et sic dicitur, quia flores mature profert ante omnes arbores.' This is well known to be the case even in this country. It was observed by the ancients, as Pliny (Hist. Nat. Xvi. 25) remarks, ' Ex his quae hyemeaquila exoriente concipiunt, floret prima omnium Amygdala mense Januario : Martio vero pomum maturat.' The name shaked is said to be derived ' a verbo Tpt£* shalcad, assiduus et diligens- fuit-,' and which is also translated ' to make haste/ ' to awake Wn - - ■ — 492. [Almond Tree.] early.' As the almond tree is a native of Syria and Palestine, and extends from thence to Aff- ghanistan, and is not. likely to have been indi- genous in Egypt, almonds were very likely to form part of a present from Jacob, even to the great men of Egypt ; the more especially as the practice of the East is for people to present what they can afford in their respective stations. The form of the almond would lead to its se- lection for ornamental carved work, indepen- dently of its forming an esteemed esculent, as well as probably yielding a useful oil. In Eccles. xii. 5, it is said, 'The almond tree shall flourish, and the fruit of the caper [Abiyonah] droop, because man goeth to his long home.1 This evi- dently refers to the profuse flowering and white appearance of the almond tree when in full bloom, and before its leaves appear. It is hence adduced as illustrative of the hoary hairs of age, in the same way as the drooping of the fruit of the caper seems to refer to the hanging down of the head Mr. Kitto mentions the almond among the first trees that flower in January. ' There are two species of Amygdalus in Palestine ; the common almond tree, arid the peach tree, and both are this month in blossom in every part of Palestine, on both sides of the Jordan. It was doubtless from this winter blossoming of the almond tree, not less than from the snowy whiteness of the blos- soms, that the hoary head of the aged man is, by a beautiful metaphor, said in Scripture, to flourish like the almond tree' (Physic. Hist, of Palestine). —J. F. R. SHAMIR. SHALISHA pW'hp ; Sept. 2e\Xc0, a dis- trict in the vicinity of the mountains of Ephraim (1 Sam. ix. 4), in which appears to have been situated the city of Raal-Shalisha (2 Kings iv. 22). This city is called by Eusebius Beth-Shalisha, and is placed by him 15 miles from Diospolis (Lydda), towards the north. SHALLUM (uW, retribution; Sept. 2e\- Xov/jl). the fifteenth king of Israel. In the troubled times which followed ihe death of Jeroboam II., B.C. 772, his son Zecbariah was slain in the presence of the people by Shallum, who by this act extinguished the dynasty of Jehu. Shallum then mounted the throne(B.c. 771), but occupied it only one nionth, being opposed and slain by Menahem, who muunted the throne thus vacated (2 Kings XV. 10-15). 2. A king of Juciah, son of Josiah (Jer. xxii. 11), better known by the name of Jehoahaz [Je- hoahaz II.]. 3. The husband of Huldah the prophetess (2 Kings xxii. 14). Several other persons of this name occur in Ezra ii. 42 ; vii. 2 ; x. 24, 42 ; Neh. iii. 12; vii. 45 ; 1 Chron. ii. 40. SHALMANESER, king of Assyria [Assy- kia]. SHAMGAR Cl3J?B> ; Sept. Zapeydp), son of Anath, and third judge of Israel. It is not known whether the only exploit recorded of him was that by which his authority was acquired. It is said that he ' slew of the Philistines 600 men with an ox-goad' (Judg. iii. 31). It is supposed that he was labouring in the field, with- out any other weapon than the long staff armed with a strong point, used in urging and guiding the cattle yoked to the plough, when he perceived a party of the Philistines, whom, witli the aid of the husbandmen and neighbours, he repulsed with much slaughter. The date and duration of hia government are unknown, but may be probably assigned to the end of that long period of repose which followed the deliverance under Ehud. In Shamgar's time, as the song of Deborah informs us (Judg. v. 6), the condition of the people was ' so deplorably insecure that the highways were forsaken, and travellers went through by-ways, and, for the same reason, the villages were aban- doned for the walled towns. 1. SHAMIR, a precious stone, named in Jer. xvii. 1; Ezek. iii. 9; Zech. vii. 12. The Sept. in Jer. xvii. 1, and the Vulgate in all the passages, take it for the diamond. The signification of the word, ' a sharp point,' countenances this inter- pretation, the diamond being for its hardness used in perforating and cutting other minerals. In- deed, this use of the shamir is distinctly alluded to in Jer. xvii. 1, where the stylus pointed with it is distinguished from one of iron (comp. Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvii. 15). The two other passages also favour this view by using it figuratively to express the hardness and obduracy of the Israelites. Our Authorized Version has ' diamond' in Jer. xvii. 1, and ' adamant ' in the other texts : but in the original the word is the same in all. Bochart, however (Hieroz. iii. 843, sq.), rejects the usual explanation, and comparing the word shamir with the Greek crfj.ipis or cr/j.vpis, conceives it, to mean ' emery.' This is a calcined iron mixed with siliceous earth, occurring in livid scales of such SHAMIR. hardness that in ancient times, as at present, it was used for polishing and engraving precious stones, diamonds excepted (Hoffmann, Mineral, i. 561, sq.). Rosenmiiller is in favour of the dia- mond in his Scholia j but in his Alterthumskunde, he fakes up Bochart's notion, and urges that if the Hebrews had been acquainted with the dia- mond, and the manner of working it, we should doubtless have found it among the stones of the high-priest's breastplate ; and that, as the shamir was not one of the stones thus employed, there- fore it was not the diamond. But to this Winer well answers, that it was perhaps not used be- cause it could not be engraved on, or was possibly not introduced until a later period. The argu- ment drawn from the rarity of the word in the Old Testament is of little weight, and there is no necessity for seeking an Oriental origin of the word ff/xvpis, or ground for considering it identi- cal with shamir, as it may easily be traced from the Greek itself. (See Passow, s. v. ; Eichhorn, De Gemmis Sculpt. Hebr.) 2. SHAMIR, a city of Judah (Josh. xv. 48). 3. SHAMIR, a city in the mountains of Ephraim, where Tola lived and was buried (Judg. x. 1, 2). 4. SHAMIR [Thorns]. SHAMMAH (TVQ&, astonishment; Salvia), one of the three chief of the thirty champions of David. The exploit by which he obtained this high distinction, as described in 2 Sam. xxiii. 11, 12, is manifestly the same as that which in 1 Cliron. xi. 12-14, is ascribed to David himself, assisted by Eleazar the son of Dodo. The in- ference, therefore, is, that Shamrnah's exploit lay in the assistance which he thus rendered to David and Eleazar. It consisted in the stand which the others enabled David to make, in a field of len- tiles, against the Philistines. Shammah also shared in the dangers which Eleazar and Jasbo- beam incurred in the chivalric exploit of forcing a way through the Philistine host to gratify David's thirst for the waters of Bethlehem (2 Sam. xxiii. 16). Other persons of this name occur. 2. A son of Reuel (Gen. xxxvi. 13, 17). 3. A brother of David (1 Sam. xvi. 9; xvii.3), who is elsewhere called Shimeah (2 Sam. xiii. 3, 32) and Sliimma (1 Chron. ii. 13). 4. One of David's thirty champions, seemingly distinct from the chief of the same name [2 Sam. xxiii. 33). 5. Another of the champions distinguished as Shammah the Harodite ; he is called Shammoth in 1 Chron. xi. 27, and Shamhutb in 1 Chron. xxvii. S. That three of the thirty champions should bear the same name is somewhat remarkable. SHAPHAN (|QtT), occurs in Lev. xl. 5 ; Deut. xiv. 7 ; Ps. civ. 1 8 •, Prov. xxx. 26. Com- mentators, in general, now conclude, on the most satisfactory grounds, that ihose versions which give Cony for the Hebrew Shapliau are incorrect; hut several still maintain that the species to which Shaphan belongs ruminates, which is equally an error. The Shaphan is, in truth, as Bruce justly indicated, the same as the Ashkoko, the Ganam, not Daman, Israel, the Wabber of the Arabs, and in scientific zoology is one of the small genus Hyrax, distinguished by the specific name of Syrian (Syrianis). Iu the upper jaw it has no SHAPHAN. 741 incisors, but two rather pointed tusks directed downwards, with an open space between them ; in the lower are four short, separated, roundish incisors, pointing obliquely forward ; there are six molars on each side, above and below, the upper round on the surface, somewhat resembling the human back teeth, and the lower more nar- row, but neither composed of alternate laminae of bony and enamel substance as in ruminants ; nor is the jaw-bone articulated so as to admit freely of a similar action ; finally, the internal structure as well as the whole osteology represents that of a rhinoceros in miniature, and has no appearance of the complicated four-fold stomachs of rumi- nants; therefore the hyrax is neither a rodent like hares and rabbits, nor a ruminant, but is anoma- lous, and most neai'ly allied to the great Pachy- derms of systematic zoology. Externally, the hyrax is somewhat of the size, form, and brownish colour of a rabbit, and, thougli it has short round ears, sufficiently like for inexact observers to mis- take the one for the other. Navigators and colo- nists often carry the local names of their native land to other countries, and bestow them upon new objects with little propriety : this seems to have been done in the instance before us ; there being reason to believe that the Phoenicians, on visiting the western shores of the European side of the Mediterranean, found the country, as other autho- rities likewise assert, infested with rabbits or co- nies, and that without attending to the difference they bestowed upon them the Hebrew or Phoe- nician name of Shaphan, applying it also to the country itself by forming j£t? spjian, into H'OiDB' sphauih, which they intended should mean ' the land of conies;' and from t his misnomer ' Hispa- nia'' and our ' Spain ' are presumed to be derived. 493. [Hyrax Syriac.us.] The hyrax is of clumsier structure than the rabbit, without tail, having long bristly hairs scattered through the general fur; the feet are naked below, and all the nails are flat and rounded, save those on each inner toe of the hind feet, which are long and awl-shaped ; therefore the species cannot dig, and is by nature intended to reside, not, like rabbits; in burrows, but in the clefts of rocks. This character is correctly applied to the Shaphan by David. Their timid gregarious habits, and the tender- ness of their paws, make them truly 'the wise. and feeble folk' of Solomon; for the genus lives in colonies in the crevices of stony places in Syria, Palestine, Arabia, Eastern Egypt, Abys- sinia, and even at the Cape of Good Hope, where one or two additional species exist. In every locality, they are quiet, gentle creatures, loving to bask in the sun, never stirring far from then* retreats, moving with caution, and shrinking hom the shadow of a passing bird; for they are often the prey of eagles and hawks; their habits are strictly diurnal, and they feed on vegetables aud 742 SHARAB. seeds. It may be that, the peculiar structure of their anterior teeth is convenient for stripping off the seeds of grasses and tritica, and that these in part retained in the mouth cause a practic* of working the jaws, which, to common observers, may appear to be chewing the cud. In hares and rats a similar appearance is produced by a particular friction of the incisors or nippers, which, growing with great rapidity, would soon extend beyond a serviceable length, if they were not kept to (heir proper size by constant gnawing, and by working the cutting edges against each other. This action, observed in the motion of the lips of most rodents, when in a state of rest, caused the belief of rumination in the hare, though, like the hyrax, all rodentia are equally unprovided with the several stomachs, and want the muscular apparatus necessary to force the food back into the mouth for remastication at pleasure, which con- stitute, the leading peculiarities of the anatomical structure of the ruminantia. But they may pos- sess, in common with pachydermata, like the horse and hog, the peculiar articulation and form of jaws which give them the power of grinding their food, and laminated teeth, fitted for the purpose. — C. H-S. SHAPHAN, the scribe or secretary of King Josiah (2 Kings xxii. 3, 12; Jer. xxxvi. 10; comp. Ezra viii. 11). Contemporary with him was a state officer named Ahikam, constantly mentioned as ' the son of Shaphan1 (2 Kings xxii. 12; xxv. 22; Jer. xxvi. 21; xxxix. 14; and perhaps xxxix. 3) ; but this Shaphan, the father of Ahikam, can hardly be the same with Shaphan the scribe, although the heedless reader may be apt to confound them. SHARAB (2"lw^). This word properly means ' heat of the sun,' as in Isa. xlix. 10. Hence it is used to designate a phenomenon which is frequent in Arabia and Egypt, and may be occa- sionally seen in the southern parts of Europe; called by the Arabs Serab, and by the French le Mirage, by which name it is also commonly known in English. Descriptions of this illusion are often given by travellers. It consists in the presentation to the view of a lake or sea in the midst of a plain where none in reality exists. It is produced by the refraction of the rays of light, during the exhalation of vapours, by the excessive heat of the sun ; and it frequently exhibits, along with the undulating appearance of water, the shadows of objects within or around the plain, both in a natural and in an inverted position. The deception is most complete ; and to the weary traveller who is attracted by it, in the highest degree mortifying ; since, instead of re- freshing water, he finds himself in the midst of nothing but glowing sand. It is often used pro- verbially, or for the sake of comparison, by the Arabs, as in the Koran (Sur. xxiv. 39) : ' But as for those who believe not, their works are like the Serab of the plain : the thirsty imagines it to be water, but when he reaches it he finds it is nothing.' The same figure occurs in Isa. xxxv. 7 : 'The sharab shall become a lake,' i. e. the illu- sive appearance of a lake in the desert shall be- come a real lake of refreshing waters. See Ge- senius and Henderson on Isaiah, and comp. the descriptions and explanations in Kitto's Physical History of Palestine, pp. 147, 150, 151. SHEBA. SHAREZER O^IP, Persic, prince of fire ; Sept. 'S.apacra.p), a son of Sennacherib, one of those who slew his father (2 Kings xix. 37 ; Isa. xxxvii. 38). Another person of this name occurs in Zech. vii. 2. SHARON (\T\W ; Sept. ^dpcov), a level tract along the Mediterranean, between Mount Carmel and Casarea, celebrated for its rich fields and pastures (Josh. xii. 18 ; Cant. ii. 1 ; Isa. xxxiii. 9; xxxv. 2 ; Ixv. 10; 1 Chron. xxvii. 9). See the head ' Plains,' in the art. Palestine. SHAVE. [Beard; Hair; Mourning.] SHAVEH (HIK* ; Sept. 2a/3, the remnant shall return ; Sept. 6 KaraXeKpOels 'la, a youth; Sept. ^ofivas), the prefect of the palace to king Hezekiah (Isa. xxii. 15); afterwards promoted to be scribe or secretary to the same monarch, when his former office was given to Eliakim (Isa. xxii. 15 ; xxxvi'. 3 ; 2 Kings xviii. 26, 27 ; xix. 2). SHECHEM (E3B>; Sept. 2vX^, also ra SiKiyUa), a town of central Palestine, in Samaria, among the mountains of Ephraim (Josh. xx. 7 ; 1 Kings xii. 25), in the narrow valley between the mountains of Ebal and Gerizim (comp. Judg. ix. 7 ; Joseph. Antiq. iv. 8. 44), and con- sequently within the tribe of Ephraim (Josh. xxi. 20). It is in N. lat. 32° 17', E. long. 35° 20', being thirty-four miles north of Jerusalem and seven miles south of Samaria. It was a very an- cient place, and appears to have arisen as a town in the interval between the arrival of Abraham in Palestine and the return of Jacob from Padan- aram, for it is mentioned only as a place, de- scribed by reference to the oaks in the neigh- bourhood, when Abraham came there on first entering the land of Canaan (Gen. xii. G). But, in the history of Jacob it repeatedly occurs as a town having walls and gates : it could not, how- ever, have been very large or important if we may judge from the consequence which the inhabitants attached to an alliance with Jacob, and from the facility with which the sons of the Patriarch were able to surprise and destroy them (Gen. x xxiii. 18, 19: xxxiv. 1, 2, 20, 24, 26). Alter the conquest of the country, Shechem was made a city of refuge (Josh. xx. 7), and one of the Le- vitical towns (Josh. xxi. 21), and during the lifetime of Joshua it was a centre of union to the tribes (Josh. xxiv. 1, 25), probably because it was the nearest considerable town to the residence of that chief in Timnath-serah. In the time of the judges, Shechem became the capital of the kingdom set up by Abimelech (Judg. ix. 1, sq.), but was at length conquered and destroyed by 7U SHECHEM. him (Judg. ix. 3 4). It must, however, have been ere long rebuilt, for it had again become of so much importance by the time of Reho- boam's accession, that he there gave the meeting to the delegates of the tribes, which ended in the separation of the kingdom (1 Kings xii. 10). It. was Shechem which the first monarch of the new kingdom made the capital of his dominions (1 Kings xii. 25; com]), xiv. IT), although later in his reign the pleasantness of Tirzah induced him to build a palace there, and to make it the summer residence of his court ; which gave it such importance, that it at length came to be regarded as the capital of the kingdom, till Samaria eventually deprived it of that honour (1 Kings xiv. 7; xvi. 24; see Israel). She- chem, however, still throve. It subsisted during the exile (Jer. xii. 5), and continued for many ages after the chief seat of the Samaritans and of their worship, their sole temple being upon the mountain (Gerizim), at whose foot the city stood (Joseph. Antiq. xi. 8. 6 ; comp. John iv. 20 ; and see also the articles Ebal and Gerizim, Samaritans). The city was taken, and the temple destroyed, by John Hyrcanus, b.c. 129 (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 9. 1 ; De Bell. Jud. i. 2. 6). In the New Testament it. occurs under the name of Svchar (JZvxoip; John iv. 5), which seems to have been a sort of nick- name (perhaps from ~\p& sheker, 'falsehood,' spoken of idols in Hab. ii. 18; or from "113 Vf shiJdior, 'drunkard,' in al- lusion to Isa. xviii. 1, 7), — such as the Jews were fond of imposing upon places- they disliked; and nothing could exceed the enmity which ex- isted between them and the Samaritans, who pos- sessed Shechem. Stephen, however, in his his- torical retrospect, still uses the proper and an- cient name (Acts vii. 16). Not long after the times of the New Testament the place received the name of Neapolis, which it still retains in the Arabic form of Nabulus, being one of the very few names imposed by the Romans in Palestine which have survived to the present day. It had, probably suffered much, if it was not completely destroyed, in the war with the Romans, and would seem to have been restored or rebuilt, by Vespasian, and then to have taken this new name; for the coins of the city, of which there are many, all bear the inscription, Flavia Neapolis — the former epithet no doubt derived from Flavius Vespasian (Eckhel, Doctr. Num. iii. 433; Mionnet, M€d. Antiq. v. 499). The name occurs first in Josephus (De Bell. Jud. iv. 8. 1), and then in Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 14), Ptolemy (Geoff, v. 16). There had already been converts to the Cliristian faith at this place under our Saviour, and it is probable that a church had been gathered here by the Apostles (John iv. 30-42; Acts viii. 25; ix. 31 ; xv. 3). Justin Martyr was a native of Neapolis (Apoloy. ii. 41). The name of Germauus, bishop of Nea- polis, occurs in A.d. 314; and other bishops con- tinue to be mentioned down to a.d. 536, when the bishop John signed his name at the synod of Jerusalem (Reland, Palcest. p. 1009 ». When the Moslems invaded Palestine, Neapolis and other small towns in the neighbourhood were subdued while the siege of Jerusalem was going on (Abulfeda, Annal. i. 229). After the taking of Jerusalem by the Crusaders, Neapolis and other towns in the mountains of Samaria tendered their SHECHEM. submission, and Tancred took possession of them without resistance (Will. Tyr. ix. 20). Neapolis was laid waste by the Saracens in a.d. 1113; but a few years after (a.d. 1120) a council was held here by king Baldwin II., to consult upon- the state .of the country (Fulcher, p. 424 ; Will. Tyr. sir. 13). Neapoli3 was not made a Latin bishopric, but belonged probably to that of Samaria, and the property of it was assigned to the abbot and canons of the Holy Sepulchre fJac. de Vitriacus, ch. Iviii.). After some disasters in the unquiet times which ensued, and after some circumstances which show its remaining im- portance, the place was finally taken from the Christians in a.d. 1242, by Abu Ali, the col- league of Sultan Bibars, and has remained in Moslem hands ever since. There is no reason to question that the presen* town occupies the site of the ancient Shechem, although its dimensions are probably more con- tracted. The fertility and beauty of the deep and narrow valley in which tire town stands, especially in its immediate neighbourhood, have been much admired by travellers, as far exceed- ing what they had seen in any other part of Palestine. This valley is not more than 500 yards wide at the town, which stands directly upon its water-shed, the streams on the eastern; part ilowing off east info the plain, and so to- wards the Jordan, while the fountains on the western side send off a pretty brook down the valley N.W. towards the Mediterranean. The town itself is long and narrow, extending along the N.E. base of Monnt Gerizim, and partly- resting upon its declivity. The streets are narrow ;. the houses high, and in general well built, all of stone, with domes upon the roofs as at Jerusalem. The bazaars are good and well supplied. There are no ruins which can be called ancient in this country, but there are remains of a church of fine Byzantine architecture, and a handsome arched gateway, both apparently of the time of the first- crusades. These occur in the main street, through the whole length of which a stream of clear water rushes down — a rare circumstance in the East. The population of the place is rated by Dr. Olin at 8000 or "iOJOUO, of whom 500 or 600 are Christians of the Greek communion, and the rest Moslems, with ihe exception of about 130* Samaritans, and one-third that number of Jews. The inhabitants bear the character of being an unusually valiant as well as a turbulent race, and some years since maintained a desperate struggle against the Egyptian government in some bloody rebellions (Robinson, Palestine, ii. 94-136 ; Olin, Travels, ii. 339-365 ; Narrative of the Scottish Deputation, p. 208-218; Schubert, Morgetiland, iii. 136-154; Winer, Real-wort. s. v. ; Lord Nugent. Lands. Classical and Sacred, ii. 172-180. 2. SHECHEM, son of Hamor prince of the country or district of Shechem, in which Jacob formed his camp on his return from Meso- potamia. This young man having seen Jacob's daughter Dinah, was smitten with her beauty, and deflowered her. This wrong was terribly and cruelly avenged by the damsel's uterine brothers, Simeon and Levi, as described in the article Dinah (Gen. xxxv.). It seems likely that the town of Shechem, even if of recent origin, must have existed before the birth of a man so young as Hamor's son appears to have SHEEP. SHEEP. 745 been ; and we may therefore suppose it a name preserved in the family, and which both the town and the princes inherited. ShecbenTs name is always connected with that of his father Hamor (Gen. xxxiii. 19 ; xxxv. ; Acts vii. 16). SHEEP, nb seh, JN¥ tzon, both it appears occasionally used as a collective term, in- cluding goats ; Arab, zain ; C55 kebes, a lamb under a year old ; Jitf. ajil, the adult ram, but originally applied also to the males of other ruminants, such as deer, &c. ; 7m rachal, a female or ewe sheep — all referable to Hebrew- roots with apposite meanings, deserving the more confidence since the earliest patriarchs of the nation, being themselves shepherds and graziers, had never at any time received this portion of their domesticated cattle from foiuign nations, and therefore had indigenous names for them. 494. [Syrian Sheep.] Domestic sheep, moreover, although commonly re- garded as the progeny of one particular wild species, are probably an instance, among many similar, where the wisdom of Providence has provided subsistence for man in different regions, by bestow- ing the domesticating and submissive instincts upon the different species of animals which the human family might find in their wanderings ; for it is certain that even the American argali can be rendered tractable, and that, the Corsican musmon will breed with the common sheep. The normal, animal, from which all or the greater part of the western domestic races are assumed to be de- scended, is still found wild in the high mountain regions of Persia, and is readily distinguished from two other wild species bordering on the same region. What breeds the earliest shepherd tribes reared in and about Palestine can now be only inferred from negative characters; yet they are sufficient to show that they were the same, or nearly so, as the common horned variety of Egypt and continental Europe : in general white, and occasionally black, although there was on the upper Nile a speckled race; ami so early as the time of Aristotle the Arabians possessed a rufous breed, another with a very long tail, and above all a broad-tailed sheep, which at present is commonly denominated the Syrian. These three varieties are said to be of African origin, the red hairy, in particular, having all the cha- racteristics to mark its descent from the wild Ovis Tragelaphus or Barbatus (/jjuu»=5), or Kebsch of the Arabian and Egyptian mountains [Rams' Skins, Red]. Flocks of the ancient breed, derived from the Bedouins, are now extant in Syria, with little or no change in external cha- racters, chiefly the broad-tailed and the common horned white, often with black and white about the face and feet, the tail somewhat thicker and longer than the European. The others are chiefly valued for the fat of their broad tails, which tastes not unlike marrow; for the flesh of neither race is remarkably delicate, nor are the fleeces of superior quality. Sheep in the various con- ditions of existence wherein they would occur among a pastoral and agricultural people, are noticed in numerous places of the Bible, and furnish many beautiful allegorical images, where purity, innocence, mildness, and submission are pourtrayed— the Saviour himself being denomi- nated ' the Lamb of God,' in twofold allusion to his patient meekness, and to his being the true paschal lamb, ' slain from the foundation of the world' (Rev. xiii. 8). The meaning of the He- brew word ntO^p kesitah, occurring only in Gen. xxxiii. 19, and Job xlii. 11, has, we think, been contested with more earnestness than can- dour, Bochart himself pointing to the Greek, Onkelos, Syrian, Arabic, and Vulgate transla- tions, where we find sheep or lambs — these autho- rities being supported by the Chaldee. On the other hand, the Rabbinical expounders have ren- dered it money ; while in Costard's dissertation on the subject neither interpretation seems to him satisfactory ; for he, in common with Bochart and others, finding no Hebrew word or root to justify the version sheep or lambs, would prefer money, but that, according to him, there was none coined till the era of Cyrus, and never any bearing the impression of a lamb, &c. Now here we have assumptions, and not proofs ; there is no reason why sheep should not in the East, a land emi- nently pastoral, have been an object of barter in kind, and why in process of time the same word should not have been applied to a piece of metal, as pecus in Italy, which likewise at first denoted sheep or ox, and subsequently a coin. There is every reason to believe that metals, very an- ciently, in the shape of mere rings or plates of a given weight, represented the value of sheep in a more convenient form. The Jewish ppB' shakal, ' to weigh,' indicates this early character of money; and its use is plainly shown in Gen. xxiii. 16, where Abraham, buying a field and cave, weighs out four hundred shekels of silver, a kind of current money, the medium of ex- change between merchants, but not therefore coin, which implies a characteristic impression on the metal. In Gen. xxxiii. 19, Kesitah may be a Canaanitish, or more properly a Scytho-Cluildaic designation of sheep in the time of Jacob, already represented by silver, most probably cast in the form of that animal, and of a standard weight, for the Hebrews were not as yet a people, and the Egyptians cast their weights in metal shaped like cattle, &c. ; and that Phoenicia, at a later period, had sheep actually impressed on a silver coin, is proyed by that figured in the travels of Clarke. It is a medal found in Cyprus, of irregular form, with the impression of a ram recumbent on one side, and on the other a sun-flower, Heliotropunn or Calendula, which occurs also on the peltss of Amazons, and among Indian bas-reliefs. Two Phoenician letters are visible at the sides of the flower. But in Job xlii. 11, where Kesitah is rendered in the Authorized Version by ' money,' 745 SHEKINAH. we tliink if: may have designated ' sheep ;' since rings of gold, translated 'ear-rings,' follow imme- [Supposed Kesitah.] diately after; and it is now known that gold, during the earlier ages, was in Egypt worked into rings, as an article of exchange, and is frequently represented instead of money among the objects of tribute. Rings were surely more likely to be presented to Job as money, than as ornaments for the ears. It would lead us beyond our limits to show the probable affinity of Kesita and Kebesch with ancient Scythian roots, whereof Kaisak, Kupjak, Kirtak, Kutschi, and even the Persian and Turkish Kotschkui and Dachkutch are all mutations, having reference to 'sheep' or 'fleece.' Kesitah was a foreign term, and might perhaps be traced to the Pelhevi, or some other more eastern language. — C. H. S. SHEKEL. [Weights and Measures.] SHEKINAH orSHECHiNAH (PlJpBO, a term applied by the ancient Jews, especially in the Chaldee Targums, to that visible symbol of the divine glory which dwelt in the tabernacle and temple. The word, though nowhere met with in this form in the Scriptures, is a direct derivative from the Hebrew root p£> shukan, 'to dwell,' 'to dwell in a tent or tabernacle,' which is of frequent occur- rence in the sacred writers, and is used mainly to imply the tabernacled presence and residence of the Most High, by a visible symbol among the chosen people. Though found in several connec- tions where the sense of secular habitation is obvi- ous, yet there can be no doubt that the dominant idea is that of sacred indwelling, of which the fol- lowing passages afford striking specimens : Exod. xxv. 8, ' Let them make me a tabernacle that I may dwell (TOStf) among them.' Exod. xxix. 45, ' And I will dwell (Tl33t5>) among the children of Israel, and will be tlieir God.' Num. v. 3, ' That they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell (T^D^).' Ps. lxviii. 16, ' This is the hill which God delighteth to dwell in, yea, the Lord will dwell in it (p£J^) for ever.' Ps. lxxiv. 2, ' Remember — this Mount Zion wherein thou hast dwelt (flJifcy),' It is -more especially employed when the Lord is said to ' cause his name to dwell,' implying the stated visible manifestation of his presence. Ezra vi. 12, 'And the God that hath caused his name to dwell there (ilD£* p&>, literally, hath shakinized his name)' (comp. Deut. xii. 11 ; xiv. 23; xvi. 6 ; xxvi. 2). It is emphatically employed in speaking of the cloud of the divine glory dwell- ing upon Mount Sinai: Exod. xxiv. 16, 'And the glory of the Lord abode (pt^) upon Mount Sinai.' The term shekinah (H^it^) is defined by Buxtorf (Lex. Talm. voc. pB>; as meaning primarily habitation, or inhabitation, but as hav- ing a dominant reference to the divine glory in its outward visible manifestation. The term is of very frequent occurrence in the Chaldee Tar- SHEKINAH. gums, where it is employed interchangeably with ' Glory,' ' Glory of the Lord,' ' Angels of the Lord,' and often with 'Lord' (Jehovah) itself The citations that follow will more fully disclose the usage in this respect : Ps. Ixxii. 2, ' Remem- ber thy congregation which thou hast purchased of old, this Mount Zion wherein thou hast dwelt.' Targ. Exod. xxv. 8, ' Let them make me a taber- nacle that I may dwell among them.' Glial. ' I will make my shekinah to dwell among them.' Arab. ' I will make my light (or splendour) to dwell among them.' Haggai i. 8, ' Go up to the mountain, and bring wood, and build the house, and I will take pleasure, and will be glorified, saith the Lord.' Targ. ' I will make my shekinah to dwell there in glory.' Ps. lxxxv. 10, ' His salvation is nigh them that fear him, that glory may dwell in our land.' Thus explained by Aben Ezra, ' That the she- kinah may be established in the land.' It would be easy to multiply these quotations to almost any extent, but sufficient has been produced to illus- trate the ums loquendi, and to show that we have ample authority for employing the term with the utmost freedom in reference to the divine theo- phanies or manifestations. From the tenor of these and a mirltitude of similar texts, it is evident that the Most High, whose essence no man hath seen, or can see, was pleased anciently to manifest himself to the eyes of men by an external visible symbol.* As to the precise nature of the phenomenon thus ex- hibited, we can only say, that it appears to have been a concentrated glowing brightness, a preter- natural splendour, an effulgent something, which was appropriately expressed by the term ' Glory;" but whether in philosophical strictness it was material or immaterial, it is probably impossible to determine. A luminous object of this descrip- tion seems intrinsically the most appropriate sym- bol of that Being of whom, perhaps in allusion to this very mode of manifestation, it is said, that ' he is light,' and that ' he dwelleth in light un- approachable, and full of glory.' The presence of such a sensible representation of Jehovah seems to be absolutely necessary in order to harmonize what is frequently said of ' seeing God ' with the truth of his nature as an incorporeal and essentially invisible spirit. While we are told in one place that ' no man hath seen God at any time,' we are elsewhere informed that Moses and Aaron, and the seventy elders, ' saw the God of Israel,' when called up to the summit of the Holy Mount. So also Isaiah says of himself (Isa. vi. 1, 5) that ' in the year that king Uzziah died he saw the Lord sitting upon his throne,' and that, in consequence, he cried out, ' I am undone ; for mine eyes have seen the Lord of hosts.' In these cases it is obvious that the object seen was not God in his essence, but some external visible symbol, which, because it stoud for God, is called by his name. * Even at the early period of the expulsion of our sinning progenitors from Paradise, such a manifestation seems to have been made in con- nection with the cherubim which the Most High placed (Heb. pt}>* yishkan, shekinized) at the east of the garden of Eden, and which, probably, constituted that ' presence of the Lord,' from wliich Cain fled after the murder of his brother.' SHEKINAH. It seems beyond question that the divine ap- pearances vouchsafed in the earlier ages of the world, to the patriarchs and prophets, was under the aspect, or with the accompaniment of light or fire, or that which conveys to the mind the idea of ' Glory.' Thus, in Stephen's account of the call of Abraham (Acts vii. 2), 'And he said, men, brethren, and fathers, the God of Glory appeared unto our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia,' &c. This is a phrase very un- wonted in plain narrative prose, and doubtless carries with it. an allusion to the fact of God's appearing in a glorious manner, with a bright and overpowering effulgence, or, in other words, by the symbol of the shekinah. So too when he appeared to Moses in the burning bush, it was doubtless by the usual symbol ; and this super- natural light or lire, glowing with a lambent and vivid, but innocuous flame, was no other than the splendour of the shekinah. To this august phenomenon the apostle plainly alludes, when, speaking of the distinguished prerogatives of the covenanted race (Rom. ix. 4), ' to wbom per- taineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law,' &c. But of all these ancient recorded theophanies, tke most signal and illustrious was undoubtedly that which was vouchsafed in the pillar of cloud that guided the march of the children of Israel through the wilderness on their way to Canaan. A correct view of this subject clothes it at once with a sanctity and grandeur which seldom appear from the naked letter of the narrative. There can be little doubt that the columnar cloud was the seat, of the shekinah. We have already seen that the term shekinizing is applied to the abiding of the cloud on the summit of the mountain (Exod. xxiv. 16). Within the tower- ing aerial mass, we suppose, was enfolded the inner effulgent brightness, to which the appellation 'Glory of the Lord' more properly belonged, and which was only occasionally disclosed. In several instances in which God would indicate his anger to his people, it is said that they looked to the cloud and beheld the ' Glory of the Lord' (Num. xiv. 10; xvi. 19, 42). So when he would inspire a trembling awe of his Majesty at the giving of the Law, it is said, the ' Glory of the Lord appeared as a devouring fire ' on the summit of the Mount. Nor must the fact be forgotten in this connection, that when Nadab and Abihu, the two sons of Aaron, offended by strange fire in their offerings, a fatal flash from the cloudy pillar instantaneously extinguished their lives. The evidence would seem then to be conclusive, that this wondrous pillar-cloud was the seat or throne of the shekinah, the visible representa- tive of Jehovah dwelling in the midst of his people. But it will be proper, in a matter of so much importance, to enter somewhat more fully into the genius of that mode of diction which obtains in regard to the shekinah ; particularly the usage by which the term ' Angel ' is applied to this visible phenomenon, deserves our investigation. This term occurs frequently in the Arabic version of those passages which speak of the divine mani- festations, especially as made in connection with the cloudy pillar. Thus, when we read (Exod. xiii. 21), 'That the Lord went before them in a pillar of cloud by day, and by night in a pillar SHEKINAH. 747 of fire,' the Arabic translation ha3 it. ' The angel of the Lord went before them.' This is countenanced by the express language of Exod. xiv. 19, ' And the angel of God which went be- fore the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them ; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them.' Here it is obvious that the same object is set. before us under two different forms of expression ; the ' Pillar of Cloud ' in the last clause being evi- dently the same as ' Angel of God ' in the first. In seeking the true solution of this phraseology, it is necessary to bear in mind that ' Angel,' in the Scripture idiom, is a term of office, and not of nature [Angels]. It is by no means confined to any order of rational, intelligent, or personal beings,, whether celestial or terrestrial. Though primarily employed to denote messengers, yet nothing is clearer than that it is used in speaking of impersonal agents, such as winds, fires, pes- tilences, remarkable dispensations — any thing in fact which might serve as a medium to make known the divine will, or to illustrate the divine working. ' He maketh the winds his angels, and the flaming fires his ministers.' From the wide and extensive use of the term angel, in the language of Holy Writ, we are prepared to recognise at once the propriety of its application to the theophanies, or special manifestations of the Deity, of which so much is said in the Old Testament. We perceive that we are furnished from this source with a key to all those passages in which mention is made of the appearance of the angel of the Lord, whether to Abraham, to Isaac, to Jacob, to Hagar, to Moses, or any of the ancient worthies. So far as the letter is concerned the intimation would seem, in many cases, to be, that a created and delegated angel was sent upon various messages to the patriarchs, and became visible to their eyes and audible to their ears. These celestial mes- sengers have been supposed occasionally to speak in the name, and even in the person, of Him whose mandates they communicated. Thus, when Abraham was about to oiler up Isaac we are told that the angel of the Lord called to him out of heaven, and said (Gen. xxii. 15-18), ' By myself I have sworn, that in blessing I will bless thee, and that in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven,' &c. This might seem at first view to be the voice of an angel -messenger speaking in the name, and by the authority, of him who sent him. But from the usage now developed, we understand that it was the visible object that appeared, which is called the angel. So when it is said that ' the angel of the Lord ap- peared to Moses in the burning bush,' we see it was the burning bush itself that was called the angel, because it was the medium of manifesta- tion to Jehovah in making this communication to his servant. The language which lie utters on that occasion is evidently not competent to any created being, and must, be considered as proceed- ing from the shekinah, to which no other than the infinite Spirit was present. The appropria- tion, therefore, of this language to the majestic pillar of cloud viewed as the shekinah of Jehovah, receives a countenance which cannot be ques- tioned. We see no room to hesitate in believing, that when it is said, ' the angel of God went be- fore them,' the meaning is, that the pillar of cloud 743 SHEKINAH. went before them, or, in other words, that the pillar is called ' the angel.' In pursuance then of this train of investigation, we advance to another phasis of the mystic column that marshalled the way of the sojourning hosts, in their march to Canaan. In Exod. xxiii. 2, it is said, ' Behold I send an angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place that I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions : for my name is in him.' The first impression, upon the perusal of this, would perhaps be, that a created and tutelary angel was intended, one whom, whether visible or invisible, they used to treat with the greatest reverence as a kind of personal represent- ative of Jehovah himself. This representative and commissioned character would be apt to be recognised in the phrase, ' My name is in him,' equivalent, as would be supposed, to the declara- tion, ' My authority is in him.' But then, on the other hand, we have shown that the term ' angel ' is applied to the cloudy pillar, and as we have no intimation of any other angel being visibly present with the travelling tribes, the in- ference is certainly a fair one, that the angel here mentioned is but the designation of that glorious object which stood forth to the eye of the congre- gation, as having the shekinah essentially con* nected with it. And now with the light of this peculiar usage to guide us, can we hesitate in regard to the genuine scope of the following passage from Isaiah, which we must assuredly recognise as a parallelism (Isa. lxiii. 8)? ' For he said, surely they are my people, children that will not lie; so he was their Saviour. In all their afflictions he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them : in his love and in his pity he re- deemed them ; and he bore them and carried them all the days of old.' The allusion is undoubtedly to the same grand symbolical object which we are now considering. After what has been said we can have no difficulty in understanding why the title, ' Angel of his presence,' is applied to the cloudy column of the wilderness. It was evi- dently so termed, because it was the medium of manifestation to the divine presence. The in- visible Deity, in some mysterious manner, dwelt in it, and was associated with it. It was called the 'Angel of the Divine Presence,' or, more literally, face (''JQ), because, as the human face is the grand medium of expression to the human spirit, so the shekinah was the medium of manifestation or expression to the Divine Spirit. Indeed Moses, on one occasion, when apprehensive that the guiding glory of his people would be withdrawn on account of their transgressions, makes use of this language, ' If thy presence go not with me, carry us not up hence. And the Lord said, my presence shall go with thee.' So also in Deut. iv. 3*7, we find the word presence ox face used with a personal import, ' And because he loved thy fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them, and brought thee out. in his sight (V3Q3, with, by, or through, his presence, i. e. the angel of his presence), with his mighty power out of Egypt.' We see not, therefore, that anything is hazarded in the position, that the angel of God's pre- sence, of whom Isaiah speaks, is essentially the same with the angel of God's pillar, of which SHEM. Moses speaks, and which is invested with per- sonal attributes, because the Israelites were taught to view it in a personal character as a visible repre- sentative of their covenant God. But our conception of the subject is essentially incomplete without the exhibition of another aspect of the cloudy pillar. This is as the oracle of the chosen people. So long as that sublime symbol continued as the outward visible token of the divine presence, it performed the office of an oracle in issuing commands and delivering re- sponses. ' They called upon the Lord,' says the Psalmist (Ps. xcix. 6, 7), ' and he answered them. He spake unto them in the cloudy pillar ; that is, the cloudy pillar was the medium of his com- munications. This is indeed sufficiently express ; but still more unequivocal is the language of Exod. xxxiii. 9, ' And it came to pass, as Moses entered into the tabernacle, the cloudy pillar de- scended and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and talked with Moses.' It is true indeed that in our established version we read that ' the Lord talked with Moses,' but the words ' the Lord ' are printed in italics to show that there is nothing in the original answering to them. We have given a literal translation ; still there is no special im- propriety in supplying the words as above, if it be borne in mind that the mystic, pillar was re- garded as a visible embodiment of Jehovah, and, therefore, that in the diction of the sacred writer the two terms are equivalentand convertible. This is evident from what follows in the conned ion, 'And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door, and the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend.' The ' Lord' here must unequivocally be applied to the symbol of the Lord, or the shekinah, which was the true organ of communication with the people. It would be easy to carry out this line of investigation to still further results : but the considerations which have been offered will suffice to indicate the general bearings of this interesting subject. See Lowman, On the Shekinah ; Taylor's Let' ters of Ben Mordecai ; Skinner's Dissertation on the Shekinah ; Watts's Glory of Christ ; Upham, On the Logos ; Bush's Notes on Exodus ; Teni- son, On Idolatry ; Fleming's Christology. — G. B. SHEM (pW, name; Sept. 2^u), one of the three sons of Noah (Gen. v. 32), from whom descended the nations enumerated in Gen. x. 22, sq., and who was the progenitor of that great branch of the Noachic family (called from him Shemitic or Semitic) to which the Hebrews belong. The name of Shem is placed first wherever the sons of Noah are mentioned to- gether ; whence he would seem to have been the eldest brother. But against this conclusion is brought the text Gen. x. 21, which, according to the Authorized, and many other versions, has ' Shem the brother of Japheth the elder ;' whence it has been conceived very generally that Japheth was really the eldest, and that Shem is put first by way of excellency, seeing that from him the holy line descended. But this conclusion is not built upon a critical knowledge of the Hebrew^ which would show that ? 11 3 71, 'the elder,' must in this text be referred not to Japheth but to Shem, so that it should be read 'Shem.... the elder brother of Japheth.' The current version of the SHEMAIAH. text is sanctioned only by the Septuagint among the ancient, versions, and it is there supposed by some to be corrupt, The Samaritan, Syriac, Arabic, and Vulgate, adopt the other interpreta- tion, which indeed is the only one that the ana- logy of the Hebrew language will admit. The whole Bible offers no other instance of such a construction as that by which PII^H nS"1 TIN becomes ' the brother of Japhet the elder,' which indeed would be an awkward phrase in any language. The object of the sacred writer is to mark the seniority and consequent superiority of Shem. He had already told us (Gen. ix. 24) that Ham was, if not the youngest, at least a younger son of Noah, and he is now careful to acquaint us that Shem, the stem of the Hebrews, was older than Japheth(See Baumgavten, Theolog. Commentar sum Aden Test. ; Geddes, Critical Remarks : respecting the posterity of Shem see Nations, Dispersion of). 1. SHEMAIAH (i1$»f, whom Jehovah hears ; Sept. ~Zajxaias), a prophet of the time of Rehoboam, who was commissioned to enjoin that monarch to forego his design of reducing the ten tribes to obedience (1 Kings xii. 22-24). In 1 Chron. xii. 15, this Shemaiah is stated to have written the Chronicles of the reign in which he flourished. 2. SHEMAIAH, a person who, without autho- rity, assumed the functions of a prophet among the Israelites in exile. He was so much annoyed by the prophecies which Jeremiah sent to Ba- bylon, the tendency of which was contrary to his own, that he wrote to Jerusalem, denouncing the prophet as an impostor, and urging the authorities to enforce his silence. In return he received new prophecies, announcing that he should never behold that close of the bondage which he fancied to be at hand, and that none of. his race should witness the re-establishmtnt of the nation (Jer. xxix. 24-32). SHEMARIM (P^m, from 1£$ shdmar, to keep, to preserve). This term is generally un- derstood to denote the lees or dregs of wine, and it is asserted that the radical idea expresses the fact that these preserve the strength and flavour of the wine. There is evidently a reference to this in Ps. lxxv. 8 : — ' For in the hand of Jehovah there is a cup, and the wine (J^ yayin) is red (or thick and turbid, ")0n hhumar) : it is full of mixture (TJDO. mesech), and he poureth out. this; but the dregs thereof (rTHftt^ shemArerjhu) all the rebels of the earth shall press and suck ;' in which verse we have four of the terms rendered ' wine' by the translators of the English Bible. This verse is interesting, as in- dicating accurately the import of the term under discussion, at least in this particular pas- sage. Shemurim are here the sediments in a cup compounded with articles, two of which, at least, are designated by terms invariably used in the Scriptures to designate something obtained from the vine. Yayin is employed in the Mishna (TV. Nedarim, vi. 9) to designate a drink obtained from apples (DTTlCD P); but this is dif- ferent from its Scriptural use. The inference is, that shemdrim here denotes the dregs of wine. This cannot be the meaning of the term, however, in Isa. xxv. 6, where, we think, it must refer to SHEMARIM. 749 some rich preserves appropriate to the feast of which that text speaks ( Tirosh lo Yayin, iv. 8). The verse may be rendered thus : — ' And Jehovah of hosts shall make to all peoples in this moun- tain a feast of fat things (shemunim), a feast of preserves (shemurim), of the richest fatness, of preserves well refined .' Considerable diversity of opinion has obtained among biblical critics in regard to both the literal meaning and prophetic bearing of this text. The most usual interpre- tation supposes a reference to ivines on the lees ; but there are strong objections to this view, the most obvious of which is, that, it is exceedingly inappropriate. There is no mention of wine in the original, but simply of dregs ; and interpreters have been forced to suppose a reference to the former, from a conviction that the latter was altogether inapt. The mention of dregs does not naturally call up (by synecdoche, as is sup- posed, though dregs are not a part of the wine which has been purified from them) the idea of wine which has been drawn from them. The trope here supposed is at variance with a fundamental principle of figurative language, which takes advantage of 'that great variety of relations be- tween objects, by means of which the mind is assisted to pass easily from one to another ; and by the name of the one, understands the other to be meant. It is always some accessory idea, which recalls the principal to the imagination ; and commonly recalls it with more force than if the principal idea had been expressed' (Blair's Lec- tures on Rhet. and Bell. Lett., lect. xiv.). Vi- tringa, indeed, renders the language with apparent literal propriety, a feast of dregs {convivium faeimi), but he explains it of wine purified from its dregs (ex vino defeccato, a iaecibus purgato) (Comm. in loc). Vitringa may well say of the expression as thus rendered : ' phrasi qui- dem fateor singulari et insolente.' Monster sup- poses very absurdly a reference to a highly in- toxicating wine (' convivium vino unde omnes in- ebiiabunlur'), which would prove a curse rather than a blessing, and refers to the supposed fulfil- ment of the prophecy in Gog and Magog, when ' Dominus tanquam ebrios faciei eos ruere in mu- tuant csedem' {CHtici Sacri, in loc). Clarius, Forerius, and Grotius render it, a feast of vine-fruit (vindemia?) ; but Clarius gives also the same explanation as Minister. Our readers, we trust, will agree with us in rejecting the idea of intoxi- cation from this beautiful passage; which, indeed, has but few supporters. X\ e agree with the great majority of interpreters, that a signal blessing is here referred to; but. we cannot agree with those who suppose that wine drawn off from dregs is made the emblem of that blessing. Such wine would evidently not answer the purpose. It was not the best wine. In reference to the separation of dregs and sediment from wine before it was drunk, Professor Ramsay says, ' Occasionally a piece of linen cloth (chxkkos, saccus) was placed over the rpvyoiiros or colum (Pollux, vi. 19; x. 75), and the wine (tjanKias, saccattts) filtered through (Martial, viii. 45). The use of the saccus was considered objectionable for all delicate wines, since it was believed to injure (Hor. Sat. ii. 4, 51), if not entirely to destroy, their flavour, and in every instance to diminish the strength of the liquor. For this reason it was employed by the dissipated in order that they might be able to 750 SHEMARIM. swallow a greater quantity without becoming in- toxicated' (Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, art. Vinum). Vitringa and others suppose that the wine in the passage before us was prepared by the very method which Pro- fessor Ramsay justly says was believed to injure, if not entirely to destroy its flavour. Columella, Cato, and Pliny, speak of wine made from dregs or lees ; but none of them speak of it as of supe- rior excellence : on the contrary, they mention it as rather inferior. Thfse considerations have induced us to think of another interpretation of the term. We regard it as indicating something excellent in its kind, and the best of its kind. It seems to refer to some rich preserves made from grapes or other fruits. We thus fall back on the radical idea of the word, and connect that idea with its use in the present passage, which is different from its use in other texts. These preserves might be usually prepared from the grape, but it is not necessary to limit them to such a preparation ; thus we find D^DJ? asis, properly the juice of the grape (Joel i. 5), used to denote the juice of the pomegranate (Cant. viii. 2). It is difficult to say how these preserves were prepared. ' In the East grapes enter very largely into the provisions at an entertainment. Thus Norden was treated by the Aga of Assaoun with coffee, and some bunches of grapes of an excellent taste ' (Robinson's Calmet, art. Vine). It is probable, however, that some solid preparation of the dried grape ('uvapassa') is here intended. The very best grapes were anciently, and still are, employed to make such preparations in Palestine. The finest grapes in that country grow in the vineyards around Hebron. ' The produce of these vineyards,' says Professor Robinson, ' is celebrated throughout Palestine. No wine, however, nor 'Arak is made from them, except by the Jews, and this is not in great quantity. The wine is good. The finest grapes are dried as raisins ; and the rest, being trodden and pressed, the juice is boiled down to a syrup, which, under the name of Dibs (our author slates in a note that 'this is the Hebrew word £01 debhash, signifying honey, and also syrup of grapes') is much used by all classes, wherever vineyards are foui»d, as a condiment with their food. It resembles thin molasses, but is more pleasant to the taste' (Biblical Researches in Palestine, ii. 442). The fact here stated regarding the use made of the finest grapes, supplies us with an article worthy of the feast mentioned in the text. Buck- ingham, a well-known traveller, mentions the fol- lowing interesting facts : — ' By way of dessert, some walnuts and dried figs were afterwards served to us, besides a very curious article, pro- bably resembling the dried wine of the ancients, which they are said to have preserved in cakes. They were of the size of a cucumber, and were made out of the fermented juice of the grape formed into a jelly, and in, this state wound round a central thread of the kernel of walnuts ; the pieces of the nuts thus forming a support for the outer coat of jelly, which became harder as it dried, and would keep, it is said, fresh and good for many months, forming a welcome treat at all times, and being particularly well adapted for sick or delicate persons, who might require some grateful provisions capable of being carried in a SHEMARIM. small compass, and without risk of injury on a journey' (Travels among the Arabs, p. 137). Whether this intelligent traveller is right in as- serting that the article mentioned by him waa made out of the fermented juice of the grape, we cannot determine. If so, it must have been entirely different from our fermented wines, for none of them could be ' formed into a jelly.' The article, as he found it, was in a solid state, having become hard as it dried, and was, pro- bably, free of the intoxicating principle. Were we able to say how the article designated by shemarim was prepared, we could easily ex- plain the force of the epithet D*pp?D mezukha- kim. It is the passive participle of the pual (or iutensitive) species of the verb pp] zukak, which is usually explained as signifying to purify, a meaning sufficiently applicable in the present case. The preserves might be purified by clear- ing out the skins of the grapes, the stones, &c. Rosenmiiller (Scholia, in loc), following Vit- ringa, supposes here a reference to filtration, by which the dregs were separated from the wine, and by which consequently the wine was purified. We have already given a reason why this inter- pretation must be rejected. The following remark of Horace (Sat. ii. 4. 51) is directly opposed to it, and shows that wine thus prepared would have no claim to stand side by side with the rich delicacies mentioned in the text : — ' Massica si coelo suppones vina sereno, Nocturna, si quid crassi est, tenuabitur aura, Et decedet odor nervis inimicus : at ilia Integrum perdunt lino vitiata saporem.' ' The sky serene, put out. your Massic wine ; In the night air its foulness shall refine, And lose the scent, unfriendly to the nerves, But filtrated, no flavour it preserves.' Francis. Dr. E. Henderson (Notes on Isaiah) and Barnes (Notes on Isaiah) suppose that purification by fermentation is here referred to ; but these distin- guished writers, to be thoroughly consistent, should adopt the opinion of Minister. Some have sought a resemblance between the process by which metals are purified, and that employed to refine the she- marim, the same word being used in connection with each (Job xxviii. 1; 1 Chron. xxviii. 18; xxix. 4 ; Ps. xii. 6 [Heb. 7] ; Mai. iii. 3) ; but probably the fact of refinement is all that may be intended, without reference to the process. Other interpretations (as that of Seb. Ravius, in Diatribe de epulo funebri gentibus dando adjes., cap. xxv. 6, 7, 8; Traj. ad Rlien., 1747, p. 23, sq. ; of J. D. Michaelis. in Supplem. ad Lex. Hebr., p. ii. 642) we omit, as anticipated in the preceding observations, or unworthy of notice. After a full consideration of the subject, we conclude that the shemarim of this text was a solid article, "different from nB^K'N ashishah, grape-cake (Gesenius, Heb. Lex., sub voc), as not being pressed in any particular form, and different from D^pDV tsimmukim, dried grapes, as being refined and prepared for being served up at a sumptuous entertainment. This subject might be further illustrated by a consideration of the Hebrew taste in regard to the produce of the vineyard. It will not be de- nied that the figurative language of the Scrip- tures is to be illustrated by reference to Jewish SHEMARIM. customs. Those commentators, however, who suppose that Isaiah here speaks of good old fer- mented wine, advocate an article which is rather offensive than agreeable to the Hebrew taste. In Cant. ii. 4, the bride says of the object of her affection, 'He brought me to the house of grapes" (pn 1TQ), an arbour being referred to, probably- similar to those found in our gardens and or- chards, or perhaps larger (Robinson's Palestine, vol. i. p. 31 4), such houses or tents being common in vineyards, and resorted to at the time of the vintage. The sweetness of honey seems to have been preferred in their wines; for in Cant. v. 1, the bridegroom says, 'I have eaten my honey (not honey-comb, as 'some have falsely and carelessly rendered it'— Gesenius) [Honey], with my grape syrup ;' and the mildness of milk was also agree- able, for he adds, ' I have drunk my wine with my milk.' That which ' goeth down sweetly' is ap- proved of (Cant. vii. 9), as well as that which lias the flavour of spices, with the addition of the juice of the pomegranate (Cant. viii. 2), or that of other fruits. Wisdom, too (Prov. ix. 2), is said to have 'mingled her wine,' a circumstance which plainly indicates that the wine referred to was thick and syrupy, and for use required to be mingled with a quantity of water equal to that which had been evaporated by boiling. The an- cient Jews had two objects in view in mingling their wine — one of which we have now mentioned, and the other was by the mixture of drugs to produce a highly-intoxicating drink (Isa. v. 22). It would be no compliment, therefore, to a sober Israelite to be promised an abundant supply of old fermented wine at a rich entertainment; in fact, it would be regarded as a kind of mockery. We may state briefly the results to which the preceding observations conduct us : — (a.) The term shemarim does not naturally call up the idea of wine. (o.) It properly signifies preservers or pre- serves, (c.) There is a paronomasia in the text in the words shemanim (delicacies) and shemarim (preserves), the beauty of which is increased by the repetition of these terms. (d.) The interpretation of ric7i preserves is the only one that suggests an article worthy of being placed side by side with the rick delicacies which interpreters acknowledge to be designated by the accompanying term. (e.) Wine filtered or drawn off from the lees was not in high repule. (/.) The Hebrew taste was in favour of a solid preparation of the grape. Neither of the other passages (Jer. xlviii. 11, Zeph. i. 12), which relate to shemarim, is in- vested with special interest. The wine was sepa- rated from the lees, sometimes at least, by being drawn oft" from one vessel to another, as appears from Jeremiah xlviii. 11, which Bishop Lowth renders thus : — ' Moab hath been at case from his youth, And he hath settled upon his lees; Nor hath he been drawn off from vessel to vessel, Neitner hath he gone into captivity: Therefore his taste remaineth in him, And his flavour is not changed.' Moab is here represented as spending a life of quiet indifference, living undisturbed in sin. Such, too, was the situation of those of whom SHESH. 751 Jehovah says (Zeph. i. 12), ' I will punish the men that are settled on their lees;' that is, those who disregarded his admonitions, and prose- cuted their sinful cuuises, unmoved by his threatenings. — P. M. SHEMEBER ("ttK)?B>, lofty fight; Sept. ~2.v/j.ofi6p), king of Zeboim, one of the five ' cities of the plain ' (Gen. xiv. 2). SHEMER p£B?, lees; Sept. 2e/d?p), the owner of the hill of Samaria, which derived its name from him. Omri bought the hill for two talents of silver, and built thereon the city, also called Samaria, which he made the ca- pital of his kingdom (1 Kings xvi. 21) [see Samaria]. As the Israelites were prevented by the law (Lev. xxv. 23) from thus alienating their inheritances, and as his name occurs without the usual genealogical marks, it is more than pro- bable that Shemer was descended from those Ca- naanites whom the Hebrews had not dispossessed of their lands. SHEMINITH. [Psalms.] SHEOL. [Hades.] 1. SHEPHATIAH (i"PE)&B>, whom Jehovah defends ; Sept. Sacparia), a son of David by Abital (2 Sam. iii. 4). 2. SHEPHATIAH, one of the nobles who urged Zedekiah to put Jeremiah (o death (Jer. xxxviii. 1). 3. SHEPHATIAH, one of the heads of families who settled in Jerusalem after the exile (Neb. xi. 6). 4. SHEPHATIAH, the head of one of the families, numbering three hundred and seventy- two persons, of the returned exiles (Ezra ii. 4,57). The same name, with a slight variation in the original (irPtOQB>), but not in the Authorized Version, occurs in the following: 5. SHEPHATIAH, a sou of king Jehosha- phat (2 Chron. xxi. '2). 6. SHEPHATIAH, one of the chief of those valiant men who went to David when at Ziklag (1 Chron. xii. 5). 7. SHEPHATIAH, the governor of the tribe of Simeon in the time of David (1 Chron. xxvii. 16). SHEPHERD. [Pasturage.] SHESH (B>B>), also SHESHI, translated fine linen in the Authorized Version, occurs twenty- eight times in Exodus, once in Genesis, once in Proverbs, and fliree times in Ezekiel. Con- siderable doubts have, however, always been en- tertained respecting the true meaning of the word; some have thought it signified fine wool, others silk; the Arabs have translated it by words referring to colours in the passages of Ezekiel and of Proverbs. Sume of the Rabbins state that it is the same word as that which denotes the number six, and that it refers to the number of threads of which the yarn was composed. Thus Abarbanel on Gen. xxv. says : 'Schesch est linum jEgypti- acum, quod est pretiosissinmin inter species I mi. Quum vem tortum est sex (ilis in unum, vocatui schesch, aut schesch moschsar. Sin ex unico Rio tantum, dicitur bad' (Cels. Hicrobot. ii. p. 260V. This interpretation, however, lias satisfied but few. The Greek Alexandrian translators use'l the word flvacros, which by some lias been sup- posed to indicate • cotton,' anil by others ' linen.' 752 SHESH. SHESH. In the article Byssus we have seen that the word bad, translated linen, occurs in various passages of the Old Testament, but that the word butz, translated fine linen and white linen, is employed only at a later period. Under the word Karpas, used in Esth. i. 6, we have shown the probability of its being derived from the Sanscrit karpasum, and that it signifies 'cotton.' We have there stated our opinion that cotton was • known to the Hebrews when in Persia, and that butz, which is not used before the time when the book of Chronicles was written, probably also sig- nifies cotton. Ethun, as well as bdoviov, appears to have been applied either to linen or cotton cloth. Bad we conceive may mean linen only. Pishtah, flax, we know was one of the great productions of Egypt. Shesh, however, must now be taken into con- sideration. In the several passages where we find the word used, we do not obtain any in- formation respecting the plant ; but it is clear it . was spun by women (Exod. xxx. 25), was used as an article of clothing, also for hangings, and even for the sails of ships, as in Ezekiel xxvii. 7, 'Fine linen (shesli) with broidered work from Egypt was that which thou spreadest forth to be thy sail.' It is evident from these facts, that it must have been a plant known as cultivated in Egypt at the earliest, period, and which, or its fibre, the Israelites were able to obtain even when in the desert. As cotton does not appear to have been known at this very early period, we must seek for shesh among the other fibre-yielding plants, such as flax and hemp. Both these are suited to the purpose, and were procurable in those countries at the times specified. Lexicographers do not give us much assistance in determining the point, from the little certainly in their in- ferences. The word shesh, however, appears to us to have a very great resemblance, with the exception of the aspirate, to the Arabic name of a plant, which, it is curious, was also one of those earliest cultivated for its fibre, namely, hemp. Of this plant, one of the Arabic names is i/jju^s*. husheesh, or the herb par excellence, the term being sometimes applied to the powdered leaves only, with which an intoxicating electuary is prepared. This name has long been known, and is thought by some to have given origin to our word assassin or hassasin. Makrizi treats of the hemp in his account of the ancient pleasure- grounds in the vicinity of Cairo, ' famous above all for the sale of the hasheesha, which is still greedily consumed by the dregs of the people, and from the consumption of which sprung the excesses, which led to the name of " assassin" being given to the Saracens in the holy wars.' Hemp is a plant which in the present day is extensively distributed, being cultivated in Eu- rope, and extending through Persia to the southern- most parts of India. In the plains of that country it is cultivated on account of its in- toxicating product, so well known as bang ; in the Himalayas both on this account and for its yielding the ligneous fibre which is used for sack and rope-making. Its European names are no doubt derived from the Arabic kinnab, which is supposed to be connected with the Sanscrit shanapee. There is no doubt, therefore, that it might easily have been cultivated in Egypt Herodotus mentions it as being employed by the Thracians for making garments. 'These were so like linen that none but a very experienced person could tell whether they were of hemp or flax ; one who had never seen hemp would cer- tainly suppose them to be linen."' Hemp is used in the present day for smock frocks and tunics ; and Russia sheeting and Russia duck are well known. Cannabis is mentioned in the works of Hippocrates on account of its medical properties. Dioscorides describes it as being employed for making ropes, and it was a good deal cultivated by the Greeks for this purpose. Though we are unable at present to prove that it was cultivated in Egypt at an early period, and used for making garments, yet, there is nothing improbable in its having been so.- Indeed as it was known to va- rious Asiatic nations, it could hardly have been unknown to the Egyptians, and the similarity of the word husheesh to the Arabic shesh would lead to a belief that they were acquainted with it, especially as in a language like the Hebrew it is more probable that different names" were applied to totalty different things, than that the same thing had two or three different names. Hemp might thus have been used at an early period, along with flax and wool, for making cloth for garments and for hangings, and would be much valued until cotton and the finer kinds of linen came to be known. Fi.ax and Linen. Reference has been made to this article from Byssus and from Pishtah, for an account of flax and the cloth made from it. So many words are translated linen in the Au- thorized Version of the Scriptures, lhat it has been considered doubtful whether they indicate only different qualities of the same thing, or totally different substances. The latter has by some been thought the most probable, on account of the poverty of the Hebrew language; hence, in- stead of considering the one a, synonym of the other, we have been led to enquire, as above, whether shesh may not signify cloth made oihemp> instead of flax. This would leave bad andpishtah as the only words peculiarly appropriated to linen and flax. The passages in which bad occurs have already been indicated [Byssus]. On referring to them we find that it is used only when articles of clothing are alluded to. It is curious, and probably not accidental, that the Sanscrit word pat signifies cloth made from flax-like substances. It has been remarked that the official garments of the Hebrews, like those of the Egyptians, were all made of linen ; and we find in the several passages where bad occurs, that linen garments and clothes, linen breeches, linen girdle, linen ephod, linen mitre, are intended ; so in Exod. xxxix. 28, and they made for Aaron and his sons ' a mitre of fine linen, and goodly bonnets of fine linen, and linen breeches of fine twined linen.' In the article Cotton we have seen that, the mummy cloths are comrjosed very generally, if not universally, of linen cloth. Pishtah (HjI^Q) no doubt refers to the flax plant, if we may judge from the context of the passages in which it occurs. Thus, in Exod. ix. 31, in the plague of the hail storm, it is related, ' And the flax (pishtah) and the barley was smitten : for the barley was in the ear, and the flax was boiled,' or in blossom, according to SfiESHACH. •Gesenius. As the departure of the Israelites took place in the spring, this passage has reference no doubt to the practice adopted in Egypt, as well as in India, of sowing these grains partly in the months of September and October, and partly in spring, so that the wheat might easily be in blade at the same time that the barley and flax were more advanced. From the numerous references SHEW -BREAD. 753 496. [Flax. to flax and linen, there is no doubt that the plant was extensively cultivated, not only in Egypt, out also in Palestine. As to Egypt we have proof in the mummy cloth being made of linen, and also in the representations of the flax cultivation in the paintings of the Grotto of El Kab, which repre- sent the whole process with the utmost clearness ; and numerous testimonies might be adduced from ancient authors, of the esteem in which the linen of Egypt was held. Flax continues to be extensively cultivated in (he present day. That it was also much cultivated in Palestine, and well known to the Hebrews, we have proofs in the number of times it is mentioned; as in Josh. xi. 6, where Rahab is described as concealing the two He- brew spies with the stalks of flax which she had laid in order upon the roof. In several pas- sages, as Lev. xiii. 47, 48, 52, 59 ; Deut. xxii. 11; .Ter. xcii. 1; Ezek. xl. 3; xliv. 17, 18, we find it mentioned as forming different ar- ticles of clothing, as girdles, cords, and bauds. In Prov. xxxi. 13, the careful housewife * seeketh wool and flax, and worketh it willingly with her hands.' The words of Isaiah (xlii. 3), ' A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking (lax shall he not quench.' are evidently referred to in Matt. xii. 20, where Kivov is used as the name of Sax, and aa (ne equivalent of pishtah. But there can be no doubt of this word being correctly understood, as it. has been well investigated by several authors. (Gels. Hkrobot. ii. p. 283 ; Yates. Tcxtr 'mum Ant /quorum, p. 253.) — J. F. R. SHESHACH (?pW), a name twice given by Jeremiah to Babylon (Jer. xxv. 26 ; li. 41). Its etymology and proper signification are doubt- ful. The Jewish interpreters, followed by Je- VOL. If, rome, suppose "]&& Sheshach to stand for ?32 Babel, according to the secret or cabbalistic mode of writing called athbash, in which the alphabet- is inverted, so that T\, the last letter, is put for X the first, ty the penultimate letter for 3 the se cond, and so on ; and this they suppose was done by the prophet for fear of the Chaldseans. Bu ■ Gesenius very properly asks, even supposing these cabbalistic mysteries of trifling had been already current in the time of Jeremiah, which cannot by any means be admitted, how comes it to pass that Babylon is in the very same verse mentioned under its own proper name ? C. B. Michaelis ingeniously conjectures that "]dy comes from "]^3E^ shiksJuwh, *tO overlay with iron or other plates,' so that it might designate Babylon as xaA«:^7ri/Aos. Von Bohlen thinks the word synonymous with the Persian IShih-S/iah, i.e. 'house of the prince;' but it is doubtful whether, at so early a period as the age of Jere- miah, Babylon could have received a Persian name that would be known in Judsea. SHESHAN (\W> liJy > SeVL 2«, and but very few ilb& : which Hengstenberg deems of no consequence, as the omission of the yod was merely a defective way of writing, whijh 3o2 755 SHILOH often occurs in words of similar structure. An argument for this interpretation has indeed been derived from Ezek. xxi. 27, where the words, ' until he shall come, whose is the domi- nion, IDS^Qn 1? "IB'K,' are regarded as an ob- vious paraphrase of 1?S? or H?£\ But to this it may be answered, that while Ezekiel may have had the present passage in his eye, and intended an alluskm to (he character or prerogatives of the Messiah, }'et there is no evidence that this was designed as an interpretation of the name under consideration. The reasons, therefore, appear ample for setting aside,, as wholly untenable, the explication of the time here propounded, without adverting to the fact, that the ellipsis involved in this construction is so unnatural and violent, that no parallel to it can be found in the whole Scriptures. Another solution proposed by some expositors is, to derive the word n?^ from p^, child, and the suffix H for 1. This will yield the reading, ' until his (Judah's) son or descendant, the Mes- siah, shall come.1 Thus the Targ. Jon., ' Until the time when the king's Messiah shall come, the little one of his sons? This view is favoured by Calvin (in loc.) and by Knapp (Dogtn. ii. p. 138j, and also by Dathe. But as this re- solves n"?*K> into a synonym with Hv^, after- birth (Deut. xxviii. 57), rendered ' young one,' it requires us to adopt the unnatural supposition, that the term properly denoting the secundi?ies, or the membrane that encloses the fcstus, is taken for the fcetus itself. Besides, this exposition has an air of grossness about it which prompts its in- voluntary rejection. The second class consists of those who con- sider rp'JS' as a radical or simple derivative. Of these we may remark, that it is principally among the Jews that the opinion of Aben Ezra finds currency, who makes Tw^V? here to be the name of the place (Shiloh) where the tabernacle was first fixed after the conquest of Canaan. The sense of the oracle, according to this construction, will be, that Judah was to be the leader of the tribes during the whole journey to Canaan, until they came to Shiloh. Subsequent to this event, in consequence of the distribution of the tribes according to the boundaries assigned them, it was to lose its pre-eminence. But there is no mention made of Shiloh elsewhere in the Penta- teuch, and no probability that any such place existed in the time of Jacob. It is, moreover, scarcely conceivable that such a splendid train of prediction should be interrupted by an allu- sion to such an inconsiderable locality. It is so utterly out of keeping with the general tone of the prophecy, that it is surprising that any mind not infatuated by Rabbinic trivialities, should en- tertain the theory for a moment. Yet TelTer, Mendelsohn, Eichhorn, Ammon, Rosenmuller (in first edition), Kelle, and others have enrolled themselves in favour of this crude conceit. But an exposition of far more weight, both from its intrinsic fitness, and from the catalogue of distinguished names which have espoused it, is that which traces the term to the root Tvfl9 quievit, to rest, to be at peace, and makes it equivalent to Pacificator, Tranquillizer, or Great SHILOH, Author of Peace. This is a sense accordant with the anticipated and realized character of the Messiah, one of whose crowning denomina- tions is ' Prince of Peace.' Still it is an objec- tion to this sense of the term, that it is not suffi- ciently sustained by the analogy of forms. The idea convej'ed by the proposed interpretation, is that of causing or effecting peace ; an idea for which the Hebrew has an appropriate form of expression, and which, in this word, would nor- mally be riv^D mashliah. The actual form, however, is wholly diverse from this, and though several examples are adduced by the advocates of this interpretation, of analogous derivations from a tri-literal root, as "il'TO from "113, TIE^O from lEO, Tl^P from IDp, &c, yet it is certain that the original characteristic of this form is a passive instead of an active sense, which Tx?^ obviously requires according to the exegesis proposed. In these circumstances we venture to suggest another origin for the term. In our view the legitimate derivation is from T'fcSti', to ask, see/c? require, so that its true import is the desired, the longed for one. The appropriate participial form for this is ?1NK>, or its equivalent T^Xt^, in which the passive sense is predominant. In words of this class the weak guttural & not only remits its vowel to the preceding letter, but falls out in the writing, as *S for *XS, rb'& for T\biV&, nnn for jmn, yy\ for m&n, nnt? for mXE*. We obtain by this process hw for ^> W, or pIKi^, the asked, the desired, which leaves the passive import unimpaired. We have then to> account for the supplementary letters ill oh (n?',^=ni?',^>). It would perhaps be reason- able to expect that the form ;)H, and that his rest should be glorious.' The reader who SHILOH. •would pursue the iuquiry into this subject, may- consult with advantage Jacobi, Alting Schilo, iii. 8 ; Hengstenberg, Christol. ch. ii. 1 a, p. 41, Keith's Transl.— G. B. 2. SHILOH, a city in the tribe of Ephraim, situated among the hills to tlie north of Bethel, eastward of the great northern road, where the tabernacle and ark remained for a long time, from the days of Joshua, during the ministry of all the judges, down to the end of Eli's life (Josh, xviii. I ; 1 Sam. iv. 3). To this circum- stance Sliiloh owed all its importance; for after the loss of the ark — which never returned thi- ther after it had been restored to Israel by the Philistines — it sunk into insignificance. It was, indeed, the residence of Ahijah the prophet (1 Kings xi. 29 ; xii. 15 ; xiv. 2), but it is more than once mentioned as accursed and forsaken (Ps. lxxviii. 60; Jer. vii. 12, 14; xxvi. fi). The last mention of it in Scripture is in Jer. xlL 5, which only shows that it survived the exile. Dr. Robin- son identifies it with a place named Seilun, a city surrounded by hills, with an opening by a narrow valley into a plain on the south. The ruins con- sist chiefly of an old tower with walls four feet thick, and of large stones and fragments of co- lumns indicative of an ancient site (see Robin- son's Palestine, iii. 85-S9). SHIMEI 01?P&?, renowned; Sept. Se/tef), a member of the family of Saul, residing at Bahu- rim, who grievously insulted king David when he fled from Absalom (2 Sam. xvi. 5-13). The king not only saved him from the immediate resentment of his followers, but on his triumphant return by the same road after the overthrow of his rebellious son, he bestowed on Shimei the pardon SHIP. 757 which he implored (2 Sam. xix. 16). It seems, however, that it was policy which chiefly dictated this course, for it was by the advice of David himself (1 Kings ii. 8, 9) that Solomon, after his father's death, made Shimei a prisoner at large in Jerusalem (1 Kings ii. 36, 37). Three years after he broke his parole by leaving Jerusalem in pursuit of some runaway slaves, and was, on his return, put to death by order of the king (1 Kings ii. 39-46). SHINAR OVy? ; Sept. ^evvadp), the proper name of Babylonia, particularly of the country around Babylon (Gen. x. 10 ; xiv. 1 ; Isa. xi. 11; Dan. i. 2; Zech. v. 11); see Babylonia. SHIP. In lew things is there greater danger of modern associations misleading the reader of the Scriptures than in regard to the subject of the present article. To an Englishman a ship calls up the idea of ' the wooden walls of old England,' which have so long withstood the ' battle and the breeze,1 and done so much to spread the fame and the influence of the British nation throughout the world. But both the ships and the navigation of the ancients, even of the most maritime states, were as dissimilar as things of the same kind can well be to the realities which the terms now represent. Navigation confined itself to coast- ing, or if necessity, foul weather, or chance drove a vessel from the land, a regard to safety urged the commander to a speedy return, for he had no guide but such as the stars might afford under skies with which he was but imperfectly acquainted. And ships, whether designed for commercial or warlike purposes, were small in size and frail in structure, if our immense piles of oak and iron be taken as the objects of comparison. 498. [Ancient Ship of the largest kind.] The Jews cannot be said to have been a sea- faring people ; yet their position on the map of the world is such as to lead us to feel that they could not have been ignorant of ships and the business which relates thereunto. Phoenicia, the north-western part of Palestine, was unquestion- ably among, if not at the head of, the earliest cultivators of maritime affairs. Then the Holy Land itself lay with one side coasting a sea which was anciently the great highway of navigation, and the centre of social and commercial enter- prise. Within its own borders it had a navi- gable lake. The Nile, with which river the fathers of the nation had become acquainted in their bondage, was another great thoroughfare for ships. And. the Red Sea itself, which con- ducted towards the remote east, was at no great distance even from the capital of the land. Then at different, points in its long line of sea- coast there were harbours of no mean repute. Let the reader call to mind Tyre and Si don in Phoenicia, and Acre (Acco) and Jaffa (Jdppa) in Palestine. Yet the decidedly agricultural bear- ing of the Israeli tish constitution checked such a development of power, activity, and wealth, as these favourable opportunities might have called forth on behalf of seafaring pursuits. There can, however, be no doubt that the arts of ship-building and of navigation cai Greece and Italy from the East, and immediately from the Levant; whence we may justifiably infer that these arts, so far as they were culti- 758 SHIP. vatedin Palestine, were there in a higher state of i erfection at an early period, at least, than in the more western parts of the world (Ezek. xxvii. ; Strabo, lib. xvi. ; Comenz, De Nave Tyrid). In the early periods of their history the Israelites themselves would partake to a small extent of this skill and of its advantages, since it was only by degrees that they gained possession of the entire land, and for a long time were obliged to give up the sovereignty of very much of their seaboard to the Philistines and other hostile tribes. The earliest history of Palestinian ships lies in impene- trable darkness, so far as individual facts are concerned. In Gen. xlix. 13 there is, however, a prophecy, the fulfilment of which would con- nect the Israelites with shipping at an early period : ' Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of the sea, and he shall be for a haven of ships, and his border shall be unto Zidon' (compare Deut. xxxiii. 19 ; Josh. xix. 10, sq.) : words which seem more fitly to describe the position of Asher in the actual division of the land. These local advantages, however, could have been only par- tially improved, since we find Hiram, King of Tyre, acting as carrier by sea for Solomon, en- gaging to convey in floats to Joppa the timber cut in Lebanon for the temple, and leaving to the Hebrew prince the duty of transporting the wood from the coast to Jerusalem. And when, after having conquered Elalh and Eaion-geber on the further arm of the Red Sea, Solomon pro- ceeded to convert them into naval stations for his own purposes, he was still, whatever he did himself, indebted to Hiram for ' shipmen that had knowledge of the sea' (1 Kings ix. 26 ; x. 22). The effort, however, to form and keep a navy in connection with the East was not lastingly suc- cessful ; it Suon began to decline, and Jehoshaphat failed when at a later day he tried to give new life and energy to the enterprise (I Kings xxii. 49, 50). In the time of the Maccabees Joppa was a Jewish seapoit(l Mace. xiv. 5). Herod the Great availed himself of the opportunities naturally af- forded to form a more capacious port at Cassarea (Joseph. De Bell. Jud., iii. 9. 3). Nevertheless no purely Jewish trade by sea was hence even now called into being. Csesarea was the place whence Paul embarked in order to proceed as a prisoner to Rome (Acts xxvii. 2). His voyage on that occasion, as described most graphically in the Acts of the Apostles (ch. xxvii., xxviii.), if it requires some knowledge of ancient maritime affairs in order to be rightly understood, affords also rich and valuable materials towards a his- tory of the subject, and might, we feel convinced, be so treated as of itself to supply many irre- sistible evidences of the certainty of the events therein recorded, and, by warrantable inferences, of the credibility of the evangelical history in general. No one but an eye-witness could have written the minute, exact, true, and graphic ac- count, which these two chapters give. The reader of the New Testament is well aware how frequently he finds himself with the Saviour on the romantic shores of the sea of Gennesareth. There Jesus is seen, now addressing the people from on board a vessel, irKdlov (Matt, xiii. 2 ; Luke v. 3) ; now sailing up and down the lake (Matt. viii. 23 ; ix. 1 ; xiv. 13 ; John vi. 17). Some of his earliest disciples were pro- SHIP. prietors of barks which sailed on this inland' saz (Matt. iv. 21 : John xxi. 3 ; Luke v. 3). These ' ships' were indeed small. Josephus designates the ships here employed by the term oK.acpt}r They were not, however, mere boats. They carried their anchor with them (De Bell. Jud^ iii. 10. \;Vit. xxxiii.). There was too a kind of vessel larger than this, called c^eSia by Jose- phus, who narrates a sea-fight which took place- on the lake, conducted on the part of the Romans by Vespasian himself (De Bell. Jud.? iii. 10. 9). It thus appears that the lake was not contemptible, nor its vessels mean ; and those should hence learn to qualify their language who represent the Galilean fishermen as of the poorest class. 499. [Ancient Light-vessel, Pompeii.] The vessels connected with Biblical history were for the most part ships of bnrden, almost in- deed exclusively so, at least within the period of known historical facts, though in a remote an- tiquity the Phoenician states can hardly fail to have supported a navy for warlike, as it is known they did for predatory, purposes. This peculi- arity, however, of the Biblical ships exonerates the writer from entering into the general subject of the construction of ancient ships and their seve- ral sub-divisions. A good general summary on that head may be found in Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, p. 875, sq. A. few details respecting chiefly ships of burden may be of service to the Scriptural student. In a ship of this kind was Paul conveyed to Italy. They (naves onerariae) were, for the purposes to which they were destined, rounder and deeper than ships of war, and sometimes of great capa- city. In consequence of their bulk, and when laden, of their weight, they were impelled by sails rather than by oars. On the prow stood the insignia from which the ship was named, and by which it was known. These in Acts (xxviii. 11) are called ■Kapd.o~rifj.oj', 'sign,' which it appears consisted in this case of figures of Castor and Pol- lux— lucida sidera — brilliant constellations, aus- picious to navigators (Horat. Od., i. 3 ; Liv. xxxvii. 92; Tac. Ann. vi. 34; Ovid, Fast. i. 10. 1). Each ship was provided with a boat, intended in the case of peril to facilitate escape, cTKa.(pri (Acts xxvii. 16 ; xxx. 32 ; Cic. De Invent. ii. 51) ; and several anchors (Acts xxvii. 29, 40 ; Cses. Civ. i. 25) ; also a plumb line for sounding (Acts xxvii. 28 ; Isidor. Orig. xix. 4). Among the sails one bore the name of dprefioiu, trans- lated in Acts xxvii. 40, by ' mainsail j' but pofl~ SHIP. SHITTAH. 759 Bibly the word may rather mean what is now termed the ' topsail' (Schol. ad Juven. xii. 68). 500. [Ancient Anchors.] In great danger it was customary to gird the vessel with cables, in order to prevent her from falling to pieces under the force of wind and sea (Acts xxvii. 17: Polyb. xxvii. 3. 3 ; Athen. v. 201; Hor. Od. i. 14. 6). The various expedients that were employed in order to prevent shipwreck are described to the eye in the ]>assage in the Acts. First, the vessel was lightened by throwing overboard all lumber, luggage, and everything that could be snared. The term employed by Luke is a-tceuy (xxvii. 19), one of a very wide signification, which the words we have just employed do not, we think, more than equal. If the peril grew more imminent, the freight was sacrificed (xxvii. 3^). When hope or endur- ance had come to a period, recourse was bad to the boat, or efforts were made to reach the shore on spars or rafts (xxvii. 38, 44). The captain was denominated vavK\ripos (xxvii. 11), steers- man, though he was a different person from him who had the actual charge of the helm, who bore the name of Kv^epnjrrjs, which is the roof 501. [Modern Levantine Ship.] of our word ' governor' (Lat. gubernator, helms- man). The dangers of the ocean to sailors on board such ships as these were, and in the then ignorance of navigation, caused sailing to be restricted to the months of spring, summer, and autumn ; winter was avoided. To the Romans the sea was opened in March and closed in November (Ca?s. Bell. Gall. iv. 36 ; v. 23 ; Philo, Opp. iv. 548 ; Acts xxvii. 9); and ships which towards the end of the year were still at sea earnestly sought a har» bour in which to pass the winter (Acts xxvii. 12). Schlozer, Vers, einer Allg. Geschichte d. Handels u. d. Schiffart in den alt. Zeiten, Rostock, .1760 ; La Marine des Anciens Peuples, par le Roy, Paris, 1777 ; Berghaus, Gesch. d. Schiffartskunde, 1792; Benedict, Vers. e. Gesch. d. Schiff. u. d. Handels bet den Alten, IS 09; Howell, On the War Galleys of the Ancients ; A. Jal, Archeologie Navale, Paris, 1840; Bbckh, Urkunden uber das Seewesen des Attischen Staales.—J. R. B. SHISHAK (pp)& ; Sept. Sovowcf/t), a king of Egypt contemporary with Jeroboam, to whom he gave an asylum when he fled from Solomon (1 Kings xi. 40). This was indicative of his politic disposition to encourage the weakening of the neighbouring kingdom, the growth of which under David and Solomon was probably regarded by the kings of Egypt with some alarm. After Jeroboam had become king of Israel, and probably at his suggestion, Shishak invaded the kingdom of Judah, B.C. 971, at the head of an immense army ; and after having taken the fortified places, ad- vanced against Jerusalem. Satisfied with the submission of Rehoboam, and with the immense .spoils of the Temple, the king of Egypt withdrew without imposing any onerous conditions upon the humbled grandson of David (1 Kings xiv. 25, 26 ; 2 Cliron. xii. 2-9). Shishak has been identified as the first king of the 22nd or Dios- politan dynasty, the Sesonchis of profane history. His name has been found on the Egyptian monu- ments. He is said to have been of Ethiopian origin, and it is supposed that, with the support of the military caste, he dethroned the Pharaoh who gave his daughter to Solomon (1 Kings iii. 1). In the palace-temple of Karnak there still exists a large bas-relief representing Sesonchis, who bears to the feet of three great Theban gods the chiefs of vanquished nations. To each figure is attached an oval, indicating the town or district which he represents. One of the figures, with a pointed beard and a physiognomy which some decide to be Jewish, bears on his oval characters which M. Champollion interprets Yooda. Mei.chi, or 'kingdom of Judah,1 a name whose component letters agree with the hieroglyphics, though Sir J. G. "Wilkinson and others think that the place it holds is not sufficiently marked to satisfy the scruples of a rigid sceptic. It is well to observe that this figure has not, as some have hastily conceived, been alleged to represent the king, but to personify the kingdom of Judah (Champollion, Syst&me Hieroglyph, p. 205; Resell ini, Montunenti Sto- rici, i. 85 ; Wilkinson, Ana. Egypt, i. 37 ; Cory, Chronological Inquiry, p. 5). SHITTAH (Ht^) and SHITTIM (UUV) occur in several passages of Exodus, and indi- cate the kind of wood which was employed in making various parts of the tabernacle while the Israelites were wandering in the wilderness. It 760 SHITTAH. "SHOHAM. is mentioned also as forming part of the offerings, as in Exod. xxv. 5, 'rams' skins dyed red. and badgers' skins, and shittim wood ;' and in xxxv. 7, 24. In Isa. xli. 19, it is mentioned as a tree worthy of planting, ' I will plant in the wil- derness the cedar, the shittah tree, and the myrtle, and the oil tree,' &c. But considerable doubts have been entertained respecting the kind of wood or tree intended ; hence the great diversity of ren- dering, some translators retaining the original word. It is evident that the wood must either have been brought to the coast of the Red Sea from Egypt or some other country, or it must have been one of the few timber trees indigenous in the desert where the Israelites wandered. It is curious that a wood has for many ages formed an article of commerce from India to the Red Sea, and that its name, sheeshum or seesam, is very similar in sound to the shittim of Scripture. This wood we have already mentioned in the article Hobnim, and identified it with the shee- shum of Forskal, considering it as probably the same as the sesamina of the Peri-plus of Arrian. This would seem to afford some grounds for the opinion held by some authors, that the shittah of Scripture was some valuable foreign wood. 502. [Acacia Seyal.} But there does not appear any proof that shit- tim, was an imported wood, and it is more probable that it was the wood of a tree of the desert. Ro- senmiiller (after Celsius, ii. p. 499) says : 'the Hebrew name, which is properly shintah, was formed from the Egyptian word shant, the double t being substituted for the nt, for the sake of sound and an easier pronunciation.' The Arabs also call it J^j kart or karate, written also kharad. The Arabs pronounce the Egyptian name sont. This is a tree of the genus Acacia, found both in Egypt and in the deserts of Arabia. Thus Pros- per Alpinus (De Plantis JEgypti, p. 6): 'Aca- cia, quam sant iEgyptii appellant, in jEgypti locis a mari remotis nascitur : hujusque arbores copiosissimas in montibus Synai, pene rubrum marepositis proveniunt.' Celsius, moreover, quotes Eugene Roger (T, S. p. 17) as stating, ' Le Se- thim rie se trouve que dans l'Arabie deserte, et croist proche de la terre des Madianites, pea eloigned du mont Sinai, en un lieu qu'on appelle Sethim ou Sethe, soit que l'arbre tire son nom du lieu, ou que l'arbre donne le nom au lieu mesme de sa naissance. Son bois est leger, de tres bonne odeur, et incorruptible aussi bien que le bois de cedre, c'est du bois de sethim que fut fabrique'e l'arche d'alliance.' ' The acacia tree,' says Dr. Shaw, ' being by much the largest and most common tree in these deserts (Arabia Petrsea), we have some reason to conjecture that the shittim wood was the wood of the acacia, especially as its flowers are of an excellent smell, for the shit- tah tree is, in Isa. xli. 19, joined with the myrtle and other fragrant shrubs.' Mr. Bruce, again, as quoted by. Dr. Harris, remarks, that ' the acacia seems the only indigenous tree in the Thebaid. The male is called the Said ; from it proceeds the gum-arabic on incision with an axe. This gum chiefly comes from Arabia Perraea, where these trees are most numerous.' Mr. Kitto says : The required species is found in either the Acacia gummifera, or in the A. Seyel, or rather in both. They both grow abundantly in the valleys of that region in which the Israelites wandered for forty years, and both supply pro- ducts which must have rendered them of much value to the Israelites. We think the probability is, that the A. Seyel supplied the shittim wood, if, indeed, the name did not denote acacia wood in general. This tree grows from fifteen to twenty feet in height.' So M. Bove : ' Le lendemain, en traversant le Voode (Wady) Schen, je vis un grand nombre d' Acacia Seyel; cet arbre s'eleve a la hauteur de vingt a vingt-cinq pieds. Les Arabes font avec son bois du charbon qu'ils vont vendre a Suez.' Robinson and Smith fre- quently mention the Seyel as occurring in the same situations. It is very probable therefore that it yielded the shittim wood of Scripture. — J. F. R. SHITTIM, a spot in the plain of Moab, east of the Dead Sea, where the Israelites formed their last encampment before passing the Jordan (Num. xxv. 1 ; comp. Micah vi. 5). See Wandering. SHITTIM, VALLEY OF, mentioned in Joel iii. 18. It must certainly have been west of the Jordan, and probably in the neighbourhood of Je- rusalem, although the particular vale cannot now be distinguished. The name is probably to be regarded as an appellative — ' acacia vale •' denot- ing, perhaps, as that tree delights in a dry soil, an arid, unfruitful vale. SHOE. [Sandal.] SHOHAM (DnC), a precious stone mentioned in Gen. ii. 12; Exod. xxviii. 9; xxxv. 9-27; Job xxviii. 16; Ezek. xxviii. 13. That it is really unknown is evinced by the variety of opinions which have been hazarded concerning it. In the two last texts the Sept. makes it the beryl (firjpvWiov), and is followed by the Vul- gate. Josephus also gives it the same name (An- tiq. iii. 7. 5). This is a great weight of authority; and whether the beryl be the shoham or not, it is a Scriptural stone by virtue of the mention of it in Rev. xxi. 20. There is no doubt that, the stone which we call beryl is the substance to which the ancients gave the same name. It is of a pale sea- green colour, inclining sometimes to water blue, and sometimes to yellow. In its crystallized •» SHUAL. SHUAL. 761 form it exhibits sexagonal columns striped lon- gitudinally. The shoham furnished the shoulder- pieces in the breastplate of the high-priest, on each of which six names were engraven, and for this purpose the stalky beryl, consisting of long, stout, hexagonal pieces, was peculiarly suited. Beryls are found, but not often, in collections of ancient gems. In Gen. ii. 12, the shoham is named as the product of Havilah ; in Job xxviii. 16, it is mentioned as a stone of great value, being classed with the sapphire and the gold of Opliir; in Ezek. xxviii. 13, it appears as a valuable article of commerce. In Gen. ii. 12, the Sept. renders the word, which it elsewhere gives as the beryl, by \t6os 6 ■Kp&ffivas, or the ' chrysoprasus,' according to its etymology 'leek-green stone;' but as the an- cients did not nicely distinguish between stones of similar quality and colour, it isprubable that the beryl is still intended by the translator in this text. The chrysoprasus (xpvcrdnrpacros) is, how- ever, a Scriptural stone, being named in Rev. xxi. 20. It is, as the name imports, of a greenish golden colour, like a leek ; i. e. usually apple- green, passing into a grassrgreen (Plin. Hist. Nat. xxvii. 20, 21). Luther, relying upon the authority of some ancient versions, makes the shoham, to have been the onyx, an interpretation which Braun, Mi- chaelis, Eichhorn, and others support on etymolo- gical grounds. This indeed is the stone usually given for the Shoham in Hebrew lexicons, and is the one which the Authorized Version has also adopted. SHUAL. ?1MK> shual, and W aye or ije, jackal (?), are both somewhat arbitrarily inter- preted by the word ' fox ;' although that denomi- nation is not uniformly employed in different texts (Judg. xv. 4; Neh. iv. 3; xi. .27; Ps. lxiii. 10 ; Cant. ii. 15 ; Lam. v. 18 ; Ezek. xiii. 4). Fox is thus applied to two ; or more species, though only strictly applicable in a systematic view to Taaleb, which is the Arabic name of a wild canine, probably the Syrian fox, Vulpes Thaleb or Taaleb of modern zoologists, and the only genuine species indigenous in Palestine. Fox is again the translation of aAco7T7j£, in Matt, viii. 20 ; Luke ix. 5-8 ; xiii. 32 : but here also the word in the original texts may apply generically to several species rather than to one 503. [Syri;in Fox.] only. There is in the language of the ancients a vague and often an indiscriminating use of zoological names; while among the moderns the contrary tendency exists, it being often attempted to apply specifically those ancient terms which in their original acceptation were more or less generic ; anil mere scholars, not familiar with the principles which guide the reasoning of systematists, often disregard their conclusions, and follow the still more fallacious inferences drawn from arbitrary etymologies and the fancied authority of similarity of names in kindred lan- guages. Yet every modern tongue of the west, notwithstanding the greater attention that is paid to a more definite terminology, abounds in similar transferences of the same radical names from one species to another, and often to genera totally distinct. These remarks apply forcibly in the present case ; for, of vulpine animals, though the taaleb alone is considered indigenous, there is the so-called Turkish fox (Cynalopex Turcicus) of Asia Minor, not unknown to the south as far as the Oronfes, and therefore likely to be an occa- sional visitant at least of the woods of Libanus. This animal is one of an osculant group, with the general characters of vulpes, but having the pu- pils of the eyes less contractile in a vertical direc- tion, and a gland on the base of the tail, marked by a dark spot. There, is besides, one of a third group, namely, Thous anthus, or deeb of the Arabs, occasionally held to be the wolf of Scrip- ture, because it resembles the species in general appearance, though so far inferior in weight, size, and powers, as not to be in the least dangerous, or likely to be the wolf of the Bible. The two first do not howl, and the third is solitary and howls seldom ; but there is a fourth {Canis Syri- acus, Ehrenb.) which howls, is lower and smaller than a fox, has a long ill-furnished tail, small ears, and a rufous-grey livery. This may be the Ca- nis aureus, or jackal of Palestine, though cer- tainly not the xpvffeos of JElian. The German naturalists seem not to have considered it identi- cal with the common jackal (Sacalhts aureus), which is sufficiently common along the coast, is eminently gregarious, offensive in smell ; howls intolerably in complete concert with all others within hearing ; burrows ; is crepuscular and noc- turnal, impudent, thievish ; penetrates into out- houses ; ravages poultry-yards more ruinously than the fox ; feeds on game, lizards, locusts, insects, garbage, grapes ; and leaves not even the graves of man himself undisturbed. It may ultimately turn out that Canis Syriacus is not a jackal, but a chryseus, or wild dog, belonging to the group of Dholes, well known in India, and, though closely allied to, distinct from, the jackal. But whether the last-mentioned is the ''N and D^N, is a ques- tion which Bochart does not solve by making thoes synonymous with ^ii awi, and beni-awi, since that denomination is only a slight mutation of U'aica, the name applied to wild dogs in India, China, and evpn in South America, being an imitation of barking; while thoes, tlios, the Phrygian dans, Greek 6ws, are of the same radi- cal origin as our dog, and Teutonic doche, dor/tie; and in Semitic tongues appears in the forms of tokla, tullce, tilki, applied to species not Of the same genus. Russell heard of four species of Can id as at Aleppo, Emprich and Ehrenberg of four in Liba- nus, not identical with each other; nor are any of these clearly included in the thirteen species which the last-named writers recognise in Egypt. '! hey still omit, or aie not cognizant of. wild dogs, already mentioned in this work [Dods], and like- wise other wild species in Arabia and Persia; all, including foxes, having migratory habits, aud •#■ 762 SHUAL, SHUMIM. therefore not unlikely to visit Palestine. Some of these may have accompanied the movements of the gve.it invasions of antiquity, or the caravans, and become acclimated : and, again, may have departed, or have been gradually extinguished by local circumstances, such as the destruction of the forests or of the inhabitants, and the conse- quent reduction of the means of subsistence ; or finally, they may have been extirpated since the introduction of gunpowder. We have therefore no proof that shual denotes exclusively the fox, and that axje or ije and iijim, and Hasselquist's little foxes, refer solely to jackals ; particularly as these animals were, if really known, not abundant in Western Asia, even during the first century of the Roman empire; for they are but little noticed by the Greek writers and sportsmen who resided where now they are heard and seen every evening; these authorities offering no remark on the most prominent cha- racteristic of the species, namely, the chorus of bowlings lasting all night — a habit so into- lerable that it is the invariable theme of all the Semitic writers since the Hegira whenever they mention the jackal. We may therefore infer- that shual, if a general denomination, and that ajim, if the etymology be just, is derived from howling or barking, and may designate the jackal, though more probably it includes also those wild Canidae which have a similar habit. Vulpes Taaleb, or Taleb, the Syrian fox, is of the size of an English cur fox, and similarly formed ; but the ears are wider and longer, the fur in general ochry-rufous above, and whitish beneath: there is a faint black ring towards the tip of the tail, and the back of the ears are sooty, with bright fulvous edges. The species burrows, is silent and solitary, extends eastward into South- ern Persia, and is said to be found in Natolia. Ehreuberg's two species of Taleb (one of which he takes to be the Anubis of ancient Egypt, and Geoffroy's Canis Niloticus, the Abou Hossein of the Arabs) are nearly al I ied to, or varieties of the species, but residing in Egypt, and further to the same south, where it seems they do not burrow. The Syrian Taleb is reputed to be very destructive in the vineyards, or rather a plunderer of ripe grapes ; but he is certainly less so than the jackal, whose ravages are carried on in troops and with less fear of man. None of the explanations which we have seen of the controverted passage in Judg. xv. 4, 5, relative to the shualim, foxes, jackals, or other canines, which Samson employed to set fire to the corn of the Philistines, is altogether sa- tisfactory to our mind. First, taking Dr. Kennicott's proposed explanation of the case by changing D vj?1)^ to D vyt^, thus reading ' foxes1 instead of 'sheaves,' and translating 331, 'ends,' instead of ' tails,' the meaning then would be, that Samson merely connected three hundred shocks of corn, already reaped, by bands or ends, and thus burned the whole. We admit that this, at first view, appears a rational explanation ; but it should be observed that three hundred shocks of corn would not make two stacks, and there- fore the result would be quite inadequate, con- sidered as a punishment or act of vengeance upon the Philistine population, then predominant over the greater part of Palestine : and if we take shocks to mean corn-stacks, then it may be asked how, and for what object, were three hundred corn-stacks brought together in one place from a surface of country at least equal to Yorkshire ? The task, in that hilly region, would have occu- pied all the cattle and vehicles for several months ; and then the corn could not have been thrashed out without making the whole population travel repeatedly, in order finally to reload the grain and take it to their threshing floors. Reverting to the interpretation of foxes burning the harvest, by means of firebrands attached to their tails, the case is borne out by Ovid {Fasti, iv. 681)— ' Cur igitur missse junctis ardentia telis Terga ferunt vulpes.' And again, in the fable of Apthonius, quoted by Merrick ; but not, as is alleged, by the brick with a bas-relief representing a man driving two foxes with fire fastened to their tails, which was found twenty-eight feet below the present surface of London ; because tiles of similar character and execution have been dug up in other parts of England, some representing the history of Susanna and the elders, and others the four Evangelists, and therefore all derived from biblical, not pagan sources. Commentators, following the reading of the Sept., have with common consent adopted the interpretation, that two foxes were tied together by their tails with a firebrand between them. Now this does not appear to have been the practice of the Romans, nor does it occur in the fable of Apthonius. We understand the text to mean, that each fox had a separate brand ; and most naturally so ; for it may be questioned whether two united would run in the same direction. They would assuredly pull counter to each other, and ultimately fight most fiercely ; whereas there can be no doubt that every canine would run, with fire attached to its tail, not from choice but ne- cessity, through standing corn, if the field lay in the direction of the animal's burrow : for foxes and jackals, when chased, run direct to their holes, anil sportsmen well know the necessity of stopping up those of the fox while the animal is abroad, or there is no chance of a chace. We therefore submit that by the words rendered 'tail to tail ' we should understand the end of the tire- brand attached to the extremity of the tail. Finally, as the operation of tying 300 brands to as many fierce and irascible animals could not be effected in one day by a single man, nor pro- duce the result intended if done in one place, it seems more probable that the name of Samson, as the chief director of the act, is employed to represent the whole party who effected his inten- tions in different places at the same time, and thereby insured that general conflagration of the harvest which was the signal of open resistance on the part of Israel to the long-endured oppression of the Philistine people. These observations, though by no means sufficiently answering all the objections, are the best we can offer on a difficult question which could not be passed over altogethet without notice [Dog; Wolf]. — C. H. S. SHUMIM (D*i?-1GJ0 occurs only once in Scrip, ture, and that in the passage which has already- been quoted under Abattachim, &c, where the Israelites are described as murmuring, among SHUNEM. othei tbings, for the leel), a small stream or river emptying itself into the sea in the tenitory of Asher (Josh. xix. 26). Michaelis (Hist. Vitri, § 2, in Com. Soc. Goti. iv.) trans- lates it 'glass-river,' and identifies it with the Belus, which joins the sea near Acre, and from whose sands the first glass was made by the Phoe- nicians (Straho, xvi. p. 758; Tacit. Hist. v. 7; Joseph. Be Bell. Jud. ii.. 10. 2). SILAS (SiAcw), a contraction of Silvanus (%i\ovavos), a distinguished Christian teacher in the church at Jerusalem, who, with Barnabas, was associated by that church with Paul (Acts xv. 22, 32), and accompanied him in his second journey through Asia Minor to Macedonia (Acts xv. 40 ; xvi. 19, 25 ; xvii. 4). He remained behind at Berea for a short time, when Paul was obliged to flee from that place (Acts xvii. 10, 14). They met again at Corinth (Acts xviii. 5 ; comp. Thess. i. 1), where Silas was active in the work of an evangelist (2 SILOAM. Cor. i. 19). He is invariably called Silvanus in the Epistles, but the contraction Silas is always used in the Acts. Whether this Silvanus is the same person who was the bearer of St. Peter's epistle to the churches in Asia Minor (1 Pet. v. 12), cannot be ascertained. The traditions (ap. Dorotheeum et Hippolytum) regard Silas and Sil- vanus as different persons, making the former bishop of Corinth, and the latter bishop of Tbes- salonica. See Fabricius, Lux Evang. p. 117; Cellarius, Diss, de Sila Viro Apostol. SILO AH. [Siloam.] SILOAM (StAwa/x), or Shiloah (>w). The name Siloah or Siloam \% found only three times in Scripture as applied to water; once in Isaiah (viii. 6), who speaks of it as running water; again, as a pool, in Nehemiah ii. 15 ; and lastly, also as a pool, in the account of our Lord's healing the man who had been born blind (John ix. 7-11). None of these passages affords any clue to the situation of Siloam ; but this silence is supplied by Joseplius, who makes frequent mention of it as a fountain (De Bell. Jud. v. 4, § 1, 2), and indi- cates its situation at the mouth of the valley of Tyropoeon, where the fountain, now and long since indicated as that of Siloam, is still found. He describes its waters as sweet and abundant. Jerome (Comment, in Esa. viii. G), indicating its situation more precisely, also mentions its ir- regular flow — a very remarkable circumstance, which has been noticed by most subsequent pil- grims and travellers. This assures us that the present fountain of Siloam is that which he had in view ; and that it is the same to which the Scriptural notices refer there is no reason to doubt. The pool of Siloam is within and at the mouth of the valley of Tyropoeon, and about eighty paces above its termination is that of Jehoshaphat. The water flows out of a small artificial basin under the cliff, the entrance to which is excavated in the form of an arch, and is immediately re- ceived into a larger reservoir, fifty-three feet in length by eighteen feet in width. A flight of steps leads down to the bottom of the reservoir, which is nineteen feet deep. This large receptacle is faced with a wall of slone, now slightly out of repair. Several columns stand out of the side walls, extending from the top downward into the cistern, the design of v^hich it is difficult to conjec- ture. The water passes out of this reservoir through a channel cut in the rock, which is covered for a short distance; but subsequently it opens and dis- closes a lively copious stream, which is conducted into an enclosed garden planted with fig-trees. It is afterwards subdivided, and seems to be ex- hausted in irrigating a number of gardens occu- pied with figs, apricots, olive and other trees, and some flourishing legumes. The small upper basin or fountain excavated in the rock is merely the entrance, or rather the termination of a long and narrow subterranean passage beyond, by 'Which the water comes from the Fountain of the Virgin. This has been established beyond dispute by Dr. Robinson, who, with his companion, had the hardihood to crawl through the passage. They found it 17J0 feet in length, which, owing to its windings, is several hundred feet more than the direct distance above ground. It is thus proved that the water of both these fountains is the same, though some travellers have pronounced the water SIMEON. 765 of Siloam to lie bad, and that of the other foun- tain good. It has a peculiar taste, sweetish and very slightly brackish, but not at all disagreeable. Late in the season, when the water is low, it i9 said to become more brackish and unpleasant The most remarkable circumstance is the ebb and How of the waters, which, although often men- tioned as a characteristic of Siloam, must belong equally to both fountains. Dr. Robinson himself witnessed this phenomenon in the fountain of the Virgin, where the water rose in five minutes one foot in the reservoir, and in another five minutes sunk to its former level. The intervals and the extent of the (low and ebb in this and the fountain of Siloam, vary with the season ; but the fact, though it has nut yet been accounted for, is be- yond dispute (see Robinson's Palestine, i. 460, 492-49S; Olin's Travels, ii. 153, 154 ; Williams's Holy City, pp. 378, 379. SILVANUS. [Silas.] SILVER. There is no mention of this metal in Scripture until the time of Abraham. Before that time brass and iron appear to have been the only metals in use (Gen. iv. 22). Abraham was rich in gold and silver, as well as in flocks and herds, and silver in his day was in general circu- lation as money. It was uncoined, and estimated always by weight. Coined money was not in use among the Israelites until an advanced period of their history. The Romans are said to have had only copper money until within five years of the first Punic war, when they began to coin silver(Pliny, Jfw£. Nat. xxx. 3). Their coins weie extensively introduced into Judaea after it be came a Roman province. Silver, as well as gold, is frequently mentioned in Scripture. They were both largely used by the Jews in the manufacture of articles of orna ment, and of various vessels for domestic pur poses, and also for the service of the temple. Many of the idols, and other objects belonging to the idolatrous nations, are stated to have been of silver. This metal was so abundant as to belittle thought of in the days of Solomon, although it was at that time, and both before and long after- wards, the principal medium of exchange among the Jews — the only recognised standard or mea- sure of value [Metals]. — G. M. B. SIMEON (pypp', favourable hearing ; 2u- pediv), the second son of Jacob, bom of Leah (Gen. xxix. 33), and progenitor of the tribe of the same name. He was the full brother of Levi (Gen. xxxiv. 25 ; xxxv. 23), with whom he took part in cruelly avenging upon the men of She- chem the injury which their sister Dinah had received from the son of Hamor (Gen. xxxiv. 25-30) ; see Dinah. The ferocity of character thus indicated probably furnishes the reason that Joseph singled Simeon out to remain behind in Egypt, when his other brethren were the first time dismissed (Gen. xlii. 24); but when they returned he was restored safely to them (Gen. xliii. 23). Nothing more of his personal history is known. The tribe descended from Simeon contained 59,300 able bodied men at the time of the Exode (Num. i. 23), but was reduced to 22,000 before entering Palestine (Num. xxvi. 14). This immense decrease in the course of one generation was greater than that sustained by all the other tribes together, and reduced Simeon from 7G6 SIMEON. SIMON. the third rank to the lowest of all in point of num- bers. It cannot well be accounted for but by sup- posing that the tribe erred most conspicuously, and was punished most severely m those transac- tions which drew clown judgments from God. As it appeared that Judah had received too large a territory in the first distribution of lands, a portion of it was afterwards assigned to Simeon. This portion lay in the soutii-west, towards the borders of Philistia and die southern desert, and contained seventeen towns (Josh. xix. 1-9). However, the Judahites must afterwards have re- appropriated some of these towns ; at least Beersheba (1 Kings ix. 3) and Ziklag (I Sam. xxvii. 6) appear at a subsequent period as belonging to the kingdom of Judah. The remarkable passage in 1 Chron. iv. 41-43 points to an emigration of or from this tribe, perhaps more extensive than the words would seem to indicate, and suggests that when they ceased to Lave common interests, this small tribe was obliged to give way before the greater power of Judah and the pressure of its population (cornp. Gen. xlix. 7). Nothing more of this tribe is recorded, although its name occurs in unhistorical intimations (Ezek. xlviiL 34 ; Rev. vii. 8). 2. SIMEON, the aged person who, when Jesus was presented by his mother at the temple, recognised the infant as the expected Messiah, and took him in his arms and blessed him, glori- fying God (Luke ii. 25-35). The circumstance is interesting, as evincing the expectations which were then entertained of the speedy advent of tlie Mes- siah ; and important from the attestation which it conveyed in favour of Jesus, from one who was known to have received the divine promise that he. should 'not taste of death till lie had seen the Lord's Christ.1 It lias been often supposed that tii is Simeon was (he same with Rabhan Simeon, the son of the famous Hillel, ami father of Gama- liel ; biit this is merely a conjecture, founded on circumstances too weak to establish such a con- clusion. SIMON ('S.l/j.wv), the same name, in origin and signification, as Simeon. 1. SIMON MACCABEUS. [Maccab;ean ■Family.] 2. SIMON, the apostle, to whom Christ gave the name of Peter, after which he was rarely called by his former name alone, but usually by that of Peter, or else Simon Peter [Peter]. 3. SIMON, surnamed Zelotes (3,1/j.o>v 6 ZtjAcuttjs), one of the twelve apostles (Luke vi. 15; Acts i. 13), and probably so named from having been one of the Zealots. He is also called 'The Canaanite' ('Xifj.aiu 6 Kavav'nrjs) in Matt. X. 4; Mark iii. 18. This, however, is not, as is usually the case, to be taken for a Gentile name, but is merely an Aramaic word signifying ' zeal,' and therefore of the same signification as Zelotes. Simon is the least known of all the apostles, not a single circumstance, beyond the fact of his apostleship, being recorded in the Scriptures. He is probably to be identified with Simon the son of Cleophas ; and if so, the traditions concerning that person, given by those who make them dis- tinct, must be assigned to him. These traditions, however, assign a different destiny to this Simon, alleging that he preached the Gospel throughout North Africa, from Egypt to Mauritania, and that he even proceeded to the remote isles of Britain. 4. SIMON, son of Cleophas and Mary, brother of the apostles James and Jude, and a kinsman of Jesus (Matt. xiii. 55 ; Mark vi. 3). He is probably the same with the Simon Zelotes above mentioned, and in that case we must regard the separate traditions respecting him as apocryphal, and take those assigned to the present Simon as proper to both. They amount, to this, that after St. James had been slain by the Jews in a.d. 62, his brother Simon was appointed to succeed him in the government of the church at Jerusalem, and that forty-three years after, when Trajan caused search to be made for all those who claimed to be of the race of David, he was accused before Atticus, the governor of Palestine, and after en- during great torture was crucified, being then 120 years of age (Epiphanius, Hares, c. 14 ; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 32; Tillemont, Hist. Eccles. ii. 204). 5. SIMON, father of Judas Iscariot (John vi. 71; xii. 4; xiii. 2, 26). 6. SIMON, a Pharisee who invited Jesus to his house (Luke vii. 40, 43, 44). 7. SIMON THE LEPER, so called from having formerly been afflicted with leprosy (Matt. xxvi. 6 ; Mark xiv. 3). He was of Bethany, and after the raising of Lazarus, gave a feast, probably in celebration of that event, at which both Jesus and Lazarus were present (comp. John xii. 2). He was, therefore, probably a near friend or rela- tion of Lazarus : some suppose that he was his brother; others that he was the husband of Mary, the sister of Lazarus, who at this feast anointed the Lord's feet, and that Lazarus abode with them. But all this is pure conjecture. 8. SIMON THE CYRENIAN, who was compelled to aid in bearing the cross of Jesus (Matt, xxvii. 32 ; Mark xv. 21 ; Luke xxiii. 26). Whether this surname indicated that Simon was one of the many Jews from Cyrene, who came to Jerusalem at the Passover, or that he was origin- ally from Cyreoe, although then settled at Jeru- salem, is uncertain. The latter seems the more likely opinion, as Simon's two sons, Alexander and Rufus, were certainly disciples of Christ ; and it. was perhaps the knowledge of this fact which led the Jews to incite the soldiers to lay on him the burden of the cross. The family of Simon seems to have resided afterwards at Rome ; for St. Paul, in his epistle to the church there, salutes the wife of Simon with tenderness and respect, calling her his ' mother,' though he does not expressly name her: 'Salute Rufus, and his mother and mine' fRom. xvi. 13). 9. SIMON THE TANNER, with whom St. Peter lodged at Joppa (Acts ix. 43 ; x. 6 ; xvii. 32). He was doubtless a disciple. His house was by the sea side, beyond the wall, as the trade of a tanner was one which the Jews did not allow to be carried on inside their towns. 10. SIMON MAGUS. In the eighth chapter of the Acts we read that Philip the Evangelist, whilst preaching the Gospel in a city of Samaria, came in contact with a person of the name of Simon, who had formerly exercised immense power over the minds of the people by his skill in the resources of magic. So high were the pretensions of this impostor, and so profound the impression he had made on the minds of the multitude, that they not only received with readiness all that be taugat, but admitted his SIMON. simon. 767 claim to be regarded as an incarnation of the de- miurgic power of God. The doctrines of Philip, however, concerning Christ, as the true and only incarnation of Deity, supported by the unparal- leled and beneficent, miracles which he per- formed, had the effect of dispelling this delusion, and inducing the people to renounce their alle- giance to Simon and receive baptism as the dis- ciples of Christ. On the mind of Simon himself a deep impression was also produced. In his former pursuits he had been probably not a little of a dupe as well" as a deceiver, for the belief in the reality of magical power was so widely dif- fused through the East that we can easily suppose Simon to have been thoroughly convinced, not only that the possession of such power was attain- able, but that the charms of which he was mas- ter actually conferred upon him a portion of that power, though very far short, of what he pre- tended to have. To his mind, therefore, the idea in all probability suggested by the miracles of Philip, the reality of which he could not doubt, was, that here was a magician of a higher order than himself — one who was possessed of charms and secrets more powerful and mysterious than those which he had obtained. To Philip, consequently, as a greater master of his science than himself, he deemed it wise to succumb, in the hope doubtless of being able ere long to par- ticipate in his knowledge and to wield his power. With this view he professed himself a disciple of Jesus, and as such was baptised by Philip. On the news of Philip's success reaching Jeru- salem, Peter and John went down to Samaria to confer upon the new converts the spiritual gifts which were vouchsafed to the primitive churches. During their visit Simon discovered that by means of prayer and the imposition of hands the Apostles were able to dispense the power of the Holy Ghost ; and supposing probably that in this lay the much-prized secret of their superior power, he attempted to induce the Apostles to impart to him this power by offering them money. This, which for such a man was a very natural act, intimated to the Apostles at once his true character (or rather, to express more accurately our conviction, it. enabled them to manifest, to the people and publicly to act upon what their own power of discerning spirits must have al- ready taught them of his true character) ; and accordingly Peter indignantly repudiated his offer, proclaimed his utter want of all true knowledge of Christian doctrine (so we under- stand the words ovk eari ctol pepls oiiSe /cA-'jf/os iv T

take a statue of the Sabine deity, Semo, for one to Simon, a supposition which it is hardly possible to resist when we know that a piece of marble has been found in an island of the Tiber actually bearing the inscription Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio Sacrum (Salmasius, Ad Spartianum, p. 38 ; Van Dale, De Oraculis, p. 579 ; Burton, Heresies of the Apostolic Age, p. 374, §c.). Kusebius adds {Hist. Lccles. ii. 13, 14), that the popularity of the impostor was completely de- stroyed by St. Peter's coming to Rome; and later writers give us a wonderful legend of his destruc- tion by the miraculous power of the Apostle's prayers joined to those of St. Paul. All are agreed in regarding these legendary accounts as fabulous, but Dr. Burton has with much inge- nuity endeavoured to expiscate the truth which may be involved in them. According to his view it is probable that Simon, in endeavouring to work something that should pass for a miracle, and to maintain his credit against the Apostles, met with an accident which ended in his death {Lib. cit. p. 371). To us it appears more pro- bable that the whole is a mythic fable; the silence of all the earlier fathers regarding it is sufficient to invalidate its pretentions to be viewed as history. Simon's doctrines were substantially those of the Gnostics, and he is not without reason re- garded as the first who attempted to engraft the theurgy and egotism of 'he Magian philosophy upon Christianity. He represented himself, ac- cording to Jerome (Ih Matt., Opp. iv. 114), as the Word of God, the Perfection, the Paraclete, the Almighty, the All of Deity ; and Irenseus (i. 20) tells us he carried with him a beautiful female named Helena, whom he set forth as the 768 SIN. first idea (ewoia) of Deity. If this be not ex- aggerated fable on the part of his enemies, we must suppose that such modes of speech and re- presentation were adopted by him as suited to the highly allegorical character of Orientalism in his day; for were we to suppose him to have meant such utterances to be taken literally, we should be constrained to look upon him in the light of a madman. Comp. Tillemout, Memoires, torn. i. p. 158, ff. ; Beausobre, Hist, du Manichee, torn. i. ; Ittigius, Hist. Eccles. Selecta Capita, v. 16, &c. ; Mos- heim, Hist, of the Church, Cent. ii. 5, 12; De Rebus Christianorum, &c. p. 190 ff. ; Burton's Heresies of the Apostolic Age, Lect. iv. ; Milman, Hist, of Christianity, vol. ii. p. 96, if., &c. — W. L. A. SIN (PD ; Sept. Scti's), a city of Egypt, which is mentioned in Ezek. xxx. 15, 16, in connection with Tliebes and Memphis, and is described as 'the strength of Egypt,' showing it to have been a fortified place. The Sept. makes it to have been. Sa'is, but Jerome regards it as Pelusium. This latter identification has been generally adopted, and is scarcely open to dispute. Sin means' mire,1 and Pelusium, from the Greek pclos, has the same meaning, which is, indeed, preserved in the modern name Tineh, ' clay,' all doubtless derived from the muddy nature of the soil in the vicinity. Sir J. G. Wilkinson, however, sup- poses that the ancient native name more nearly resembled the Peremoun or Pheromis of the Copts ; and the latter is, doubtless, the origin of the Farama of the Arabs, by which it is still known. Pelusium was anciently a place of great consequence. It was strongly fortified, being the bulwark of the Egyptian frontier on the eastern side, and was considered the ' key,' or, as the prophet terms it, 'the strength' of Egypt {Hist. Bell. Alexand. p. 20, 27 ; Liv. xlv. 11 ; Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 8. 1 ; De Bell. Jud. i. 8. 7 ; i. 9. 3). It was near this place that Pompey met his death, being murdered by order of Ptolemy, whose pro- tection he had claimed. It lay among swamps and morasses on the most easterly estuary of the Nile (which received from it the name of Ostium Pelu- siacum), anil stood twenty stades from the Medi- terranean (Strabo, xvi. p. 760; xvii. 801, 802; Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 11). The site is now only approachable by boats during a high Nile, or by land when the summer sun has dried the mud left by the inundation : the remains consist only of mounds and a few fallen columns. The cli- mate is very unwholesome (Wilkinson's Mod. Egypt, i. 406, 444; Savary's Letters on Egypt, i. let. 24 ; Henniker's Travels'). SIN, the desert which the Israelites entered on turning oft* from the Red Sea (Exod. xvi. 1 ; xvii. 1 : Num. xxxiii. 12) [Sinai]. SINAI (VJip ; Sept. S,iA). The Hebrewname, denoting a district of broken or cleft rocks, is de- scriptive of the region to which it is applied. That region, according to Exod. xix. 1 ; Lev. vii. 38; Num. i. 1,3, 4, is a wild mountainous country in Arabia Petraea, whither the Israelites went from Rephidim, after they had been out of Egypt for the space of three months. Here the law was given to Moses, which fact renders this spot one of special and lasting interest. From the magnitude and pro- minence of the Sinaitic group of mountains, the SINAI. entire district of which it forms apart has received the name of the peninsula of Sinai. This peninsula may be roughly described as formed by a line running from Suez to Ailah, all that lies on the south of this line falling within the peninsula. In the present day the name Sinai is given by Christians to the cluster of mountains to which we have referred ; but the Arabs have no other name for this group than Jebel et-Tar, sometimes adding the distinctive epithet Sina. In a stricter sense the name Sinai is applied to a very lofty ridge which lies between the two parallel valleys of Sher and el-Lega. Of this ridge the northern end is termed Horeb, the southern Sinai, now called Jebel Musa, or Moses' Mount. The entire district is a heap of lofty granite rocks, with steep gorges and deep valleys. The several mountains in the peninsula seem all to ascend gradually till they reach their highest point in the group of Sinai, which presents a wild aspect of broken, cleft, and irregular masses, with pointed tops and precipitous sides. The entire group is made up of four huge ranges, which run south and north with an inclination eastward. The ranges are separated from each other by deep valleys or watercourses. Of the four longitudinal masses of mountain, Sinai lies the most easterly* but one, namely, Jebel ed-Deir. The range which lies on the west of Sinai is designated at its southern extremity Jebel Catharine, which is the highest mountain in the district, for Sinai is 7033, and Catharine 8063 Parisian feet above the level of the Mediterranean (the highest point of Hermon being 10,000 feet). The Sinai ridge, in- cluding Horeb, is at least three miles in length. It rises boldly and majestically from the southern end of the plain Rahah, which is two geographical miles long, and ranges in breadth from one-third to two-thirds of a mile, making at least one square mile. This space is nearly doubled by extensions of the valley on the west and east. ' The examination convinced us,' says Robinson {Biblical Researches, i. 141), 'that here was space enough to satisfy all the requisitions of the Scriptural narrative, so far as it relates to the assembling of the congregation to receive the law.' Water is abundant in this mountainous region, to which the Bedouins betake themselves when oppressed by drought in the lower lands. As there is water, so also is there in the valleyr; great fruitfulness and sometimes luxuriance of vegetation, as well as beauty. What was the exact locality from which the law was given, it may not be easy to ascertain. The book of Deuteronomy (i. 6; iv. 18, &c.) makes it to be Horeb, which seems most probable ; for this, the north end of the range, rises immediately from the plain of which we have just spoken as the head- quarters of the Israelites. Sinai is, indeed, ge- nerally reputed to be the spot, and, as we have seen, the southern extremity of the range is deno- minated Moses' Mount ; but this may have arisen from confounding together two meanings of Si- nai, inasmuch as it denotes 1, a district; 2, a particular part of that district. It was no doubt on Horeb, in the region of Sinai, that the law was promulgated. Robinson imputes the common error to tradition, and declares that ' there is not the slightest reason for supposing that Moses had any thing to do with the summit which now bears his name. It is three miles distant from the plain SINAI. SINAI. 769 cm which the Israelites must have stooil, and hid- den from it by the intervening peaks of modern Horeb. No part of the plain is visible from the summit, nor are the bottoms of the adjacent val- leys, nor is any spot to be seen around it where the people could have been assembled." Robinson also ascended the northern extremity of the ridge, and had there a prospect which he thus describes : — ' The whole plain, er-RQJiah, lay spread out beneath our feet with the adjacent Wadys and mountains. Our conviction was strengthened that here, or on some one of the ad- jacent clifl's, was the spot where the Lord " de- scended in fire,"' and proclaimed tire law. Here lay the plain where the whole congregation might be assembled; here was the mount that could be approached and touched, if not forbidden ; and here the mountain brow where alone the lightnings and the thick cloud would be visible, and the thunders and- the voice of the trump be heard when "the Lord came down in the sight of all ibe people upon Mount Sinai." We gave ourselves up to the impressions of lire awful scene, and read with a feeling that will never be forgotten the sublime account of the transaction and the commandment there promulgated/ On descend- ing, Robinson came to a convent (5306 feet above the sea), his description of the vicinity of wh'ch will impress on the reader's mind what we have before said as to the IVuitfulness of spots in these lofty regions. ' A large plantation of olive-trees extends far above and below the convent along the valley. Just around the buildings is also a garden of other fruit trees, in which apple and apricot trees were in blossom (March 20), and not far off is a small grove of tall poplars, here 506. [The summit of cultivated for timber. In this garden too was a rill of water. A family of serfs was here to keep the garden. As we entered, the sweet voice of a prattling Arab child struck my ear, and made my heart thrill as it recalled the thoughts of home1 (i. 159). Traelition seems to have been busily and freely at work in the district. A rock is pointed out as that whence Moses made the water gush. It. is in a narrow valley, and Ro- binson affirms that there is not the slightest ground for assuming any connection between it and Rephidim ; but, on the contrary, every thing against such a supposition. Having thus given a general view of Sinai, we shall now briefly trace the Israelites in their journey to the mountain. Another article [Wan- UEiiiNu] will follow their course into the Land of Promise. If the reader will turn bad; to Exodus, lie will find that, we there conducted the fugitive horde through the Red Sea to the eastern shore of the gulf of Suez. The Biblical autho- rities for the portion of the task immediately be- VOL. II. fore us may be found in Exod. xvi. 22; xvii., xviii., xix., 1 and 2; and Num. xxiii. fi-15. When safe on the eastern shore, the Israelites, had they taken the shortest route into Palestine, would have struck at once across the desert in a south-easterly direction to el-Arish or Gaza. But this route would have brought them into direct collision with the Philistines, with whom they were as yet quite unable to cope. Or they might have traversed the desert of Paran, follow- ing the pilgrim road of the present day to l'l.itli, and, turning to the north, have made lor Pales- tine. In order to accomplish this, however, hostile hordes and nations would have to be en- countered, whose superior skill and experience in war might have proved fatal to the newly liberated tribes of Israel. Wisely, therefore, did their leader take a course which necessitated the lapse of time, and gave promise of affording intellectual and moral discipline of the highest value. A regard to this discipline chiefly determined Moses in ihe selection of his route. He resolved to lead his Hock 3 D 7TO SINAI, SINAI, to Sinai in order that they might see the wonders there to be exhibited, and hear the lessons there to h?. given. At Sinai, and on the journey thither, might the great leader hope that the moral brand which slavery had imprinted on his people would be effaced', and that they would acquire that self- respect, that regard to God's will, that capacity of self-guidance, which alone could make liberty a blessing to the nation, and enable Moses to realise on their behalf the great and benign intentions which God had led him to form. There were, however, two ways by which he might reach Sinai. By following a south-easterly direction, and proceeding across the desert el-Tyh, he would have reached at once the' heart of the Si- naitic region. This was the shorter and the more expeditious road. The other route lay along the shore of the Red Sea, which must be pursued till an opening gave the means of turning sud- denly to the east, and ascending at once into the lofty district. The latter was preferable for the reason before assigned, namely, the addi- tional opportunities which it offered for the edu- cation of the undisciplined tribes of recently emancipated slaves. It, therefore, was wisely adopted by Moses. Moses did not begin his arduous journey till, with a piety and a warmth of gratitude which well befitted the signal deliverance that his people had just been favoured with, he celebrated the power, majesty, and goodness of God in a triumphal' ode, full of the most appropriate, striking, and splendid images ; in- which commemorative festivity he was assisted by ' Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron,' and her associated female baud, with poetry, music, and dancing. The nature of these festivities gives us full reason to conclude, that if the people at large were still slaves in intellect and morals, there were not wanting individuals in the camp who were eminently skilled m ihe best refinements of the age. The spot where these re- joicings were held could not have been for from that which still bears- the name of Ayun Musa, ' the fountains of Moses-,' the situation of which is even now marked by a few palm-trees. This was a suitable place for the encampment, because well supplied with water. Here Robinson counted seven fountains, near which, he saw a patch of barley, and a few cabbage plants. Hence the Israelites proceeded along the coast, three days' journey, into what is termed the wilderness of Shur. During this march they found no water. The district is hilly and sandy, with a few watercourses running into the Red Sea, which, failing rain, are dry. ' These Wadys,' says Robinson, ' are mere depressions in the desert, with only a few scattered habs and shrubs, now withered and parched with drought.' At the end ©f three days the Israelites reached the fountain Marah, but the waters were bitter, and could not be drunk. The stock which they had brought with them being now exhausted, they began to wtter murmurings on finding themselves disap- pointed at Marah. Moses appealed to God, who- directed him to a tree, which, being thrown into the waters, sweetened them. The people were satisfied and admonished. About this sta- tion authorities are agreed. It is identified with the fountain Hawarah. The basin is six or eight feet in diameter, and the water Robinson found about two feet deep. Its taste is unpleasant, saltish, and somewhat bitter. The Arabs pronounce ii bitter, and consider it as the worst water in all these regions. Near the spring are numerous bushes of the shrub c/kurkud — a low, bushy, thorny shrub, producing a small fruit, which ripens in June,, not unlike the blackberry, very- juicy, and slightly acidulous. It delights in a saline soil, and is found growing near the brackish fountains in and around Palestine, affording a grateful refreshment to travellers. By means of the berries, or, if they were not ripe, the leaves of this plant, the bitterness may have been removed from the waters of Marah. Not. improbably themiracle in: the case lay in this, that Jehovah directed Moses to use the tree (bush) itself, instead of what was usual, the berries, as from the time of year, shortly after Easter, they could hardly have been ripe. The next station mentioned in Scripture is? ETim, where were twelve wells of water, and three score and ten palm-trees. As is customary with travellers in these regions, ' they encamped there by the waters-' (Exod. xvi. 1). The'indica- tions given in the Bible are not numerous, nor very distinct. Neither time nor distance is accu- rately laid down. Hence we can expect only general accuracy in our maps, and but-partial suc- cess in fixing localities. Elirn, however, is gene- rally admitted to be Wady Glmrundel, lying about half a day's journey south-east from Marah, The way from Egypt to Sinai lies through this- valley, and on account of its water and verdure ic i» a chief caravan station at the present day. From Elim the Israelites marched, encamping on the shore of the Red Sea, for which purpose they must have kept the high ground for some time, since the precipices of Jebel Hum mam — a lofty and precipitous mountain of chalky limestone — run down to the brink of tlte sea. They, there- fore, went on the land side of this mountain to- the head of Wady Taiyikeh, which passes down south-west through the mountains- to Ihe shore. On the plain at the mouth of this valley was the encampment 'by the Red Sea' (Num. xxxiii. 10). According to Num. xxxiii. 11, the Israel- ites removed from the Red Sea, and encamped next in the wilderness of Sin. This Robinson identifies with ' the great plain which, beginning near el-Mvkkhah, extends with greater or less- breadth almost to the extremity of the peninsula. In its broadest part it is called el-Ka-a' (i. 106). Thus they kept along the shore, and did not yet ascend any of the fruitful valleys which run up towards the centre of the district. They arrived in the wilderness of Sin on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departure out of the land of Egypt ; and being now wearied with their journey, and tired of their scanty fare, they began again to murmur. Indeed, it is not easy to see bow the most ordinary and niggard food could have been supplied to them, constituting as they did nearly two millions of persons, in such a country as that into which they had come. Jl is true that some provision might have been made by individuals ere the march from Suez began. It. is also possible that the accounts of encamp- ments which we have, are to be regarded as chiefly those of Moses and his principal men, with a chosen body of troops, while the multitude were allowed to traverse the open country, and forage in the valleys. Still the region was unfavour- SINAI. SINAI. 771 able for the purpose, and we are brought to the conclusion that here we have one of those nu- merical difficulties which are not uncommon in the Old Testament Scriptures, and which make us suspect some radical error in our conceptions of the Hebrew system of numbers. The contrast between the scant supply of the desert and the abundance of Egypt' furnished the immediate occasion of the outbreak of dissatisfaction. Bread and flesh were the chief demand ; bread and flesh were miraculously supplied; the former by manna, the latter by quails. Manna grows in some of the neighbouring valleys; but the Israelites were in the wilderness, so that the supply could not have proceeded from natural resources, even had such existed to a sufficient extent for the purpose. The next station mentioned in Exodus is Rephidim ; but in Numbers Dophkah and Alush are added. The two latter were reached after the people had taken ' their journey out of the wil- derness of Sin.' Exact precision and minute agreement are not to be expected. The circum- stances of the case forbid us to look for them. In a desert, mountainous, arid rarely frequented country, the names of places are not lasting. There was the less reason for permanence in the case before us, because the Israelites had not taken the shorter and more frequented road over the mountains to Sinai, but kept along the shore of the Red Sea. It still deserves notice, that in Exodus ^xvii. 1) there is something like an inti- mation given of other stations besides Rephidim in the words ' after Micir journeys.' Dophkah is probably to be found near the spot where Wady Feirfm runs into the gulf of Suez. Alush may have lain on the shore near Ras Jehan. From this point a range of calcareous rocks, termed Jehal Hemam, stretches along the shore, near the southern end of which the Hebrews took a sudden turn to 1 he north-east, and going up Wady Hibran, reached the central Sinaitic district. On the opposite side, the eastern, the Sinaitic mountains come to a sudden stop, breaking off. and present- ing like a wall nearly perpendicular granite cliffs. These clills are cut by Wady Hibran, and at the point of intersection with the plain which runs between (he two ranges, lav Rephidim. This was the last station before Sinai itself was reached. Naturally enough is it recorded, that ' (here was no water for the people to drink.' The mad was an arid gravelly plain; on either side were barren rocks. A natural supply was impossible. A miracle was wrought, and water was given. The Scripture makes it clear that it was from the Sinaitic group that the water was produced (Exod. xvii. 6). The plain received two de- scriptive names: Massah, 'Temptation;' and Meribali, 'Strife.' It appears that the congregation was not allowed to pursue their way to Sinai un- molested. The Arabs thought the Israelites suitable for plunder, and fell upon them. These hordes arc termed Amalek. The Amalekites may have been out on a predatory expedition, or ihey may have followed the Israelites from the north, and only overtaken them at Rephidim; any way no conclusion can be gathered from this fact as to the ordinary abode of these nomades. It ap- pears, however, thai the conflict was a severe and doubtful one, which by some extraordinary aid ended in favour of the children of Israel. This aggression uu the part of Amalek gave occasion to a permanent national hatred, which ended only in the extermination of the tribe (Num. xxiv. 20 ; Exod. xvii. 14-16). In commemoration of this vic- tor}' Moses was commanded to write an account of it in a book : he also erected there an altar to Jehovah, and called the name of it ' Jehovah, my banner.' There is no occasion to inquire whether or not there was space for a battle in the spot where Moses was. It was a nomade horde that made the attack, and not a modern army. The fight was nut a pitched battle. The word Horeb, applied by Moses to the place whence the water was gained, suggests the idea that Horeb was the general, and Sinai the specific name ; Horeb standing for the entite district, and Sinai for one particular mountain. Many pas- sages sanction this distinction. But in the New Testament Sinai only is read, having then ap- parently become a general name, as it is ai the present day (Acts vii. 30-38 ; Gal. iv. 24). It is a monkish usage which gives the name Sinai to Jebel Mfisa, and Horeb to the northern part of the same ridge. The district of Sinai is remaikable for the nume- rous inscriptions engra\ed on the face of the rocks. They are found on all the routes which lead from the west towards the mountain, as far south as Tur, and extend to the very base of Sinai. The spot where they exist in the greatest number is the Wady, which hence derives its name, W. Mukattel), ' Written Valley,' through which the usual road to Sinai passes before reaching Wady Teirfin. Here inscriptions occur by thousands on the rocks, chiefly at such points as would form convenient resting-places for travellers or pilgrims during the noon-day sun. Many of them are ac- companied by crosses. The characters are every where the same, and till recently had delied all the efi'oits of the ablest palseographists. In the year 1839, Professor Beer, of the university of Leip- zig, succeeded in deciphering them. The charac- ters of the Sinaitic inscriptions the Professor finds to belong to a distinct and independent alphabet ; some being wholly peculiar, others having more or less affinity with the Cufie, which may have been developed from them. The contents hitherto ascertained (1839) consist of proper names, pre- ceded by some such word as 'peace; blessed; in memory of.'' The word son often occnis between the names. No Jewish nor Christian name has been found. Beer thinks the writers Mere pil- grims : it is probable, from the presence of the cross, that they were also Christians. The in- scriptions are ascribed to the fourth century, and may have been made by the native inhabitants of the mountains. The Leipzig Professor considers them as the only remains of the language and cha- racter once peculiar to the Nabalhaeaus of Arabia Petrsea. Inscriptions have also been discovered on the rocks of Hisn Ghorab in Hadramaut, ou the southern extremityof Arabia, of which, and of the deciphering of which, a very interestin count may be found in Forsler's recently pub- lished and very valuable work, The Hist Geography (/Arabia, or the Patriarchal Evi* denccs of Revealed Religion, 2 vols. 8vo. Loud. 1R44. Robinson's work before referred to is a classical one on the subject, though we are unstfle to assent to all his views. The celebrated Uaumer's Beitruye to his Palestine should be Studied in connection with Robinson. W ithin the last few 3d2 772 SIN API. years very much has been done for laying open the regions through which our minds have passed, by Niebuhr, Burckhardt, and Laborde. See also Biisching, Erdbeschreibung , v.; andRosenmuller, Alterthum. iii. 131, sq. — J. R. B. SINAPI (Si'vcnn), translated ' mustard tree ' in the Auth. Vers, of the New Testament, has engaged the attention of many commentators, great, difficulty having been experienced in find- ing a plant with the requisite characteristics, notwithstanding the several attempts which have been made. The subject was investigated by the present wriler in a paper read before the Royal Asiatic Society, on the 16th March, 1844. Hav- ing referred to the passages of the New Testament in which the word occurs (Matt. xiii. 31 ; xvii. 20 ; Mark iv. 31 ; Luke xiii. 19 ; xvii. 6), he first showed how unsuitable were the plants which had been adduced to the circumstances of the sacred narrative, and mentioned that his own attention had been turned to the suliject in consequence of the present Bishop of Lichfield having informed him that Mr. Amueny. a Syrian student of King's College, was well acquainted with the tree. Mr. A. stated that this tree was found near Jerusalem, but most abundantly on the banks of the Jordan and round the sea of Tiberias ; that its seed was employed as a substitute for mustard, and that it was called khardal, which, indeed, is the common Arabic name for mustard. In the writer's MS. Materia Medica of the East, mentioned in vol. i. p. 6, he had enumerated, 1. Khardal, or common mustard ; 2. Khardal barree, or wild mustard ; 3. Khardal room-ee, Turkish mustard. The last appeared to lie the plant referred to, but nothing more than this name was known of it. In his Illustrations of Himalayan Botany, he found a tree of N. W. India, which was there called kharjal, and which appeared possessed of the re- quisite properties, but he could not find it men- tioned in any systematic work, or local Flora, as a native of Palestine. The plant is Salvadora Persica, a large shrub, or tree of moderate size, a native of the hot and dry parts of India, of 507. [Salvadora Persica.] Persia, and of Arabia. Dr. Roxburgh describes the berries as mucn smaller than a grain of black pepper, having a strong aromatic smell, and a taste much like that of garden cresses. Dr. Lindley SINIM. informed the writer that he had seen them in a col- lection made by Bove. Lastly, Irby and Mangles, in their travels, mention a tree which they suppose to be the mustard tree of Scripture. They met with it while advancing towards Kerek, from the southern extremity of the Dead Sea. It bore its fruit in bunches resembling the currant; and the seeds had a pleasant, though strongly aromatic taste, nearly resembling mustard. They say, ' We think it possible that this is the tree our Saviour alluded to in the parable of the mustard seed, and not the mustard plant which we have in the north, and which, even when growing, large, can never lie called a tree, whereas the other is really such, and birds might easily, and actually do, take shelter tinder its shadow.' On further inquiry, the wri- ter learned that a specimen of the tree had been brought home by Mr. W. Barker, and that it had been ascertained by Messrs. Don and Lambert to be the Salvadora Persica of botanists ; but both had written against its claim to be the mustard tree of Scripture, while Mr. Frost, hearing a con- versation on the subject, had supposed the tree to be a Phytolacca, and had hence maintained it to be the mustard free of Scripture, but without adducing proofs of any kind. The paper above referred to concludes "by stating it as an important fact, that the writer had come to the same conclusion as Irby and Mangles, by an independent mode of investigation, even when he could not ascertain that the plant existed in Palestine ; which is, at. all events, interesting, as proving that the name kharjal is applied, ''ven in so remote a country as the north-west of India, to the same plant which, in Syria, is called khardal, and which no doubt is the chardal of the Talmudists, one of whom describes it as a tree of which the wood was sufficient to cover a potter's shed, and another says that he was wont to climb into it, as men climb into a fig-tree. Hence the author stated that he had no doubt but that Salvadora Persica is the mustard tree of Scripture. The plant has a small seed, which produces a large tree with numerous branches, in which the birds of the air may take shelter. The seed is possessed of the same properties, and is used for the same purposes, as mustard, and has a name, khardal, of which sinairi is the true translation, and which, moreover, grows abundantly on the very shores of t he sea of Galilee, where our Saviour addressed to the multitude the parable of the mustard seed. — J. F. R. SINIM (D^D; Sept. 77? Ilepaw), a people whose country, ' land of Sinim,' is mentioned only in Isa. xlix. 12, where the context im- plies a remote region, situated in the eastern or southern extremity of the earth. Many Bibli- cal geographers think this may possibly denote the Sinese or Chinese, whose country is Sina, China. This ancient people were known to the Arabians by the name of ..yua Sin, and to the Syrians by that of YJ-^-J-, Tsini; and a Hebrew writer may well have heard of them, espe- cially if sojourning at Babylon, the metropolis, as it were, of all Asia. This name appears to have been given to the Chinese by other Asiatics ; for the Chinese themselves, though not unac- quainted with it, do not employ it, either adopt- ing the names of the reigning dynasties, or osten<- SINITE. tatiously assuming high-sounding titles, e. g. Tchungkue, ' central empire.' But when the name was thus given by other nations, and whence it was derived, is uncertain. The opinion of those writers is possibly correct, who suppose that the name D^D Sineses came from the fourth dynas- ty, called Tshin, which held the throne from 249 to 206 b.c. (Du Halde, Descript. de la Chine, i. § 1, p. 306 ; A. Re'musat, Nouv. Melanges Asia- tiques, ii. 334, sq. ; Klaproth, Journal Asiat. x. 53, sq.). A people called Tsliinas are spoken of in the laws of Menu, and the name of this dynasty may have been known among foreign nations long before it acquired the sovereign power over all China. See this view more largely stated by Gesenius {Thesaurus, pp. 948-950). It is not void of probability, but objections to it are obvi- ous and considerable. Some, therefore, think that by the Sinim the inhabitants of Pelusium (Sin) are, by synecdoche, denoted for the Egyptians (Bochart, Phaleg, iv. 27). But as the text seems to point to a region more distant, others have upheld the claims of the people of Syene, taken to repre- sent the Ethiopians (Michaelis, Spicil. ii. 32, sq. ; Suppl. p. 1741, sq.). See Syene. If, however, 'the land of Sinim' was named either from Sin or Syene, it is remarkable that the Seventy, who knew Egypt well, should have gone eastward in search of it, even so far east as Persia ; and if they considered it as lying in the remote eastern parts of the Persian empire, which extended to the borders of India, the great step which is thus taken in the direction of China would give some support to the identification of the Chinese with the Sinim. SINITE (^D ; Sept. 'haevvcuos), a people pro- bably near Mount Lebanon (Gen. x. 17 ; 1 Chron. i. 15). Strabo mentions a city in Lebanon called Sinna {Geog. xvi. 756). Jerome also speaks of a place called Sini, not far from Area (Qucsst. Heb. in Gen.). SISERA (N^D, battle array; Sept. 2;ensation to the person injured; but when a man was stolen, no property compen- sation was allowed ; death was inflicted, and the guilty offender paid the forfeit of Ids life for his transgression ; God thereby declaring the infi- nite dignity and worth of man, and the inviola- bility of his person. The reason of this may be found in the great fact that God created man in his own image (Gen. i. 26-28) — a high distinction, more than once repeated with great solemnity {v. 1 ; and ix. 6). Such was the operation of this law, and the obedience paid to it, that we have not the remotest hint that the sale and pur- chase of slaves ever occurred among the Israel- ites. The cities of Judaia were not, like the cities of Greece and Rome, slave-markets, nor were there found throughout all its coasts either helots or slaves. With the Israelites servioe was either voluntary, or judicially imposed by the law of God (Lev. xxv. 39,47; Exod. xxi. 7; xxii. 3,4; Deut. xx. 14). Strangers only, or the descendants of strangers, became their possession by purchase (Lev. xxv. 44-16) ; but, however acquired, the law gave the Jewish servants many rights andpri- SLAVE. 775 vileges : they were admitted into covenant with God (Deut. xxix. 10, 13); they were guests at all the national and family festivals (Exod. xii, 43, 44; Deut. xii. 18; xvi. 10-16): they were stateiily instructed in morals and religion (Deut, xxxi. 10-13; Josh. viii. 33-35 ; 2 Chron. xvii, 8, 9; xxxv. 3; xxxiv. 30; Neh. viii. 7, 8); they were released from their regular labour nearly one-half of their term of servitude, viz., every seventh year (Lev. xxv, 3-6) ; every seventh day (Exod. xx.) ; at the three annual festivals (Exod. xxiii. 17 ; xxxiv. 23), viz., the Passover and Feast of Weeks, which lasted each seven days, and the Feast of Tabernacles, which lasted eight. Also on the new moons, the Feast of Trumpets, and the Day of Atonement. Besides these were the local festivals (Judg. xxi. 19 ; 1 Sam. ix. 12, 22, &c), and the various family feasts, as tiie weaning of children, marriages, sheep-shearing, and circumcisions ; the making of covenants, &c. ( 1 Sam. xx. 6. 28, 29). To these must be added the Feast of Purim, which lasted three days, and the Dedication, which lasted eight. The servants of the Israelites were protected by the law equally with their masters (Deut. i. 16, 17; xxvii. It); Lev. xix. 15; xxiv. 22; Num. xv. 29) ; and their civil and religious rights were the same (Num. xv. 15, 16, 29 ; ix. 14; Deut. i. 16, 17; Lev. xxiv. 22), To these might be added numerous passages which represent the Deity as regarding alike the natural rights of all, and making for all an equal provision (2 Chron. xix. 7; Prov. xxiv. 23; xxviii. 21;, Job xxxiv, 19; 2 Sam. xiv. 14; Ephes. vi. 9). Finally, these servants had the power of changing their masters, and of seeking protection where they pleased (Deut. xxiii. 15, 16); and should their masters by any act of violence injure their persons, they were released from their engage- ments (Exod. xxi. 26, 27). The term of Hebrew servitude was six years, beyond which they could not be held unless they entered into new engage- ments (Exod. xxi. 1-1 1; Deut. xv. 12); while that of strangers, over whom the rights of the master were comparatively absolute (Lev. xxv. 44-46), terminated in every case on the return of the jubilee, when liberty was proclaimed to all (Lev. xxv. 8, 10, 54). On one occasion the state of the sexennial slavery was violated, and the result was fearful (Jer. xxxiv. 8-22). See also Exod. xxi. 20; Lev. xix. 20-22; Tobit x. 10 (fj.a.Ta) ; Ecclus. vii. 20, 21 ; x. 25 ; xxxiii. 24-31. 4. Gibeonithh S-ervitude. — The condition of the inhabitants of Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth, and Kirjath-jearim, under the Hebrew common- wealth, was not that of slavery. It was volun- tary (Josh. ix. 8-11). TUey were not employed in the families of the Israelites, but resided in their own cities, tended their own Hocks and herds, and exercised the functions of a distinct though not independent community (Josh. x. •6-18). The injuries inflicted on them by Saul were avenged by the Almighty on his descendants (2 Sam. xxi. 1-9). They appear to have been devoted exclusively to the service of the ' house of God' or the Tabernacles, and only a few of them comparatively could have been engaged at any one time. The rest dwelt in their cities, one of which was a great city, as one of the royal cities. The service they rendered may be 776 SLAVE. SLAVE. regarded as a natural tribute for the privilege of protection. No service seems to have been re- quired of their wives and daughters. On the re- turn from the Babylonish captivity they dwelt at Ophel (Neluiii. 26). See also 1 Chron. ix. 2; Ezra ii. 43; Neh. vii. 24; viii. 17: x. 28; xi. 21 [Nethinim]. The laws which the great Deliverer and Re- deemer of mankind gave for the government of his kingdom, were those of universal justice and bene- volence, and as such were subversive of every sys- tem of tyranny and oppression. To suppose, there- fore, as has been rashly asserted, that Jesus or his apostles gave their sanction to the existing systems of slavery among the Greeks and Romans, is io dishonour them. That the reciprocal duties of masters and servants (SoOAoi) were inculcated, ad- mits, indeed, of no doubt (Col. iii. 22 ; iv. 1 ; Tit. ii. 9 ; 1 Pet. ii. 18; Ephes. vi. 5-9). But the per- formance of these duties on the part of the masters, supposing them to have been slave-masters, would have been tantamount, to the utfer subversion of the relation. There can be no doubt eiiher that ' servants under the yoke,1 or the slaves of heathens, are exhorted to yield obedience to their masters (1 Tim. vi. 1). But this argues no approval of the relation ; for, 1. Jesus, in an analogous case, appeals to the paramount law of nature as super- seding such temporaiy regulations as the ' hard- ness of men's hearts' had rendered necessary (see Slavery at the Cape of Good Hope, by the Rev. W. Wright, M.A., 1S31 . p. 58) ; and, 2. St. Paul, while counselling the duties of contentment and submission under inevitable bondage, inculcates at the same time on the slave the duty of adopt- ing alt legitimate means of obtaining his freedom (1 Cor. vii.' 1R-20); We are aware that the ap- plication of this passage has been denied by Chrysostom, Photius, Theodoref, and Theophy- lact, who maintain that it is the state of slavery which St. Paul here recommends the slave to prefer. But although this interpretation is in- deed rendered admissible by the context, yet the more received meaning, or that which counsels freedom, is both more easily connected with the preceding phrase, ' if thou mayest be vaa.de free, use it rather,' and is, as Neander observes, ' more in accordance with the liberal views of the free- minded Paul ' (Bilroth, Commentary on Co- rinthians, in Bib. Cabinet). Besides which, the character of tire existing slavery, to which we shall now refer, was utterly inconsistent with the entire tenor of the moral and humane principles of the precepts of Jesus. 5. Roman Slavery. — Our limits will not allow us to enter into detail on the only kind of slavery referred to in the New Testament, for there is no indication that the Jews possessed any slaves in the time of Christ. Suffice it therefore to say that, in addition to the fact that Roman slavery was perpetual and hereditary, the slave bad no protection whatever against the avarice, rage, or lust of his master. The bondsman was viewed less as a human being, subject to arbitrary do- minion, than as an inferior animal, dependent wholly on the will of his owner. The master possessed the uncontrolled power of life and death over his slave. — a power which continued at least to the time of the Emperor Hadrian. He might, and frequently did, kill, mutilate, and torture his slaves, for any or for no offence, so that slaves were sometimes crucified from mere caprice. He might force them to become prostitutes or gladiators ; and, instead of the perpetual obligation of the marriage tie, their temporary unions- {contubernia) were formed and dissolved at his command, families- and friends were separated, and no obligation existed to provide for their wants- in sickness or in health. But, notwithstanding all the barbarous cruelties of Roman slavery, it had one decided advantage over that which was introduced in modern times into European colonies, both law and custom being decidedly favourable to the freedom of the slave {Inquiry into the State of Slavery among the Romans, by W. Blair, Esq. 1833). The Mahommedan law also, in this re- spect, contrasts favourably with those of the European settlements. Although the condition of the Roman slaves was no doubt improved under the emperors, the early effects of Christian principles were manifest in mitigating the horrors, and bringing about the gradual abolition of slavery. St. Onesirrius, ac- cording to the concurrent testimony of antiquity, was liberated by Philemon (Phil. ver. 21) ; and in addition to the testimonies cited in Wright's Slavery (ut supra, p. 60), see the preface of Euthalius to this Epistle. The servile condition formed no obstacle to attaining the highest dig- nities of the Christian priesthood. Our space will not allow us to pursue this subject. ' It was,' says M. Guizot, 'by putting an end to the crues institution of slavery that. Christianity extended its mild influence to the practice of war ; and that barbarous art, softened by its humane spirit, ceased to be so destructive ' (Milman's Gibbon, i. 61). 'It is not,' says Robertson, 'the authority of any single detached precept in the Gospel, but the spirit and genius of the Christian religion, more powerful than any particular command, which has abolished the practice of slavery throughout, the world.' Although, even in the most corrupt times of the church, the operation of Christian principles tended to this benevolent object, they unfortunately did not prevent the revival of slavery in the European settlements in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, together with that nefarious traffic, the suppression of which has rendered the name of Wilberforce for ever illustrious. Modern servitude had all the characteristic evils of the Roman, except, perhaps, the uncontrolled power of life and death, while it was destitute of that redeeming quality to which we have referred, its tendency being to perpetuate the condition of slavery. It has also been sup- posed to have introduced the unfortunate pre- judice of colour, which was unknown to the ancients (Linstant's Esmi, 1841). It was the be- nevolent wish of the philosophic Herder {History of Man, 1788) that the time might come 'when we shall look back with as much compassion on our inhuman traffic in negroes, as on the ancient Roman slavery or Spartan helots.' This is now no longer a hope, so far as England is concerned, as she not only set the example of abolishing the traffic, but evinced the soundness of her Christian principles by the greatest national act of justice which history has yet recorded, in the total abo- lition of slavery throughout all her dependencies, W. W SLIME. [AsPHAiTUM.] SMITH. SMYRNA. 777 SMITH (BHH), a workman in stone, wood, or metal, like the Latin faber, but sometimes more accurately defined by what follows, as ^.p? ^10j a workman in iron, a smith ; Sept. t4ktu>v, tcktcdv cnSripov, xaA^£^s, T*Xvvrrls > ^ u^o- fa^er and faber ferrarius (1 Sam. xiii. 19; Isa. xliv. 12; liv. 16; 2 Kings xxiv. 14; Jer. xxiv. I; xxix. 2). In 2 Chron. xxiv. 12, 'workers in iron anil brass' are mentioned. The first smith mentioned in Scripture is Tubal-Cain, whom some writers, arguing from the similarity of the names, iden til'y with Vulcan (Gerh. Vossius, De Orig. Idw- lol. i. 16). He is said to have been ' an in- structor of every artificer in brass and iron (Gen. iv. 22), or perhaps more properly, a wbefter or sharpener of every instrument of copper or iron. So M on tan us, ' acuentem omne artificium seris et ferri ;' Sept. a). The Sept. does not regard the word as denoting a snail at all, but in the text cited translates it by /typos, ' bees' wax.' SO (KID ; Sept. 2riyc&p), a king of Egypt, whom Hoshea, the last king of Israel, called to his help against the Assyrians under Shalmaneser (2 Kings xvii. 4). It has been questioned whe- ther this So was the same with Sahaco, the first king of the Ethiopian dynasty in Upper Egypt, or his son and successor Sevechus, the second king of the same dynasty, and the immediate prede- cessor of Tirhakah. Winer hesitates between them, and Gesenius concludes for the latter. Sevechus reigned twelve years, according to Manetho, four- teen according to Syncellus. This name, in Egyptian Sevech, is also that of the god Saturn (Champollion, Panth. Egypt. No. 21, 22; Winer, Real- Worterb. s. v. ; Gesenius, Comment, in Jes. i. 696). SOAP. [Borith; Neter.] SODOM (DID ; Sept. So'Sojua), a city in the vale of Siddim, where Lot settled after his sepa- ration from Abraham (Gen. xiii. 12; xiv. 12; xix. 1). It had its own chief or 'king,' as had the other four cities of the plain (Gen. xiv. 2, 8, 10), and was along with them. Zoar only excepted, destroyed by fire from heaven, on account of the gross wickedness of the inhabitants ; the memory of which event has been j>erpetuated in a name of infamy to all generations (Gen. xix.). The destruction of Sodom claims attention from the solemnity with which it is introduced (Gen. xviii. 20-22) ; from the circumstances which pre- ceded and followed — the intercession of Abra- ham, the preservation of Lot, and the judgment which overtook his lingering wife (Gen. xviii. 25-33 ; xix.) ; and from the nature of the physical agencies through which the overthrow was effected. Most of these particulars are easily understood ; SODOM. but the last has awakened much discussion, and may therefore require a larger measure of atten- tion. The circumstances are these. In the first place, we learn that the vale of Siddim, in which Sodom lay, was very fertile, and every- where well watered — 'like the garden of the Lord ;' and these circumstances induced Lot to fix his abode there, notwithstanding the wicked- ness of the inhabitants (Gen. xiii. 10, 11). Next it appears that this vale was full of ' slime-pits.' This means sources of bitumen, for the word is the same as that which is applied to the cement used by the builders of Babylon, and we know that to have been bitumen or aspbaltum (Gen. xiv. 10 ; comp. xi. 3). These pits appear to have been of considerable extent; and, indeed, it was from them doubtless that the whole valley derived its name of Siddim (D'HE^). At length, when the day of destruction arrived, ' the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven ; and he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of those cities, and that which grew upon the ground' (Gen. xix. 24, 25). In the escape from this overthrow, the wife of Lot ' looked back, and became a pillar of salt ' (ver, 26). When Abraham, early that same morning, from the neighbourhood of his distant camp, ' looked towards Sodom and Gomorrah, and towards all the land of the plain, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace ' (ver. 27). These are the simple facts of the case. It has usually been assumed that the vale of Siddim occupied the basin of what is now the Dead -Sea, which did not previously exist, but was one of the results of this catastrophe. It has now, however, been established by Dr. Robinson, that a lake to re- ceive the Jordan and other waters must have oc- cupied this basin long before the catastrophe of Sodom : as all the geological characteristics of the region go to show that its present configuration is in its main features coeval with the present condition of the surface of the earth in general, and is not the effect of any local catastrophe at a subsequent period [Sea, Dead]. But although a lake must then have existed, to receive the Jordan and other waters of the north, which could not have passed more southward, as was at one time supposed, and which must even, as is now proved, have received the waters of the south also, we are at liberty to assume, and it is neces- sary to do so, that the Dead Sea anciently covered a much less extent of surface than at present. The cities which were destroyed must have been situated at the south end of the lake, as it then existed; for Lot lied to Zoar, which was near Sodom (Gen. xix. 20), and Zoar lay almost at the southern end of the present sea [Zoar]. ' Even at the present day,' says Robinson, ' more living streams flow into the Ghor, at the south end of the sea, from wadys of the eastern mountains, than are to be found so near together in all Palestine ; and the tract, although now mostly desert, is still better watered through these streams, and by the many fountains, than any other district throughout the whole country ' (Bibl. Researches, ii. 603). The slime-pits, or wells of asphaltum, are no longer to be seen ; but it seems that masses of floating asphaltum occur only in the southern part of the lake; and as they are seen h SODOM. but rarely, and immediately after earthquakes, the asphaltum appears to be gradually consolidated in the lake, and not being able to flow off", forms by consequence a layer at the bottom, portions ot which may be detached by earthquakes and other convulsions of nature, and then appear on the surface of the waler or upon the shore. The eminent geologist, Leopold von Buch, in his letter to Dr. Robinson (Bibl. Researches, ii. 606-608), thinks it quite probable that this accumulation may have taken place in remote times, as well as at the present, day. Thus another circumstance of importance is produced in coincidence with the sacred accounts ; and again, with reference to the southern portion of the present lake, suggesting the probability that the remarkable bay, or ' back water,' at its southern extremity, is the portion of it which did not in ancient times exist, that it in fact covers the more fertile vale of Siddim, and the site of Sodom and the other cities which the Lord destroyed ; and that, in the words of Dr. Robinson — ' by some convulsion or catastrophe of nature, connected with the miraculous destruction of the cities, either the surface of this plain was scooped out, or the bottom of the sea was heaved up, so as to cause the waters to overflow, and cover perma- nently a larger tract than formerly. The coun- try is, as we know, subject to earthquakes, and exhibits also frequent traces of volcanic action. It would have been no uncommon effect of either of these causes, to heave up the bottom of the an- cient lake, and thus produce the phenomenon in question. But the historical account of the destruction of the cities implies also the agency of fire. Perhaps both causes were therefore at work; for volcanic action and earthquakes go hand in hand; and the accompanying electric discharges usually cause lightnings to. play and thunders to roll. In this way we have all the phenomena which the most literal interpretation of the sacred records can demand.' The same writer, with the geological sauction of Leopold von Buch, repeats the conjecture of Le Clerc and others, that the bitumen had become accumulated around the sources, and had perhaps formed strata, spreading for some distance upon the plain ; that possibly these strata in some parts extended under the soil, and might thus approach the vicinity of the cities : — ' If, indeed, we might suppose all this, then the kindling of such a heap of combustible materials, through volcanic action or lightning from heaven, would cause a confla- gration sufficient not only to engulf the cities, but also to destroy the surface of the plain, so that ' the smoke of the country would go up as the smoke of a furnace, and (lie sea rushing in, would convert it. to a tract of waters.' The sup- position of such an accumulation of bitumen, with our present knowledge, appears less extra- ordinary than it might in former times have seemed, and requires nothing more than nature presents to our view in the wonderful lake, or rather tract, of bitumen, in the island of Trinidad. The subsequent barrenness of the remaining por- tion of the plain is readily accounted for by the presence of the masses of fossil salt which now abound in its neighbourhood, and which were perhaps then, for the first time, brought to light. These being carried by the waters to the bottom of the valley, would suffice to take away its pro- SOLOMON. 779 ductive power. In connection with this fact, the circumstance that the wife of Lot ' became a pillar of salt, ' is significant and suggestive, what- ever interpretation we may assign to the fact recorded. SOHERETH {W$fi ; Udpivos \i0os), a kind of costly stone, used for tesselated pavements (Esth. i. 6). It seems to have been either a species of black marble, as a similar- word in Syriac would suggest ; or else marble marked with round spots like shields, i. e. spotted or shielded marble. This interpretation finds the meaning in the He- brew word mnD soherah, which is the name for a shield. It is however easier to discover the mean- ing of the name than the application of it. We do not feel satisfied with that which lias been given ; and still less with that of Harfmann {Rebraerin, iii. 363), who supposes the sohereth to have been tortoise-shell, consisting as it were of shields ; for tortoise-shell would hardly be interspersed in a pavement with various kinds of marble. SOLOMON (Ttihf, pacific; Sept. SoA^y). The reign of Solomon over all Israel, although second in importance only to that of David, has so little variety of incident as to occupy a far less space in the Bible narrative. Moreover, some of the problems which that narrative suggests do not admit of a solution sufficiently certain to allow of our entering on the discussion. In the declining age of David, his eldest sur- viving son, Adonijah, endeavoured to place him- self on the throne, by the aid of Joab the chief captain, and Abiathar one of the chief priests, both of whom had been associated with David's early sufferings under the persecution of Saul. The aged monarch did not for a moment give way to the formidable usurpation, but. at the re- monstrance of his favourite, Bathsheba, resolved forthwith (o raise Solomon to the throne. To Joab he was able to oppose the celebrated name of Benaiah ; to Abiathar his colleague Zadok and the aged prophet Nathan. The plot of Ado- nijah was at once defeated by this decisive mea- sure ; and Solomon, being anointed by Nathan, was solemnly acknowledged as king. The date of this event is, as nearly as can be ascertained, B.C. 1015. The death of David would seem to have fol- lowed very quick upon these transactions. At least, no public measures in the interva' are re- corded, except Solomon's verbal forgiveness of Adonijah. But after the removal of David, the first events of which we hear are the destruction of Adonijah, Joab, and Shimei son of Gera, with the degradation of Abiathar. Those who look for Christian perfection in the conduct of Solomon do some violence to the facts in order to explain these transactions; which are in them- selves clear enough. Despotic monarchs are seldom found to forgive unsuccessful competitors for the crown, or their assistants; and their first deed is not rarely to put to death even their inno- cent brothers (2 Chron. xxi. 4). The promise of Solomon to Adonijah, almost as much as his command to Shimei (1 Kings ii. 37), was but a deferring of vengeance to a more convenient time; and the same absolute power, which could interpret into treason the humble suit for the hand of a beautiful but obscure damsel, would have 7S0 SOLOMON. been sure sooner or later to find a plausible ex- cuse for effecting the object determined on. In fact, Abiathar is declared ' worthy of death,' clearly not for any new offences, but for his par- ticipation in Adonijah's original attempt ; and Joab is put to death solely because he is alarmed at the treatment of his associates (ver. 26-29). For the wicked Joab no pity need be felt; yet the complexion of the whole affair proves that his murder of two chief captains was rather a con- venient excuse than the true ground of his death. As for Shimei, the tyrannical restriction on his innocent liberty, by which a pretence for his death was found, is far less respectable than simple violence ; and almost makes David's pub- lic forgiveness of him (2 Sam. xvi. 9-12) and solemn oath (xix. 21-23), appear like an ostenta- tious catching at popularity, which concealed implacable resentment. It is remarkable that these three executions are all perpetrated by the hand of Benaiah himself, who was head of Da- vid's body-guard, and after Joab's death chief captain of the army. After this, the history enters upon a general narrative of the reign of Solomon ; but we have very i'ew notices of time, and cannot attempt to fix the order of any of the events. All the in- formation, however, which we have concerning him, may be consolidated vinder the following heads : (1) his traffic and wealth ; (2) his buildings ; (3) his ecclesiastical arrangements ; (4) his general administration ; (5) his seraglio ; (6) his enemies. (1.) The overflowing wealth in which he is so vividly depicted is not easy to reduce to a mo- dern financial estimate ; partly because the num- bers are so often treacherous, and partly because it is uncertain what items of expenditure fell on the general funds of the government. In illustration of the former topic, it is enough to observe, that the money prepared for the temple by David, is computed in 1 Chron. xxix. 4 at 3000 talents of pure gold and 7000 of silver, while in xxii. 14 it is called 100,000 of gold and 1,000,000 of silver : also the sum for which David buys the floor of Araunah is, in 2 Sam. xxiv. 24-, 50 she- kels of silver; but this in 1 Chron. xxi. 25, is become 600 shekels of gold. Efforts are made to resolve the former difficulty ; but they are su- perseded by the latter, and by numerous other manifestly exaggerated figures. But abandoning all attempt at numerical estimates, it cannot be doubted that the wealth of Solomon was very great ; and it remains for us to consider from what sources it was supplied. The profound peace which the nation enjoyed as a fruit of David's victories, stimulated the in- dustry of all Israel. The tribes beyond the Jordan had become rich by the plunder of the Hagar- enes, and had a wide district where their cattle might multiply to an indefinite extent. The agricultural tribes enjoyed a soil and climate in some parts eminently fruitful, and in all richly rewarding the toil of irrigation; so that, in the security of peace, nothing more was wanted to develope the resources of the nation than markets for its various produce. In food for men and cattle, in timber and fruit trees, in stone, and probably in the useful metals, the land supplied of itself all the first wants of its people in abun- dance. For exportation, it is distinctly stated, SOLOMON. that wheat, barley, oil, and wine, were in chief demand ; to which we may conjecturally add, wool, hides, and other raw materials. The king undoubtedly had large districts and extensive herds of his own ; but besides this, he received presents in kind from his own people and from the subject nations ; and it was possible in this way to make demands upon them, without severe oppression, to an extent that is unbearable where taxes must be paid in gold or silver. He was himself at once monarch and merchant; and we may with much confidence infer, that no private merchant will be allowed to compete with a prince who has assumed the mercantile character. By his intimate commercial union with the Tyrians, he was put into the most favourable of all posi- tions for disposing of his goods. That energetic nation, possessing so small a strip of territory, had much need of various raw produce for their own wants. Another large demand was made by them for the raw materials of manufactures, and for articles which they could with advantage sell again : and as they were able to furnish so many acceptable luxuries to the court of Solo- mon, a most active exchange soon commenced. Only second in importance to this, and .superior in fame, was the- commerce of the Red Sea, which could not have been successfully prose- cuted without the aid of Tyrian enterprise and experience. The navigation to Sheba, and the districts beyond — whether of Eastern Arabia or of Africa — in spite of its tediousness, was highly lucrative, from the vast diversity of productions between the countries so exchanging ; while, as it was a trade of monopoly, a very disproportion- ate share of the whole gain fell to the carriers of the merchandise. The Egyptians were the only nation who might have been rivals in the south- ern maritime traffic ; but their religion and their exclusive principles did not favour sea-voyages ; and there is some reason to think that at this early period they abstained from sending their own people abroad for commerce. The goods brought back from the south were chiefly gold, precious stones, spice, almug or other scented woods, and ivory; all of which were probably so abundant in their native regions as to be parted with on easy terms ; and of course were all admirably suited for re-exportation to Europe. The carrying trade, which was thus shared be- tween Solomon and the Tyrians, was probably the most lucrative part of the southern and east- ern commerce. How large a portion of it went on by caravans of camels, is wholly unknown ; yet that this branch was considerable, is certain. From Egypt Solomon imported not only linen yarn, but even horses and chariots, which were sold again to the princes of Syria and of the Hittites ; and were probably prized for the supe- rior breed of the horses, and for the light, strong, and elegant structure of the chariots. Wine being abundant in Palestine, and wholly wanting in Egypt, was no doubt a principal means of re- payment. Moreover, Solomon's fortifying of Tadmor (or Palmyra), and retention of Thapsa- cus on the Euphrates, show that he had an im- portant interest, in the direct land and river trade to Babylon ; although we have no details on this subject. The difficulty which meets us is, to imagine by what exports, light enough to bear land carriage, he was able to pay for his imports- SOLOMON. SOLOMON. 781 We may conjecture that he sent out Tyiian cloths and trinkets, or Egyptian linen of the finest fabric ; yet in many of these things the Babylonians also excelled. On the whole, when we consider that in the case of Solomon the com- mercial wealth of the entire community was con- centrated in the hands of the government; that much of the trade was a monopoly; and that all was assisted or directed by the experience and energy of the Tyrians ; the overwhelming riches of this eminent merchant-sovereign are perhaps not surprising. The visit of the Queen of Sheba to Solomon, although not strictly commercial, rose out of commercial intercourse, and may perhaps be here noticed. The territory of Sheba, according to Strabo, reached so far north as to meet that of the Nabathteans, although its proper seat was at the southernmost angle of Arabia. The very rich presents made by the queen show the extreme value of her commerce with the Hebrew mo- narch ; and this early interchange of hospitality derives a peculiar interest from the fact, that in much later ages — those of the Maccabees and downwards — the intercourse of the Jews with Sheba became so intimate, and their influence, and even power, so great. Jewish circumcision took root there, and princes held sway who were called Jewish. The language of Sheba is be- lieved to have been strongly different from the literate Arabic; yet, like the Ethiopic, it be- longed to the great Syro-Arabian family, and was not alien to the Hebrew in the same sense that the Egyptian was; and the great ease with which the pure monotheism of the Maccabees propagated itself in Sheba, gives plausibility to the opinion, that even at the time of Solomon the people of Sheba had much religious supe- riority over the Arabs and Syrians in general. If so, it becomes clear, how the curiosity of the southern queen would be worked upon, by seeing the riches of the distant monarch, whose purer creed must have been carried every where with them by his sailors and servants. (2.) Besides the great work which has ren- dered the name of Solomon so famous — the Tem- ple at Jerusalem — we are informed of the palaces which he built, viz., his own palace, the queen's palace, and the house of the forest of Lebanon, his porch (or piazza) for no specified object, and his porch of judgment, or law court. He also added to the walls of' Jerusalem, and for tided Millo ('in the city of David,' 2 Chron. xxxii. 5), and many other strong-holds. The temple seems to have been of very small dimensions — 60 cu- bits long, 20 broad, and 30 high (1 Kings vi. 3) — or smaller than many moderate-sized parish churches in England ; but it was wonderful for the lavish use of precious materials. Whether the three palaces were parts of the same great pile, remains uncertain. The house of the forest of Lebanon, it has been ingeniously conjectured, was so called from the multitude of cedar pil- lars, similar to a forest. That Solomon's own house was of far greater extent than the temple, appears from its having occupied thirteen years in building, while the temple was finished in seven. In all tliese works he had the aid of the Tyrians, whose skill in hewing timber and in carving stone, and in the application of machines for conveying heavy masses, was of the first im- portance. The cedar was cut from Mount Leba- non, and, as would appear, from a district which belonged to the Tyrians ; either because in the Hebrew parts of the mountain the timber was not so fine, or from want of roads by which it might be conveyed. The hewing was superin- tended by Tyrian carpenters, but all the hard labour was performed by Hebrew bondsmen. This circumstance discloses to us an important fact — the existence of so large a body of public slaves in the heart of the Israelitish monarchy, who are reckoned at 153,600 in 2 Chron. ii. 17; see also 1 Kings ix. 20-23. During the prepara- tion for the temple, it is stated (ver. 13-1 S) that 70,000 men were employed to bear burdens, 80,000 hewers of wood in the mountains ; be- sides 3300 overseers. The meaning of this, how- ever, is rather obscure ; since it also states that there was a ' levy' of 30,000, of whom 10.000 at a time went to Lebanon- Perhaps the 150,000 was the whole number liable to serve, of whom only one-fifth was actually called out. From the large number said to ' bear burdens.,' we may infer that the mode of working was very lavish of human exertion, and little aided by the strength of beasts. It is inferred that at least the Hittites had recognized princes of their own, since they are named as purchasers of Egyptian chariots from Solomon ; yet the mass of these nations were clearly pressed down by a cruel bondage, which must have reacted on the op- pressors at every time of weakness. The word DO, which is translated 'levy' and ' tribute,'' means especially the personal service performed by public slaves, and is rendered •' task,' in Exod. i. 11, when speaking of the Israelites in Egypt. _ ■-.-;_ (3.) Until the temple was finished, the taber- nacle appears to have continued at Gibeon, al- though the ark had been brought by David to Zion (2 Chron. i. 3, 4). [This distinction was overlooked in a passage concerning David, i. 529 a. of this work.] David, it appears had pitched a tent on purpose to receive the ark, where Asaph and his brethren the Levites ministered before it with singing, while Zadok and his brethren the priests ministered before the taber- nacle at Gibeon with sacrifices (1 Chron. xv. 16-24; Kvi. 37-40). This shows that even in David's mind the idea of a single centre of religious unity was not fully formed; as the co- ordinate authority of Abiathar and Zadok indi- cates that no single high priest was recognized. But from the time of the dedication of the tem- ple, not only the ark, lint all the holy vessels from the tabernacle were brought into it (1 Kings viii. 4), and the high priest naturally confined his ministrations to the temple, Zadok having been left without an equal by the disgrace of Abiathar. Nevertheless, the whole of the later history of the Jewish monarchy, even under the most pious kings, proves that the mass of the nation never became reconciled to the new idea, that ' in Jerusalem (alone) was the place where they ought to worship.' The ' high places,' at which Jehovah was worshipped with sacrifice, are perpetually alluded to in terms which show that, until the reign of Josiah, it was impossible for kings, priests, or prophets, to bring about a uniformity and central superintendence of tbt national religion. 782 SOLOMON. After the death of Nathan and Zadok, those faithful friends of David, although Solomon continued to celehrate with the same splendour all the exterior ceremonies of worship, it is hard to believe that much of that spirit of God which was in his father animated his ecclesiastical pro- ceedings. Side by side with the worship of Je- hovah foreign idolatries were established ; and the disgust which this inspired in the prophets of Jehovah is clearly seen in the address of Ahijali the Shilonite to Jeroboam, so manifestly exciting him to rebel against the son of David (1 Kings xi. 29-39). The priests were too much under the direct domination of the crown to act an in- dependent part ; the prophets had little sympathy with the routine of pompous solemnities. Solo- mon himself, with all his erudition and insight into man's nature, had little, as far as we are aware, of that devotional character and susceptible feeling which distinguished David ; and how- ever well meant his ostentatious patronage 0f divine worship, it probably could have produced no spiritual fruit, even if he had not finally neutralized it by his impartial support of hea- then superstitions. (4.) Concerning his general administration little is recorded beyoud the names of various high officers. Among his chief ministers (I Kings iv. 1-6) are named a son of Zadok, and two sons of Nathan. There is a difficulty in the list, since it names Abiathar and Zadok as joint priests, at a time when Benaiah is already ' over the host ;' although the latter event could not have been until after the death of Joab, and therefore after the ejection of Abiathar. The two sons of Nathan seem to be named as pecu- liarly eminent; for one of them, Azariah, is said to have been ' over the officers ;' the other, Zabud, is called ' principal officer and the king's friend.' It is not likely that any other considerable changes were made in his government, as com- pared with David's, than such as peace and commerce, in place of war, necessitate. Yet it is probable that Solomon's peculiar talents and taste led him to perform one function which is always looked for in Oriental royalty, viz., to act personally as Judge in cases of oppression. His award between the two contending mothers cannot be regarded as an isolated fact : and f the porch of judgment' which he built for him- self may imply that he devoted h'sed portions of time to the judicial duties (see 2 Kings xv. 5 of Jotham). In all the older civilization of the world, the quality most valued in a judge is flie abilily to detect truth in spite of the perjury of witnesses, or defect of (what we should esteem) legal evidence; a defect which must be of daily occurrence where the art of writing is little used for common contracts. The celebrity which So- lomon gained for wisdom, although founded mainly perhaps on his political and commercial sagacity, must have received great popular im- petus from his administration of law, and from his readiness in seeing through the entanglements of affairs which arise in commercial transactions. (5.) For the harem of Solomon — consisting of 700 wives and 300 concubines — no other apology can be made, than the fact, that in countries where polygamy is not disreputable, an unlimited indulgence as to the number of wives is looked upon as the chief luxury of wealth, and the most SOLOMON. appropriate appendage to royalty. Permission once being given and the taste established, no- thing but poverty can set a limit ; since an esta- blishment of a hundred or a thousand wives is perhaps more harmonious than one of two or three. The only remarkable facts are. his mar- riage with an Egyptian princess, and his esta- blishment of his wives' idolatry. The commercial union of Tyre with Egypt, iu spite of the vast diversity of genius between the two nations, was in those days very close ; and it appears highly probable that the affinity to Pharaoh was sought by Solomon as a means of aiding his commercial projects. Although ^his possession of the Edomite ports on the gulf of Akaba made him to a certain extent independent of Egypt, the friendship of that power must have been of extreme importance to him in the dan- gerous navigation of the Red Sea; and was per- haps a chief cause of his brilliant success in so new an enterprise. That Pharaoh continued for some time on good terms with him, appears from a singular present which the Egyptian kingmade him (1 Kings ix. 16): 'Pharaoh had gone up and taken Gezer, and burnt it with fire, and slain the Canaanites that dwelt in the city, and given it for a present unto his daughter, Solomon's wile:' in consequence of which, Solomon rebuilt and fortified the town. In his declining years, a very different spirit is manifested towards him by Shishak, the new Egyptian king ; whether after the death of the princess who had been the link between the two kingdoms, or from a new view of policy in the new king, is unknown. The proceedings of Solomon towards the reli- gion of his wives has been mildly or approv- ingly regarded by various learned men, as being only what we have learned to name Toleration. But such a view seems to imply a want ol dis- crimination between those times and our own ; and besides, would require us to suppose the statements in the history to be exaggerated, as though they were highly improbable. The re- ligions of antiquity, being essentially ceremonial, were of a most obtrusive kind. It 16 one .thing to allow men in private to hold their conscientious sentiments, or indeed by argument and discussiou to aim at propagating them, and quite another to sanction public idolatries, which appeal to and allure the senses of the ignorant, and scan- dalize the minds of the better taught ; to say no- thing of the impurities and cruelties with which these idolatries were almost always connected. The spirituality and individuality of religion weie not as yet so developed as to allow of our ascrib- ing Solomon's conduct to right and noble views of toleration. Besides, he was under no neces- sity to marry these foreign wives at all. Unless prompted by mere voluptuousness (as in the case of the concubines), he must have taken them from political motives; although distinctly know- ing that the step would draw after it his public establishment of heathen sin and superstition. This is widely different from allowing foreigner, who for trade resided in the country, to practise their own religious ceremonies at their own prompting and expense; and yet even this, if permitted at all, would have been permitted only within walled and separated streets appropriated to the foreigners, by a king anxious to obey the law of Moses and of Jehovah in ever so liberal SOLOMON. SOSTHENES. 783 and unconfined a spirit. This is a topic of prime consequence in the history of the Jewish monarchy. Modern commentators, impressed with the im- portance of liberty of conscience, are naturally prone to suspect that the prophetical or priestly feeling under which the history of the kings was composed, has misrepresented the more liberal policy of these monarchs. But granting, as we may, that it was not given to those prophets or priests to understand the Christian rule of univer- sal toleration, it is certain that the times were not ripe for the application of that rule, and that the most earnest, devout, and spiritually enlightened men of those days were the most vehemently op- posed to a public toleration of idolatry. Taking tii is merely as a great and unalterable fact, it was shortsighted policy in Solomon, as well as worldly want of faith, to seek to conciliate the foreign heathen, at the expense of the devoted allegiance of God's chosen ones in Israel. He won at best a momentary good will from Ammon- ites, Moabites, or Sidonians, by such an affinity, and by such an introduction of their favourite idols : lie lost the heart of the prophets of Jeho- vah, and, as a result, he could not transmit to his son more than a fraction of his kingdom. It is no mere fiction of priestly prejudice, but a his- torical certainty, that David owed his rise mainly to the overruling and pervading power exerted on him by the pure and monotheistic faith of the prophets; while Solomon lost (for his posterity) the kingdom of the ten tribes, and perpetuated strife, weakness, debasement, and superstition, by preferring the attractive splendours of this world to that godliness which -would in the end have been rewarded even in the present life. (6.) The enemies especially named as rising against him in his later years, are Jeroboam, Ha- dad the Edomite, and Rezon of Damascus. The iirst is described as having had no treasonable in- tentions, until Solomon sought to kill him, on learning the prophecy made to him by Ahijah. .Jeroboam was received and fostered by Shishak, king of Egypt, and ultimately became the provi- dential instrument of punishing Solomon's ini- quity, though not without heavy guilt of his own. As for Hailad, his enmity to Israel began from the times of David, and is ascribed to the savage butchery perpetrated by Joab on his people. He also, when a mere child, was warmly received in Egypt, apparently by the father-in-law of Solo- mon; but this does not. seem to have been prompted by hostility to David. Having married the sister of Pharaoh's queen, he must have been in very high station in Egypt ; still, upon the death of David, he begged leave t'> depart into Edom, ami (luring the earlier part of Solomon's reign was probably forming his party in secret, anil preparing for that dangerous border warfare which he carried on somewhat later. Rezon, on the Contrary, seems to have had no personal cause against the Hebrew monarchy ; but having be- come powerful at Damascus and on its frontier, sought, not in vain, to aggrandize himself at its expense. In the long continuance of peace Da- vid's veterans had died, and no successors to them can have been trained ; and considering the other great expenses of the court, it may be confi- dently inferred that the standing army had not been kept up in any efficiency. The revenues which would have maintained it were spent on a thousand royal wives: the king himself was un- warlike; and a petty foe, if energetic, was very formidable. Such were the vexations which daikened the setting splendours of the greatest Israelitish king. But from within also his pros- perity was unsound. Deep discontent pervaded his own people, when the dazzle of his grandeur had become familiar; when it had became clear, that the royal wealth, instead of denoting national well being, was really sucked out of (he nation's vitals. Having no constitutional organ to express their discontent, they waited sullenly, until the recognition of a successor to the crown should give them the opportunity of extorting a removal of burdens which could not permanently be endured. The picture of Solomon here drawn is far les3 favourable than could be wished ; yet an en- deavour has been made to keep close to the facts. Undoubtedly the book of Chronicles, — which (contrary to custom) in this reign adds little or nothing to that of the Kings, — by omission never- theless gives a seriously altered view of this cele- brated man : for not only are his numerous mar- riages, his idolatries, his oppressions, his vexatious enemies, and the grave rebuke of the prophet Ahijah, left out of the narrative entirely, — but his building of a special palace for his Egyptian queen is ascribed to his pious objection to her dwelling in the house of David, because of the ark having passed through it (2 Chron. viii. 11). From a mind of so sensitive scrupulosity no one could have expected an establishment of heathen- ish worship. This very circumstance will show how tender was the feeling of the Levitical body towards him, and how little likely it is that the book of Kings has in any way given a discoloured and unfair view of his lamentable woildliness of principle. — F. W. N. SOLOMON, WISDOM OF. [Wisdom of Solomon.] SOLOMON'S SONG. [Canticles.] SONG. [Poetry] SOOTHSAYER. [Divination.] SOFATER (S^TraT^os), a Christian at Bersea, and one of the party of brethren who accom- panied Paul into Asia Minor from Greece (Acts xx. 4). He is supposed to be the same with the Sosipater (2a>cr<7raTpos) named in Rom. xvi. 21 ; and, if so, was a kinsman of St. Paul. SORCERER. [Divination.] 1. SOREK (p"?£* ; Sept. (Ta>fr)]K), a vine of the finest and noblest kind (Isa. v. 2 ; comp. Gen. xlix. 11, where nplK' xorekah, is translated a ' choice vine ;' and Jer. ii. 21, where pTli^ soruk, is rendered 'noble vine"). [Vine.] 2. SOREK, a valley, probably so called from its vineyards (Judg. xvi. 4). Eusebius and Je- rome place it north of Eleulheropolis, and near to Zorah. SOSIPATER. [Sopateh.] SOSTHENES (Sa-rflcV?;?), the chief of the Synagogue at Corinth, when Paul was in that city on his second journey iuio Greece (Acts xviii. 17). He was seized and beaten by the people) before the judgment-seal of Galiio, on account of the tumult raised by (lie Jews against Paul, of which he seems to have been one of the leaders. He is supposed to have been afterwards 784 SOUL. converted to Christianity, as a Sosthenes is men- tioned by Paul as 'a brother,' and coupled with himself in 1 Cor. i..l. This identity is, how- ever, a pure conjecture, and not remarkably pro- bable. Apart from it, however, we know nothing of this second Sosthenes. Eusebius makes him one of the seventy disciples, and later tradition describes him as bishop of Kolophon. SOUL. The present article is a sequel to that on Punishment, in which the literature only of the question concerning future punishment will be briefly stated. It is frequently conceded that we have not authority decidedly to say that any other motives were held out to the ancient He- brews to pursue good and avoid evil, than those derived from the rewards and punishments of this life (Jahn, Biblisches Archuologie, § 314). It is, however, considered by some learned Jews that one reference in the book of Genesis to punishment in a future stale has been over- looked. God said to the Noachidse (cli. ix. 5), 4 And surely your own blond will I require,' &c. According to tradition, the first part of the text is directed against suicide ; but it seems to us more like the enunciation of the general sub- ject, which afterwards descends to particulars. Then follows the unintelligible rendering, 'at the hand of every beast will I require it.' Now it is a surprising fact that, wherever, throughout the Scriptures, we find TV'U (here rendered beast) applied to the brute creation, it is always in conjunction with the word HDm (cat.tle),"r^O"l (reptile), or F|iy (bird), and that if none of these words accompany it, the expression is either flUT] DTI (beasts of the earth ), or JlTJ iYlETi (beasts of the field), or ~|J>» IJVn (beast of the forest), or njTl iTTl (a wild beast); but that whenever, as in this instance, no adjunct is coupled with DTI, it invariably relates to the soxd of man. This rule is, by the best Hebraists, allowed to be general, the only ex- ception throughout the Scriptures being the lext now before us, in which the word HTl stands by itself without any adjunct, but is nevertheless made in out* version to refer to the brute creation. It would, however, remove these apparent diffi- culties to suppose that the general rule holds good in pur text, as well as in every other part of Scripture, and that the word here also means the soul of man. Suppose then the first part of the verse, ' Surely your own life-blood will I re- quire,' to be taken as a general prohibition against the unauthorized destruction of human life, then the following words may be understood as be- ginning to particularise, first, the punishment of suicide, 'of every soul will I require it,' that is, of every soul will I require his own blood shed by himself. Then follows ihe punishment of homicide, 'and at the hand of man, yea, at the hand of every man, will I require the life of man his brother ;' literally, 'and at the hand of the man, at the hand of man his brother, will I require the life of man ;' which words, as has already been suggested, may be the foundation of the law of blood-revenge [Punishment]. Next follows, agreeably to the style of the book of Genesis, an emphatical recapitulation of this pu- nishment of homicide, and the reason of it (ver. ■6) : ' Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God made he man.' If then the rendering, ' at the hand of SOUL. every soul will I require it,' be admitted, and this part of the text be understood concerning suicide, the meaning must necessarily be, ' from the soul of the suicide will I require his blood,' Hence then we have the satisfaction to find in the Scrip- tures this eaily and perfect indication of a punish- ment to the soul after death, and the necessary sequitur — its immortality (Naphtaly Herz Wes- seley, in the F|DKC>, or Gatherer for Adar Rishon, 5548, p. 160 ; see also Menasseh Ben Israel's Nishmat Chayim, and the Neio Translation of the Scriptures, with notes, by the Rev. D. A. De Sola, &c, pp. 51, 52). The literature of the question concerning the nature and duration of future punishment consists of tlie following particulars. First, its duration was believed by the heathens to be eternal, or more correctly speaking, at least in our language, everlasting. For though these two words are often used as synonymous, yet strictness of use requires that the word eternal should be limited to that which has neither be- ginning nor end; and everlasting, to that which has a beginning but no end. The duration cf the Deity alone is eternal ; that of the souls of men, angels, &c, everlasting. Thus Virgil, in his well-known description of Tartarus, 'Sedet, oeternumque sedebit, Infelix Theseus.' For the Greeks reference is made to Lilian. Or. 941 B: o.vt\ fiaxpou XP°V0V ^ov tt/s vfiovrjs, aQavaros iiriKSLO-tTai (^/xia. Lycoph. 907 : aKTzpiarov Iv ■KSTpais Pduva Komvtrovav h\oKL(rp.ivoi; and 92ft, cdavT) ®ehv icvdavovcri. Secondly, there is a still more striking similarity between the descriptions both of the nature and duration of future punish- ment given in the Apocryphal books and those of the New Testament. Thus Judith xvi. 17 : ' Woe, to the nations which rise up against my kindred ; ihe Lord Almighty will take vengeance on them in the day of judgment, in putting (ire ami worms in their flesh ; and they shall feel them, and weep for ever,' ecus alooj/os (comp. Ecclus. vii. 17; Mark ix. 44). These terms seem borroxoed from Isaiah's description of a different subject (ch. Ixvi. 24). Thirdly, Josephus describes the doctrine of everlasting punishment as being held by the Pharisees and Essenes : ' that the souls of the wicked should be punished with perpetual pu- nishment (di'Sioj TL/xmpia), and that there was ap- pointed for them a perpetual prison (eipyp.bs di'Sios'). (De Bell. Jud. ii. 8. 1.1, 14 ; Antiq. xviii. 1. 3). Josephus himself, in the discourse ascribed to him on Hades, speaks of a subterraneous re- gion, a lake of unquenchable fire, everlasting punishment, and of a worm ntver dying (6 2. 6) ; but that homily, as Winston calls it, abounds with other evidence that its author was a Christian. For proofs that the Rabbinical writers held the notion of infinite punishment, see the references by Wetstein on Matt. xxv. 46. In the New Testament the nature of future punishment is almost always described by figures. The most abstract description occurs in Rom. ii. 9-1G: ' Tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men.' Our Lord generally describes it under figures suggested by some comparison he had just before made, and in unison with it. Thus, having described future happiness under the figure of a midnight banquet, lighted up witli lamps, then the state of. the rejected is described under that of ' outer darkness ' outside the man- SOUL. SOUTH. 785 nion, and gnashing ' or chattering * of teeth,' from the extreme cold of an Oriental night (Matt. viii. 12 ; Luke xiii. 2S) ; though the phrase also denotes rage and vexation (comp. Ecclus. xxx. 10). Our Lord employs the phrase ' wailing ' or 'weeping and gnashing of teeth' no less than seven times. If 'the end of the world' be de- scribed by him under the figure of a harvest, then the wicked, who are represented by tlie tares, are accordingly gathered and burned. If his return be represented by a master returning to take ac- count of his servants, then the wicked servant is cut asunder, or rather discarded — margin, 'cut oil*' (Matt. xxiv. 51); for in the same verse he is described as being still alive, and consigned to the place of ' weeping and gnashing of teeth.' Our Lord also frequently represents future punish- ment under the idea of tire, which Calvin, on Isa. lxvi. 24, remarks, must be understood metaphori- cally of spiritual punishment. Indeed both the nature and variety of the figures employed by our Saviour in regard to the subject fully justify Paley's observation, 'that our Lord's discourses exhibit no particular description of the invisible world. The future happiness of the good and t lie future misery of the bad, which is all we want, to be assured of, is directly and positively affirmed, and is represented by metaphors and comparisons which were plainly intended as metaphors and comparisons, and nothing more. As to the rest a solemn reserve is maintained ' {Evidences of Christianity, part ii. ch. ii.). The question of the duration of future punishment chiefly turns on the force of the Words translated ' ever,' ' ever- lasting,' 'never,' which our Lord and his apostles apply to it, and which it is well known have some- limes a limited signification, and are very vari- ously translated in the English version. Thus the word aicov, as a substantive, occurs 128 times in the Greek Testament ; and in our' translation is rendered 72 times ever, twice eternal, 36 times world, 7 times never, 3 times evermore, twice worlds, twice ages, once course, once ivorld wilh- out end, and twice it is passed over. The word al&vios, as an adjective, occurs 71 times, and is once rendered ever, 42 times eternal, 3 times icorld, and 25 times everlasting. It is furthermore an important circumstance, that the terms of like import in the Old Testament, and translated in the Septuagiut by these Greek words, when ap- plied to the Mosaic law, as a ' statute for ever,' ' vo\i.ip.ov aiwviov, ' were urged in proof of the ir- revocable perpetuity of that law, by the Judaizing teachers; yet St. Paul styles this argument 'a doting about questions, and a strife of words' (1 Tim. vi. 4)-; 'fighting about, words' (2 Tim. ii. 14); 'foolish and untaught questions' (see Mackni^ht's comment on these passages, and Archbishop Seeker's Sermons, Serm. xvi. vol. 5, Loud. 1771). Hence, therefore, it is urged on the one side, that we can never settle the precise import of these words, as applied in the New Testament to the duration of future punishment, until we shall be aide also to answer the following ques- tions; namely, Was it part of the commission of Christ and his apostles to determine this matter? and if so, In what, sense were the terms they used in regard to it meant by themselves, and under- stood by their hearers — whether' as denoting a punishment oi unknown duration, or one literally coexistent with the duration of the Eternal God? VOL. 12. On the other side it is objected, that the same word is applied both to the happiness of the righteous and the misery of the wicked, though varied in our translation of Matt. xxv. 45 : 'These shall go away into everlasting punish- ment, but the righteous into life eternal ;' where Rosenmiiller, reasoning from the context, infers ' the loss of the rewards of virtue ' to be meant, which will necessarily be infinite. Various opinions have been held concerning the nature and duration of future punishment, ascending from the doctrine of Edwards, — ' Souls full of dreadful grief, bodies and every member of them full- of racking torture, without any possibility of getting ease, without any possibility of moving God to pity' (Discourse on the Eternity of Hell Torments, p. 2S, &c), through the various mo- difications of the doctrine — punishment with pain, literally everlasting, but proportioned to the de- merit, of the condemned ; punishment in the sense of loss or damage (see Greek of Matt. xvi. 26) to the same duration; punishment by pain, reme- dial in its intention, limited in duration, but yet followed by disadvantage literally everlasting — > up to the highest extreme on the opposite side, namely, annihilation. Upon this truly important subject we cordially acquiesce in the remark of Doddridge : ' Miserable are they who venture their souls upon the possibility that the words in question, when applied to future punishment, may have a limited meaning.' Among the an- cients, the following held that punishments, at least sensible ones, would some time cease : Justin Martyr, Theophilus, Tatian, Arnobius, &c. Grotius (apud Bloom field, Recensio Syn- optica, on Matt, xxv.) refers also, for the doubts. of certain ancients, to the end of Jerome's Commentary on Isaiah. Among the more emi- nent moderns who have maintained that the fu- ture punishment of the wicked will be limited and corrective, see Bishop Rust, Letter of Resolution concerning Origcn, 1(561 ; "Jeremy White (who had been Chaplain to the Protector Cromwell), On the Restoration of all Things, Lond. 1712; Dr. Thomas Burnet (Master of the Charter House) De Statu Mortuorum ; Newton (Bishop of Bris- tol), Sixtieth Dissertation; Hartley, Observa- tions on Man, 1791; Whifitoli, The Eternity of Hell Torments considered ; Soutliwood Smith, On the Divine Government, Loud. 1826; and the List of Authors mentioned in his Appendix. J. F. D. SOUTH. The country, or quarter of the heavens, which the Shemite, standing with his face to the east, supposes to be on his right hand. It is denoted by seven Hebrew words (1. 3M; 2. DVH; 3. JD^j 4. pO*; 5. -qn ; 6. "flip; 7. CD), nearly all of which refer to some characteristic of the region to which they are respectively applied. 1. 233 (root 233 in Syr. and Chald., to be dry), probably derived its name from the hot drying winds which blow annually into Syria, over Africa and Arabia. ' In March,' says Volney, ' appear in Syria the pernicious southerly winds, with the same cir- cumstances as in Egypt, that is to say, their heat, which is carried to a degree so excessive, that it is difficult to form an idea of it without having felt it ; but oue can compare it to that of a great oven when the bread is drawn out (Voyage en 3 E 786 SOUTH. SOUTH. Syrie et Egypte, torn. i. p. 297 ; comp. p. 55 ; Luke xii. 55, ' When ye see the south wind blow ye say there will be heat;' and see Kitfo's Physical History of Palestine, month of March, pp. 221, 222). The word is occasionally applied to a parched or dry tract of land. Caleb's daughter says to her father, 'Thou hast given me a south,' or rather ' dry land ;' H^H flN (Vulg. terrain arentem ) ; ' give me also springs of water ' (Judg. i. 15 ; comp. ver. 9). At other times the word refers to those arid regions, notwithstanding their occasional fertility, over which the south wind blows into Syria. So the Sept. and Vulg. under- stood the 'whirlwinds from the south " (Isa. xxi. 1 ; St' ip-qfiov, turbines ab Aphrico). ' The burden of the beasts in the south' is rendered ra>v re- rpanoSaiv ra>v iv rrj ip-ij/J.'j> (Isa. xxx. 6). At other times the word is rendered by voros and hty, which latter is the Hellenized form of Libs, Ventus ex Libya, the south-west wind, and, by metonymy, the quarter whence it blows. In several instances the Hebrew word is simply put into Greek letters ; thus, rhv Naye/3, Josh. x. 40 ; rrjv yr)v Na-ys^S, Alex. rr\v Na-ye/3, al. Neytfi, xi. 16; Na-ye'0, Cyr. 'Aye',0, Obad. 19, 20; and once, probably by a corruption, it is dpydfi, 1 Sam. xx. 41, al. vtyr\fi, al. veyep, al. ipy6.fi. The Vulgate renders the word by ' meridies, austral is plaga, terra meridiana, auster ab Aphrico, terra australis.' More than once the Sept. differs widely from the present Hebrew text; thus, in Ezek. xx. 47, it renders n^lSV 333JD by cbro air-oMiirov eoos fioppa; Vulg. ' ab austro usque ad aqui- lonem ;' so also in Exod. xxvi. 8, HHjJ J1NQ is rendered irphs jioppdv; Vulg. 'ad austrum.' It is also used in the geographical sense in Num. xxxiv. 3; Josh. xv. 2 ; 1 Chron. ix. 21; 2Chron. iv. 4 ; Ezek. xl. 2 ; xlvi. 9, &c. But a further and important use of the word is as the name or designation of the desert regions lying at the south • of Judaa, consisting of the deserts of Shur, Zin, and Paran, the mountainous country of Edom or Idumnea, and part of Arabia Petraea (comp. Mai. i. 3; Shaw's Travels, p. 4o8). Thus Abra- ham, at his first entrance into Canaan, is said to have ' gone on toward the south ' (Gen. xii. 9) ; Sept. iv rrj ipr^fMU, Aquila vorovSe, Symniaehus els v6rov ; and upon his return from Egypt into Canaan, he is said to have gone ' into the south ' (xiii. 1); Sept. els rhv eprjfiov ; Vulg. 'ad australem plagam,' though he was in fact then travelling northward. Comp. ver. 3, ' He went from the south to Bethel ;' Sept. eh rr\v ip-qixov ; Vulg. ' a meridie in Bethel.' In this region the Amalekites are said to have dwelt, ' in the land of the south,1 when Moses sent the spies to view the land of Canaan (Num. xiii. 29), viz., the locality between Idumaea and Egypt, and to the east of the Dead Sea and Mount Seir [Ahai.ekites]. The inhabitants of this region were included in the conquests of Joshua (x. 40). Whenever the Sept. gives the Hebrew word in the Greek letters, No'/e'jS, it always relates to this particular district. To the same region belongs the passage, ' Turn our captivity as the streams in the south ' (Ps. cxxvi. 4) ; Sept. cos x€'/Lt£Woyy *v TV Nrfra, ' as winter torrents in the south' (Vulg. ' sicut torrens in Austro'); which suddenly fill the wadys or val- leys during the season of rain (comp. Ezek. vi. 3 ; xxxiv. 13 ; xxxv. 8 ; xxxvi. 4, 6). These are dry in summer (Job vi. 15-18). The Jews had, by their captivity, left their country empty and deso- late, but by their return would ' flow again into it.' Through part of this sterile region the Israelites must repass in their vain application to Egypt (Isa. xxx. 6 ; com]). Deut. viii. 15), It is called the Wilderness of Judaea (Matt. iii. 1; Josh. xv. 61 ; comp. Ps. lxxv. fi, Hebrew or margin; see also Jer. xvii. 26: xxxii. 41; xxxiii. 14; Ezra xx. 46, 47 ; xxi. 4 ; comp. Obad. xix. 20 ; Zech. ix. 7). Through part of this region lay the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, 'which is desert" (Acts viii. 26). Thus, as Drusius observes, the word often means not the whole southern hemisphere of the earth, but a desert, tract of land to the south of.Iudoea. Some- times it is used in a relative sense; thus, the cities of Judah are called ' the cities of the south ' (Jer. xiii. 19), relatively to Chaldaa, expressed by 'the north' (i. 14; comp. iv. 6; vi. 1). Jerusalem itself is called ' the forest of the south field,' or country, like the Latin ager (Ezek. xx. 4G ; comp. Gen. xiv. 7) [Forest]. Egypt, is also called ' the south ;' thus. ' the king of the south ' (Dan. xi. 5) is Ptohmy Soter and his successors ; .comp. ■ verses 6, 9, 11,15,25, 29, 40; but in the last-named verse, Mede understands the Saracen from Arabia Felix ( Works, pp. 674, 816). 2. Dill, which, according to Gesenius, is a word of, uncertain derivation. It is rendered by \fy. Sept., Deut. xxxiii. 23; by voros, Eccles. i. 6.; xi. 3; Ezek. xl. 24, 27, 28, 44, 45 ; xii. 1 1 ; and by ed\Kaaaa, Ezek. xiii. 18. Vulg. ' meridies, auster, australis, ventus australis.' 3. jQTl audits adverb njHOTl, strictly what lies to the right; Sept. voros, An|/ ; and sometimes the word is simply put into Greek letters ; thus, Qai/j.dv (Hab. iii. 3). Indeed all the three preceding words are so rendered (Ezek. xx. 46), 'Tie dvdpdirov, ari'ipicrov to Trpocruiirov cou iirl 6a.Lfj.dv, ko.I eVi/DA.e^oi' iirl Sapb/x, koX -Kpoty'i]- reucov eirl Bpv/xbv riyov/xevov vaye/3 : where per- haps the vocabulary of the translator did not afford him sufficient variety. The Vulgate here gives ' viam austri, ad aphricum, ad saltum agri meridiani,' and elsewhere renders the Hebrew word by ' meridiana plaga, ad meridiem." It occurs in Exod. xxvi. 35; Num. ii. 10; iii. 29 : x. 6 ; Job ix. 9; xxxix. 26; Ps. lxxviii. 26; Cant. iv. 16; Isa. xliii. 6^ Hah. iii. 3; Zech. ix. 14; xiv. 4. In Zech. vi. 6, it denotes Egypt. It is poetically used for the south wind, like Shaks- peare's 'sweet south;' Ps. lxxviii. 26, vorov, Africum, and Cant. iv. 16, v6re; for the ex- planation of the latter see North. Observe that iUDTl and 323 are interchanged in Exod. xxvi. 18; xxxvi. 23; Ezek. xlvii. 1. 4. p», also meaning the right side and south. Thus, Ps. lxxxix. 12, ' Thou hast made the north and the south;" Sept. QaKaaaa ; Vulg. mare. The word is evidently here used in its widest sense, compre- hending not only all the countries lying south, but also the Indian ocean, &c, the whole hemi- sphere. Aquila, Boppdv kuX Se^dv ; Theodotion, Boppav Ktzl Norov. In some passages where our translation renders the word right, the meaning would have been clearer had it rendered it south (1 Sam. xxiii. 19, 24; 2 Sam. xxiv. 5 ; Jobxxiii. 9). 5. Tin, ' Out of the south cometh the whirl- wind' (Job xxxvii. 9), literally ' chamber'or 'store- house,' iKra/XLelcov. interioribus. The full phrase occurs in ch. ix. 9, jDfl 'Tin, rO.jj.eia vorov, in- teriora austri, the remotest south ; perhaps in both these passages the word means the chambers oi SPAIN. storehouses of the south wind. 6. *13"!to, ' Pro- motion cometh not from the south ' (Ps. lxxv. 6), literally ' wilderness,' curb ip7]jj.wp, desertis mon- iibus. 7. D^D, ' And gathered them out of the lands, and from the south ' ( Ps. cvii. 3), 8d\acraa, mare; where Gesenius contends that it ought to be translated 'west,' though it si ands opposed to ]1E)¥1D, as it is indeed so translated under ex- actly the same ciicumstances in Isa. xlix. 12. He refers to Deut. xxxiii. 23, and Amos viii. 12. It is also thus rendered in our version of the first of these references: and on the latter we can only refer to Archbishop Newcome's Version of the Minor Prophets, Pontefracr, 1809, pp. 51,52. In (he New Testament we have v6ros in the geo- graphical sense, fiacrihi(r*3|J?; Sept. c.P6.Xvq ; Yulg.ara- nea) occurs in Job viii. 14; Isa. lix. 5. In the other instance in which the word is used in our version (Prov. xxx. 28), and where the Hebrew has rPptO^, the Sept. KaXajiwrrts, and the Yulg. stellio, there is most probably a mistranslation [Semamith]. In the first of these passages, the reference seems clear to the spider's web, or lite- rally, house (rP2), whose fragility is alluded to as a fit representation of the hope of a profane, ungodly, or -profligate person : for so the word Ppn really means, and not ' hypocrite,' as in our version. The object of such a person's trust or confidence, who is always really in imminent danger of ruin, may be compared for its uncer- tainty to the spider's web. ' He shall lean upon his house (J,, e. to keep it steady when it is shaken) ; he shall hold it fast [i. e. when it is about to be de- stroyed) ; nevertheless it shall not endure (ver. 15). In the second passage (Isa. lix. 5) it is said, ' The wicked weave the spider's web' (''lip, literally, ' thin threads) ;' but it is added, ' their thin threads shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works ;' that is, their artifices shall neither succeed, nor conceal them- selves, as does the spides's web. This allusion intimates no antipathy to the spider itself, or to its habits when directed towards its own purposes ; but simply to the adoption of those habits by man towards his fellow-creatures. No expression of an abstract antipathy towards any creature whatever is to be found in Scripture. Though certain species, indeed, which for good and wise reasons were prohibited as food, are so far called ' an abomination ;' yet revelation throughout re- cognises every living creature as the work of God, and deserving the pious attention of mankind. It is worthy of remark, that, natural history, with all its characteristic superiority to prejudices and antipathies^ is indebted for its existence to reve- lation. The Creator himself first directed the attention of man to this science : — ' Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the airT and brought them unto Adam, to see what be would call them ; and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to- the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field' (Gen. ii. 19, 20), The most ancient system or classification of the natural world is to be found in the writings of Moses (Gen. i. 20, &c.) ; a system recognised by the writers of Scripture in widely different times (Gen. vi. vii. viii. ix. ; 1 Kings iv. 33 ; Ps.clxviii.; Acts x. 12). Michaelis well observes that ' the systematic division of quadrupeds given by Mo3e3 is so excellent, as never yet, after all the SPIRIT. improvements in natural history, to have beeome obsolete, but, on the contrary, is still considered as useful by the greatest masters of the science :' ' a fact,' he adds, ' which cannot but be looked upon as truly wonderful' (Commentary on ike Laws of Moses, Art. 204). It is recorded of Solomon, that ' he spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon, unto the hyssop (moss) that spring- eth out of the wall : he spake also of beasts, and of fowl, and of creeping things, and of fishes' (1 Kings iv. 33). To revelation also the rise of natural history, as a science, is to be attributed among the Gentiles ; for there is good ground for believing that Aristotle had seen the writings of Solomon. It is revelation which, by teaching that ^all things' proceed from one and the same God, invests the science with interest to every dis- cerning mind. The study of insects is so new in this country, that even at the distance of some years after the death of Willughby, an attempt was made to set aside the will of a Lady Glanville, on the ground of lunacy, because she had shown a strong par- tiality for insects; and Mr. Ray had to appear on the day of trial to bear testimony to her sanity (see Memoir of Willughby, by Rev. J. F. Den- ham, p. 132, Edinburgh, 1838 ; or in the.NaturaI- ist's Library). Even poets, from Aristophanes to Thomson, have too often contributed to the popu- lar prejudices against insects. The latter stigma- tizes spiders as ' Cunning and fierce — Mixture abhorred ;' but these epithets are in reality as unjustly ap- plied to them (at least with reference to the mode by which they procure necessary subsistence), as to the patient sportsman, who lays snares for the birds that are to serve for the dinner of his fa- mily : while it can be further pleaded in behalf of spiders, that they are actively serviceable to the human race, in checking the superfecundity of other insects, and afford in their various pro- cedures the most astonishing displays of that Supreme Intelligence by which they are directed. J. F. D. SPIKENARD. [Nerd.] SPIRIT and HOLY SPIRIT. The word for -spirit' in the Hebrew is T\"D; in the Greek, ■/rvevijLa ; and in the German, geist. It is one of the most generic terms in either the English, Hebrew, or Greek language. A somewhat ex- tended reference to the tcsus loquendi, both of the Old and New Testament, is necessary, in order to ascertain its Scriptural use and import. Its leading significations may be classed under the following heads : — 1. The primary sense of the term is tcind. ' He that formeth the mountains and createth the wind' (ni"T, Amos iv. 13; Isa, xxvii. 8). ' The wind (m/evp-a) bloweth where it listeth ' (John Hi. 8). This is the ground idea of the term ' spirit ' — air — ether — air refined, sublimated, or vitalized: hence it denotes — 2. Breath, as of the mouth. ' At the blast of the breath of his nostrils (IBS nil) are they con- sumed ' (Job iv. 9). ' The Lord shall consume that wicked one with the breath of his mouth ' (rip -KvevfxaTi to5 ar6p.aTosi 2 Thess. ii. 8). 3. The vital principle which resides in and animates the body. In the Hebrew, K'BJ is the SPIRIT. main specific term for this. In the Greek it is tywxf\, an(l 'n the Latin, anima. ' No man hath power over the spirit (ni"D) to retain the spirit ' (Eccles. viii. 8; Gen. vi. 17; vii. 15). 'Jesus yielded up the ghost' (afyrjite to irvzvfxa, Matt. xxvii. 50). ' And her spirit (irvevfj.a auTJjs) came again,' &c. (Luke viii. 55). In close connection with this use of the word is another — 4. In which it has the sense of apparition — spectre. ' They supposed that they had seen a spirit,' i. e. spectre (Luke xxiv. 37). 'A spirit hatli not flesh and bones, as ye see me have ' (ver. 39 ; Matt. xiv. 26). 5. The soul — the rational immortal principle, by which man is distinguished from the brute creation. It is the to nvevfia, in distinction from the 7) \pvxv- With the Latins it is the animus. In this class may be included that use of the word spirit in which the various emotions and dispositions of the soul are spoken of. ' Into thy hands I commend my spirit ' (to irvevfid pov, Luke xxiii. 46 ; Acts vii. 59 ; 1 Cor. v. 5 ; vi. 20 ; vii. 34 ; Heb. xii. 9). ' My spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour ' (Luke i. 47). ' Poor in spirit ' (tttoixoi tQ -rrvev/xaTi) denotes humility (Matt. v. 3). ' Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of ' (Luke ix. 55), where irvevixa denotes disposition or temper. ' He that hath no rule over his own spirit' (1111"), Prov. xxv. 2S; xvi. 32; Eccles. vii. 9). The moral affections are denominated ' the spirit of meek- ness ' (Gal. vi. I) ; 'of bondage ' (Rom. viii. 1 5) ; 'of jealousy' (Num. v. 14); 'of fear' (2 Tim. i. 7) ; 'of slumber ' (Rom. xi. 8). In the same way also the intellectual qualities of the soul are denominated. ' the spirit of counsel ' (Isa. xi. 2) ; ' (he spirit of knowledge ' (Isa. xi. 2) ; 'the spirit of wisdom' (Eph. i. 17); 'the spirit of truth and of error' (1 John iv. 6). 6. The race of superhuman created intelli- gences. Such beings are denominated spiritual beings because they have no bodies like ours. To both the holy and the sinning angels the term is applied. In their original constitution their natures were alike pure spirit. The apostacy oc- casioned no change in the nature of the fallen angels as spiritual beings. In the New Testament daemonology Sai/xcov, Bat/J.6vwv, irvevfxa duddapTov, -irvevixa irovijpovj, are the distinctive epilhets for a fallen spirit. Christ gave to his disciples power over unclean spirits (irv. aKaddpTwi/, Matt. x. 1 ; Mark i. 23; Luke iv. 36 ; Acts v. 16). The holy angels are termed spirits: — 'Are they not all ministering spirits' (AeiTovpyina. irvevpaTa, Heb. i. 14)? 'Anil from the seven spirits (kina. irvevfxdTuv) which are be- fore his throne' (Rev. i. 4). 7. The term is applied to the Deity, as the sole, absolute, and uncreated Spirit. ' God is a Spirit' (irvevLia b ®e6s). This, as a predicate, belongs to the divine nature, irrespective of the distinction of persons in that nature. Cut its characteristic application is to the third person in the Divinity, who is called the Holy Spirit (Uvevpa aywv), because of his essential holiness, and because in the Christian scheme it is his peculiar work to sanctify the people of God. He is denominated The Spirit, by way of eminence, as the immediate author of spiritual life in the hearts of Christians. The New Testament writers SPIRIT. 789 are full and explicit in referring the principle of the higher life to the Spirit. In the Old Testa- ment the reference is more general. The Spirit is an all-pervading, animating principle of life in the world of nature. In the work of creation the Spirit of God moved upon, or brooded over, the face of the waters (Gen. i. 2 ; Job xxvi. 13). This relation of the Spirit to the natural world the ancients expressed as Ens extra — Ens super — Ens intra mundanum. The doctrine of the Spirit, as the omnipresent life and energy in nature, differs from Pantheism on the one hand, and from the Platonic soul of the world on the other. It makes the Spirit the immanent divine causality, working in and through natural laws, which work is called nature; as in the Christian life He is the indwelling divine causality, operating upon the soul, and through divine ordinances; and this is termed grace. The Spirit in the world may be considered as the divine omnipresence, tnd be classed among the doctrines which are mo -e pe- culiarly theological. But (he indwelling and operation of the Spirit in the heart, of the helttver is an essential doctrine of Christianity. The one province of the Spirit is nature, the other grace. Upon the difference between (he two, in respect to the Spirit's work, rests the Christian consciousness. The general presence and work of the Spirit in nature is not a matter of consciousness. The special presence and work of the Spirit in the heart of the believer, by the effects which are produced, is a matter of which, from conscious- ness, there may be the most consoling and de- lightful assurance. The words Spirit, and Holy Spirit, frequently occur in the New Testament, by metonymy, for the influence or effects of His agency. a. As a procreative power — ' the power of the Highest' (Luke i. 35). b. As an influence, with which Jesus was en- dued (Luke iv. 4). c. As a divine inspiration or afflatus, by w/ ich (he prophets and holy men wrote and spoke (iv ■KvevLiari, 5m ■nviifxaTos, inrb irvevpaTos). ' Holy men of God spake as they were moved by (he Holy Ghost' (2 Pet. i. 21 ; Num. xi. 26; Neh. ix. 30; Ezek. iii. 12, 14). John in Patmos was wrapped in prophetic vision — was iv trtevfian (Rev. i. 10; iv. 2; xvii. 3). d. As miraculous gifts and powers, with which the Apostles were endowed, to qualify them for the work to which they were called. ' Jesus breathed on then:, anil said unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost ' (Aa/3ere Vlved/Aa dyiov, John xx. 22). ' And they were rilled with the Holy Ghost,' &c. (Acts ii. 4). ' They were baptized with the Holy Ghost' (iv Uvev/xaTt aylcp, Acts i. 5; comp. Joel ii. 28 with Acts ii. 16-18, where the ITn of the prophet is translated irveu/xa by the apostle). But the phrase, Holy Spirit, is specially used to denote a divine personal agent. The Holy Spirit is associated, as a distinct person, with the Father and the Son, in the baptismal formula and the apostolical benediction. The Father and Son are real persons. It is reasonable to think that (he spirit who is joined with them in this solemn form of induction into the Christian church, is also a personal agent, and not >in ab- straction— a mere power or influence. The sub- ject is baptized into the belief of three personal 790 SPIRIT. agents. To suppose that, in this solemn profes- sion of faith, he avows his belief in the Father and the Son, and the power or influence of God, is forced and frigid. He is baptized into- the name of each of the three — ets to ovojjlo. tou Ttarpos, k STEPHANAS. however, who wish to ascertain what works have been written on the subject are referred to Walch, Bibliotheca Theol. ii. 422, sq. ; Thiess, Krit. Comment, ii. 350, sq. On the epoch of the birth of Christ, see Professor Wallace's Dissertation on the True Age of the World (a work, however, to which we do not attach much value), p. S4, London, 1811.— J. R. B. STEPHANAS (2,Tt;n»i, denominations of the common heron, are from the same source, and not primitive appellatives in the great northern family of languages, which, it must he confessed, an- not solitary examples in vocabularies so remote from each other. Of '.he 800 SUCCOTH. SUPPER OF THE LORD. smaller sized, more solitary black stork, no men- tion need be made in this place, because it is evidently not the bird referred to in the sacred writers. — C. H. S. STREETS. [Towns.] STRIPES. [Punishments.] 1. SUCCOTH (1TI3D, booths; Sept. 2okx^)> the first encampment of the Israelites on the Egyptian side of '"the Red Sea (Exod. xii. 37; xiii. 20 ; Num. xxxiii. 5) [Exodus]. 2. SUCCOTH, a town in the tribe of Gad (Josh. xiii. 27), on the east of the Jordan (Judg. viii. 5 ; 1 Kings vii. 6). The spot in which the town stood is called ' the Valley of Succoth,' and must have been part of the valley of the Jordan. The place derived its name from Jacob having tarried some time there on bis return from Padau- aram, and made booths for bis cattle (Gen. xxxiii. 17). SUMMER. [Palestine.] SUPH (Pj-ID), translated ' flags' in the Auth. Vers., means some aquatic plant. It is men- tioned in Exod. ii. 3, 5 ; Isa. xix. 6 ; Jonah ii. 6 ; but. it is difficult to say whether it may not have been used in a comprehensive sense, as sea-weed is with us, rather than have been confined to one of the plants growing in the sea. The word suph oc- curs in several other passages : these, however, have reference to the Red Sea, which by the He- brews was called Suph Sea. Roseumiiller states that this, ' in the Coptic version of the Pentateuch, and the Psalms, is called by its old Egyptian name, the Shari Sea.' But Shari, or. as the Greeks pronounced it, Sari, is the Egyptian name for tan- gles or sea-weeds, of which there is great abund- ance in that sea. In Jonah ii. 5, ' sea- weed was wrapped around my head," one of the fiicj would seem to be indicated. Lady Calcott selects zostera marina, or sea wrack, which resembles them in habit. It has by others been translated juncus, arundo, carex, &c. Rosenmiiller says, there is no doubt that a species of sari is denoted by svph, which, according to Pliny, grows on the banks of the Nile. 'Fruticosi est generis sari, circa Nilum nascens, duorum ferme cubitorum altitudine, pollicari crassitndine ; coma papyri, similique manditur modo.' This is supposed to be some reed, or grass-like plant. It is curious that the names sar and sari extend even to India. There is a species of saccharum growing in the neigh- bourhood of Calcutta, which has been named .S. Sari by Dr. Roxburgh. — J. F. R. SUPPER OF THE LORD (KvpuucSy Setff- vov), so called by St. Paul in his historical re- ference to the Passover Supper as observed by Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed (1 Cor. xi. 20 ; Matt. xxvi. 20-31). As regards the day on which our Lord observed the Passover, it seems more rjroper to say, that the Pharisees, the dominant party among the Jews, deferred its observance a day in accordance with their tra- ditions, than that Jesus anticipated k. What one party considered the fourteenth Nisan, would to the other be the thirteenth. This supposition seems best to harmonize any apparent discrepancy in the accounts of the evangelists. Several controverted points may perhaps be best adjusted by a connected harmony of the last Pass- over of the Lord, constructed from the evangelic narratives alluding to it, but filling up the va* rious omitted circumstances from the known Passover rites [Passover] . ' Now, when it was evening, Jesus sat down with the twelve (Matt.) Apostles ' (Mark). The first customary washing and purifications being performed, the blessing over \he first cup of wine, which began the feast, would be pronounced, probably in the usual form — ' We thank thee, O God, our Heavenly Father, who hast created the fruit of the vine.' Considering the peculiarity of the circumstances, and the genius of the new dis- pensation about to be established — that the great Teacher had already declared the superiority of simple form.? to the involved traditions of the Jewish doctors, and that his disciples alone were present on this occasion — it may be supposed that, after the blessing over the herbs, the recital of the liturgy (or haggadah) explanatory of the redemption of their ancestors from Egyptian bond- age, would be somewhat simplified, and perhaps accompanied with new reflections. Then probably the second cup of wine was mingled, and with the flesh of the paschal lamb, feast-offerings, and other viands, placed before the Lord. ' And he said unto them, With desire have I desired to eat this Pascha. with you before I suffer; for I say unto you, I shall no more eat thereof until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And he took the [second] cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide among yon, for I say unto you, I will not henceforlh drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God shall come ' (Luke). When the wine d retributed to each would be drunk off, one of the unleavened cakes would next be broken, the blessing said over it, and a piece distributed to each disciple, probably with the usual formula: — 'This is the bread of afflic- tion which your fathers did eat in the land of Egypt' — i.e., not the identical bread, transub- stantiated, but a memorial or sign of it. The company would then proceed with the proper sup- per, eating of the feast-offering, and, after a bene- diction, of the paschal lamb. ' And as they were at supper.* the Devil having now put it into the heart of Judas to betray him ; Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all tilings into his hands, and that he was come from God, and was going to God, riseth from supper; and' after due preparations ' began to wash the disci- ples' feet ' (John). After this striking symbolic exhortation to humility and mutual service (John xiii. 6-20), ' Jesus was troubled in spirit, and bare witness, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you will betray me. Then the disciples looked on one another, doubting of whom he spake ' (John). ' And they were very sorry, and began each of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I ? ' (Matt.) ' One of the disciples, leaning back on Jesus"s breast, saith unto him, Lord, is it I ? Jesus answered, He it is to whom I shall * The translation of the phrase Ze'mvov yevo- fj.ej>ov by ' supper being ended,' has much con- fused the various narratives, and led many to think that Judas was present at the Lord's Supper, properly so called. The true reading probably is yivojxivov (not yevofxivov), as understood by the Arabic and Persic translators, in the sense 'while supper was about,' or ' during supper-time.' SUPPER OF THE LORD. SUPPER OF THE LORD. 801 give a sop, when I have dipped it'. And after dipping the sop he giveth it to Judas Iscariot. Then Satan entered into him. Jesus saitli unto him, What thou doest, do quickly. He then, on taking the sop, went immediately out; and it was night' (John). The supper would then proceed, until each had eaten sufficient of the paschal lamb and feast- offering. 'And as they were eating, Jesus took the bread,' the other unleavened cake left unbroken, 'and blessed' God 'and brake it, and gave it to the' eleven 'disciples, and said, Take eat; this is my body (Matt, Mark), which is broken for you : this do in remembrance of me ' (Luke, Paul, 1 Cor. xi. 24;. The supper being concluded, the hands were usually washed the second time, and the third cup or ' cup of blessing ' (1 Cor. x. 16) prepared, over which the- master usually gave thanks for the Covenant of Circumcision, and for the law given to Moses. Jesus, therefore, at this juncture, an- nounced, with peculiar appropriateness, his New Covenant. ' After the same manner, also, Jesus took the cup after supper, and, having given thanks, gave it to them, saying, Drink all of you out of it ; for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many' for forgiveness of sins (Matt.) : this do, as oft as ye drink, in remembrance of me ' (1 Cor. xi. 24). But I say unto you, I shall not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new (ko.iv6v) with you in my Father's kingdom' (Matt.). 'And when they had sung a hymn ' (Matt.), probably (lie Hallel, our Lord discoursed long with his disciples about his approaching death and departure (John xiii.31 ; xiv. 31), and when he had finished he said, ' Arise, let us go hence.' 'And thev went out on to the Mount of Olives' (Matt.). A multitude of disputes and controversies have existed in the church, from the earliest ages of Christianity, regarding the nature, ob- servance, and elements of the Lord's Supper. On these points the reader may consult the following works: — Pierce, Waterland, Cudworth, Hoadley, and Bell, On the Eucharist; Dr. Wiseman's Ro- man Catholic Lectures, and Dean Turton's Reply ; Orme's Lord's Supper Illustrated, Lond. 1832; Goodman, On the Eucharist, Lond. 1841 ; Coleman's Christ. Antiq. ; Dr. Hal ley, On the Sacraments, Lond. 1845 ; De Lindeand Mearns's Prize Essays on the Jewish Passover and Chris- Han Eucharist, Lond. 1815. The early church appears, from a vast preponderance of evidence, to have practised communion weekly, on the Lord's day. The custom, which prevailed during the first seven centuries, of mixing the wine with water, and in the Greek church with hot water, aPppi ars to have originated with the ancient Jews, who mingled their thick, boiled wine with water (Mishna. Tr. Tcroomoth, xi.).* The raisin-wine, often employed both by the ancient and modern * Maimonides (in Chometz Vematzah, sect. vii.) states, that the proportion of pure wine in every cup must not be less than the fourth part of a quarter of a bin, besides water which must needs be mingled, that the drinking of it may be the more pleasant. VOL. II. Jews (Arbah Turim, § 483, date 1300), contains water of course. Remnants of this custom are still traceable in the East. The Nestorian Chris- tians, as late as the sixteenth century, as we find from the old travellers, celebrated the Eucharist in such wine, made by steeping raisins one night in water, the juice being pressed forth (Osorius, De Eel. Emanuel, lib. iii. ; Boter, Pel., p. 3, lib. ii.; Odoard Barboso, ap. Ramum., v. i. p. 313; Prof. Brerewood, On Div. Lang., 1622, p. 147). The Christians of India (said to be converted by St. Thomas) used raisin-wine, as also do some of the Syrian churches at the present day (Ross's Pansebeuij 16S3, p. 4'j2; W. Aiusworth's Travels in Asia Minor, 1842). The third Council of Braga would not permit the use of the pure 'fruit of the vine,' for they condemned as heretics 'those who used no other wine but what they pressed out of the clusters of grapes, which were then presented at the Lord's Table ' (Bingham, Christ. Antiq., V. ch. ii.). It seems to us, however, that the language of Jesus is conclusive on this point Dr. De Wette (on Matt. xxvi. 29) observes, that 'the wine is called new here, in reference to the future renova- tion of all things at Christ's coming. It refers to an ideal celebration of the supper in a glorified state." This is true ; but this able critic should have further explained ,wby the wine must be new rather than the bread. The reason is plainly referable to the kind of wine which the disciples were then drinking. Had Jesus been speaking of fermented wine he could not have used this lan- guage, because of such it is said that ' the old is better than the ne-,v ' (Luke v. 39). But the wine here employed to symbolize the heavenly or spiri- tual feast was of a kind which is best when new, or, as Clement of Alexandria designates it {Peed, ii.), ' the blood of the vine,' which of course is in its best state when pure and fresh from the vintage. The wine employed at the last Supper of our Lord must, therefore, have been made either from dried or preserved grapes, or from the juice pre- served by boiling or by preventing the access of air. As regards the bread, many of the Eastern churches use un fermented bread in the Commu- nion. ' The Gieek church adopts a leavened bread, but the Roman church lias it unleavened; and this difference 1ms been the cause of much controversy, though it seems easy to decide which kind was used by Jesus, the last Supper having been on one' of the ** days of unleavened bread, when no other kind could be eaten in the land of Judaea.' The Protestant churches, generally, pay little regard to the nature of the elements, but use the ordinary bread, as well as wine, of the country. It was probably from regarding in a similar way the bread and wine as mere ordinal} beverage, that some of the ancient sects gave up the wine altogether, and substituted other I Epiphanius {Uteres. 49) and Augustine (l.'rms. 28) mention an ancient sect of Christians in Phrygia, called Artotyrites, because they used bread and cheese. Others made use of bread and water only; and the third Council of Braga (ad. 675) condemn a custom of communicating in bread and milk. If, however, the elements of the Supper are to be regarded in a symbolic sense, after the manner of the Jewish Passover — if the language of our Lord is to be applicable to wine in the present day — it would seem that at- 3 F 802 SWALLOW, tention should be paid, not only to the name, but. to the nature of the elements ; that the symbol and the things symbolized should naturally cor- respond, and still retain a reference to the ancient Passover. ' For,' as St. Paul observes, ' Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness ; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth ' (1 Cor. v. 8).— F. R. L. SUSA. [Shushan.] SUSANNAH. [Daniel, Apocryphal ad- denda to.] SWALLOW (D^D Sis, and "nTl Deror). The latter is sometimes translated ' turtle-dove,' but it is more properly the ' swift' or ' black mar- tin,' and, probably, the Dururi of Alexandria, mentioned by Forskal. The first occurs only in Isa. xxxviii. 14; Jer. viii. 7; the second in Psa. lxxxiv. 3 ; Prov. xxvi. 2. Sis, however, when coupled with "lljy Ogur, is by some thought to denote the crane, while the last-mentioned He- brew word denotes the swallow. The Septuagint, Vulgate, and three ancient manuscripts point out the true meaning ; and Bochart with others have established it by learned researches, which leave little to be desired, although Rabbinical writers produce Arabic authority to prove that Sis is the name of a long-legged bird. Sis, however, is an imitative name expressive of the swallow's voice or twitter, and in Dr. Kennicott's remark, that in thirteen Codices of Jercm. he read Isis for Sis, we find the source of the ancient fable of the Egyptian Isis being transformed into a swallow. The species of Syria and Palestine, so far as they are known, appear all to be the same as those of Europe: they are, 1. Hirundo rustica, or do- mestica, the chimney swallow, witli a forked tail, marked with a row of white spots, whereof Hirundo Syriaca, if at all different, is most likely only a variety. 2. Hirundo Urbica, the martin or common window swallow. These two are most likely the species comprehended under the name of Sis. 3. Hirundo Riparia, sand-martin or shore-bird, not uncommon in northern Egypt, near the mouths of the Delta, and in southern Palestine, about Gaza, where it nestles in holes, even on the sea-shore. 4. Hirundo Assus, the swift or black martin, distinguished by its larger size, short legs, very long wings, forked tail, and by all the toes of the feet turning forward : these, armed with small, crooked, and very sharp claws, enable the bird to hang against the sides of walls, but it cannot rise from the ground on account of the length of its wings. The last two, but more particularly this species, we take to be the Deror., on account of the name Dururi, already mentioned; which was most probably applied to it, because the swift martin prefers towers, minarets, and ruins to build ■ in, and is, besides, a bird to which the epithet of ' free ! is particularly applicable. On the Eu- ropean coast of the Mediterranean it bears the name of Barbota, and in several parts of France, including Paris, is known by the vulgar name of 'le Juif,' the Jew; and, finally, being the largest and most conspicuous bird of the species in Pa- lestine, it is the type of the heraldic martlet, originally applied in the science of blazon as the SWINE. especial distinction of Crusader pilgrims, being borrowed from Oriental nations, where the bird is likewise honoured with the term Hadgi, or Pil- 511. [The Swift— Dururi.] grim, to designate its migratory habits. The Deror being mentioned as building on the altar, seems to imply a greater generalization of the name than we have given it ; for habits of nest- ing in immediate contact with man belong only to the house and window swallows ; but, in the present instance, the expression is not meant to convey a literal sense, but must be taken as re- ferring to the whole structure of the temple, and in this view the swift bears that character more completely than the other. It is not necessary to dilate further on the history of a genus of birds so universally known.— C. H. S. SWEARING. [Oath.] SWINE (*VTn chazir). We have already noticed these animals [Boar], chiefly as they occur in a wild state, and here refer to the do- mesticated breeds only, because they appear to have been repeatedly introduced and reared by the Hebrew peonle, notwithstanding the strong prohibitions in the law of Moses (Isa. lxv. 4). Egyptian pictures, the parable of the Prodigal Son, and Christ's miraculous cure of the demo- niac, when he permitted swine to be possessed and destroyed by rushing over a precipice into the sea of Galilee, furnish ample proofs that during the dominion of the Romans they were kept around the kingdom of Judah ; and the re- strictive laws of Hyrcanus on this subject, indicate that the Jews themselves were not altogether strangers to this unlawful practice. Commentators ascribe this abundance of swine to the numerous Pagan sacrifices of these animals in the temples: but we do not deem this to be a sufficiently cor- rect view of the case, since hogs of every denomi- nation were less used for that purpose than oxen, goats, and sheep. May it not be conjectured that in those days of a greatly condensed population the poor found in swine's flesh, and still more in the fat and lard, melted for culinary purposes, as it still is in every part of Pagan Africa, a most desirable aliment, still more acceptable than the salt fish imported from Sidon, to season their usual vegetable diet? ' When the melting fire burnetii, the fire causeth the waters to boil' (Isa. lxiv. 2); and, again, ' a broth of abominable things in their vessels ' (lxv. 4). For, although the Mosaic law SYCAMINE TREE. justly condemned the use of swine's flesh, at the time of the departure of Israel out of Egypt, when the state of slavery the people had been in, there is reason to believe, had greatly multiplied leprosy, and, moreover, when it was important to enforce cleanliness among the multitude on many ac- counts ; yet the reasoning of the ancients and of commentators, Rabbinical and medical, regard- ing the nnhealthiness of sound pork, in moderate quantities, as a condiment, or more generally as an article of food, is entirely erroneous. For in some provinces of Ancient Persia, the practice of curing animal food was known so early, that the procession of tribute-bearing deputies from the several satrapies, sculptured on the great stairs at. Persepolis, represents at least one nation bringing preserved flesh meat, apparently hams, and already, before the conquest of northern Gaul by Caesar, pork and various sausages were ex- ported from Belgium to the Roman capital. Neither in the tropics, nor in the East, during the first centuries of Christianity', or in the era of the Crusades, or among the Christians of Hie present day, are any ill effects ascribed to the use of swine's flesh ; and the Moslem population, which isdebarred the use of this kind of food, is, perhaps, more liable to disease and to the plague than others, because it lacks the stamina of resistance to in- fection, and that supply of digestive nutriment which keeps the alimentary system in a healthy condition. The rich Moslem supply the deficiency by vegetable oils and butter, or ghee; hence, while the wealthy official class multiplies, the poorer classes, for want of a cheap supply of simi- lar ingredients, diminish. As the Mosaic law was abrogated by the Christian, it was plainly meant to be only temporary ; and if by the decrees of Providence the Gospel is once more to triumph in the land of the first Christian churches, it may hereafter be found that this apparently insignifi- cant agent has been a considerable instrument in the event.— C. H. S. SWORD. [Arms.] SYCAMINE TREE C2.vKdp.wos) is mentioned only once in the New Testament, in Luke xvii. 6, ' And the Lord said, If ye had faith as a grain of mustard-seed, ye might say unto this sycamine- tree,' &c. From a slight similarity in name, this tree has often been confounded with the sycamore, both by ancient and modern writers. Both trees are, however, mentioned by the apostle, who must have had the technical knowledge necessary for distinguishing such things. Though the English version avoids translating the word, there can be little doubt of the mulberry-tree being intended; and it is frequently so rendered. Thus. Dios- corides says, Mouea if) Ivicaixivea, &c, 'Mulberry or sycamine is well known.' Celsius shows (Ilicrobot. i. 290), by quotations from Athenseus, Galen, &c, that the Greeks called it by both names; and Corn. Celsus {Be Medicina, iii. 18) says expressly, 'Graeci morum crvicd/xivci' ap- pellant,' But still even ancient authors confound it with the sycamore, and therefore modern writers may be excused when so doing. Dr. Sibthorpe, who travelled as a botanist in Greece, for the ex- press purpose of identifying the plants known to the Greeks, says that in Greece the white mul- berry-tree is called novpia ; the black mulberry- tree, crvKa/xfvia.. The mulberry, moreover, is a tree which we might expect to find mentioned in SYENE. 803 Scripture, since it is so common in Palestine. It is constantly alluded to by old travellers, and indeed is much cultivated in the present day, in consequence of its affording food for the silk- worm ; and it must have been common also in 512 [Black Mulberry — Morus nigra.) early times, or the silk-worms would not. have ob- tained suitable food when first introduced. As the mulberry-tree is common, as it is lofty and affords shade, it is well calculated for the illus- tration of the above passage of Luke. — J. F. R. SYCAMORE is a species of fig, N. Fines Sycomorus of botanists, and the same as Shik- Moii. — J. F. R. SYCHAR CXvxdp), a name of reproach ap- plied by the Jews to Shechem [Shechem]. SYCHEM (2uxe'M)> t'ie name for Shechem in Acts vii. 16, being that also used in the Septua- giut version of the Old Testament [Shechem]. SYENE (rmp ; Sept. iv^ry) a city of Egypt, situated in the Theba'is, on the southern extremity of the land towards Ethiopia (Ptol. iv. 5 ; Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 10; xii. 8; Strabo, pp. 7S7, 815). Ezekiel, describing the desolation to be brought upon Egypt through its whole extent, says, ' Thus saith the Lord, I will make the Land of Egypt utterly desolate, from the tower of Syene even to the border of Cush (Arabia),' or, as some read, is ' from Migdol to Syene,' implying, ac- cording to either version of the passage, the whole length of the country from north to south. Syene is rep/resented by the present Assouan, which exhibits i'ew remains of the ancient city, except some granite columns of a comparatively late date, and the sekos of a small temple. This building has been supposed by late travellers to have contained the famous well of Strabo {Geog. xvii. p. 817), into which the rays of a vertical sun were reported to fall during the summer solstice, a circumstance, says the geographer, that proves the place ' to lie under the tropic, the gnomon at midday casting no shadow." But although exca- vations have been carried on considerably below 3*2 801 SYNAGOGUE. the pavement, which has been turned up in search of the well it was thought to cover, no other re- sults have been obtained than that this sekos was a very improbable site for such an observatory, even if it. ever existed ; and that Strabo was strangely misinformed, since the Egyptians them- selves could never in his time have imagined this city to lie under the tropic ; for they were by no means ignorant of astronomy, and Syene was, even in the age of Hipparclius (b.c. 140, when the obli- quity of the ecliptic was about 23° 51' 20"), very far north of that line. The belief that Syene was in the tropic was however very general in the time of the Romans, and' is noticed by Seneca, Lucau, Pliny, and others. But, as Sir J. G. Wilkinson remarks, ' a well would have been a bad kind of observatory if the sen had been really vertical ; and if Strabo saw the meridian sun in a well, he might be sure he was not in the tropic' {Mod. Egypt and Thebes? ii. 2S6). The same writer adds, ' Unfortunately the observations of the ancient Greek writers on the obliquity of the ecliptic are not so satisfactory as might be wished, nor are we enabled, especially as La Grange's theory of the annual change of obliquity being variable is allowed to be correct, to ascertain the time when Assouan might have been within the tropic, a calculation or traditional fact in which, perhaps, originated the erroneous assertion of Strabo.' The latitude of Assouan is fixed by Wilkinson at 24° 5' 30", and the longitude is usually given as 32° 55'. SYNAGOGUE (HD3? H rFQ), a Jewish place of worship. The Greek, from which the word is immediately derived (ffvva.ywyr)'), denotes ' an assembly ;' being similar in meaning to eKKXTpria, whence our ' church ' is taken. Both terms ori- ginally signified an assembly or congregation ; but afterwards, by a natural deflection of meaning, they both came to designate the building in which such church or assembly met. The Hebrew phrase '''house of assembly ') is more strictly descriptive of the place than were originally ' synagogue' and ' church.' The latter word retains its ambiguity ; the former has lost it, signifying.now and in the time of our Lord exclusively a building. The precise age of the introduction of syna- gogues among the Israelites it does not appear easy to determine. There is a natural tendency among men, nor least among those who are given to letters, to refer institutions back to very early periods ; and the Rabbins surpassed all others in this exaggerating propensity. Hence, we believe, arose the traditionary and Tayguminical stories of the extreme antiquity of synagogues. Even a patriarchal origin has been ascribed to them. But the statements made are unworthy as of credence, so of investigation. It. is quite certain that if synagogues were in use in the days of Abraham, we have no evidence to establish this as an histo- rical fact ; and averments which rest on conjecture or legends may well be passed in silence. A passage in Acts (xv. 21). certainly speaks of the antiquity of synagogues in the first century : ' Moses of old (e/c yevewv apx^iov) hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath-day.' But ' of old ' is a relative term. The ' ancient generations ' here spoken of may not reach back farther than the return from Babylon. If, indeed, Psalm lxxiv. SYNAGOGUE.. was written before the exile, synagogues were known previously to that event. This, however, would leave a long interval between the date of the psalm and the days of the patriarchs untouched and unaffected. The words to which we refer are found in ver. 8 : ' They have burned up all the synagogues of God fa H^IC) in the land.' Ewald (Die Poet. Buchsr des Alien Bundes, 2 th. p. 293) refers this composition to the time of Nehemiah (b.c. 445). Tholuck gives for its- date the year B.C. 5^8, when the kingdom of Jmlah v/as overrun by the Chaldeeans, and the temple plundered and burnt down. The Hebrew words, however, do not necessarily denote syna- gogues. ' Houses of God ' is a general term, and may refer to any sacred place. There may be here a reference to the schools of the prophets, preserved by the principle of reverence long after the spirit of prophecy and the pursuits of learning had ceased to fill them with eager pupils. If we might, from 2 Kings iv. 23, suppose that at, least on festival occasions pious Israelites resorted to the prophets- for prayer and advice, we could easily understand how such a practice would spontaneously convert the places where they abode into a species of syna- gogue; and not improbably we may Ihere find Ihe germ out of which the proper synagogue worship arose. Psalm cvii. 32, 'Let them exalt him also in the congregation of the people, and praise hinv in the assembly of the elders,' affords words which will correspond with that worship, but proves nothing as to a praj-exilian custom, since it was written after the return from captivity ; for even Tholuck says, 'Freilich nachdeniExil ' (Psalmerx fiir Geistliche und Laien, p. 343. Halle, 1843). The earliest worship was offered to God in what may with propriety be termed his own house — sub . divo — before the eye of Heaven, in the open air. But such a temple was too vast, for the human mind, which lost, itself in the immensity of ..space, and needed narrower limits,, in order to concen- trate, fix, and inflame its sympathies. Accord- ingly, in the course of time, particular spots were approved of God as worshipping places, till at length one distinguished house of prayer was chosen and established in Zion. The temple- worship, as it was constituted in the days of David and Solomon, was grand, august, and imposing. Yet can we easily understand how a- felt necessity would arise for a more intimate and closer, if it must be also majestic, intercourse with God, by the intermediation of certain so- lemnities in which all and each of a congregation would have an individual share. Nor would this feeling of want wait for any other condition than an active and somewhat refined religious sense experienced hi a population of which only a small number could crowd and find room in the gates of the national temple : so that there is nothing unreasonable nor imaginary in giving to the origin of synagogues an earlier date than the period of the exile. To this epoch it is that the origin of synagogues is generally referred •, and beyond a doubt there were then peculiar circumstances which called for their establishment. Yet the considerations into which we have gone may possibly warrant the idea that the wish rather developed than ori- ginated the influences out of which the worship in question sprung. Unquestionably, however. SYNAGOGUE. SVNAGOGUE. 805 then, if not before, s}'nagogues came into exist- ence. A later date cannot well be assigned. Deprived of the solemnities of their national wor- ship, yet still retaining their religious convictions, and keenly feeling the loss they had endured, earnestly, too, longing and praying for a restora- tion of their forfeited privileges, the captive Israelites could not help meeting together for the purposes of mutual sympathy, counsel, and aid, or of prayer and other devout exercises. But prayer makes every spot holy ground. Some degree of secrecy, too, may have been needful in the midst of scoffing and scornful enemies. Thus bouses of p*ayer would arise ; and the peculiar form of the synagogue worship — namely, devotion apart from external oblations — would come into being. It has, indeed, been asserted (Bauer, Gottesd. Verfassung, ii. 125) that synagogues were not known till the time of Antiochus Epi- phanes (n.c. 174), on the ground that it is then for the first time that the term is used by Josephus — one more instance added to the hundreds which already existed, of the folly which denies an histo- rical reality to every thing for which positive vouchers cannot be found in the Jewish historian. Such arguments would have some force if Jose- phus had professed to narrate" every thing, and left us as many volumes as he lias left us chapters. That he did not consider it 'set down in his duty' to give an exact history of the origin and progress of the synagogue-worship, may be inferred from the fact that his mention of synagogues is only occasional and e:i ijassuv.t. The authority of theTalmudists (such as it is) would go to show that a synagogue existed wherever there were ten families. What, how- ever, is certain is, that in the times of Jesus Christ synagogues were found in all the chief \\ mm 513. [Jewish Synagogue in Amsterdam. cities and lesser towns of Palestine. These places are then spoken of as well known, and therefore long-established houses of worship, and obviously formed an essential and recognised portion of the national inheritance. There was a synago ue at Nazareth (Luke iv. 16), one also at Capernaum (Mark i. 21), as well as in the several cities of Syria, Asia Minor, and Greece, which had a Jewish population (Acts ix. 2; xiii. 5 ; xiii. 12; xiv. 1 ; xvii. 1, 1(1 ; xviii. 4 ; xix. 8 ; and see also Joseph. Antiq. xix. 6. 3; De Bell. Jud. vii.3. 3). The larger cities had several. In Acts ix. 2, we find Paul asking for letters to Damascus ' to the ^i/ihif/ofjucs'1 (ver. 20). In Jerusalem, one Rab- binical authority (Megill. lxxiii.4) represents the number to have been ISO ; another (T. Ilieros. l"'ust's °'" pi aver, ora'tdfia, oratories, chapels, places 'where prayer was wont to be made' (Acts xvi. 13), which, as in the place just cited, were mostly near a piece of flowing water, in order to afford the Jews means of obsei their custom of washing before prayer (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 10. 23 : Deufsch, De Sacris Judceortim ad Mora frequenter exstrtictls}. Synagogues were built sometimes on the outside of cities, but more frequently within, and preferably oil < ., BDOtsi At ;t J'l,lT l"'1'1"1 Ul,'.v were nxr'! "ear burial -places. A peculiar sanctity was attached td these spots, even after the building had fallen to ruin (Mishna, Megtll. 3. 3). In the 806 SYNAGOGUE. Synagogue pious Israelites assembled every Sab- bath and festival day, the women sitting apart from the men (Philo, Opp. ii. 458, 630) ; and at a later period, on every second and fifth day of each week (T. Hieros. Megill. 75. 1 ; T. Babyl. Babd. Kama, 82. lj, for the purposes of common prayer, and to hear portions of the sacred books read ; which was performed sometimes by any one of the company (Luke ii. 10), or, according to Philo (Opp. ii. 630, ed. Mang.), by any one of the priests or elders (tcou lepecov Se tls 6 Trapcuv ■}) Twy yepovTow eh avayiyaxTKei rovs lipovs vofxovs avrots koL naff eKafffov e^yen-ai), who, as the pas- sage just quoted shows, expounded eacli particular as he proceeded. The writings thus read aloud and expounded were the Law, the Prophets, and other Old Testament hooks (Actsxiii. 15; xv. 21 ; Mishna, Megill. 3. 4 ; Eichhorn, Einleit. ins A. T. ii. 458, sq.). The language in which the Scrip- tural passages were read cannot be generally and accurately determined. It doubtless varied ac- cording to circumstances. Ezra (Nell. viii. 8), if he read in the old Hebrew, gave the sense in the Chaldee. The Septnagint translation was in very common use in the time of our Lord, and may have been employed in synagogues. It appears (T. Hieros. Sota, 7 ) that in Ca?sarea, a city more Graecian than Jewish, the prayers were uttered in the Greek tongue. In synagogues out of Palestine, the Greek translation seems to have been read conjointly with the original text. The exposition of the Scripture was doubtless made in each nation in the vernacular tongue; accordingly, in Palestine the worship of the synagogue was con- ducted in Syro -Chaldee. In Egypt, from the time of the Ptolemies, the Greek language was customary in ihe services of the synagogue. The expositor was not always the same person as the reader (Philo, Opp. ii. 458, 476). A memorable instance in which the reader and the expositor was the same person, and yet one dis- tinct from the stated functionary, may be found in Luke iv. 16, sq., in which our Lord read and applied to himself the beautiful passage found in the prophecy of Isaiah (lxi. 4). The synagogue, indeed, afforded a great opportunity for preaching the gospel of ihe kingdom ; and the reader may well suppose that the novelties of doctrine which weie'then for the first time heard within its walls created surprise, delight, wonder, and indignation in the minds of the hearers of our Lord and his apostles, according to their individual spiritual condition. After the reading and exposition were con- cluded, a blessing was pronounced, commonly by a priest. The people gave a response by utter- ing the word Amen ; when the assembly broke up (1 Cor. xiv. 16). At the head of 1 he officers stood the 'ruler of the synagogue' (apxicrvvdyuyos, j~lDJ3n CXI), who had the chief direction of all the affairs con- nected with the purposes for which the syna- gogue existed (Luke viii. 49; xiii. 14; Mark v. 35, seq. ; Acts xviii. 8: Yitringa, Archisynag. Observat. novis Illustrat.). Next in rank were the elders (Luke vii. 3), called also ' heads of the synagogue' (Mark v. 22; Acts xiii. 15j, as well as 'shepherds' and ' presidents,' who formed a sort of college or governing body under the presidency of the chief ruler. There was in the third place the TQi'n tf1^, legatus ecclesice, ' the angel of SYNAGOGUE, GREAT. the church,1 who in the synagogue meetings acted commonly as the speaker, ur as the Protestant minister, conducting the worship of the congre- gation (Mishna, Bosh Hasshana, 4. 9), as well as performed on other occasions the duties of se- cretary and messenger (Schottgen, Hor. Heb. i. 10S9, sq.). Then came, fourthly, ' the minister' (Luke iv. 20), the attendant who handed the books to the reader, was responsible for the clean- liness of the room, and for its order and decency, and opened and closed the synagogue, of which he had the general care. In addition, there probably were almoners or deacons, HpT:. ''fcOJ (Matt. vi. 2), who collected, held, and distributed the alms of the charitable. In regard to the furniture of the synagogue, seats merely are mentioned in the New Testament (Matt, xxiii. 6 ; James ii. 3). The ' chief seats,' or rather ' front seats' (TrpairoKaBedpiai), were oc- cupied by the Scribes and Pharisees. The outfit may have been more simple in the days of Christ; still there was probably then, as well as at a later period, a sort of pulpit (j87jjua, HCS, THJO), and a desk or shelf (Btikt], iTDT) or pTl), for holding the sacred books (Mishna, Berach, v. 3; Bosk Hasshana, 4. 7 ; Megilla, 3. 1; Sabb. 16. 1). Some sort of summary judicature seems to have been held in the synagogues, and punishments of flogging and beating indicted on th» spot (Matt, x. 17; xxiii. 34; Mark xiii. 9; Luke xii. 11; xxi. 12; Acts xxii. 19; xxvi. 11 ; 1 Cor. xi. 22). The causes of which cognizance was here taken were perhaps exclusively of a religious kind. Some expressions in the Talmud seem to imply that a sort of judicial triumvirate presided in this court (Mishna, Sanhed. i. ; Maccoth, 3. 12_). It certainly appears from the New Testament that heresy anil apostacy were punished before these tribunals by the application of stripes. The reader may have been struck by some re- semblance between this account and the arrange- ments which prevailed in the early Christian churches. The ' angel of the church ' (Rev. ii. 1), the pastor, was obviously taken from the syna- gogue. Winer, however, denies that ' the mes- sengers of the churches' (2 Cor. viii. 23) has any connection with the legatus ecclesice. The words • because of the angels' (1 Cor. xi. 10) have been referred to this same office, — a reference which Wilier does not approve. Meier (Commentar, in loc.) holds that the allusion is to celestial beings, an idea which he thinks Paul derived from Judaism (Septuagint, Ps. cxxxviii. 1 ; Tobit xii. 12; Burt, Synag. p. 15; Grotius,«»i loc; Eisenmeier, Entdeckt. Judenth. ii. p. 193). The work of Yitringa (De Synagogd Veterum) remains the chief authority on the subject, though published in J 696. See also Burmann, Exercitt. Acad. ii. 3, sq. ; Relaud, Antiq. Sacr. i. 10; Carpzov, Appar. p. 307, sq. ; Hartmann, Verbind. des A. T. mit d. Neuen, p. 225, sq. ; Brown, Anti' quities of the Jews, vol. i. p. 59ft, sq. — J. R. B. SYNAGOGUE. GREAT (iWffp Wp"), the name applied in the Talmud to an assembly or synod presided over by Ezra, and consisting of one hundred and twenty men, alleged therein to have been engaged in restoring and reforming the worship of the Temple after the return of the Jews from Babylon. We shall hae furnish the evidences of the existence of this assembly. ' The SYNAGOGUE, GREAT. bouse of judgment of Ezra is that called the Great Synagogue, which restored the crown to its original condition' (Chron. ^OTW, fol. 13). The crown, observes Buxtorf {Tiberias, ch. x.), 'was triple, consisting of the law, the priesthood, and the commonwealth ;' and he explains this by adding that Ezra purified the- law and the Scrip- tures generally from all corruptions. Again in the Jerusalem Talmud (Cod. Megillah, 3) it is said, ' When the men of the Great Synagogue arose, they restored magnificence (i. e. the crown of the law) to its pristine state.' In Pirke Aboth, cap. 1, it is observed that Moses received the law from Mount Sinai, gave it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, the elders to the prophets, and these to the men of the Great Synagogue ;' and in Tract Yomah, lxix. 2, it is added, ' Why is this called by the name of the Great Synagogue ? Because they restored the crown to its pristine state.' In Megillah, fol. x. 2 : ' This is a tra- dition from the men of the Great Synagogue ;' and in Baba Bathra, fol. 15 : 'The men of the Great Synagogue wrote Ezekiel, the twelve(minor) prophets, Daniel, and Esther ;' and the glossator explains this by saying ' that they collected the books into one volume, and made new copies of them, knowing'that the prophetic spirit was about to depart.' In Pirke Aboth it is added that Simeon the Just was the last survivor of the men of the Great Synagogue. He is supposed to have been contemporary with Alexander the Great (b.c. 332), and is said to have completed the canon by adding the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and to have survived forty years the building of the second temple. Abarbanel and some of the later Jewish com- mentators have amplified these statements, and some eminent Christian writers have adopted their views in regard to the history of the text of Scripture. We have already seen that several of the fathers held that the books of the law, having been destroyed at the burning of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar, were miraculously restored by Ezra [Esdras]. Buxtorf assumes that the labours of the Great Synagogue con- sisted only in restoring both the law and the entire Scriptures to their integrity, separating the false from the true, and removing corruptions. Carpzov (Introd. lib. i. ch. i.) observes, in re- ference to this subject, that the account of the restoration by Ezra of the law, which had been burned by Nebuchadnezzar, is ' a fable of the Papists derived from the fathers, but impugned by Bellarmine (De Verb. Dei, ii. 1), and Natalis Alexander, (Hist. Eccles.) [and others of the Roman church]. Neither.' he adds, ' did Ezra correct and amend the Scriptures, which had been corrupted during the captivity — a papist- ical comment built up by Cornelius a Lapide, (Proem. Com. p. 5), and refuted by our divines (see Calovius); nor did he invent the present letters of the Hebrew alphabet, in place of the Samaritan — a fable refuted by Buxtorf [Scrip- ture, Holy]. But what Ezra really did was this : he collected the copies of the Scriptures into one volume, purified them by separating the spurious from the genuine, fixed the canon of di- vinely inspired hooks, and rejected all that was heterogeneous, and finally examined the canonical books, that nothing foreign or depraved should be mixed up with them, and pointed out the true SYRIA. 807 method of reading and expounding them: in which labour he had the assistance of Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Nehemiah [Ezra, Mordecai, Simon the Just], and the others, in all one hun- dred and twenty." ' It was,' lie observes, ' the unshaken principle of both Jews and Christians that the canon of the Old Testament was fixed once for all by Ezra and the men of the Great Synagogue.' Bellarmine also (I. c.) maintains that although some of the fathers supposed that the whole Scriptures had been burned and mira- culously restored by Ezra, as Basil, whose words (Ep. ad Chilon.) are, ' Hie campus in quo secessu facto Esdras omnes divinos libros ex mandato Dei eructavit,' yet that from the state- ments of Chrysostom, ' that out of the remains of the Scripture Ezra recomposed it ;' of Hilary (Prcef. in Psal.), that 'Ezra had collected the Psalms into one volume ;' and of Theodoret, that ' the Scripture having been depraved in the time of the exile was restored by Ezra ;' — these fathers did not mean to assert that Ezra had restored the whole from memory, but only that he collected into one body the difl'erent books which he had found dispersed in various places, and amended such parts as had been corrupted by the negli- gence of transcribers. In opposition to all these views, Le Gere (Sentiments de quelques Theo- logiens) maintains that the whole history of the Great Synagogue and the Esdriue Recension was a Talrnudical fable ; in which he was followed by Father Simon and many others. There cer- tainly appears but a very slight foundation for the superstructure raised by Buxtorf (Tiberias),- Carpzov, and Prideaux [Esdras]. That the law and the prophets, however, bad not perished, but were read by the Jews during the exile, appears from Dan. ix. 1, 2, <5, 11, 12; comp. Ezra vi. IS; vii. 10. Genebrard asserts that there were no less than three Great Synagogues, one in a.m. 3010, or b.c. 391, when the Hebrew canon, consisting of twenty-two books, was fixed; another in 3860 (b.c. 114), when Tobit and Ecclesiasticus were added ; and a third in 3950 (b.c. 51), when the whole was completed by the addition of the books of Maccabees. But this statement, being un- supported by any historical proof, has met with no reception. — W. W. SYNTYCHE (Zwrixn), a female Christian named in Phil. iv. 2. SYRACUSE (Svpdtiovo-ai), a celebrated city on the south-east coast of the island of Sicily. It was a strong, wealthy, and populous place, to which Strabo gives a circumference of not less than one hundred and eighty stades. The great wealth and power of Syracuse arose from its trade, which was carried on extensively while it re- mained an independent state under its own kings ; but about 200 u.c. it was taken by the Romans, after a siege rendered famous by the mechanical contrivances whereby Archimedes protracted the defence. Syracuse still exists as a considerable town under its original name, and some ruins of the ancient city yet remain. St. Paul Spent three days at Syracuse, after leaving Melita, when bewty conveyed as a prisoner to Rome (Acts xxviii. 12). SYRIA (Supio). This great country is men- tioned under the name of Auam in the Hebrew Scriptures, several parts of it being so designated, 808 SYRIA. with the addition of a district name; and it is only by putting together the portions thus sepa- rately denominated, that we learn the extent of country which the word indicated among the He- brews [see Aram]. Aram is usually rendered Syria in the Authorized and other versions : and in the time of the kings it more frequently in- dicates the kingdom of which Damascus was the capital than the whole country, or any other jsart of it. [Damascus.] In the Maccabees the Greek text frequently employs the term ' Syria ' to designate the empire of the Seleucidse; and in the New Testament it occurs as the name of the Roman province (Matt. iv. 21; Luke ii. 2; Acts xv. 23, 41 ; xviii. 18 ; xx. 3 ; xxi. 3 ; Gal. i. 21 \ which was governed by presidents, and to which Phoenicia and (with slight interruption) Judaea also were attached : for in and after the time of Christ, Judaea was for the most part go- verned by a procurator, who was accountable to the president of Syria. The word Syria is of uncertain origin. Some conceive it to be merely a contraction of Assyria, which was sometimes considered as part of it; while others conjecture that it may have been derived from Sur (Tyre), which may be re- garded as the best known, if not the chief, town of the whole country. The names of both Aram and Syria are now equally unknown in the coun- try itself, which is called by the Arabs Bar- esh-Sham. or simply Esh-Sham, i. e. the country to the left, in contradistinction to Southern Arabia r;r Yemen, i. e. the country to the right ; because when, in order to determine the direc- tion of the cardinal points, the eye is supposed to be directed towards the east, Arabia lies on the right, hand, and Syria on the left. It is difficult to define the limits of ancient Syria, as the name seems to have been very loosely applied by the old geographers. In general, however, we may perceive that they made it include the tract of country lying between the Euphrates and the Mediterranean, from the mountains of Taurus and Amanus in t lie north, to the desert of Suez and the borders of Egypt, on the south ; which coin- cides pretty well with the modern application of the name. Some ancient writers, such as Mela (i. 11) and Pliny (v. 13), give to Syria a much larger extent, carrying it beyond the Euphrates, and making it include Mesopotamia, Assyria, and Adiabene. Understood in the narrower and more usual applications, Syria may lie de- scribed as composed of three tracts of land, of very different descriptions. That which adjoins the Mediterranean is a hot, damp, and rather un- wholesome, but very fruitful valley. The part next to this consists of a double chain of moun- tains, running parallel from south-west to north- east, with craggy precipitous rocks, devious val- leys, and hollow defiles. The air is here dry and healthy ; and on the western declivities of the mountains are seen beautiful and highly cultivat- ed terraces, alternating with well-watered valleys, which have a rich and fertile soil, and are densely peopled. The eastern declivities, on the contrary, are dreary mountain deserts, connected with the third region, which may be described as a spa- cious plain of sand and rock, presenting an ex- tensive and almost unbroken level. Spring and autumn are very agreeable in Syria, and the heat of summer in the mountain districts SYRIA. is supportable. But in the plains, as soon as the sun reaches the equator, it becomes of a sudden oppressively hot, and this heat continues till the end of October. On the other hand, the winter is so mild, that orange-trees, fig-trees, palms, and many tender shrubs and plants flourish in the open air, while the lieights of Lebanon are glitter- ing with snow and hoar-frost. In the districts, however, which lie north and east of the moun- tains, the severity of winter is greater, though the heat of the summer is not less. At AntiocL, Aleppo, and Damascus, there are ice and snow for several weeks every winter. Yet, upon the whole, the climate and soil combine to render this coun- try one of the most agreeable residences through- out the East. The principal Syrian towns mentioned in Scrip- ture are the following, all of which are noticed under their respective names in the present work : — Antioch, Seleucia, Helbon, Rezeph, Tiphsah, Rehobotb, Hamath, Riblah, Tadmor, Baal-Gad, Damascus, Hobah, Beth-Eden. Syria, when we first become acquainted with its history, was divided into a number of small kingdoms, of which the most important of those mentioned in Scripture was that of which Damas- cus was the metropolis. A sketch of its history is given under Damascus. These kingdoms were broken up, or rather consolidated by conquerors, of whom the first appears to have been Tiglath- pileser. King of Assyria, about 750 B.C. After the fall of the Assyrian monarchy, Syria came under the Chaldsean yoke. It shared the fate of Baby- lonia when that country was conquered by the Per- sians; and was again subdued by Alexander the Great. At his death in B.C. 323, it was erected into a separate monarchy under the Seleucidse, and continued to be governed by its own sovereigns until, weakened and devastated by civil wars be- tween competitors for the throne, it was finally, about B.C. 65, reduced by Pompey to the condition of a Roman province, after the monarchy had sub- sisted 257 years. On the decline of the Roman empire, the Saracens became the next possessors of Syria, about a.d. 622; and when the crusading armies poured into Asia, this country became the chief, theatre of the great contest between the armies of the Crescent and the Cross, and its plains were deluged with Christian and Moslem blood. For nearly a century the Crusaders remained masters of the chief places in Syria ; but at length the power of the Moslems predominated, and in 1186 Saladin, Sultan of Egypt, found himself in pos- session of Syria. It remained subject to the sul- tans of Egypt till, in a.d. 1517, the Turkish sul- tan, Selim I., overcame the Memlook dynast?) and Syria and Egypt became absorbed in the Ottoman empire. In 1832, a series of successes over the Turkish arms gave Syria to Mehemet Ali, the Pasha of Egypt; from whom, however, after nine years, it again passed to the Turks, in consequence of the operations undertaken for that purpose by the fleet under the command of Ad- miral Stopford, the chief of which was the bom- bardment of Acre in November 1840. The treaty restoring Syria to the Turks was ratified early in the ensuing year. See Rosenmiiller's Bib. Geography translated by the Rev. N. Morren ; Winer's Eeal-Worlerb. s. v. ; Volney's Travels, ii 289, 358 ; Modem Traveller, vol. ii. ; Napier's War in Syria. SYRIAC VERSIONS. SYRIAC VERSIONS. The old Syriac version of the Scriptures is often called the Peshito; a term in Syriac which signifies sample or single, and which is applied to this version to mark its freedom from glosses and allegorical modes of interpretation (Havemick, Einleit. Erst. Theft, zweite Abtheil. S. 90). The time when the Peshito wras made cannot now be certainly known. Various traditions respecting its origin have been current among the Syrians, which partake of the fabulous. Jacob of Edessa, in a passage communicated by Gregory Bar Hebraeus, speaks of ' those translators who were sent to Palestine by the apostle Tliad- deu*, and by Abgarus king of Edessa' (Wiseman, liorce Syriacee, p. 103). This statement is not improbable, There is no good ground for abso- lutely rejecting it. It is true that other accounts are repeated by Bar Hebraeus which must be. pro- nounced fabulous ; but the present does not wear tb« same aspect. Ephrem the Syrian, who lived in the fourth century, refers to the translation before us in such a manner as implies its high antiquity. It was universally circulated among the Syrians in his time ; and accordingly he speaks of it as ouit version, which he would scarcely have done had it not then obtained general authority. Besides, it has been shown by Wiseman that many expressions in it were either unintelligible to Ephiem, or at least obscure. Hence this father deemed it necessary to give an explanation of many terms and phrases for the benefit of his countrymen. Such circum stances are favourable to the idea of an early origin. Perhaps it was made in the first century, agreeably to the tradition in Jacob of Edessa. Its internal character favours the opinion of those who think that the Old Testament part, of which we are now speaking, was made by Chris- tians. Had it proceeded from Jews, or one Jew, as Simon supposed, it would not have been free from the glosses in winch that people so much indulged. It would probably have resolved anthropomorphisms and other figurative expres- sions, as is done in the Sept. ; and have exhi- bited less negligence and awkwardness in tender- ing the Levitical precepts (Hirzelj Lie l'< vers. Syr. indole, Commentat. crit.-exeget., p. 127, et sec].). Besides, the Messianic passages show that no Jew translated them. Dathe conjectured that the author was a Jewish Christian, which is not improbable; for the version does present, evi- dence of Jewish influences upon it — influences subdued and checked by Christian opinions, yet not wholly imperceptible. Hence some have thought that use was made of the Targums by the translator or translators. This can scarcely be proved. The Jews were numerous throughout Syria and Mesopotamia, as we learn from Jose- phue ; and their modes of interpretation were prevalent in consequence. There is therefore an approach to the Chaldaic usus loquendi — a simi- larity to Jewish exegesis. If the authors Were originally Jews, who had afterwards embraced Christianity, this indication of Jewish influence is at once accounted fir, without having recourse to the supposition that they made actual use of the Targums when translating the original. It is now impossible to tell whether the Septuagint was consulted by the authors of the Peshito. There is indeed a considerable resemblaoi tWeen it and our version, not so much in single SYRIAC VERSIONS. 809 passages as in general tenor ; but it is not neces- sary to assume that the Greek was used. Perhaps it was afterwards employed in revising and cor- recting the Peshito. The latter was sometimes interpolated out of it in after times (Havernick, p. 92; Hirzel, p. 100; Credner, p. 107). It is certain that it was taken from the original Hebrew. In establishing this position, external and internal arguments unite. Eichhom tried to show, from the parts of the version itself, that it proceeded from several per- sons. Without assenting to all his arguments, or attaching importance to many of his presumptive circumstances, we agree with him in opinion. Tradition, too, affirms the same thing; and the words of Ephrem are favourable where he says, on Josh. xv. 28, 'since those who translated into Syriac did net understand the signification of the Hebrew word,' &c. (Von Lengerke, Conunentatio Critica de Ep/ir. Syro s. s. interprete, p. 2-1;. The Peshito contains all the canonical books of the Old Testament. The Apocryphal were not originally included. They must, however, have been early rendered into Syriac out of the Septua- gint, because Ephrem quotes them. In his day, the books of Maccabees were wanting in the Syriac; as also the apocryphal additions to Daniel. After the Syrian church had been divided into different sections, various recensions of the version were made. The recension of the Nestorians is often quoted in the scholia of Gregory Bar Hebrseus. According toAViseman, this recension extended no farther than the points appended to the Syriac letters. The Karkaphensian recension is also cited by Bar Hebraeus. For a long time, this was supposed to be a separate version, till (lie researches of Dr. Wiseman at Rome threw light upon its hue character. From the examination of two codices in the Vatican library, he ascer- tained that i! was merely a revision of the Peshito, distinguished by a peculiar mode of pointing and a peculiar arrangement of the books, but nut de- viating essentially from the common text. In this recension, Job comes before Samuel ; and immediately after Isaiah, the minor pro] hets. The Proverbs succeed Daniel. The arrangement in the New Testament is quite as singular. It begins with the Acts of the Apostles, and ends with the four Gospels ; while the epistles of James, Peter, and John, come before the fourteen letters of Paid. This recension proceeded from the Monophysites. ' According to Assemani and Wiseman, the name signifies Mountainous, because it originated with 1 hose living about Mount Sagara, w here there was a monastery of Jacobite Syrians, or simply because it was used by them. The Peshito in the Old and New Testaments is one and the same version, having been made in the first century of the Christian era. Bishop Marsh, in his notes to Mich. lelis's Introduction to the New Testament, contends that the New Testa- ment part was not made till after the canon had been formed, i. e. about the middle of the Becond century. From the feet, how. \er, of its wanting the books that were not reoeivedal oncebj tl Christians, viz., the second epistle of Peter, the second and third of John, .hide, and the Apoca- lypse, it claims a higher antiquity than the it. Had the version been made in the third century, it is not probable 810 SYRIAC VERSIONS. that these epistles would have been wanting. Michaelis therefore seems to have been right in placing it in the first century. Hug has endea- voured to show that the Peshito had originally the Apocalypse and the four Catholic epistles which are now wanting, and that they gradually disappeared from the version in the fourth cen- tury : but his opinion is improbable, as has been shown by Bertholdt and Guerike (Bertholdt, Einleit. th. ii. s. 635 ; Guerike, Einleit. s. 44, not. 1). As the Old Testament part was made from the original Hebrew, so the New Testament portion was translated from the original Greek. In consequence of the variety observable in the mode of translating different books, Hug supposes that the New Testament proceeded from different hands. This, however, is scarcely probable. The tradition of the Syrians themselves (Assemaui, Biblioth. Orient, ii. 486) refers it to one person ; and such is the opinion of Eichhoru. The text of it is somewhat peculiar. Hug assigns it to the kolvt) exSoais, or unrevised text ; while Griesbach thinks that it comes nearer the Occidental than any of the other recensions. Scholz reckons it to the Constantinopolitan, although he admits that it contains Alexandrian and singular readings. The Old Testament Peshito was first printed in the Paris Polyglolt, with a translation by Gabriel Sionita. The text is by no means accurate, for the editor supplied deficiencies in his MSS. out of the Vulgate. It was afterwards printed in the London Polyglott from various MSS. ; but Pro- fessor Roediger pronounces the Loudon edition to have been more carelessly executed on the whole than the Paris one {Hallische Lit. Zeit. 1832, No. 5, p. 38). The edition published by Professor Lee in 1823, 4ro., for the use of the British and Foreign Bible Society, is the best. It was ably reviewed by Roediger in the Hall. Lit. Zeit. for 1832, No. 4. The best lexicon is Michaelis's re- print, and enlargement of Castell's, published in two parts at Gottingen, 1788, 4to. The New Testament Peshito was first made known in Europe by Moses of Merdin, a Syrian priest, who was sent by Ignatius, patriarch of Antioch, in 1552, to Pope Julius III., to acknow- ledge the supremacy of the Roman pontiff in the name of the Syrian church, and also to superin- tend the printing of the Syriac, Testament. It was first published at Vienna in 1555, by Albert Widmanstadt, chancellor of Austria under Fer- dinand I. Two MSS, were employed. L. de Dieu subsequently published the Apocalypse from an ancient MS. formerly in the library of the younger Scaliger, and afterwards in that of the university at Leyden, containing part of the Philoxenian or younger Syriac version; or rather of the translation made by Thomas of Harclea. (Lugd. Bat. 1627, 4to., reprinted with a Latin version and notes in his Critica Sacra, Amster- dam, 1693, fob). Pococke published the four epistles, viz., second Peter, second and third John, and Jude, from a MS. in the Bodleian library (Lugd. Bat. 1630, 4to.). This is the only MS. of the Peshito, so far as is yet known, which con- tains these four epistles, together with the Acts and the three Catholic epistles universally ac- knowledged. The character of this version of the four epistles does not generally correspond with that of the Peshito ; on the contrary, it appears to SYRIAC VERSIONS. betray a later age, and probably belongs to the Philoxenian or Heraclean, of which it apparently forms a part. All the parts were collected and printed in the Paris Polyglott along with the Old Testament portion ; and transferred to the London Polyglott, with corrections. The best editions of the New Testament Peshito are the second edition of Schaaf, Lugd. Bat. 4to., 1717; and that prepared by Professor Lee for the Bible Society, London, 1816, 4to. The best Lexicon, which also serves as a concordance, is Schaaf's, in one quarto volume, published at Leyden, in 1709, 4to. The style of this version is generally pure, the original well translated, and the idioms trans- ferred to the Syriac with ease, vigour, and pro- priety. It need create no surprise that it differs considerably from the Hebrew and Greek MSS. of the Old and New Testaments, since it existed much earlier than the oldest codices now extant. Its assistance in the interpretation of the New Testament is valuable and important. Nor is it wholly without its use in the criticism of the same (Winer, De usu vers. Syriacce N. T. critico caute instituendo, Erlang. 1823, 4to.). See Davidson's Lectures on Biblical Criticism, the various Introductions to the Old and New Tes- taments, especially those of H'avernick and De Wette (last edition) to the Old, and those of Hug, Michaelis (by Marsh), and De Wette (last edition) to the New Testament ; Wiseman, Horce Syriacce, vol. i., Romas, 1828, 8vo. For the Old Testament Peshito consult also Hirzel, De Pentat. vers. Syr. quam vocant Pe- schito, indole, Lips. 1825, 8vo. ; Credner, De Pro- phelarum min. vers. Syr. quam Peschito vocant indole, Gotting. 1827, 8vo. ; C. v. Lengerke, De Ephraemi Syr. arte hermeneutica, Regiom. 1831, 8vo., and Comm. crit. de Ephr. Syro s. s. interprete, Hal. 1828, 4to. ; Gesenius, Ueber Jesaia, vol. i. ; Lee, Prolegomena to Bagster's Polyglott; Simon, Histoire Critique du V. T., Paris, 1678, 4to. For the New Testament Peshito see also J. G. C. Adler, N. T. versiones Syriacce simp>lex, Philoxeniana et Hierosolymitana, denuo exami- natce et adjidem, &c, Halhise, 1789, 4to. ; G. C. Storr, Observationes super N. T. versionibus Syriacis, Stuff g. 1772, 8vo. ; J. G. Reusch, Syrus inter pres cum fonte N. T. Grceco collatus, Lips. 1741, 8vo. Various Arabic versions have been made from the Old Testament Peshito. These have been already mentioned [Akabic Versions]. The Persian version of the Gospels in the London Polyglott was also derived from the Peshito. Hug thinks that it was made at Edessa {Introduction, §§ 81, 82, 83). Besides the Peshito, Gregory Bar Hehrasus, in the preface to his Horreum Mysteriorum, men- tions two other versions of the New Testament, the Philoxenian and the Harclean. The Pkiloxe?iian was made from the original Greek into Syriac, in the city of Mabug. It is so called from Philoxenus or Xenayas, Bishop of Mabug or Hierapolis, in Syria. There is some uncertainty in relation to the part which this bishop took in the version. The testimony of Bar Hebraaus is not uniform. In one passage he affirms that it was made in the time of Philo- xenus ; in his Chronicon, that it was done by desire of this bishop ; and in another place of the SYRIAC VERSIONS. same work, thai it was his own production. Aghe- laeus (Assemani, Biblioth. Orient, torn. ii. p. 83) states, that the author of it was Polycarp, rural Bishop of Philoxenus. Again, in an Arabic MS. quoted by Assemani, Philoxenus is said to have translated the four Gospels into Syriac. Thus all is uncertainty in regard to the authorship of the version. It cannot be ascertained whether it proceeded in whole, or in part only, from Philo- xenus himself; or whether Pqly.oarp, acting under his auspices and bj his advice, deserves the ho- nour of the work. One thing is certain, that it was made between the years 485 and 518 of the Christian era, most probably in 508. No MS. of this version has been yet discovered, either complete or otherwise, so that it is impos- sible to ascertain its intrinsic merit. Bar He- brseus does not quote it. Hence it would seem to have been almost supplanted in his day. It is known to the public only by a few fragments constituting the marginal annotations of a very ancient Vatican MS. examined by Wiseman and numbered 153. The passages were first printed by Wiseman in his Horce Syriacce, p. 178, sq. As far as it is possible to judge from these specimens, the version was much superior to the Peshito, — a conclusion which agrees with the Syrian tradition respecting it. The llarclean derives its name from Thomas of Harkel or Heraclea, in Syria. Various notices of Thomas's life have been collected by Bern- stein from ancient authors. He was bishop of Mabilg at the conclusion of the sixth and the commencement of the seventh century. From thence he fled into Egypt, and took up his abode in a monastery at Alexandria, where lie laboured in amending the Syriac Philoxenian version of the New Testament. From postscripts added by himself it appears that he corrected the Gospels of the Philoxenian after two (some MSS. have three) Greek MSS. ; the Acts and the Catholic epistles after one. Having revised and amended the en- tire text with great care, rendering it as conform- able as possible to the Greek copies which he had before him, the work was completed and published in the year of Christ 616. The basis of it was the Philoxenian; but the Peshito seems to have been also consulted. Still it was not so much a new recension of the Philoxenian, as an addi- tional version of the New Testament; and ac- cordingly it is described as a third translation by Bar Hebraeus. The most complete MS. of this translation which has yet been described, is that which formerly belonged to Ridley, now in the library of New College Oxford. Those who wish to know more of this copy must consult Ridley's Dissertation concerning the Genius and Use of Syriac Versions of the New Testament (London, 1761), and White's preface to the printed edition of it. It contains all the books of the New Testament except the Apocalypse, and from the 27th verse of the eleventh chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, to the end of that epistle. The edition of Professor White is the only one of the llarclean version published. It is in four volumes 4to., Oxford, 1778-1803. The text agrees generally with the Alexandrine family, as might be inferred a priori from the place where it. was made. It is now impossible to determine whether theHarclean version embraced originally the entire New Testament. No MS. has yet been SYRIAC VERSIONS. 811 found which has the Apocalypse. Gregory Bar Hebiaeus. who quotes and criticises the version, has no citation from this book — a circumstance favourable to the opinion that it never belonged to the version in question. It is also impossible to determine whether it ever extended to the Old Testament. The version is extremely literal. It seems to have been the translator's endeavour that not a word or syllable of the original should be lost. Accordingly, he has often sacrificed the Syriac idiom to a rigid adherence to the Greek text. The style is inferior to that of the Peshito. Bernstein thus contrasts the two translations : ' In ilia (Simplice) interpretatio est liberior, ver- borum quodque non exprimens, sed sensum eorum per ambitum magis, quam ad (idem enuntians, oratio consuetudini sermonis Syriaci accommoda- tion elegantior, et inrellectu facilior ; haec(Char- klensis) ad verbum facta diligenter archetypum reddit, sed oratio ejus ea ipsa de causa a com- muni Syrorum usu loquendi saepe abhorret, lo- cisque baud paucis obscura est et sine Grseco ex- emplo vix apta ad intelligendum. Ilia Syrorum istius temporis doctorum de Novi Testamenti locis sententias et explicationes refert, haec Grae- corum prsecipu33 auctoritatis exemplarium, quae exeunte seculo sexto Thomas Charklensis Alex- andria?, illustri literarum illius temporis sede, in- venit, effigiem mira similitudine exscriptam re- prfesentat ' (p. 38). The same writer has printed a specimen of it along with a specimen of the old Syriac ; as also the readings quoted by Bar Hebraeus in his Ilorreum Mysteriorum. From the preceding description it will be seen, that what is usually called the PhUoxenian, should be designated the Harclean version. The two are quite distinct. Of the one we know ex- ceedingly little; the other has been printed under the superintendence of White,who erroneously calls it the Philoxenian. (See Wiseman's Horce Sy- riacce ; Bernstein's Commentatio de Charklensi Novi Testamenti trauslatione Syriacd ; Ridley's Dissertatio de Syriacarum Novi Foederis ver- sionum indole atque usu ; Adler's Novi Testa- menti versiones Syriacce Simplex, PJiiloxeniana et Hierosoly7nitana, &c. ; White's edition of the Harclean, vol. i.; Bertholdt's Krit. Joitmal der neuestcn Theol. Litcratur. torn. xiv. ; Loehnis's Grundzuye, pp. 373-1 ; and Davidson's Lectures on Biblical Criticism.') There is also another Syi'iac version of the New Testament called the Jerusalem or Palces- tino- Syriac, which was discovered by Adler in a Vatican MS. (No. 19). The MS. seems, from the subscription, to have been written in a mo- nastery at Antioch, a.d. 1030. The language is a mixture of Chaldee and Syriac, similar to that of the Jerusalem Talmud, and the character em- ployed is peculiar. The MS. consists merely of a lectionary or cvangelistarium. embracing no more than lessons from the four Gospels for all the Sundays and festivals in the year. Internal evidence favours the idea, that this version was made in some part of Syria, subject at the time to the ftomans ; probably in the fifth century. The text agrees with the western family.' The story of the adulteress, though wanting in the Peshito and Harclean, is given in this version, almost in the same form as that in which it ap- pears in the Codex Bezae. Specimens of it are 812 SYRO-PHCENICIA. TABERNACLE. given by Adler in his Treatise on Syriac Ver- sions, p. 137, sq. See also Eichhorn's All- gem. Biblioth. ii., p. 498, sq. ; and Marsh's Notes to Michaelis' 's Introduction. Dr. Scholz col- lated it for his edition of the Greek Testament. (Davidson's Lectures, pp. 65, 66.) — S. D. SYRO-PHCENICIA (Supo^ow'/cij), or Phoe- nicia Proper, called Syro or Syrian Phoenicia, from being included in the Roman province of Syria. It includes that part of the coast of Canaan, on the borders of the Mediterranean, in which the' cities of Tyre and Sidon were situated ; and the same country, which is called Syro- Phcenicia in the Acts, is in the Gospels called the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. The woman also described as Syro-Phoenician (%vponfc, tent of assem- bly, from the root iy>, to fix or appoint time and place of a meeting). Kimchi exjilains the name thus : '■And thus ivas called the ^\0 S"!N, be- cause the Israelites were assembled and congre- gated there, and also because he (Jehovah') met there with Moses,' &c. It is also called pnX nnjm. or nnj?n pK>D, tent of testimony, from TlJ/, testari, to witness. The Septuagint almost constantly uses the phrase o-ktjv^ tov fiaprvpiov, and in Kings viii., cfKwwfia rod /uaprvplov, not dis- tinguishing the roots "iy and TfjJ., The Vulgate has tabernaculum foederis, tent of the covenant. With this rendering agrees Luther's Stiftshutte. The Chaldee and Syrian translators have WOT p"B>D, tent of festival. We may distinguish in the Old Testament three sacred tabernacles : I. The Ante-Sinaitic, which was probably the dwelling of Moses, and was placed by the camp of the Israelites in the desert, for the transaction of public business. Exod. xxxiii, 7, 'Moses took the tabernacle, and pitched it without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called it the tabernacle of the congre- gation. And it came to pass, that every one which sought the Lord went out unto the taber- nacle of the congregation, which \)jas without the camp. And it came to pass, when Moses went Out unto the tabernacle, that all the people rose up, and stood every man at his tent door, and looked after Moses until he was gone into the tabernacle. And it came to pass, as Moses en- tered into the tabernacle, the cloudy pillar de- scended and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the Lord talked with Moses. And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the taber- nacle door : and all the people rose up and wor- shipped, every one in his tent door.' II. The Ante-Sinaitic tabernacle, which had served for the transaction of public business probably from the beginning of the Exodus, was superseded by the Sinaitic : this was -con- structed by Bezaleel and Aholiab as a portable mansion-house, guildhall, and cathedral, and set up on the first day of the first month in the second year after leaving Egypt. Of this alone we have accurate descriptions. Philo {Opera, ii. p. 146) calls it lepbv ine branches, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths.' It is added, ' So the people made themselves booths, every one upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the street of the water-gate, and the street of the gate of Ephraim.' From the details given in this article, it appears that the Feast of TABITHA. Tabernacles was a season of universal joy. Je- rusalem bore the appearance of a camp. The entire population again dwelt in tents, but not with the accompaniments of travel, fatigue, and solicitude; all was hilarity, all wore a holiday appearance ; the varied green of the ten thousand branches of different trees; the picturesque cere- mony of the water-libation, the general illumina- tion, the sacred solemnities in and before the temple ; the feast, the dance, the sacred song; the full harmony of the choral music; the bright joy that lighted up every face, and the gratitude at ' harvest home,' which swelled every bosom, — all conspired to make these days a season of pure, deep, and lively joy, which, in all its elements, finds no parallel among the observances of men. Plutarch (Sympos. iv. 5) has found in the Feast of Tabernacles a Dionysian or Baccha- nalian festival. He could trace any outward re- semblance there was between the Jewish and his own heathen festivals, but the deep and appro- priate moral and spiritual import of the Feast of Tabernacles lie was unable to discern (Biel, De Sacrificio aquce in scenar. festo vino misceri solito, Yit. 1716; Reland, Antiq. Sacr. iv. 5; Carpzov, Appar. p. 414, sq. ; Nicolaus, De Phyl- lobolia, Thes. in Ugolini, torn. xxx.}. TABITHA (Ta/3i0a antelope), the Aramaean name of a Christian female, called in Greek Dorcas (Aop/cas), resident at Joppa, whose bene- volent and liberal conduct, especially in pro- viding the poor with clothing, so endeared her to the Church in that place, that on her death they sent for Peter, then six miles off at Lydda, im- ploring him to come to them. Why they sent is not stated. It is probable that they desired his presence to comfort and sustain them in their affliction. That they expected he would raise her from the dead is less likely, as the Apostles had not yet performed such a miracle^ and as even Stephen had not been restored to life. But the Apostle, after fervent prayer to God in the chamber of death, bade the corpse arise ; on which Tabitha ' opened her eyes, and when she saw Peter, she sat up.' This great miracle was not only an act of benevolence, but tended to give' authority to the teaching of the Apostles, and to secure attention for the doctrines which they promulgated (see Acts ix. 36-42). 1. TABOR ("iHWi Tcuepwp; Sapc&p; 'iraPv- oiov , a mountain on the confines of Zebulun and Naphtali, standing put in the north-east border of the plain of Esdraelon, the name of which appears among Greek and Roman writers in the forms of Itabyrion and Atabyrion, and which is now known by the name of j»i? (J.Ar»- Jebel Tur. It is mentioned in Josh. xix. 22; Judg. iv. 6 ; viii. 18; Ps. Ixxxix. 12; Jer. xlvi. 18; Hos. v. 1). Mount Tabor stands out alone and eminent above the plain, with all its fine proportions from base to summit displayed at one view. It lies at the distance of two hours and a quarter south of Nazarelh. According to the barometrical mea- surements of Schubert, the height of Tabor above the level of the sea is 1748 Paris feet, and 1310 Paris feet above the level of the plain at its base. Seen from the south-west, it presents a semi- globular appearance ; but from the north-west, it more resembles a truncated cone. By an au- TABOR. 815 cient path, which winds considerably, one may ride to the summit, where is a small oUong plain, with the foundations of ancient buildings. The view of the country from this place is very beautiful and extensive. The mountain is of limestone, which is the general rock of Pales- tine. The sides of the mountain are mostly covered with bushes, and woods of oak trees (ilex and aagilops), with occasionally pistachio trees, presenting a beautiful appearance, and affording a fine shade. There are various tracks up its sides, often crossing one another. The ascent usually occupies an hour, though it has been done in less time. The crest of the mountain is table-land, of some six or seven hundred yards in height from north to south, and about half as much across; and a fiat field of about an acre occurs at a level of some twenty or twenty-five feet lower than the eastern brow. There are remains of several small ruined tanks on the crest, which still catches the rain-water dripping through the crevices of the rock, and preserves it cool and pure, it is said, throughout the year. The view from the summit, though one edge or the other of the table-land, wherever one stands, always in- tervenes to make a small break in the distant horizon, is declared by Lord Nugent to be the most splendid he could recollect having ever seen from any natural height. This writer cites an observation made many years ago, in his hearing, by Mr. Riddle, that he had never been on any natural hill, or rock, or mountain, from which could be seen an unbroken circumference with a radius of three miles in every part. This, his lordship says, has been verified in all his own experience, and it was so at Mount Tabor, although there are many abrupt points of vantage ground on the summit {Lands Classical and Sacred, ii. 204, 205). This mountain is several times mentioned in the Old Testament (Josh. xix. 12, 22; Judg. iv. 6, 12, 14); but not in the New. Its summit has however been usually regarded as the ' high mountain apart,' where our Lord was transfigured before Peter, James, and John. But the proba- bility of this is opposed by circumstances which cannot be gainsaid. It is manifest that the Transfiguration took place in a solitary place, not only from the word ' apart,' but from the circumstance that Peter in his bewilderment pro- posed to build ' three tabernacles ' on the spot (Matt. xvii. 1-8; Luke ix. 28-36). But we know that a fortified town occupied the top of Tabor for at least 220 years before and 60 years after the birth of Christ, and probably much be- fore and long after (Polvbius, v. 70. 6; Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 6. 3 ; De Bell. Jud. i. 8. 7 ; ii. 20. 1 ; iv. 1. 8 ; Vita, § 37) ; and the tradition itself can- not be traced back earlier than towards the end of the fourth century, previously to which we have in the Onomasticon notices of Mount Tabor, with- out any allusion to its being regarded as the site of the Transfiguration. It may further be re- marked that this part of Galilee abounds with 'high mountains apart,' so that in removing the scene of this great event from Tabor, there is no difficulty in providing other suitable sites for it (Robinson, Bib!. Researches, iii. 210-227; Lord Nugent, u s., ii. 198-204 ; Schubert, Moracnland, iii. 174-180; Burckhardt, Syria, pp. 332-336, Stephens, ii. 317-19; Elliot, ii. 364). 816 TABOR. TADMOR. 2. TABOR is also the name of a grove of oaks in the vicinity of Benjamin, in 1 Sam: x. 3, the topograph}' of which chapter is usually much em- barrassed by the groundless notion that Mount Tabor is meant. 3. TABOR, a Levitical city in Zebulun, si- tuated upon Mount Tabor (1 Chron. vi. 62). TABRET. [Musical Instruments.] TABRET. [Weights and Measures.] TACHMAS (EOIFI, Lev. xi. 16; Deut. xiv. 15) is mentioned as one of the unclean birds in the Pentateuch, but so little characterised that no de- cided opinion can be expressed as to what species is really intended. Commentators incline to the belief that the name imports voracity, and therefore indi- cates a species of owl, which, however, we take to be not this bird, but thp JVT? With ; and as the night-hawk of Europe (Caprimulgus Europ&us), or a species very nearly allied to it, is an inha- bitant of Syria, there is no reason for absolutely rejecting it in this place, since it belongs to a genus highly connected with superstitions in all coun- tries ; and though a voracious bird among moths (Thalence) and other insects that are abroad during darkness, it is absolutely harmless to all other animals, and as wrongfully accused of sucking the udders of goats, as of being an indicator of misfortune and death to those who happen to see it fly past them after evening twi- light ; yet, beside the name of ' goatsucker,' it is denominated 'night-hawk' and ' night-raven,' as if it were a bulky species, with similar powers of mischief as those day birds possess. The night- hawk is a migratory bird, inferior in size to a thrush, and has very weak talons and bill : but the gape or mouth is wide ; it makes now and then a plaintive cry, and preys on the wing ; it flias with the velocity and action of a swallow, the two genera being nearly allied. Like those of most night birds, the eyes are large and remarkable, and the plumage a mixture of colours and dots, with a prevailing grey effect ; it is finely webbed, and entirely noiseless in its passage through the air. Thus the bright eyes, wide mouth, sudden and inaudible flight in the dusk, are the original causes of the superstitious fear these birds have excited ; and as there are in southern climates other species of this genus, much larger in size, with peculiarly contrasted colours, strangely dis- posed feathers on the head, or paddle-shaped single plumes, one at each shoulder, projecting in the form of two additional wings, and with plaintive loud voices often uttered in the night, all the species contribute to the general awe they have inspired in every country and in all ages. We see here that it is not the bulk of a species, nor the exact extent of injury it may inflict, that determines the importance attached to the name, but the opinions, true or false, which the public may have held or still entertain concerning it. The goatsucker is thus confounded with owls by the Arabian peasantry, and the name massasa, more particularly belongs to it. But that the confusion with the With is not con- fined to Arabia and Egypt, is sufficiently evident- from the Sclavonic names of the bird, being in Russian, Wok, lelek ; Polish, lelek; Lithuanian, lehlis ; and Hungarian, egeli; all clearly allied to the Semitic denomination of the owl — C. H. S. TADMOR pfrp ; Sept. &oe8p6p) or Ta- eiar ("iDfl), a town built by King Solomon (1 Kings ix. 18 ; 2 Chron. viii. 4). The name Tamar signifies a palm-tree, and hence the Greek and Roman designation of Palmira, ' city of palms ;' but this name never superseded the other among the natives, who even to this day give it the name of Thadmor. The form Tamar seems more ancient than that of Tad m or. It is found in the text (Jieihib} of 1 Kings ix. IS, while the latter stands in (he 'margin (keri): but in the later historical book ' Tadmor," Inning become the usual designation, stands in the text without any various reading. Palm frees are still found in the gardens around the town, but. not in such numbers as would warrant, as they once did, the imposition of the name. Tadmor was situated between the Euphrates and Hamath, to the south- east of that city, in a fertile tract or oasis of the desert. It was built by Solomon probably with the view of securing an interest in and com- mand over the great caravan traffic from the east, similar to that which he had established in respect of the trade between Syria and Egypt. See this idea developed in (lie Pictorial Bible, note on 2 Chron. viii. 4 ; where if is shown at some length that the presence of water in this small oasis must early have made this a station for the caravans coming west through the desert ; and this circumstance probably dictated to So- lomon the importance of founding here a garrison town, which would entitle him — in return for the protection he could give from the depredations of the Arabs, and for offering an intermediate station where the factors of the west might meet the merchants of the east — to a certain regulating power, and perhaps to some dues, to which they would find it more convenient to submit than to change the line of route. It is even possible that the Phoenicians, who took much interest in this important trade, pointed out to Solomon the advantage which he and his subjects might de- rive from the regulation and protection of it, by building a fortified town in the quarter where it was exposed to the greatest danger. A most important indication in favour of these conjec- tures is found in the fact that all our information concerning Palmyra from heathen writers, de- scribes it as a city of merchants, who sold to the western natives the products of India and Ara- bia, and who were so enriched by the traffic that, the place became proverbial for luxury and wealth, and for the expensive habits of its ci- tizens. We do not again read of Tadmor in Scripture, nor is it likely that the Hebrews retained posses- sion of it long after the death of Solomon. No other source acquaints us with the subsequent history of the place, till it reappears in the ac- count of Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 24), as a consider- able town, which, along with its territory, formed an independent state, between the Roman and Parthian empires. In the time of Trajan, how- ever, it was lying waste ; but it was rebuilt by his successor Adrian, and from him took the name of Adrianopolis. From Caracalla it re- ceived the privileges of a Roman colony. Dur- ing the weak administration of the emperors Gallienus and Valerian, in the third century, while independent governments were rising in TADMOR. several provinces of the Roman empire, Oden- fitus became master of Palmyra and. the whole of Mesopotamia, and assuming the regal title him- self, also bestowed it upon his consort Zenobia, and his eldest son Herod. After his death, Ze- nobia, styling herself queen of the East, ruled over most of the eastsrn provinces of the Roman empire, as well as over her own territories, with so much firmness and policy, that Aurelian, who vanquished her and led her in triumph to Rome, could not withhold his admiration. On (he revolt of Palmyra shortly after, Aurelian, having recovered possession of it, caused it to be levelled with the ground, and the greater part of the inha- bitants to be put to death. He, however, ordered TADMOR. 817 the temple of the sun to be restored, placed a gar- rison in the town, and appointed a deputy over the district attached to it. Diocletian adorned the city with additional buildings ; and under the Emperor Honorius it still had a garrison, and was the seat of a bishop. Justinian strengthened the fortifications, and also constructed a very costly aqueduct, the remains of which still exist. When the successors of Mohammed extended their con- quests beyond the confines of Arabia, Palmyra was one of the first places which became sub- ject to the khalifs. In the year 659, a battle was here fought between the khalifs All and Moawiyah, and won by the former. In 744, it was still so strongly fortified that it took the [Palmyra.] khalif Merwan seven months to reduce it, the rebel Solyman having shut himself up in it. From this period it seems to have gradually fallen into decay. Benjamin of Tudela, who was there towards the end of the 12th century, speaks of it as ' Thadmor in the desert, built by Solomon tff equally large stones (with Daalbec). This city is surrounded by a wall, and stands in the desert, far from any inhabited place. It is four days' journey from Baalath (Haalbec), and contains 2000 warlike Jews, who are at war with the Christians and with (Ik; Arabian sub- jeots of Noureddin, and aid their neighbours the Mohammedans.' In connection with (his state- ment, it. may lie remarked that, the existing in- scriptions of Palmyra attest the presence of Jews iheru in its most, flourishing period, and that they, in common with its other citizens, shared in the general trade, and were even objects of public honour. One inscription intimates the erection of a statue to Julius Schaltualat, a Jew lor having at li is own expense conducted a cara- van to Palmyra. This was in a.d. 25$, not long vol.. II. before the time of Zenobia, who, according to some writers, was of Jewish extraction. Ilby and Mangles ( Travels, p. 273) also noticed a Hebrew inscription on the architrave of the gieat colonnade, but give no copy of it, nor say what it expressed. The latest historical notice of Tadmor which we have been able to find is, that it was plundered in 1400 by the army of Timnr Beg (Tamer- lane), when 200. OUt) slice]) were taken (Ran- kin, Wars of the Mongols). And Abull'oda, at the beginning of the fourteenth century [Arab* Descript. p. 9$), speaks of Tadmor as merely a village, but celebrated for its ruins of old and magnificent, edifices. These relics of ancient art and magnificence were scarcely known in Europe till towards the close of the seventeenth century. In the year 1G7S, some English merchants at Aleppo resolved to verify, by actual inspection] the reports concerning these ruins which existed in that place. The expedition was unfortunate; for they were plundered of every thing by the Arabs, and returned with their object unaccom- plished. A second expedition, in 1691, had So 818 TADMOR. TAHPANHES. better success ; but the accounts which were brought back received little credit : as it seemed unlikely that a city which, according to their report, must have been so magnificent, should have been erected in the midst of deserts. When, however, in the year 1753, Robert Wood pub- lished the views and plans, which had been taken with great accuracy on the spot two years before, by Dawkins, the truth of the earlier accounts could no longer be doubted ; and it appeared that neither Greece nor Italy could exhibit an- tiquities which in point of splendour could rival those of Palmyra. The examinations of these travellers show that the ruins are of two kinds. * The one class must have originated in very remote times, and consists of rude, unshapen hillocks of ruin and rubbish, covered with soil and herbage, such as now alone mark the site of the most ancient cities of Mesopotamia and Babylonia, and among which it would be reasonable to seek any traces of the more ancient city of Solomon. The other, to which the most gorgeous monu-, ments belong, bears the impress of later ages. It is clear from the style of architecture that the later buildings belong to the three centuries pre- ceding Diocletian, in which the Corinthian order of pillars was preferred to any other. The ruins 'cover a sandy plain stretching along the bases of a range of mountains called Jebel Belaes, running nearly north and south, dividing the great desert from the desert plains extending westward towards Damascus, and the north of Syria. The lower eminences of these mountains, bordering the ruins, are covered with numerous solitary square towers, the tombs of the ancient Palmyrenes, in which are found memorials simi- lar to those of Egypt. They are senn to a great distance, and have a striking effect in this desert solitude. Beyond the valley which leads through these hills, the ruined city first opens upon the view. The thousands of Corinthian columns of •white marble, erect and fallen, and covering an extent of about a mileand a half, present an appear- ance which travellers compare to that of a forest. The site on which the city stands is slightly ele- vated above the level of the surrounding desert for a circumference of about, ten miles ; which the Arabs believe to coincide with the extent of the ancient city, as they find ancient remains when- ever they dig within this space. There are in- deed traces of an old wall, not more than three miles in circumference ; but this was probably built by Justinian, at a time when Palmyra had lost its ancient importance and become a deso- late place ; and when it was consequently desirable to contract its bounds, so as to include only the more valuable portion. Volney well describes the general aspect which these ruins piresent: — 'In the space covered by these ruins we sometimes find a palace, of which nothing remains but the court and walls ; sometimes a temple whose peristyle is half thrown down ; and now a portico, a gallery, or triumphal arch. Here stand groups of columns, whose symmetry is destroyed by the fall of many of them ; there, we see them ranged in rows of such length that, similar to rows of trees, they deceive the sight and assume the ap- pearance of continued walls. If from this strik- ing scene we cast our eyes upon the ground, another, almost as varied, presents itself: on all sides we behold nothing but subverted shafts. some whole, others shattered to pieces, or dislo* cated in thejr joints ; and on which side soever we looked, the earlli is strewed with vast stones, half buried ; with broken entablatures, mutilated friezes, disfigured reliefs, effaced sculptures, vio- lated tombs, and altars defiled by dust.' It may be right to add, that the account which has been more recently given of these ruins by Captains Irby and Mangles, is a mu.ch less glow- ing one than those of other travellers, English and French. They speak indeed with admiration of the general view, which exceeded anything they had ever seen. But they add, ' Great, however, was our disappointment when, on a minute exa- mination, we found that there was not a single column, pediment, architrave, portal, frieze, or any architectural remnant worthy of admiration.' They inform us that none of the pillars exceed four feet in diameter, or forty feet in height. ; that the stone scarcely deserves the name of marble, though striking from its snowy whiteness ; that no part of the ruins taken separately excite any interest, and are altogether much inferior to those of Baal bee; and that the plates in the magnifi- cent work of Messrs. Wood and Dawkins do far more than justice to Palmyra. Perhaps this dif- ference of estimate may arise from the fact that earlier travellers found more wonderful and finished works at Palmyra than their information had prepared them to expect ; whereas, in the latter instance, the finished representations in the plates of Wood's great, work raised the expecta- tion so highly, that their disappointment inclined the mind to rather a detractive estimate of the claims of this ruined city — Tadmor in the wil- derness. The present Tadmor consists of num- bers of peasants' mud huts, clustered together around the great temple of the sun. This temple is the most, remarkable and magnificent ruin of Palmyra. The court by which it was enclosed was 179 feet square, within which a double row of columns was continued all round. They weie 390 in number, of which about sixty still remain standing. In the middle of the court stood the temple, an oblong quadrangular building, sur- rounded with columns, of which about twenty still exist, though without capitals, of which they have been plundered, probably because they were composed of metal. In the interior, at the south end, is now the humble mosque of the village. The remains of Palmyra, not being of any direct Scriptural interest, cannot here be more particularly described. Very good accounts of them may be seen in Wood and Dawkins, Ruins of Palmyra, otherwise Tadmor in the Desert ; Irby and Mangles, Travels; Richter, Wallfahr- ten ; Addison, Damasctis and Palmyra. The last work contains a good history of the place ; for whicli see also Rosenmuller's Bib. Geog. translated by the Rev. N. Morren ; and in particu- lar Cellarius, Dissert, de Imp. Palmyreno, 1693. Besides Wood's great work, excellent views of the place have been published by Cassas in his Voyage Piitoresque de la Syi-ie ; and more re- cently by Laborde in his Voyage en Orient, TAH ASH-SKINS. [Rams'-Skins, Red.] TAHPANHES (Dn^Br^l), or Tehaph- nehes (Dn??nft), a city of Egypt. The for- mer name is used by Jeremiah (ii. 16 ; xliii. 7-9; xliv. 1 : xlvi. 14), and the latter by Eze« TAHPENES. TALMUD. 819 kiel (xxx. 18). The Sept. render it by Td(pyr], Tdvcu, the name of a goddess, Tphnet (Cham- pollion, pp.121, 123). This was doubtless Daphne, a strong buundaty city on thePelusiac arm of the Nile (Herodot. ii. 30, 107). A mound called Tel Defenneh, nearly in a direct line between the modern Zan and Pelusinm, is supposed from its name anil position to mark the site of Daphne (Wilkinson, Mod. Egypt, i. 447). Isaiah (xxx. 4) names it in the abbreviated form Hftnes. It was to this place that Johana.n and his party re- paired, taking Jeremiah with them, alter the murder of Gedaliah. TAHPENES (D\:bnn, head of the age, Sept. QeKejxivas), a queen of Egypt, consort of the Pharaoh contemporary with David. Her sister was given in marriage to Hadad, the fugitive prince of Edom (1 Kings xi. 19) [Hadad]. TALMAI (*1p%, full offurrotcs; Sept. ®o\fj.l), king of Geshur, and father of David's wife Maacah, the mother of Absalom (2 Sam. iii. 3; xiii. 37; 1 Chron. iii. 1,2) [Geshur]. TALMUD. The Talmud O-IK&Pl, doctrine, from *IO?, to learn) is the work which embodies the civil and canonical law of the Jewish people. It contains those rides and institutions by which, in addition- to the Old Testament, the conduct of that nation is regulated. Whatever is obligatory on them, besides the law, is recorded in this work. Here doubts are resolved, duties explained, cases of conscience cleared up, and the most, minute cir- cumstances relalive to the conduct of life dis- cussed with wonderful particularity. Hence the contents of the Talmud are of a diversified cha- racter, relating not merely to religion, but to phi- losophy, medicine, history, jurisprudence, aud the various branches of practical duty. The Jews have been accustomed to divide their law into written and unwritten — the former being contained in the Pentateuch ; the latter having been handed down orally, until circumstances compelled them to commit it also to writing. The oral law is an interpretation of the written, and constitutes the text of the Talmud. To the oral law the same antiquity is assigned as be- longs to the written. According to the Jews, Moses received both on Mount Sinai. It was received by Joshua from Moses ; Joshua again delivered it to the seventy elders, from whom it was received by the prophets, who transmitted it to the men of the great synagogue, the last of whom was Simon the Just. From the men of the synagogue it was received by the Rabbins. After the second destruction of Jerusalem under Adrian, and I he consequent dispersion of the Jews through- out the world, fears were entertained lest the oral trad! I ions which they held so sacred should be lost, particularly as their number rendered it in- convenient, or lather impossible, to preserve them in the memory. Hence arose the necessity of committing them to writing, that they might be handed down from age to age as a national trea- sure. It is generally agreed that Rabbi Judah Hakkadosh (i.e. the ho/g) made the Brsl perma- nent record of (hem, about 120 or 150 years from the destruction of the Temple, A.n. 190 or 220. Morin, however, has assigned a much later date, viz. the sixth century, relying chiefly on the fact that Origen, Epiphanius, and Jerome, make no mention of such a work (Exercitationes Biblicce, lib. ii. exercit. vi. cap. 2, p. 291, sq.). But. the circumstances adduced by this learned and ingenious writer are not conclusive in favour of his peculiar opinion. Ii. Judah is said to have lived under Antoninus Pius. Such was the origin of the Mishna or text. It. must not be supposed, however, that all the traditional inter, pretatiuus or midrashim were embodied in the official Mishna. Many others existed which were not incorporated in that work. A twofold commentary, or series of commen- taries, was subsequently appended to it; one called the Babylonian Gemara, the other the Jerusalem Gemara. The former was begun by R. Asrhe, who died a.d. 427, and was completed a.d. 500. It is the work of several Rabbins, whose names continue to be venerated by the learned Jews. Morin indeed thinks that it was not finished till the commencement of the eighth century ; but in this sentiment he has not been followed. These portions, committed to writing after the Mishna, constitute notes on that text, aud make up, toge- ther with it, the Babylonian Talmud. The Jerusalem Gemara proceeded from the aca- demy at Tiberias, and embodied the comments of the Palestinian Jews. It is said to have been written chiefly by R. Jochanan, rector of that academy. It is not agreed when 11. Jochanan lived; but most writers follow Buxtorf, whoplaces him in a.d. 230. David Ganz prefers 270 ; while Moses Maimonides, Abarbanel, Simeon Mikke- non, and Elias Levita, fix upon a.d. 370. But internal evidence shows that it was composed towards the end of the last half of the fourth cen- tury, which would agree nearly with the Opinion of Maimonides. Hence R. Jochauan could not liave been the principal author. Morin, Vossius, and Pezronius, assign to this Gemara a later date. According to Vossius, it was begun in a.d. 055, and linished in 727. Morin relets it to the seventh century ; whilePezionius fixes it between 0 1 1 and 628. Morin alludes to the occurrence of Gothic and other barbarous words, and to the name Turcs which is found in it. Such evidence is scarcely conclusive. The Jerusalem Talmud has contri- buted to the Babylonian, since there are evident traces of it in the latter. From this statement it will be seen that the two Talmuds differ in their Gemaras or notes upon the text, while both have the same Mishna. The term mishna (HJB'P) signifies repetition, from i"!!^, to repeat, because it is, as itwere, a repetition of the written law, or a second laic (Sein-e'oa'a/y). The word gemara (fcOftil), according to Buxtorf, denotes completion or supplement, inasmuch as it completes the work ; but it is better to regard, it a^ synonymous with talmxd, 'woctrine,1 from the Arnnrean ")QJ, to learn, equivalent to the Hebrew ID?. By the Jews the Babylonian is a ways pre- ferred to the Jerusalem Talmud. It is far nu/re copious and abundant in its expositions. H«'mv. i-i speaking of it, they call it the Talmud, while the other is never mentioned without prefixing the name Jerusalem. Yet. Christians generally value the Jerusalem Talmud more than the Babylonian : its brevity and succinctness recommend ii to them ; besides, it is generally free from the absun. lies and fables of the other ; it is, however, more uiiti- 3 a 2 820 TALMUD. TALMUD. cult to be understood ; both, indeed, partake of obscurity. The Mishna is written in the Hebrew dialect, but the Gemara in Aramaean. The for- mer is tolerably pure, and free from the admix- ture of foreign terms, but the latter contains many Persian, Greek, and Latin words — a circumstance which contributes to the difficulty of understand- ing it. The style of the Babylonian Gemara differs from that of the Jerusalem commentary. The latter is more in the Palestinian dialect, ap- proaching to the Syriac. ' The almost uncon- querable difficulty of the style,' says Lightfoot, 'the frightful roughness of the language, and the amazing emptiness and sophistry of the matters handled, do torture, vex, and tire him that reads them (the Talmudic authors). They do every- where abound with trifles in that manner, as though they had no mind to bei'ead; with obscu- rities and difficulties as though they had no mind to be understood ; so that the reader hath need of patience all along, to enable him to bear both trifling in sense, and roughness in expression.' . The Mishna is divided into six parts, tWtf CmD, or, in the abbreviated form, D«E^. 1. The first TlD seder, i. e. order, disposition, division, is called Cjnj "HD seder zeraim, the order of seeds. It treats of sowing, the produc- tions of the earth, herbs, trees, the uses of fruits, of seeds, &c. &c. 2. The second is called 1J/1D T1D seder moed, the order of festivals, and is occupied with a statement of the times when ihe festivals should begin and when they should terminate, as also of the different rites and ceremonies to be observed at such seasons. 3. Q'&'l "110 seder nashim, the order of wo- men. This section discusses the distinctive rights of men and women, marriage, divorce ; the cus- toms, inclinations, and sicknesses of women, &c. 4. d^p^TJ "HD seder nezikim, the order of damages. This division treats of the losses and injuries which one may be the means of bringing on another, of the damages done by cattle, of resti- tution, of the punishment to be inflicted for such offences or losses, &c. &c. 5. D^lp "HD seder kodashim, the order of holy things, treating of sacrifices, oblations, their different species, &c. &c. 6. niintO "lTD seder taharoth, the order of purifications, relative to the purity and impu- rity of vessels, to household furniture and other things, and the way in which they should be pu- rified. Each of these b^TlD is subdivided into several niri3DD massictoth, treatises, or tracts, which again are subdivided into D^pIS perakim, sections or chapters. I. CD? "flD. ■ 1. ITCH niDD masseceth berachoth, the treatise of blessings, containing precepts relative to prayers and thanksgivings for the fruits of the earth and other blessings given by God ; instruc- tions in relation to the times, places, and modes in which such prayers should be offered up. This treatise contains nine chapters. 2. HNQ H5DD masseceth peah, treatise of the corner. This treatise shows how corners of the harvest fields should be left to the poor at the time of reaping, and how the fruits of the field should be gathered. Here there are eight chap- ters. 3. ^ft*! masseceth demai, treatise of the doubtful. This treatise refers to things about which some doubts may be raised whether tithes should be paid from them or not. . Here there are seven chapters. 4. Cre?5 masseceth cilaim, treatise of the heterogeneous, i. e. the mixing of several kinds of seed, &c. Here there are nine chapters. 5. JVyOS* masseceth shebiith, of the seventh year, i. e. the sabbatical year, in which the Jews were forbidden to sow. In this treatise are ten chapters. 6. n01"in masseceth terumah, oblation, treat- ing of free-will gifts and offerings, what one must take out of his own property and bring to the priest, as also who ought and who ought not to do so, &c. &c. This contains eleven chapters. 7. JI^'NI l^yD maasher rishon, the first tenth or tithe, which belonged to the. Levites, and with what things it should be discharged. Here there are five chapters. 8. "OE^ "CPD maasher slieni, the second tenth, which the Levites had to pay out. of their tenth to the priests. Here again there are five chap- ters. 2. n?H challah, cake, i. e, the cake which the women were required to bring of kneaded dough to the priest, &c. This treatise has four chapters. 10. n?iy orlah, prepuce. Young trees were so called ; for during the first three years their fruit was reckoned impure and injurious, and was thrown away. In the fourth year it was consecrated to God. Here are three chapters. 11. Q''"YD2 bicurim, first-fruits. This trea- tise is occupied with an examination of the things of which first-fruits were to be brought into the temple. Here are four chapters. The entire seder consists of seventy-five chap- ters. II. IJtttt T1D. 1. fllK' niDDft masseceth shabbath, of the sabbath, its privileges and its sacredness ; of lights, oil used on that day ; of ovens in which articles of food were warmed on the sabbath, and the dress of men and women used on the same day. This treatise has twenty-four chapters. 2. D^^ny erubim, mixings. This treatise shows how, on the evening of the sabbath, the food collected by various neighbours should unite them in such a manner as if they belonged to one household. This was done lest persons living at a distance should break the sabbath by too long journeys. If they lived beyond the zechum shabbath, i. e. the proper limits of a sabbath day's journey, the food was placed in such a position as that an individual was allowed to go farther than he otherwise might lawfully have done. His eating it at the place where it was put was reckoned equivalent to his eating it at home. Here are ten chapters. 3. DTIDS pesachim, the Passover. This trea- tise relates to the Passover, and all things con- nected with the celebration of it. Here again are ten chapters. TALMUD. " 4. Dvpty shekalim, shekels. This treatise is occupied with a statement of the contributions which individuals were to pay towards the daily sacrifice, and the defraying of other expenses connected with the temple worship. This treatise has eight chapters, 5. N01* yoma; the day of expiation or atone- ment, a day spent by the Jews in fasting and chastising the body in many ways. This treatise has also eight chapters. 6. n31D succah, the Feast of Tabernacles. This treats of the form of the tents, the mode of living in them, &c. &c. Here are five chapters. 7. nVH betzah, egg. This treatise begins with the question, whether it be right to eat on (he day of a festival, or a HID DV yom tob, the egg which a hen has laid on the same day. . It relates to everything which a person should do or omit on any feast-day except the sabbath. Here again are five chapters. S. Tiyyn CWI rosh hashannah. This treatise is occupied with remarks about the new year, the begiuning of the new year on the new moon of the month Tisri, and the manner in which the day should be kept. Here are four chapters. 9. ll^yn taanith, fasting. Tin's relates to fasting and the different kinds of it. It has also four chapters. !0. iT?!lO mcgillah. This treatise refers to the Feast of Purim, and is so called because the me- giliah of Esther is read at that time. Here are four chapters. 11. JIDp *iyiO moed katon. In the present treatise are discussed the minor festivals inter- vening between the first and last days of the great festival. Here are three chapters. 12. n^jn chagigah. This treatise is founded on the command contained in Exodus xxiii. 17, that all the males should appear three times in the year before the Lord at Jerusalem. Here again are three chapters. The entire seder contains eighty-eight chapters. III. D*tW no. 1. TTlOn* yebamoth. This treatise concerns the marrying of a deceased brother's wife, who has had no children by her husband. Here are sixteen chapters. 2. rTQirD cethuboth. The present treatise relates to matrimonial contracts, dowries, and writings connected with marriage. Here are thirteen chapters. 3. D*"n3 nedarim, vows, discussing what vows are binding or otherwise; who can make vows and who not. Here are eleven chapters. 4. rTnTJ neziroth. This treatise refers to the vows of the Nazarites, and their mode of living. It contains nine chapters. 5. |*t3*J gittin, respecting divorce, and the writing given to the wife on that occasion, how it. must be written, &c. &c. This treatise con- sists of nine chapters. G. HLD'lD sotah. This treatise regards the adul- teress, or rather the woman suspected of conjugal infidelity; how she must drink the bitter water ■that causeth the curse, &c. &e. Here again are nine chapters. TALMUD. 821 7. *,*tJ>1Tp kiddushin, respecting betrothment. Here are four chapters. This third seder, or order, contains seventy-one chapters. IV. J*p*» TID. 1. NOp K3!l baba kama, the first gate, rela- tive to the losses sustained by men and beasts from one another. This treatise consists of ten chapters. 2. NJ/*¥0 JOS baba- metziah, the middle gate. This treatise refers to things found or deposited, usury, &c. &c. It lias also ten chapters. 3. N"in;2 fc02 baba bathra, the last gate. This treatise relates to commercial transactions, buying and selling, inheritances, &c. &c. Here again are ten chapters. 4. )*TliYJD Sanhedrim. This is a most im- portant treatise, relating to the great tribunal, to various punishments, judges, witnesses ; who of the Israelites shall have part in the future life, and who not. It consists of eleven chapters or sec- tions. 5. DIIDD maccoth. This treatise relates to the forty stripes (Deuteron. xxv. 3) which were to be inflicted on certain offenders. Here the reason is explained why the expounders of the law omitted one stripe of the forty (2 Cor. xi. 24). It contains three chapters. 6. minute shebuoth, respecting oaths; who can take an oath, and who not. This treatise con- sists of eight chapters. 7. m**ry edaioth, respecting witnesses and witness-bearing. Here again are eight chapters. 8. JTI3K aboth, or ni3X *p"13 pirke aboth. This treatise relates to the Jewish fathers who handed down the oral law from the time of Moses. It contains six chapters. 9. D1*"lin horaioth, respecting the statutes and other original documents, according to which every man was required to judge in cases of trial ; and how transgressors should be punished. The present treatise contains three chapters. 10. mt iTTDN abodah zarah, called also D*^K mini? abodath eli/im, and also nTQK D*32"D abodath cocabim, respecting idolatry, and the avoiding of communion with the idolatrous Christians. This treatise is wanting in the Basel edition, because it has severe reflections upon Jesus Christ and his followers. It is printed in the Venice edition, and consists of five chapters. The entire seder contains seventy-four chapters. V. d*KHp TID. 1. D*I"QT zebachim, sacrifices. This treatise has fourteen chapters. 2. nin!JO menachoth, the evening sacrifices. This treatise has thirteen chapters. 3. }vin cho/in. This treatise respects the clean and unclean animals which the Jewrs were required or forbidden to eat. Here are twelve chapters. 4. niTDl becoroth, respecting the first-born « of beasts. Here are nine chapters. 5. |*my eracin. This treatise relates to the valuing and taxing of such things as are dedi- cated to the Lord. It consists of nine chapters. 6. miOn tenmrah. This treatise refers to the putting of one sacrifice in place of another ; 822 TALMUD. whether such a tiling is lawful or not. It con- sists of seven chapters. 7. nirVD cerithuth, the catting off a soul from a future life, and the sins which cause such a punishment : thirty-six kinds of this excision are enumerated. Here are six chapters. 8. Tw^lD meilah, respecting sins committed in offering up animals in sacrifice. This treatise also has six chapters. 9. T'iDn tamid, respecting the daily morning and evening sacrifice. Here are six chapters. 10. nilD middoth. This treatise relates to the measuring of the temple. It consists of five chapters. 11. D'Op kinmm, relating to birds' nests. The treatise is divided into three chapters. The whole seder has ninety sections. vi. ninna no. 1. D v3 celim, respecting measures, household furniture, clc-thes, and their purification. This treatise lias thirty chapters. 2. niPHX aholoth, respecting cottages or houses; how they become unclean, and how they must be cleaned. Ttiis treatise has eighteen chapters. 3. D1"!^ negaim, regarding leprosy. Here are fourteen sections. 4. iT"IQ parah, the red heifer (Num. xix.). This treatise is divided into twelve chapters. 5. JTnntD tahoroth, respecting purification, when a person who has touched any object lias been made unclean. Here are ten chapters. 6. niNlpO ?nikvaoth. This treatise concerns those reservoirs of water in which the Jews washed their bodies. It is divided into ten chapters. 7. n*T3 niddah, respecting the uncleanness of women. This treatise has also ten chapters. 8. p-ft^D mecshirin, of fluids and their pu- rification. It consists of six chapters. 9. D'QT zabim, of nocturnal pollution. This treatise is divided into five sections. 10. DV 7"QL3 tebul yom, respecting the washing of the same day, or what is washed while it is yet day. This treatise consists of four sections. 11. D'H'1 ya'daim, respecting the washing of hands. Here again are four chapters or sections. 12. j^pty oketzim, relative to the stalks of fruits; and how they, by touching other fruits, become unclean. This treatise has three chapters. The entire seder has 126 chapters. From the detailed account now given, it ap- pears that the Talmud consists of six sedarim, or orders, containing sixty-three massecoth, or trac- tates, and five hundred twenty and four perqkim, or chapters. The Babylonian Gemara extends to one trac- tate of the first order, i. e. Berachoth, and to most in the succeeding four orders except Shekalim in the second order ; Aboth and Edaioth in the fourth ; Middoth, Kinnim, and the half of Tamid in the fifth. In Taharoth (the sixth order) there is only a Gemara in both Talmuds to the tract Nidda. The Jerusalem Talmud originally extended to the first five orders of the Mishna. It is now, how- ever, incomplete. The order Kodashim is en- tirely wanting. There is no Gemara to the four TALMUD. last chapters of Shabbath, to the three last o Maccoth, nor to Aboth and Edaioth. Four treatises were afterwards added to the Talmud, viz. : 1. D'HQ'lD ]"DDO masseceth sopherim, con- taining directions for the writers of manuscript rolls. This treatise consists of -twenty-one chap- ters. 2. inn blH ebel rabbethe, or mrtiDB> TGCIQ masseceth shemachoth. This treatise relates to mourning for the dead, and the manner in which mourners should be comforted. It has fourteen chapters. 3. J"l?3 calla'h, how one should talce a wife, &c. &c. Here there is but one chapter. 4. y~)is *]"n ]"DDD masseceth derek eretz, about modes of life, &c. This treatise is sepa- rated into a greater and a less, the former con- taining ten chapters, the latter six. To this is- appended a 01?^ p~)2 pereh shalom, or chapter of peace, by way of conclusion. The earliest edition of the Jerusalem Talmud was published at Venice by Bomberg, in one volume folio, about the year 1523. No date is attached to it. Another edition was published at Cracow in 1609, folio; and another at Amster- dam, in 1710, folio. The Babylonian Talmud was published by Bomberg at Venice in twelve folio volumes, in 1520-30. This edition contains the comments of Rashi and others, as also various appendices by different Rabbins. In the years 1578, 1579, 15S0, the celebrated Froben of Basel published the same work ; but passages which ca- lumniated Christ were rejected by command of the Tridentine bishops. Accordingly the Jews prepared a new and complete edition at Cracow, in 13 volumes folio, in 1603, and following years. Another edition was prepared and pub- lished at Frankfort and Berlin, 1715, in 12 vols, folio ; and another at Amsterdam, 1763, in 18 vol3. folio, with additions and notes, besides various passages not found in preceding impressions. This last has been pronounced the best. Various parts of th#- Talmud have also been printed at different times by different editors ; sometimes with translations and commentaries, exrgr. by Coch, Schmidt, l'Empereur, Leusden, Dachs, Wagenseil, &c. The best edition of the Mishna is that of Suren- husius, published at Amsterdam, 1698, and fol- lowing }Tears, in six folio volumes, with a Latin version and copious commentaries by the Rabbins. The Mishna was translated into Arabic by desire of Alhachem, king of Lsmael, at Corduba, in the tenth century after Christ. It has also been translated into German by Rabe, in six parts, Anspach, 1760. No English version of it has appeared ; much less has the whole Talmud been translated into our language. The Greek words have been collected by Landau in his lexicon en- titled, Rabbinisch-a?-amaisch-deutsches Wcirter- buch zur Kentniss des Talmuds, der Targumim und Midraschim, mit Anmerkungen fur Philo- logie, Geschichte, Archaologie, Geographies Na- tur und Kunst, 5 B'ande, 8vo. Lips. 1819. Reland has a dissertation on the Persian terms, in the second volume of his Miscellaneous Dispu- tations. The best lexicon to the Talmud is still that of Buxtorf, Basel, 1639, folio. The modern TALMUD. work of Landau is a valuable accompaniment, but cannot compensate for the want of BuxtorPs volume. The celebrated Maimonides, in the twelfth century, made a digest of all. the laws and ordinances contained in the Talmud. This ex- cellent abridgment is sufficiently copious for most readers, since it contains everything of value in the whole work. It is entitled Tad Hachazakah, sen manus fortis quam fecit Moses in conspectu Israel, and was first published at Soncino, 1490, folio; republished at Venice, 1524, 3 vols, folio; and at Amsterdam, dated 5461, 4 vols', folio. Selections from it have also been published in Hebrew and English, with notes, by Bernard, in a book entitled, The main principles of the Creed and Ethict of the Jews, exhibited in selections from the Yad Hachazakah of Maimonides, with a literal English translation, copious Illustra- tions from the Talmud, &c. Cambridge, 1832, 8vo. The Jews set so high a value on the Talmud as to place it generally above the inspired law. Hence we find in the Masseceth Sopherim the saying, ' The Biblical text is like water, and the Mishna like wine, and the six orders (sedarim) like aromatic wine.' In another passage the fol- lowing words occur — 'The Law is like salt, the Mishna like pepper, but the six orders like fine spices.' Again, ' The words of the scribes are lovely, above the words of the Law ; for the words- of the Law are weighty and light, but the words of the scribes are all weighty.' ' He that shall say there are no phylacteries, transgressing the words of the law, is not guilty ; but he that shall say, There are five totaphoth, adding to the words of the scribes, he is guilty ' (Hieros. Berac. fol. 3. 2). Such extravagant praises of their oral tradi- tions correspond with the Saviour's words, 'Mak- ing the word of God of none effect, through your tradition which ye have delivered ' (Mark vii. 13). But they do not harmonize with the real nature of the Talmud itself; for the book contains many fabulous, trifling, absurd, and irreverent things. It unites the allegorizing propensity of the East with a childish prying into the most curious questions. It abounds with miraculous stories, and with sentiments derogatory to the majesty of God. Some, indeed, of the questions proposed are merely ludicrous, but others belong to the profane and impious. The following ex- amples will justify the truth of our remarks. ,. A Rabbin was once in the midst of the ocean, and seeing a bird standing up to its thighs in the water, he said to his companions, ' We will bathe here.' But a voice from heaven was heard, say- ing, ' Do not so ; for seven years ago a person let an axe fall from his hand into this water, and it has not yet reached the deep bottom.' 'Is it right to kill a flea on the Sabbath?' ' We were once carried,' says a Rabbin, ' in a great ship, and the ship went three days and three nights between the two fins of one iish. But per- haps the ship sailed very slowly? The Rabbi Dimi says, A rider shot an arrow, and the ship flew faster than the arrow ; and yet it took so long time to pass between the two fins of this fish. It is called Gildena'' (Pitman's Preface to the octavo edition of Lightfoot1 s Works, pp. 43-45 ; Allen's Modern Judaism; and M'Caul's Old Paths). Several parts of the Talmud, however, lorm an exception to the foolish and^ ridiculous TALMUD. 823 passages with which the work abounds. Thus the treatise Pirke Aboth, containing the moral maxims and sentiments of the Jewish fathers, pre- sents a favourable specimen of ethical philosophy. The work before us has been applied to the illustration of the New Testament by Lightfoot, Schoettgen. and Meuschen ; and in various in- stances it has served to throw light on the meaning, especially where there is a reference to Jewish cus- toms and manners. Here, however, its utility has been over-estimated, as is apparent from the lan- guage of Lightfoot in the dedication prefixed to his Talmudical exercitations on Matthew, com- pared with the exercitations themselves : ' Chris- tians, by their skill and industry, may render them (the Talmudic writings) most usefully serviceable to their studies, and most eminently tending to the interpretation of the New Testa- ment ' (Pitman's edition of lightfoot' s Works, vol. xi. ji. 6, dedication). The work has also been employed to illustrate the meaning of the Old Testament, especially by Gill, who has frequently cited it where it throws no light on the text. Nor is he alone- in this respect ; others have spent their time in the same unprofitable task. The Talmud is more useful in the criticism of the Old Testament text, although most of its cita- tions from the original agree with the Masoretic readings. Probably it has been conformed to the Masoretic standard by the Rabbins. Criticism, therefore, can derive extensive benefit from it only by consulting MS. copies, not the printed text, since it can scarcely be doubted that the latter has been altered. The instances in which the text of the work, even as printed, deviates from the Hebrew Masoretic text, afford a presumption that more of the same kind might be found, were MSS. carefully collated. Frummann collected fourteen various readings out of the Mishna ; but Dr. Gill, when collating the Mishna and Gemara for Kennicott, found a thousand. Many of them, properly speaking, are not various readings, but words added by the Rabbins for the purpose of explanation; while not a few are of trifling conse- quence. (See the preface of Maimonides, prefixed to Surenhusius's edition of the Mishna, and trans- lated into Latin by Pocock ; Buxtorf s Recensio operis Talmudici, in his Liber de Abbreviations Hebraicis ; Wolfius' Bibliotheca Hcbreea, ii. 657, sq. ; Wot ton's Miscellaneous Discourses relat- ing to the Traditions and Usages of the Scribes and Pharisees in our Saviour Jesus Christ's time, i. 10, sq. ; Stehelin's Traditions of the Jews, or the Doctrines and Expositions con- tamed in the Talmud and other Rabbinical writ- ings, &.C, 2 vols. Svo., London, 1742; Leusden's Philologus Hebrceo-mixtus, p. 95, sq. ; Pri- deaux"s Connection, part i. ; Basnage's Histoiro des Juifs ; Bodeuschatz's Aufrichtig dcuisch- redender Hebrder, Frankfort and Leipzig, 1756; Loehnis's Grundzuge derbibdschen Ucrmencutik, u. s. w., p. 397, sq. ; Waehner's Antiqui/a/es Bebrceorum, i. 256, sq. ; Aug. Pfeiflfer's Critica Sacra, also printed in the second volume of his Works, Utrecht, 1704. 4to; Bartolocci's Bibli- otheca Rabbinica, ni. 85, sq. ; Reima&rTs Ein- hit. in die Geschichte der Theo/ogie, p. 282, sq. ; Zunz, Gottesdienst/ichen Vortriige der Juden, p. 50, sq.).— S. D. 824 TAMAR. 1. TAMAR (*>£>ft) has been universally ac- knowledged to denote tlie ' palm-tree,' sometimes called the 'date-tree.' Good says the radical meaning of the word is straight or upright. The date- tree is remarkable for its erect and cylin- drical stem, crowned with a cluster of long and. feather-like leaves, arid is as much esteemed for its fruit, the 'date,' as for its juice, whether fer- mented or not, known as ' palm wine,' and for the numerous uses to which every part of the plant is applied. The Arabic name of the date is tamr ; thus the tamarind is called the Indian date, tamr hindee. The name Tamar seems to have been applied to the city which Solomon built in the desert (1 Kings ix. 18; Ezek. xlvii. 19; xlviii. 28), probably on account of the palm- trees growing about it ; and the name Palmyra, from palma, a palm, was no doubt applied to it by the Romans on the same account. Abul- feda, who flourished in the fourteenth century, expressly mentions the palm-tree as common at Palmyra in his time ; and it is still called by the Arabs by the ancient name of Tadmr. The family of* palms is characteristic of tropical coun- tries, and but. few of them extend into northern latitudes. In the old world, the species P. dactylifera, genus Phoenix, is that found furthest north. It spreads along the course of the Eu- phrates and Tigris across to Palmyra and the Syrian coast of the Mediterranean. It has been in- troduced into the south of Spain, and thrives well at Malaga ; and is also cultivated at Bordaghiere in the south of France, chiefly on account of its leaves, which are sold at two periods of the year, in Spring for Palm Sunday, and again at the Jewish Passover. In trie south of Italy and in Sicily, Lady Callcott states, ' that near Genoa there is a narrow, warm, sandy valley full of palms, but they are diminutive in growth, and unfruitful, being cultivated only for the sake of the leaves, which are annually sent to the pope's chapel at Rome, where they are blessed and dis- tributed to the cardinals and other dignitaries, in sign of the triumph of the church.' The peculiarities of the palm-tree are such that they could not fail to attract the atleution of the writers of any country where it is indigenous, and especially from its being an indication of the vicinity of water even in the midst of the most desert country. Its roots, though not penetrating very deep, or spreading very wide, yet support a stem of considerable height, which is remark- able for its uniformity of thickness through- out. The centre of this lofty stem, instead of being the hardest part, as in other trees, is soft and spongy, and the bundles of woody fibres successively produced in the interior are regu- larly pushed outwards, until the outer part be- comes the most dense and hard, and is hence most fitted to answer the purposes of wood. The outside, though devoid of branches, is marked with a number of protuberances, which are the points of insertion of former leaves. These are from four to six and eight feet in length, ranged in a bunch round the top of the stem, the younger and softer being in the centre, and the older and outer series hanging down. They are employed for covering the roofs or sides of houses, for fences, frame-work, mats, and baskets. The male and fe- male flower's being on different trees, the latter re- TAMAR. quire to be fecundated by the pollen of the former before the fruit can ripen. The tender part of the spatha of the flowers being pierced, a bland and sweet juice exudes, which being evaporated^ yields sugar, and is no doubt what is alluded to in some passages of Scripture : if it be fermented and distilled a strong spirit or arak is yielded. The fruit, however, which is yearly produced in numerous clusters and in the utmost abundance, is its chief value ; for whole tribes of Arabs and Africans find their chief sustenance in the date, of which even the stony seeds, being ground down, yield nourishment to the camel of the desert. 515. [1. Cluster of dates ; 2. flower ; 3. a date; 4. sec- tion of the same.] The palm-tree is first mentioned in Exod. xv. 27, when the Israelites encamped at Elim, where there were twelve wells and threescore and ten palm-trees. In the present day Wady Gho- rendel is found the largest of the torrent beds on the west side of the Sinai peninsula, and is a valley full of date-trees, tamarisks, &c. Jericho was called the City of Palm Trees, no doubt from the locality being favourable to their growth. Mariti anil Shaw describe them as still existing there, though in diminished numbers. The palm-tree was considered characteristic of Juda;a, not so much probably because it was more abundant there than in other countries, but be- cause that was the first country where the Greeks and Romans would meet with it in proceed- ing southward. Hence the coins of the Roman conquerors of Judaja have inscribed on them a weeping female sitting under a palm-tree, with the inscription 'Judam capta' (vide Kempfer, Amocnitates Exoticce, and Celsius, Hierobot. i. 444-579). 2. TAMAR, a Canaanitish woman, espoused successively to the two sons of Judah, Er and Onan ; but as they both died childless, Judah hesitated to give her his third son Shelah, as patri- archal usage required. This set her upon the contrivance described in Gen. xxxviii. ; and two sons, Pharez and Zarah, thus became the fruit of her criminal intercourse with Judah him- self [Judah]. 3. TAMAR, daughter of David by Maacah, who was also the mother of Absalom. The un- happy consequences of the criminal passion entertained fur this beautiful damsel by her half- brother Amnon, brutally gratified by him, and terribly avenged by Absalom, formed the ground- TAMMUZ. work of the family distractions which embittered the latter years of David's reign (2 Sam. xiii.) ["Absalom ; Amnon ; David]. TAMMUZ 0-1EFI ; Sept. ®annoi(), a Syrian deity, for whom the Hebrew idolatresses were ac- customed to hold an annual lamentation (Ezek. viii. 14). This idol was the same with the Phoe- nician Adon or Adonis, and the feast itself such as they celebrated. Silvestre de Sacy thinks that the name Tammuz was of foreign origin, and probably Egyptian, as well as the god by whom it was borne. In fact, it would probably not be difficult to identify him with Osiris, from whose worship his differed only in accessories. The feast held in honour of Tammuz was solstitial, and commenced vvith the new moon of July, in the month also called Tammuz; it consisted of two parts, the one consecrated to lamentation, and the other to joy ; in the days of grief, they mourned the disappearance of the god, and in the days of gladness, celebrated his discovery and return. Tammuz appears to have been a sort of incarnation of the sun, regarded principally as in a state of passion and sufferance, in connection with the apparent vicissitudes in its celestial po- sition, and with respect to the terrestrial meta- morphoses produced, under its influence, upon vegetatiun in advancing to maturity. See Lucian, De Dea Si/ra, § vii. 19 ; Selden, De Diis Syris, iT. 31; Creuzer, Symholik, iv. 3 ; Fickenscher, ErJddr. d. My thus Adonis. TAPPUACH (n-ISri), translated 'apple' in the Authorized Version, has been the subject of considerable difference of opinion among authors on Biblical Botany. Most admit that apple is not the correct translation, for that fruit is indifferent in Palestine, being produced of good quality only on Mount Lebanon, and in Damascus. Many contend that 'quince ' is the correct trans- lation of Tappuach. Though somewhat more suitable than the apple, we think that neither the quince tree nor fruit is so superior to others as to be selected for notice in the passages of Scrip- ture where tappuach occurs. This word would seein to bave the same general signification as the Arabic toph or too/a, which it so closely resem- bles, and which is usually thought to be the apple; but. the Arabs themselves are but little acquainted with that, fruit. They no doubt use the word occasionally in a generic sense, for tappuach-al-shuetan, or 'devil's apple,' is one of the names of Mandragora. So the Greek p.rj\ov, and the Latin pomum, were used rather as generic than as specific terms. Dioscorides, for instance, gives the different kinds, under the heads of Mala vulgaria, Cotouea, Persica, Armeniaca, and Medica, sive Citria. The last, or citron, we think, has the best claim to be considered the Tappuach of Scripture, as it was esteemtd by the ancients, and known to the Hebrews, and con- spicuously different, botli as a fruit and a tree, from the ordinary vegetation of Syria, and the only one of the orange tribe which was known to the ancients. The orange, lemon, and lime, were introduced to the knowledge of Euro- peans at a much later period, probably by the Arabs from India (ltoyle, Ilimal. Hot.). The citron, resembling the lemon in form, but distin- guished by its thick rind, was the /.ojAop MtjSi/c^j/ of Theophrastus, the M?j5

TIP, for the human jawbone; for that of an ass, Judg. xv. 15-17, (TLayova, ' maxillam, i.e. mandibulam ' (which becomes t^rDlD in ver. 19, -rbv Xclkkov t6v iv Trj aiayovi, ' molarem dentem in maxilla asini ') [Samson] ; and for that of leviathan, Job xl. 14, rb xe^os> maxillam. A 'broken (or rather 'bad,' DJ?"), that is, decayed; Vulg. dens putridxis) tooth,' is referred to in Prov. xxv. 19, as furnishing an apt similitude of ' confi- dence in an unfaithful man in the time of trouble.' 'The teeth of beasts,' or rather 'tooth,' }£*, is a phrase expressive of devastation by wild animals : thus, ' I will send the tooth of beasts upon them ' (Deut. xxxii. 24), ^?^^2"|K,, bSovrus TOOTH, TEETH. Byplay, denies bestiarum (comp. 2 Kings xvii. 25). The word is sometimes metaphorically used for a sharp cliff or summit of a rock (Job xxxix. 28) : thus, ' The eagle dwelleth and abideth upon the tooth of the rock;' y?D"|B>"?JJ, «r' e|oxJ? wtrpas, inaccessis rupibus. So also (1 Sam. xiv. 4) : ' a sharp rock on the one side and a sharp rock on the other side ;' J/?DrTJt^, 68ovs irirpas, quasi in modum dentium scopidi : these eminences were named Bozez and Seneh. Teeth, W2W, oSSvres, dentes, is found in the dual number only, referring to the two rows, yet used for the plural (1 Sam. ii. 13). The word occurs first with reference to the literal organs in man (Gen. xlix. 12) : ' His teeth shall be white with milk,' which the Sept. and Vulg. understand to mean 'whiteness greater than milk,' 7) yd\a, lacte candidiores (Num. xi. 33 ; Prov. x. 26 ; Cant. iv. 2; vi. 6). Although DW be the general word for teeth, yet the Hebrews had a dis- tinct term for the molares or jaw teeth, especially of the larger animals ; thus, T)\y?T\13, Job xxix. 17 ; Ps. lvii. 4 ; Prov. xxx. 14 ; Joel i. 6 ; and by transposition T\)]}n7'0, Ps. Iviii. 6, [ivAai, moles and molares. The apparent teeth of the leviathan, gyrus dentium, are however called D*35$> (Job xli. 14). Ivory, ' elephants' teeth,' 1 Kings x. 22, is simply COBJ ; in Sept. deest ; Vulg. dentes ele- phantorum : dens in Latin is somelimes so used. In 2 Chron. ix. 21, the word is □"'Dil^, btiovres i\€(pdvTLvoi, ebur, where }£> evidently denotes a tooth ; but the signification of the latter part, D'Qn, is unknown, and Gesenius thinks that the form of the word may be so corrupted as to dis- guise its original meaning. May it not be of foreign origin, imported with the material from Ophir? [Ivory]. In other passages the reference to teeth is metaphorical ; thus, ' a flesh-hook with three teeth,' that is, prongs (I Sam. ii. 13) [Hooks]. ' The teeth of lions' is a symbol of the cruelty and rapacity of the wicked (Job iv. 10). 'To take one's flesh into one's teeth,' signifies to gnaw it with anguish (Job xiii. 14; comp. Rev. xvi. 10. ' The skin of his teeth,' with which Job says he had ' escaped ' in his affliction, is under- stood by the Vulgate, of the lips — 'derelicta sunt tantummodo labia circa dentes meos ;' but Gese- nius understands it 'as a proverbial expression, meaning, I have scarcely a sound spot in my body. ' To smite upon the jaw-bone' and ' to break the teeth,' mean to disgrace, and to disable (Ps. iii. 7 : comp. Mic. vi. 13 ; 1 Kings xx. 35 ; Lam. iii. 30). The teeth of calumniators, &c, are com- pared to ' spears and arrows ' (Ps. lvii. 4 ; comp. 1 Sam. xxiv. 9). To break the teeth of such per- sons, means to disable them (Ps. Iviii. 6). To escape the malice of enemies, is called an ' escape from their teeth ' (Ps. cxxiv. 6 ; Zech. ix. 7). Oppression is compared to ' jaw-teeth like swords, and grinders like knives ' (Prov. xxx. 14). Beau- tiful teeth are compared to ' sheep newly shorn and washed ' in Cant. iv. 2 ; vi. 6 ; but the re- maining part of the comparison, ' whereof every one beareth twins, and none is barren among them," is much better rendered by Le Clerc, 'all of them twins, and none hath lost his fellow.' To 'break the teeth with gravel stones,' is a most hyperbolical metaphor for inflicting the harshest disappointment (Lam. iii. 16). 'Iron teeth' TOPHET. 887 are the symbol of destructive power (Dan. vii. 7, 19). A nation having the teeth of lions, and the cheek-teeth of a great lion, denotes one which de- vours with irresistible force (Joel i. 6 ; comp. Ecclus. xxi. 2 ; Rev. ix. 8). ' Prophets who bite with their teeth, and cry Peace,' are greedy and hypocritical prophets (Mic. iii. 5). ' To take away blood out of the mouth, and abominations from between the teeth,' means, to rescue the in- tended victims of cruelty (Zech. ix. 7). ' Clean- ness of teeth,' is a periphrasis for hunger, famine (Amos iv. 6) ; Sept. yo/j. and in the Vulg. infre- mo, fremo, frendo(see also Acts vii. 54 ; Ecclus. Ii. 2). In the New Testament it is said of the epilep- tic child (Mark ix. IS), rp££et robs 656vras, stridet dentibus. The phrase, 0 0pvyp£s rwv oBovtcdv, is in the Vulgate 'stridor dentium' (Matt. viii. 12; xiii. 42, 50; xxii. 13; xxiv. 51 ; xxv. 30 ; Luke xiii. 28). Suidas defines fipvyfxos' Tpwp.bs oSovtoov. Galen, 6 air6 tu>v bhovrcnv crvyKpovoy.evuii' i\/6iily Expositor, in loc, note g.) Stockius also describes it as 'A sacred ecstasy, or rapture of the mind out of itself, when the use of the ex- ternal senses being suspended, God reveals some- thing in a peculiar manner to prophets and apostles, who are then taken or transported out of themselves.' The same idea is intimated in the English word trance, from the Latin ' transifris,' the state of being carried out of oneself. The Greek word, eKcrracris, denotes the effect of any passion by which the thoughts are wholly ab- sorbed. In the Sept. it corresponds to \V2i&, ' a wonderful thing ' (Jer. v. 30) ; and JinDD, 'asto- nishment ' (Deut. xxviii. 28). In the New Tes- tament it represents the absorbing effects of ad- miration (Mark v. 42; Luke v. 26; Acts iii, 10) ; of terror, Mark xvi. 8. The Hebrew word is used to denote the prophetic ecstasy. Thus ' the deep sleep ' which fell upon Adam during the creation of Eve (Gen. ii. 21), and during which, as appears from the narrative, he was made aware of the transaction, and of the purport of the attendant circumstances (21-24) [Marriage]. It is applied again to the 'deep sleep ' which fell upon Abraham (xv. 12, eKaraais, sopor), during which the bondage of his descendants in Egypt was revealed to him. Possibly all the accounts recorded in that chapter occurred in ' vision ' (1-12). which ultimately deepened into the trance (12-21). Compare verses 5, 12, where he is said to have seen the stars, though the sun was not gone down. The apparent objection, tliat Abra- ham was ' brought forth abroad ' to see the stars, is only of the same nature with others explained in the Art. Temptation of our Lord. Some, perhaps many things recorded in Scripture, belong to this supernatural state of trance, which are not expressly referred to it. See the long list of such supposed instances in Bishop Law's Considera- tion qf the Theory of Religion (pp. 85, 86, Lond., 1820). Eisner includes in this list the star seen by the wise men (Comment, on Matt. ii. 9, 10, &c). In the narrative which Balaam giv^s of himself our translators have rightly added the words ' into a trance ' after the word ' falling.' The incident of the ass speaking to him, &c, is also understood by many learned Jews and Christians to have occurred in a vision (Bishop Law, u. s.). To the same mode of divine com- munication must be referred the magnificent description in Job iv. 13-21. Persons receiving it often fall to the earth. ' Abraham fell on his face, and God talked with him ' (Gen. xvii. 3, &c. ; 1 Sam. xix. 24, Hebrew, or margin ; Ezek. i. 28 ; Dan. viii. 18 ; x. 15, 16 ; Rev. i. 10, 17). It is important to observe that in all these cases the visions beheld are also related ; hence such cases are distinguished from a mere deliquium animi. We find cases of prophetical trance in the New Testament as that of St. Peter : ' he fell into a trance' (or rather a ' trance fell upon him,' TRANSFIGURATION". eir67rev T\ku>v, which, lite- rally translated, is ' the type of the nails/ Again, it denotes a model or example, placed before us for imitation (see Phil. iii. 17; 1 Thess. i. 7 ; 2 Thess. iii. 9 ; 1 Tim. iv. 12 ; Titus ii. 7 ; 1 Pet. v. 3-; ii. 21 ; Acts xxiii. 25 ; Rom. vi. 17). The word is used also by physicians to desig- nate the particular form which diseases assume : hence Galen wrote a work entitled Tlepl tS>v tv- ■kwv. But in its theological sense the best defini- tion perhaps is that which Heb. x. 1 supplies : a type is a shadow of good things to come, or, as the apostle elsewhere expresses it (Col. ii. 17), 'a shadow of things to come ; bat the body is of Christ.' Adopting this definition as the correct one, we proceed briefly to point out the different types by which God was pleased in va- rious ages to adumbrate the person and work ot the Redeemer. It would be beside our present purpose to inquire as to the reasons why Jehovah developed his plan of human redemption in a gradually progressive form — by visions, dreams, voices, inspirations, impulses of his spirit, and by miracle. It is enough for us to know that he actually did speak (Heb. i. 1) ' at sundry times and in divers manners to the fathers/ In tracing out xclvo and what typified or sha- dowed forth Christ and his salvation under the antediluvian, patriarchal, and Mosaic dispensa- tions, we must, be careful not to substitute the suggestions of our own imaginations for the inti- mations of Scripture. We must endeavour to learn the mind of God as to what actually constitutes a type, either by the express declarations of Scrip- ture, or by the obvious analogy which subsists between things under the Gospel and its antece- dent dispensations. Thus guurding ourselves, we may notice the various types by which God was pleased, at all times, in a sense, to preach the Gospel to mankind. I. Before the law, Adam, Enoch, Noah, Melchiaedee, Abraham, Isaac, and Joseph wen: eminently typical of Christ. Again, under the law, Mosi s, Joshua, Samson, David, Solomon, Elijah, Elislm, Jonah, Zerubbabel, and Joshua the high priest, were, in many points, singularly types of Christ. 2. The first-born, the Nazarites, prophets, priests, and kings, were typical orders of persons. 3. Under the head of things typical may be noticed : Jacob's ladder, the burning-bush, the TYRANNUS. 895 pillar of cloud and fire, the manna, the rock, and the brazen serpent. 4. Actions typical were : the deliverance out of Egypt, passage of the Red sea, sojourn in the wilderness, passage over the Jordan, entrance into Canaan, and restoration from Babylon. 5. Rites typical were : circumcision, various sacrifices, and sundry purifications. 6. Places typical were : the land of Canaan, the cities of refuge, the tabernacle, and the temple. The above types were designed to shadow forth Christ and the blessings of his salvation ; but there were others also which pointed at our mise- ries without him. There were ceremonial un- cleannesses ; the leprosy, for instance, was a type of our natural pollution ; and Hagar and Ishmael a type of the covenant of works. As there must be a similarity or analogy be- tween the type and the antitype, so there is also a disparity or dissimilitude between them. It is not in the nature of type and antitype that they should agree in all things; else, in- stead of similitude,, there would be identity. Hence the apostle, whilst, making Adam a type of Christ, yet shows how infinitely the latter ex- celled the former (1 Cor. xv. 47). So the priests of old were types of Christ, though he infinitely excelled them both as to his own person and as- to the character of his priesthood (see Heb. vii.r vi ii, , ix., and x). Chrysostom observes (Flom. 61, in Gen.) that there must be more in the type than in the antitype. Hence the distinction must be observed between total ami partial types. This distinction CEcumenius also draws, in com- , mentingon vii. Heb. p. 829. He says : 'Otvttos ov Kara. -Kavra Itros iarl t?7 aXqOtla (eVsl real av- tos a\r)9zia euplcnceTUL, real ravTorrjs /iciWov, ■f) tuttoj), aW eludvas exet Twas tal lvoo.Kfxa.Ta : — ' A type does not express that which it represents: in every minute particular, for then instead of si- militude there would be identity, but it contains certain outlines and assimilations of the antitype.' Cyril of Alexandria in cap. vi. Amos p. 315, also observes on this subject : 'O tvttus ovk a\T]6eia, )xopr two years daily in his school after quitting the synagogue (Acts xix. 9). This proves that the school was Greek, TYRE. TYRE. not Jewish. It does not appear whether Tyran- nus was himself a convert or not ; for it may be that he let to the apostle the house or hall which he used : but it is more pleasant to suppose that he was a convert, and that the apostle was hospitably entertained by him and obtained the use of the hall in which he himself taught. TYRE. Besides its antiquity, manufactures, colonies, and commerce, the city of Tyre claims attention as frequently mentioned in biblical his- tory, and still more on account of the prophecies of its overthrow, and their exact fulfilment. Its Hebrew name, T)^ Tsor or Tsur, which means a rock, was probably derived from its being at first founded for purposes of defence on a rocky hill. Our word Tyre and its Latin form Tyrus, which are used interchangeably (indifferently) in the English version of the Scriptures, as well as its Greek form Tvpos, are only slightly changed from JOI2, the Aramasan form of the original Hebrew name. The original position of Tyre was on the east- ern coast of the Mediterranean, about midway between Egypt and Asia Minor, near the north- western frontier of Palestine. As it was a colony of Zidon, Isaiah, by a well-known Hebraism, styles it (xxiii. 1 2) ' daughter of Zidon,'' and as it was founded before the records of history, or, as some say, 240 years before the building of Solomon's temple, Isaiah also speaks (xxiii. 7) of its 'antiquity of ancient days.' A defensible location, which was also favourable to commerce, combined with other circumstances to make the daughter surpass the mother city, becoming the metropolis of Phoenicia, a mart of nations, and the planter of colonies. As early as the eleventh century before the ad- vent of Christ, the Tyrians had become famous for skill in the arts. Apart from the statement that the territory of Asher extended to theirs (Josh. xix. 29), tire first notice of them in the Scriptures is, that about 1 142 b.c. (2 Sam. v. 11), their king Hiram sent cedar-trees to Jerusalem, and workmen who built David a house. A gene- ration later, when Solomon, preparing to build the temple, sent to the same monarch for similar assistance, he said to him (1 Kings v. 6), ' Thou knowest that there is not among us any that can skill to hew timber like unto the Sidonians.' He also (1 Kings vii. 13) sent and fetched Hiram out of Tyre, a widow's son, filled with cunning to work all works in brass. At nearly the same period, the Sidonians, of whom the Tyrians were a branch, were often alluded to in Homer as artists of everything elaborate and beauteous. In subsequent ages, every king coveted a robe of Tyrian purple, and Ezekiel (xxvii. 16) speaks of ' the multitude of wares of its making,' — eme- ralds, purple, and broidered work, and tine linen, and coral, and agate. The commerce of Tyre was commensurate with its manufactures. Situate at the entry of the sea, it became a merchant of the people for many isles. It was inhabited by seafaring men, and was styled by way of eminence ' the merchant- city,' whose merchants were princes, whose traffick- ers were the honourable of the earth (Isa. xxiii. 8). When the ships of Solomon sailed away to Ophir (I Kings ix. 27), ' Hiram sent in the navy his servants, ship-men that had knowledge of the sea, with the servants of Solomon.' The Tyrians al- ready adventured three years' voyages to Tarshish beyond the pillars of Hercules. In its vicinity they afterwards built Cadiz. Among their other colonies, whither ' their own feet carried them afar off to sojourn,' were Cyprus, Utica, and Carthage — the last so long the most formidable rival ot Rome, the founding of which, so poetically treated by Virgil, is placed by antiquarians in the year b.c. 869. In the 27th chapter of Ezekiel. Syria, Persia, and Egypt, Spain, Greece, and every quarter of the ancient world, are portnyed has- tening to lay their most jjrecious things at the feet of Tyre, who sat enthroned on ivory, covered with blue and purple from the isles of Elishah ; while the Gammadims were in her towers, hanged their shields upon her walls round about, and made her beauty perfect. Near the close of the eighth century before the Christian era, Shalmaneser, the king of Assyria who captured Samaria, was led by cupidity to lay siege to Tyre. He cut off its supplies of water which aqueducts had furnished, but wells within the walls supplied their place ; and at the end of five years he gave up his blockade as hopeless. At this crisis, or even earlier, an island half a mile from the shore was made a strong- hold for the riches of the city : the water, to a nautical people, being the best bulwark against the Assyrians, who had no maritime power. The original city on the mainland was subsequently named Palaio-Tyrus, or Old Tyre. The Tyrians were naturally proud of having successfully done battle with the mightiest king of the East, and for a time played a part in the ancient world like that which Venice played in the middle ages. Each was insular, colonial, and continental — its borders in the midst, of the seas — the builders had perfected its beauty — every precious stone was its covering. Each was not only commercial and opulent, but a joyous city, a pleasant place of all festivity — dance, song, and harp. It was against a city such as this, so confident, and to all appearance so justifiably confident, of sitting a queen for ever, that several prophets, particularly Isaiah and Ezekiel, fulminated the denunciations which Jehovah dictated. They prophesied that it should be overthrown by Ne- buchadnezzar, that it should revive, but at length be destroyed and never rebuilt. Before a generation had passed away, accord- ing to Josephus, Philostratus, and Seder Olam, Nebuchadnezzar came up, as had been pre- dicted (Ezek. xxvi. 7-13), making a fort, casting a mount, and lifting up the buckler. A_t the end of thirteen years (about a.m. 3422) he took the eity, at least that on the mainland, and Tyre was forgotten seventy years, as had been foretold by Isaiah (xxiii. 15). In the year b.c. 332 Tyre, which had again become a flourishing emporium for all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth, ' and heaped up silver as the dust, and fine gold as the mire of the streets,' was assailed by Alexander the Great in the midst of his Oriental career of conquest. It is doubtful whether the city on the mainland had been re^ built ; if so, it yielded at once to the youthful conqueror. But the insular city sustained a siege of seven months; and was at length taken only by means of a mole, by which the island was turned into a peninsula, and rendered ac- TYRE. cessible by land forces. In constructing this mole Alexander made use of the ruins of the old city, and thereby fulfilled two prophecies. One was (Ezek. xxvi. 12), 'And they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the water.' The other was (ver. 21), ' And thou shalt be no more : (hough thou be sought for, yet. shalt thou never be found again, saith the Lord God.' So utterly were the ruins of old Tyre thrown into the sea, that its exact site is confessedly undeterminable, although the ruins of neaily fifty cities near Rome, which perished almost. 2500 years ago, testify that the extinction of every trace of a city is a sort of miracle. Moreover, Alexander laid Tyre in ashes : thus accomplishing the prediction of Zechariah (ix. 4), ' She shall be devoured with fire.' Besides, as ships from Tyre, out on a three years' voyage, returned to find that city razed to the ground which they had left and looked to find once more in the perfection of beauty, there is a significance hi the prophecy of Isaiah not at first obvious (xxiii. I, 14) : ' Howl, ye ships of Tarshish ; for it is laid waste, so that there is no house, no entering in. Howl, ye ships of Tarshish, for your strength is laid waste.' The mole of Alexander has prevented Tyre from becoming insulated again. The revival of the city was long retarded by the rivalship of the newly-founded Alexandria, and by other causes, so that, although a ship in which Paul saiLd was there to unlade her burden (Acts xxi. 3), Pliny, who wrote in the first century, after relating how great it had been, and that its ruins were nineteen miles in circuit, adds, ' at this day all its nobility consists in oysters and purple' (v. 17). But in the time of Jerome, the latter half of the fourth century, it bad so far revived that he was embarrassed in commenting on Ezek. xxvi. 14, ' Thou shalt be built no more;' and at last interprets the meaning to be, that it should not again become an independent state, but re- main subject to the Macedonian, Seleucian, Ro- man, or some other power. But time was a better commentator, or has now made Sabbath-school children better commentators than St. Jerome. The possession of Tyre was often afterwards contested as if it were a key to unlock a king- dom ; it was beleaguered more than once during the crusades, was the burial-place of the German Emperor Barbarossa, and, remaining in European hands till 1291, was almost the last place in Asia which the- chivalry of ihe West, yielded to the Moslems. Its fortifications, which were almost impregnable, were demolished, and it has never since been a place of consequence. Travellers of every succeeding century describe it as a heap of mine, broken arches and vaults, tottering walls and towers, with a few starveling wretches housing amid the rubbish. A chief of the Druses, indeed, attempted to rebuild it two hundred years ago, but in vain. Maundrell, in 1694, found ' not. so much as one entire house left.' In Pococke's day (1738) it was a place of export for grain, but contained only two or three Christian families and a few other inhabitants. In 17G6 a part of the peninsula was walled, and a town named Sur founded, which still exists, and exports tobacco, cotton, wool, and wood. Yet its population has never exceeded three thousand souls. It cannot compete with its neighbour Beirut; its harbour voi,. II. TZAPHTZAPHA. 897 is navigable only by boats, and becomes more and more shallow every year. It was half ruined by an earthquake in 1837. One of the best ac- counts of its present appearance is given by the American traveller Robinson, who spent a Sab- bath there in 1838 (Biblical Researches, iii. 395) : 1 1 continued my walk,' says he, 'along the shore of the peninsula, part of which is now unoccupied, except as " a place to spread nets upon,'' musing upon the pride and fall of ancient Tyre. Here was the little isle, once covered by her palaces and surrounded by her fleets : but alas ! thy riches and thy fame, thy merchandise, thy ma- riners and thy pilots, thy caulkers, and the oc- cupiers of thy merchandise that were in thee, — where are they ? Tyre has indeed become like " the top of a rock." The sole tokens of her more ancient splendour — columns of red and grey granite, sometimes forty or fifty heaped together, or marble pillars — lie broken and strewed beneath the waves in the midst of the sea ; and the hovels that now nestle upon a portion of her site present no contradiction of the dread decree, " Thou shalt be built no more." The downfall and permanent desolation of Tyre is one of the most memorable accomplish- ments of prophecy which the annals of the world exhibit. The sins which sealed its ruin were, in the words of the sacred writers, these : ' Because that Tyrus hath said against Jerusalem, Aha, she is broken that was the gates of the people; she is turned unto me ; I shall be replenished now she is laid waste' (Ezek. xxvi. 2). ' Because thy heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in 'he seat of God, in the midst of the' seas' (xxviii. 2). ' The children also of Judah and the children of Jerusalem have ye sold unto the Grecians that ye might remove them lar from their border' (Joel iii. G). — J. D. B. TZAPHTZAPHA (nQ>'Q¥) occurs only in Ezek. xvii. 5, and is usually translated ' willow- tree :' ' He took also of the seed of the land, and planted it in a fruitful field ; he placed it by great waters, and set it as a ■willoio-tree.'' Cel- sius, however, thinks that the word means lo- cus planus, planities, although he at the same time gives all the evidence for the former mean- ing. First, the Rabbins consider it to mean a tree, ' et quidem sa/ix ;' R. Ben Melech says it is ' species salicis, Arabibus Tziphtzaph dicta;' while ' Avicennahoc tit. dicit Tziphtzaph esse ChilafS Travellers, also, give us similar information. Thus Paul Lucas : ' Les Arabes le nomment sof- s«f, qui signilie en Arabe saule.1 Rauwolf (Tra- vels, i. ch. 9), speaking of the plants he found near Aleppo, remarks, ' There is also a peculiar sort of willow-trees, called safsaf, he. ; the stems and twigs are long, thin, weak, and of a pale yellow- colour; on their twigs here and there are shoots of a span long, like unto the Cypriotish wild li^- trees, which put forth in the spring tender and woolly flowers, like unto the blossoms of the poplar-tree, only they are of a more drying quality, of a pale colour, and a fragrant smell. The ill- habitants pull of these great quantities, and distil a very precious and sweet water out of them.' This practice is still continued in Eastern coun- tries as far as Northern India, and was, and probably still is, well* known in Egypt. The species which is called chilaf by the Arabs if 3m 898 TZEBI. called Salix Mgyptiaca by botanists ; and it is pro- bable that it is also found in Syria, and may be the above safsaf. Indeed, it was found by Hassel- 529. [Salix JEgyptiaca.] quist on nis journey from Acre to Sidon, as lK, flame of Jehovah; Sept. Ovpias), a Hittite, and therefore a descendant of the ancient inhabitants of Palestine, whose name occurs in the list of the 'worthies' or champions of king David, in whose army he was an officer. He was the husband of Bathsheba ; and while he was absent with the army before Rabbah, David conceived and gratified a criminal passion for his wife. The king then directed Joab to send him to Jerusalem, but failing to make his presence instrumental in securing Bathsheba from the legal consequences of her misconduct, he sent him back with a letter directing Joab to ex- pose him to the enemy in such a manner as to ensure his destruction. This the unscrupulous Joab accomplished ; and David then took the widow into his own harem (2 Sam. xi. ; xxiii. 39) [David ; Bathsheba]. 1. URIJAH (■mT'VIK, flame of Jehovah ; Sept. Ovpias), high priest of the Jews in the time of king Ahaz. He received from this young prince, who was then at Damascus, the model of an altar which had there engaged his attention, with orde s to make one like it at Jerusalem. It was his duty to refuse compliance with this dan- gerous order ; but he made such haste in his obedience that the altar was completed by the time Ahaz returned ; and he afterwards went so far in his subservience as to offer upon this new and unauthorized altar the sacrifices prescribed by the law of Moses (2 Kings xvi. 10-12). He was probably not so fully aware as he ought to have been of the crime and danger involved in this concession to a royal caprice, being a transgres- sion of the law which fixed the form of the Mosaical altar (Exod. xxvii. 1-8 ; xxxviii. 1-7) : for he appears to have been in intention a good man, as he is one of the ' faithful witnesses' chosen by Isaiah (viii. 2) to attest one of his prophecies. 2. URIJAH, a prophet, son of Shemaiah of Kirjath-jearim in Judah, who, in the time of Jehoiakim, uttered prophecies against Judasa and Jerusalem of the same tenour as those which Jere- miah was commissioned to deliver. Menaced with death by the king, Urijah sought refuge in Egypt ; but Judsea was at that time subject to Pharaoh-Necho, who had no interest in protecting a proscribed fugitive who foretold the conquests of the Babylonians. He was therefore delivered up on the demand of Jehoiakim, who put him to URIM. death, and ordered him to be buried dishonour- ably in one of the graves of the meanest of the people (Jer. xxvi. 20, 21). URIM and THUMMIM (D^fll OniK ; Sept. StiAcoais ical d\r]6eia, &c. ; Vulg., Doctrina et Veritas). The Hebrew words are generally considered to be plurales excellentiae, denoting light (i. e. revelation) and truth ; and as used by a metonymy for the things or modes whereby the revelation was given, and truth declared. They may, however, be duals. A similar view of their construction and meaning pervades the Sept. and Vulg. renderings, under some varieties of expres- sion. There are two principal opinions respecting the Urim and Thummim. One is, that these words simply denote the four rows of precious stones in the breastplate of the high-priest, and are so called from their brilliancy and perfection ; which stones, in answer to an appeal to God in difficult cases, indicated his mind and will by some supernatural appearance. Thus, as we know that upon each of the stones was to be engraven the name of one of the sons of Jacob, it has been conjectured that the letters forming the divine respionse became some way or other distinguished from the other letters. It has been conjectured by others that the response was given by an audible voice to the high-priest arrayed in full pontificals, and standing in the holy place with his face turned towards the ark. The other prin- cipal opinion is, that the Urim and Thummim were two small oracular images, similar to the Teraphim, personifying revelation and truth, which were placed in the cavity or pouch formed by the folds of the breastplate, and which uttered oracles by a voice. [Priest, the breastplate ; Teraphim.] We propose simply to lay before the reader a statement of the facts connected with this obscure but interesting subject. It is remark- able that the first time the Urim and Thummim are mentioned in Scripture, they are referred to as things already known. After a minute de- scription of the breastplate, which, as we have shown in Priest, was to differ in several parti- culars from that worn by the Egyptian priests, it is simply added, 'And thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgment, the Urim and the Thum- mim ' (Exod. xxviii. 30). So indefinite, how- ever, is the preposition ?K, here translated ' in,' that it may also mean ' on ' or ' near ' (Sept. reads iiri). The Urim and Thummim are, however, here clearly distinguished from the breastplate itself, or from the four rows of gems, unless we can imagine that the breastplate should be so called before the gems, the essential part of it, were put into their place. We observe the like distinction made in the account of Aaron's consecration (Lev. viii. 8; comp. Ecclus. xlv. 10), and by Josephus (Antiq. viii. 3. 8), where he distinguishes the rb Koyziov, or oracle, from the precious stones. So does the Samaritan text, which also states the Urim and Thummim to have been made on the occasion. We think the distinction indicated in these passages of Scrip- ture sufficiently clear to withstand the inference which has been derived from comparing Exod. xxviii. 29, with 30, and Exod. xxxix. 8, &c, with Lev. viii. 8 ; namely, that the Urim and Thum- mim were identical with the gems in the breast- plate. In Num. xxvii. 21, the word D'HlKn URIM. URIM. 901 alone is used in a brief recapitulatory manner, and, no doubt, including the Thummim, or else, in the general sense of divine revelations, answers, &c, by thismethod (Sept. f) Kpiffis tS>i/ S-fiKwv Zvuvti Kvplov ; comp. 1 Sam. xxviii. 6 ; Sept. iu ro7s SijAois; Vulg. per sacerdotes). The usual order is reversed in Deut, xxxiii. 8, where it is Thummim and Urim. The last mention of them occurs after the return of the captivity, when ' the Tirshatha' decreed that certain claimants to the rights of the priesthood, but who could not produce their eccle- siastical pedigree, should wait 'till there stood up a priest with Urim and with Thummim,' by whom their claim might be infallibly decided (Ezra ii. 63 ; Sept. rols Ti(ovopfj (that they might carry the image of the two powers) ; 5?)AcoTTy, strength; Sept. '0££), son of Abinadab, a Levite, who, with his brother Ahio, eonducted the new cart on which the ark was fiaken from Kirjath-jearim to Jerusalem. When Che procession reached the threshing-floor of Nachon, the oxen drawing the cart became un- 'uly, and Ujzab hastily put forth his hand to <»tay the ark, which was shaken by their move- ments. For this the anger of the Lord smote him, and he died on the spot. This judgment appeared to David so severe, or even harsh, that he was much distressed by it, and becoming afraid to take the ark any farther, left it there, in charge of Obed-edom, till three months after, when he finally took it to Jerusalem (2 Sam. vi. 1-1 1). The whole proceeding was very irregular, and contrary to the distinct and far from unmeaning regulations of the law, which prescribed that the ark should be carried on the shoulders of the Le- vites(Exod. xxv. 14), whereas here it was conveyed in a cart drawn by oxen. The ark ought to have been enveloped in its coverings, and thus wholly concealed before the Levites approached it; but it does not appear that any priest took part in the matter, and it would seem as if the ark was brought forth, exposed to the common gaze, in the same manner in which it had been brought back by tlie Philistines (1 Sam. vi. 13-19). It was the duty of Uzzah, as a Levite, to have been acquainted with the proper course of proceeding : he was therefore the person justly accountable for the neglect ; and the judgment upon him seems to have been the most effectual course of ensuring attention to the proper course of pro- ceeding, and of checking the growing disposition to treat the holy mysteries with undue familiarity. That it had this effect is expressly stated in 1 Chron. xv. 2, 13. UZZEN-SHERAH (iTW ||N ; Sept. 'O&v leripa), a small city, founded by Sherab, the daughter of Ephraim (1 Chron. vii. 24). UZZIAH (H*Ty, might of Jehovah; Sept. 'O(ias), otherwise called Azariah, a king of Judah, who began to reign B.C. 809, at the age of sixteen, and reigned fifty-three years, being, with the sole exception of Manasseh's, the longest reign in the Hebrew annals. Uzziah was but five years old when his father was slain. He was six- teen before he was formally called to the throne : and it is disputed by chronologers, whether to count the fifty-two years of his reign from the be- ginning or from the end of the eleven intervening years. In the first half of his reign, Uzziah be- haved well, and was mindful of his true place as viceroy of the Divine King. He accordingly pros- pered in all his undertakings. His arms were successful against the Philistines, the Arabians, and the Ammonites. He restored and fortified the walls of Jerusalem, and planted on them engines for discharging arrows and great stones ; he organized the military force of the nation into a kind of militia, composed of 307,500 men, under the command of 2600 chiefs, and divided into bands liable to be called out in rotation ; for these he provided vast stores of all kinds of weapons and armour, — spears, shields, helmets, breastplates, bows, and slings. Nor were the arts of peace neglected by him : he loved and fostered agriculture ; and he also dug wells, and constructed towers in the desert, for the use of the flocks. At length, when he had consolidated and extended his power, and developed the internal resources of his country, Uzziah fell. His prosperity engendered the pride which became his ruin. In the twenty-fourth year of his reign, incited probably by the example of the neighbouring kings, who united the regal and pontifical functions, Uzziah, unmindful of the fate of Dathan and Abiram, dared to attempt the exercise of one of the principal functions of the priests, by entering the holy place to bum in- cense at the golden altar. But, in the very act, he was smitten with leprosy, and was thrust forth by the priests. He continued a leper all the rest of his life, and lived apart as such, the public functions of the government being administered by his so"4 Jotham, as soon as he became of suffi- cient dgt <~ Kings xv. 27, 28; 2 Chron. xxvi.). V. VALE; VALXJ&\ [Palestine; Plain.] VASHTl CT\m ; Ytx.beaitti/ ; Sept. 'Aot.V), the wife of Ahasuerus, \i'.\yg of Persia, whose re- fusal to present herself unv.iled before the com- potators of the king led to her degradation, and eventually to the advancement of Esther (Esth. i. 9-12) [Aiiasuekus; Esther]. VAT. The three Hebrew words translated Wine-fat, wine-press, and vat, are not well dis- criminated in the common version of the Bible; nor indeed, owing to their comparatively infre- 904 VAT. VEIL. quent occurrence, are their original distinctions very obvious. 1. Dp1* yekeb or yehev, seems to denote the fruit-house and wine-press as a whole, including the press-vat and the receptacle for grapes in- tended to be preserved ; just as ' barn' includes both the corn-heap and the threshing-floor. The word occurs sixteen times, in most of which it evidently denotes the entire building appropriated to vintage and orchard fruit (Deut. xvi. 13; Judges vii. 25; Isa, v. 2; Hos. ix. 2; Hag. ii. 16; Zech. xiv. 10). In Joel iii. 13; iv. 13, ' the press (gath) is full, the fruit-vats (yekeb) overflow.' This term is clearly distinguished from the press-xaX in which the grapes were trodden. The apparent exceptions are Prov. iii. 10; Joel ii. 24; but these texts are capable of a better rendering. We translate the former — ' Thy fruit-vats shall be heaped up with vintage-fruit.' Gesenius observes that 'neither the wine-press nor wine-vat can be said to burst from the quan- tity of wine made, the figure applying only to a cask or wine-skin' {Lex. by Prof. Robinson, p. 879) ; hence he considers ]-*"lD, translated ' over- flow,' as a verb of abundance — metaph. 'to be redundant with."1 The latter text is explained under Fruits. Olearius, in his Persian Travels, 1G37, says, ' they have a way to keep grapes by wrapping them up in green reeds and hanging them up in the roof of their chambers' (lib. vi. p. 310). It is a mistake to suppose that the yekeb would be needed only during the vintage, since the grapes are capable of preservation all the year round, and it would therefore be useful as a store- house. Ellis W. Delesser, Esq., of Florence, thus describes to us the mode of keeping grapes adopted in Italy : ' The grapes are preserved in the state in which they are cut. from the vine, from, the time of the vintage till the month of March, by spreading them out on hurdles, taking care to leave sufficient space between the bunches, in lofty and dry outhouses' {Private Letter, 1844). Gesenius considers that the yekeb was ' the vat or receptacle into which the must, or new wine, flowed from the press D3 ;' probably impressed with the affinity between yekev and the root of 'excavate.'' But the fact is, that in the rudest and original states of society amongst the Orien- tals it was common to form storehouses by ex- cavating, in which they kept their grain, grapes, and other fruit. The name yekeb might origi- nally have referred to this, and would afterwards be retained in its application to more civilized methods and structures. By this interpretation Gesenius is compelled to give two distinct mean- ings to the word — 1, the wine-vat; 2, ihe grape- vat; whereas, by adopting our more generic but inclusive definition, these and other difficulties are obviated. 2. mi 3 poorah, occurs but twice (Isa. lxiii. 3; Hag. ii. 16). It is derived from "112 'to break,' and hence is applied to the vat in which the grapes are crushed or broken. The vats were generally large and deep, requiring several per- sons to tread the grapes in them together. Hence to 'tread (he wine-press alone' indicated extreme distress and desolation. Probably this term was applied only to the ivine-vax, as distinguished from Gathshemen, the oil-press. 3. D3 yath, occurs in five passages. It de- notes the vat {Krjvos) in which grapes and olives were trodden with the feet. These were either formed with stones and covered with insoluble cement, or were, in favourable localities, hewn out of the rock, forming raised reservoirs, into which the picked grapes were cast and trodden upon by men to press out the must, or new wine, which flowed out through gratings <>r spouts into large vessels placed outside {vitoXr\viov). In the Egyptian paintings these vats are represented as having a temporary beam extended over them,, with short ropes hanging down, by which the headers held fast, and which greatly helped them in their labour, inasmuch as the beam acted as a lever in its rebound, lifting them up from the mass of grapes into which they sank. 533. [Wine-press.] This work, although laborious, was performed with great animation, accompanied by vintage- songs, and with a peculiar shout or cry, and sometimes by instrumental music (Isa. xvi. 9T 10; Jer. xxv. 30; xlviii. 32, 33). The viroXijviou referred to in Mark xii. 1, was a vessel placed below the Xt]v6s, or vat, as a re- ceptacle for the new wine or oil. A place was digged for holding it, as well as sometimes for the vat in which the fruit was trodden (Mark xxi. 33).— F. R. L. VEIL. There are several words denoting veil in the Hebrew Scripture, showing that, as at present, there were different kinds of this essential article of an Eastern female's attire. These are essentially of two descriptions. The first, and which alone offer any resemblance to the veils used among us, are those which the Eastern wo- men wear iu-doors, and which are usually of mudin or other light texture, attached to the head-dress and falling down over the back. They are of different kinds and names, some descending only to the waist, while others reach nearly to the ground. These are not used to con- ceal the face. The veils mentioned in Scripture were, no doubt, mostly analogous to the wrappers of dif« VEIL. ferent kinds in which the Eastern women envelop themselves when they quit their houses. These VERSE. 905 534. [In-door Veils.] are of great amplitude, and, among the common people, of strong and coarse texture, like that in which Ruth carried home her corn (Ruth iii. 15). The word here is JiriQftft mitpachat, and is rightly rendered 'veil' by our translators, although some lexicographers, not understanding Eastern veils, have considered it a mantle or cloak. The cuts will'show how sufficient (he out-door ' veils' of the Eastern women are for such a use. The word which indicates Ruth's ample and strong veil is that which also occurs in lsa. iii. 22, and is there translated ' mantle.' In the same verse we find Til radid, which denotes another kind of veil, probably of liner materials, from the manner in which it is mentioned in this text and in Cant. v. 7. The latter passage shows that it was an out-door veil, which the lady had cast around her wiien she went forth to seek her be- loved. In lsa. iii. 22, this word is rendered by the old English and now obsolete term ' wimple,' which means a kind of hood or veil in use at the time the translation was made, and was not a ' But (she) the same did hide Under a veil that wimpled was full low ; And over all a black stole she did throw, As one that inly mourned.' Another kind of veil, called HDV tzamah, is named in Cant. iv. 1,3; vi. 7, and lsa. xlvii. 2, in which places the word is rendered ' locks ' in the Auth. Vers.; but in these texts, according to the best critics, we should read, ' Thou hast dove's eyes within thy veil;' not 'within thy locks.1 ' Thy temples within thy veil;' not 'within thy locks.' ' Raise thy veil ;' not ' uncover thy locks.' And as these passages refer mostly to the effect of the veil as connected with the head-dress, it may perhaps have been one of those veils which have been already described as a part of in-door dress ; although it must be admitted that the expressions are almost equally applicable to some kind of street-veil. Of this the reader can judge from the engravings. 535. [Dress Veils, &c. In-door.] bau representative of the original. The word occurs in Spenser : — 'For she had laid her mournful stole aside, And widow-like sad wimple thrown away.' 53fi. [Out-door Veils.] Another veil, called f]^^' tzaiph, is mentioned in Gen. xxiv. 65 ; xxxviii. 14, 19, under circum- stances which show that it was one of those ample wrappers which women wore out of doors. The etymology, referred to the Arabic itii, sub dup/icavit, suggests that it was ' doubled ' over the shoulders, or folded about the body, in some peculiar manner which distinguished it from other veils. It is clear that it concealed the face, as Judah could not recognise Taniar when she had wrapped herself in a tzaiph. VEIL OF THE TABERNACLE AND TEMPLE. [Tabernacle; Temple.] VERMILION. [Purjpjus.] VERSE (j>1DB ; o-tIxos, k6/xh. kcu tt\v fx.r\Tepa avTov. kcu TjAflei' eis TV" lo-par]A. amvaas 5e. <5ti ApxvAaos fiacrtAevce eiri tt]s louSaias. avTi UpoiSov tov irarpos avrov. f(po- /3tj07) e/cei aireAdetv. Sometimes, instead of the point, the stichs com- menced with a capital, as in the Cod. Bo.tiht., which, however, seems to have been written by an ignorant Irish scribe, unacquainted with the lan- guages in which the MS. was written [\ ulgatej. Ut non quasi ex necessitate t em bonum tuuro Iva. /mj ws KaTavayia\v to ayaSov ffov, sit. Scd vohmtariiim forsitan enira ideo ■n." AAAa KctTeKOUcreiof. Tax* 7°»' Ala 908 VERSE. VERSE, t propterea. Ad horam t ad tempus ut rovro. Excopicrdy]. irpos ccpav Ira. aeternum ilium t eum recipias non jam quasi aicayetov avrov awex7)* ovk erei cos servum fratrem dilectum maxime mihi SovAov. ASeAcpov. Ayairrjrov. MaAAicrra e/xoi quanto autem magis tibi et in came et in diio Tloaco. 5e fj.aAA.ov troi kui. ev. aaptcet Kai ev icai si igitur t ergo me habes socium accipe ct ovv fxe ex^is koivcovov TlpoaAafiov ilium sicut me. 77 . Si autem aliquid nocuit t avrov cos €fj.a.L, Et 5e .rt. TjSet- laesit te aut debet hoc mihi imputa ego K7](T€V ere 7]. ocpeiAeirai. Tovto jxoi. eAAoya E-yw paulus scripsi mea manu ego reddam ivavAos. eypevf/a rrj. 6^77 XlPel- By® airoreicrco. ut non dicam tibi quod et te ipsum mihi Ira fj.7] Aeyco trot, otl icai ere avrov. jxol. debes ita t utique frater ego te fruar irpoaocpiAeis. Nat. Hat adeAcpe. ilyco aov. ovai/xriv. in diio. ev. mo. [Philem. 14—20.] The stichs were sometimes very short, as in Cod. Laud. (E), in which there is seldom above one word in each. The Clermont MS. (D) contains a list of the stichs in all the Greek books of the Old and New Testaments, and the Stichometry of Nicephorus contains a similar enumeration of the Canonical books, — the Antilegomena of the Old and New Testament, — and of the Apocry- phal books, as Enoch, the Testaments of the Pa- triarchs, &c. &c. Hug {Introd.) observes that Ihe Codex Alex- andrinus might be easily mistaken for the copy of a stichometrical manuscript, from the resem- blance of its divisions to the crrixoi, as, riKovcra 5e Qri ev aapKr eSiKaiwdev w? oxpQy} ayyeKois' e/crjpux^Tj ev edvecrtV e-KiG- revd-q ev Kocrw aveXTifxipQi} ev 8o£j7" Versicular divisions in the printed Bibles. — These, together with the numerical notation, are generally attributed to Robert Stephen, or Ste- phens (Etienne). Their origin is, notwithstand- ing, involved in obscurity. Even those who attribute the invention to Stephens are not agreed as to their date. 'We are assured,' observes Cal- met (Pre/, to the Bible), 'that it is Robert Stephens who, in his edition of 1545, has divided the text by verses, numbered as at present.' This division passed from the Latins to the Greeks and Hebrews. ' Robert Stephens,' says Du Pin (Pro- leg.), 'was the first who followed the Masorites in his edition of the Vulgate in 1545.' ' Verses,' says Simon (Hist. Critique), and after him Jahn (Introd.), 'were first introduced into the Vulgate and marked with figures by Robert Stephens in 1548. Morinus (Exercit. Bib/.), who is followed by Prideaux ( Connection), attributes the verses to Vatablus, without naming a date, while Che- villier (Hist, de V Imprimerie) and Maittaire (Historia Stcphanorum) assert that Stephens di- * Mr. Gresly (Forest of Arden, cfa. i.) is guilty of an anachronism in making Latimer, in 1537, cite for his text the twentieth verse of the tenth chapter of Matthew. The New Testament was not referred to by verses until long after thii period. 910 VERSE. VERSE. vided tie chapters into verses, placing a figure at each verse, in the New Testament in 1551, and 5n the Old in 1557. Chevillier adds that James Faber of Estaples had introduced the practice in his edition of the Psalms printed in 1509 by Henry, father of Robert Stephens ; and he is fol- lowed by Renouard {Annates des Etienne, Paris, 1843), in supposing that Stephens took his idea from this very work. But, not to multiply instances, Mr. Home (Introd. vol. ii. p. i. ch. ii. s. iii. § 1) gives the following ac- count of their introduction : ' Rabbi Mordecai Nathan .... undertook a similar Concordance tfo that of Hugo] for the Hebrew Scriptures Scripture, Holy], but instead of adopting the marginal letters of Hugo, he marked every fifth verse with a Hebrew numeral, thus, S 1, fl 5, &c. ; retaining, however, the cardinal's divisions into chapters. . . . The introduction of verses into the Hebrew Bible was made by Athias, a Jew of Amsterdam [1661], . . . with the figures common in use, except those which had been previously marked by Nathan with Hebrew letters in the manner in which they at present appear in the Hebrew Bibles. By rejecting these Hebrew nu- merals, and substituting for them the correspond- ing figures, all the copies of the Bible in other languages have since been marked.' ' The verses into which the New Testament is now divided are much more modern [than the trrixoi], and are an imitation of those invented for the Old Test- ament by Rabbi Nathan in the fifteenth century. Robert Stephens was the first inventor.' In another place (6 2), Mr. Home has observed that the Masorites were the inventors of verses, but without intimating that they are the same with those now in use. Doubts were entertained on this subject so early as the sixteenth century. ' Who first,' observes Elias Levira, ' divided the books of the Old and New Testament into (TTixot ? There are even some who entertain doubts respecting a matter but recently come into use, viz., who the person was who intro- duced the division of verses into the Greek and Latin Bibles.' Serrarius {Prolog.) makes the following allusion to the circumstance: ' I strongly suspect that it is far from certain who first restored the intermitted division into verses. Henry Stephens, indeed, having once come to Wurzburg, would fain have persuaded me that his father Robert was the inventor of this distinction in the New Testament ; and I after- wards observed this same statement in his preface to his Greek Concordance, with the addition that it was on his way from Paris to Lyons that he made the division, a great part of it while riding on horseback ' {inter equitandwn). ' This ma}', after all, be an empty boast ; but supposing it, true, as Catholics have used the versions of Aquila, Sym- machus, and Theodotion, who were apostates or heretics, so may we use this division of Robert Stephens ;' and, not able to conceal his mortifica- tion that the honour should belong to a Protestant, he significantly observes that Seneca had found the best scribes {notarii) among the vilest slaves. Henry Stephens, in the preface to his Concordance, thus expatiates on his father's in- vention : ' As the books of the New Testament had been already divided into the sections {t?ne- mafa) which we call chapters, he himself sub- divided them into those smaller sections, called by an appellation more approved of by others than by himself, versicles. He would have pre- ferred calling them by the Greek tmematia, or the Latin sectiunculce ; for he perceived that the ancient name of these sections was now restricted to another use. He accomplished this division of each chapter on his journey from Paris to Lyons, and fhe greater part of it inter equitandum. A short time before, while he thought on the matter, every one pronounced him mad, for wasting his time and labour on an unprofitable affair which would gain him more derision than honour: but lo ! in spite of all their predictions, the invention no sooner saw the light, than it met with universal approbation, and obtained such authority that all other editions of the New Testament in Greek, Latin, German, and other vernacular tongues, which did not adopt it, were rejected as un- authorized.' Henry Stephens had already stated the same fact, in the dedication to Sir Philip Sydney, prefixed to his second edition of the Greek Testament (1576). We now proceed to Stephens's own statements. Upon leaving the church of Rome, and em- bracing Calvinism in 1551, in which year he took refuge in Geneva, he published his fourth edition of the Greek Testament, containing also the Vulgate and the Latin version of Erasmus, with the date in the title mdlxi., an evident error for mdli. The x has been, in consequence, erased in nearly all the copies. In the preface, he observes : 'As to our having numbered this work with certain versicles, as they call them, we have herein followed the most ancient Greek and Latin manuscripts of the New Testament, and have imitated them the more willingly, that each translation may be made the more readily to cor- respond with the opposite Greek.' Bishop Marsh (notes to Michaelis), and after him Mr. Home {ut supra"), asserts that ' Beza split the Greek text, into the verses invented by Robert Stephens;' but the bishop is evidently mistaken, as Stephens's fourth edition is divided into these breaks as well as Beza's (see fac-simile in Christ. Remembr., ut supra). Each verse commences the line with a capital, the figures being placed between the co- lumns. The fourth edition of the Greek Testament was followed, in 1555, by the seventh of the Latin Vulgate, in 8vo., containing the whole Bible, having the present verses marked throughout with numerals, and the following ad dress to the reader : • Here is an edition of the Latin Vulgate, in which each chapter is divided into verses, accord- ing to the Hebrew furm of verses, with numerals prefixed, corresponding to the number of the verse which has been added in our new and com- plete Concordance, after the marginal letter3 A, B, C, D, E, F G, that you may be relieved from the labour of searching for what these figures will point out to you as with the finger.' The title-page bears Stephens's olive ; and the name of the printer, Conrad Badius, the son-in- law of Stephens, with the date, 8 idibus Jprilis, 1555, shows where and when it was printed. It was the first edition of the entire Bible printed by Stephens since he left the church of Rome. The text is continuous, the verses being separated by a ^ , with the figures in the body of the text. The next edition of the Bible by Stephens is that of 1556-7, in three vols, fol., containing the VERSE. Vulgate, the version of Pagninus, and Beza's Latin version of the New Testament, now first published. The notes are those commonly ascribed to Vatablus, with those of Claude Badwell in the Apocryphal books. The text is broken up into divisions, and there is a notice to the reader, apprising him that this edition contains the text divided into verses, as in the Hebrew copies. Again, in the preface to Stephens' Latin and French New Testament, published at Geneva in 1552, which is also tbus divided, but which we have never seen cited, he observes : ' El a fin de plus aisement pouoir faire la dicte collation et confronrement, avons distingue tout iceluy Nouveau Testament comme par vers, a la facon et maniere que tout le Yieil a este escript et dis- tingue, soit par Moys# et les prophetes composi- teurs et autheurs, ou par scavans Hebrieux suc- cedans, pour la conservation des dictes Esciiptures, suyuans aussi en ce en partie la maniere de ceux qui ont escript les premieres exemplaires Grecs, et les vieulx escripts de la vielle tralation Latine du diet Testament, qui de chasque sentence, ou chasque moitie de sentence, voire de toules les parties dime sentence en faisoyeut comme des versets. Et en la fin de chasque livre mettoyent le nombre d'iceulx versets : possible a fin que par ce moyen on n'en peust rien oster, car on Feust apperceu en retroavant le contenu du nom- bre des diets versets.' Stephens adds that he lias also given references to the verses in indexes and concordances, not omitting the letters (letfrines) by which the chapters had been divided by his predecessors into four or seven parts, according to their length, for the purpose of a concordance. He makes reference to the chapters and verses in his Ilarmonia Evangeliva, taken from the work of Leo Judah, and placed at the end of his edition of the New Testament (1551), Henry Stephens, in his preface to his Concord- ance, states that it was this division which first suggested to his father's fertile mind the idea of a Greek and Latin concordance to the New Testament, in imitation of his Latin concord- ance, Concordantiae Bibl^ utriusque Tcslamenti VII Cal. Feb. 1555, fol. ; in the. preface to which he says that he lias followed the Hebrew mode of numbering the verses. In the title-page he makes an appeal to his brother printers not to ' thrust their sickle into his harvest,' not that he ' feared such plagiary from well-educated printers, but from the common herd of illiterate publishers, whom lie considered as no better than highway robbers, no more capable of Christian integriry than so many African pirates.' 'Whether his apprehensions were well founded,' continues his son, ' let the experience of others telL' Owing to Stephens's death, in 1559, his Concordance was published by Henry Stephens, in 1594. But it is far from being true that Stephens, as has been commonly believed, was the first who either followed the Masorites, or divided the chapters into verses, or attached figures to each verse. This had been done, not only in regard to the Psalms, by James le Fevre, in his Psal- terhmi Quincuplex in 1509, but throughout the whole Bible by Sanctes Pagninus in 1528. The Psalter him was beautifully printed by Henry, father of Robert Stephens, each verse commencing the line with a red letter, and a number prefixed ; and we may here observe, that the Book of VERSE. 911 Psalms was the first portion of the Seriptures to which numbers were attached, by designating each separate Psalm by its number. Some as- cribe this numeration to the Seventy; it is, we believe, first referred to by St. Hilary (Pre/.), and is found in the manuscripts of the Sept. W he- ther they were so numbered at the Christian esa, is somewhat doubtful. In Acts xiii. 33, the se- cond Psalm is cited by its number, but in some of the best manuscripts the reading here is the first Psalm. In ver. 35 ' in another ' is said, without reference to its number -r and Kuinoel is of opinion that the true reading in ver. 33 is simply iv \paAfj.<3, — 'in a psalm.' In the year 1528 the Dominican Sanctes Pag- ninus of Lucca published at Lyons, in quarto, his accurate translation of the Bible into Latin from the Hebrew and Greek. This edition is divided throughout into verses marked with Arabic numerals in the margin, both in the Old and New Testament. The text runs on conti- nuously, except in the Psalms, where each verse commences the line. There was a second edi- tion, more beautifully executed, but without the figures and divisions, published at Cologne in 1541. The versicular divisions in. the Old Testament are precisely the same with those now in use, — viz., the Masoretic. Each verse is separated by a pe- culiar mark (ST). Masch (Biblioth. Sac.), in reference to Stephens' statement that he had followed the oldest Greek manuscripts, says that this assertion was made by Stephens to conciliate those who were taking all methods of blackening him, for that the ancient divisions were quite different. The reader will judge from Stephens' preface to his French trans- lation above cited, whether this assertion is borne out. Stephens there asserts that the authors of the ancient (stichometrical) division reckoned by whole books, and lie only professes to imitate them in part, as well as the Hebrew copies: which he did by making a versicular division of each chapter, and prefixing a figure to each veise (as in Nathan's Concordance), instead of adding the amount at the end of each book. Hug observes that it is really true that, ancient MSS. of the New Testament are sometimes divided into smaller sections, which have some analogy to our verses, instancing the Alexandrine, Vatican, and others. We have already given an example of this in C, to which we shall here add one more instance — viz., V. in Matthad (Appendix to vol. ix. p. 265.), who observes that ' this IMS. is stichometricully arranged.' His fac-simile contains eight of the nine first verses of St. Mark's Gospel, each of which commences the line with a capital. All but one are identical with those in Stephens, whose first two verses form but one in the Moscow MS. It is, however, only in. the canonical books of the Old Testament that Stephens follows Pag- ninus. In St. Matthew's Gospel, Pagninus has 677 verses, and Stephens 1071. The number of verses in each chapter in Stephens is oflen double, fre- quently treble that in Pagninus. In John v., for instance, Pagninus has 7 and Stephens 22 verses. In the deutero-canonical books, into which no Masoretic distinction had found its way, Stephens has also a different division ; thus, in Tol.it he has 292 verses, while Pagninus has but 76; and the same proportion prevails throughout the other books, only Pagninus has not the third and 912 VERSE. VERSE. fourth hooks of Esdras, the Prayer of Manasses, nor the addenda to Daniel. There are two editions of the Bihle contain- ing this division, stated by Le Long to have been published this year in Lyons, one by John Frellon, the other by Antony Vincent. The former is entitled Biblia Sacro-Sancta Veteris et Novi Testamenti, Lugdun., apud Joannem Frel- lonium, 1556, 8; the colophon of which has 'Lug- ;: duni, ex officina typographical Michaelis Sylvii, MDLV.,' which, doubtless, induced Le Long to assign to it the latter date. We have at present a copy of this rare edition before us, and there was a second, which exactly represented it, pub- lished in 1566, of which there is a copy in the Brit. Museum. Masch, the continuator of Le Long, observes of this edition (vol. iii. p. 202), that the publisher did not venture to ascribe the division of verses to Stephens, but refers it to Pagninus. Le Long places Stephens' edition and Vincent's toge- ther among the Protestant versions ; thus : ' Biblia Latina. Charactere minutissimo. R. Stephanus lectori. En tibi Bibliorum Vulgata &c. (ut sup. p. 910).) in 8vo. Oliva Rob. Ste- phani, 1555. ' Biblia Latina. Minutioribus characteribus, versibus numerorum distinctione notatis, in 8vo., Lugduni, Ant. Vincentii, 1555. 1556. Eadem est. prorsus editio. Ex monitione typographi : " Biblia Sacra quum jam non semel variis turn typis turn formis emiserim, sicque passis ulnis accepta, ut ne unum quidem aut alteram nobis superesset exemplar id operis minuti- oribus quam antea unqam excudi placuit charac- teribus Deinde quas ad sacrarum -. sensum literarum pertinere visa sunt non omis- I sums, Hebrseorum secutus morem, versos quos- ■^ libet notandos curavi quo sensa ipsa certis distincta versibus clarius innotescerent, et minori negotio linguae sanctae candidati con- cordantias, commentaria, &c, consul ere possent." ..... utraque editio prima est. his distincta versibus,' &c. According to this statement of Le Long, it would appear that the edition of Robert Ste- phens and that of Antony Vincent were the same. Masch, however, who places Stephens' edi- tion of 1555 in its chronological order (p. 209), and does not transfer it to the Protestant editions, notices Vincent's thus : — ' Biblia utriusque Testamenti, Lugduni, in aedi- bus Antonii Vincentii, MDLV., &c. Biblia . . . MDLVI. versibus distinct. Eadem est prorsus editio utraque est (ut supra).' Now, whatever the word utraque or eadem here refers to, the very extract from the preface given by Le Long as Vincent's (whose edition we have never seen), commencing with ' Biblia Sacra quurn jam non semel,' forms part of the pre- face to Frellon 's edition, of which Masch had observed that the publisher did not venture to assign the invention of- the verses to Stephens, <- hut ascribed them to Pagninus. It was this circumstance which led us to turn to this pre- face, which also contains the identical assertion : ' Et ne quem sua frustratum a nobis laude quispiam clamiret, aut peculatus arguet, et etiam ut institutum hoc nostrum plus ponderis obtineat, ultro fatemur nos imitatos Santern ilium Pagninum Heb. linguae peritissirnum, qui et hoc ipsum ceu necessarium magnopere probans, eo modo sua imprimenda curavit.' Now it seems clear that Frellon, whom, from the evidence before us, we must believe to have been the true author of this preface, wishes to take credit to himself for the introduction of the division of verses into his Bible, and from his declaration that he takes Pagninus for his model, in order that none should complain of being defrauded, we think it by no means improbable that he meant this observation as a sly insinuation against Robert Stephens, who had, in the preface to his Concordance just published, not only protested against such frauds on the part of his brother printers, but had himself adopted Pagninus's figures without acknowledgment, while it is equally evident that Frellon adopts not Pagninus' Ihit Stephens' division, both in the New Testament and in the deutero- canonical books of the Old ; for we presume from the dates that Stephens' edition was the earliest printed ; and his Concordance, as we have seen, was published so early as the month of January in the same year. The verses in Frellon' s edition are divided into breaks, with the figures on the left margin. The next edition containing this division into verses is Stephens's eighth and last edition of the Vulgate, 1556-1557, 3 vols. fol. This-is one of the editions called Vatablus' Bibles, of which there are three, viz., Stephens' nonpareil (1545), his eighth edition of which we are now treating, and the triglott edition published at Heidel- berg in 1599. It is the Bible which Morinus (Exercit. Bibl.), Prideaux (Connect, vol. i.), and so many others, conceived to have been the first containing the division of verses. Prideaux observes that Vatablus soon after published a Latin Bible after this pattern, viz., that of Rabbi Nathan (1450), with the chapters divided into verses. ' Soon ' after, however, meant about a century; Vatablus died 16th March, 1547. It is evident also, from Prideaux' note, that he was not aware that Vatablus' Bible was no other than Stephens' eighth edition. There was a beautiful edition of the Psalter published in 1 555 by Robert Stephens, contain- ing the Latin of Jerome, with that of Pagninus, the numerals attached to each verse being placed in the centre column between perpendicular rubricated lines. It is entitled Liber Psahnorum Davidis, Tralatio duplex, vetus et nova. Hcec posterior Santis Pagnini, partim ab ipso Pag- nino recognita partim et Francisco Vatablo, in prcelectionibus emendata et exposita. The ..-• title bears the date MDLV., but in the colophon A *• is the subscription : ' Impnmebat Rob. Stephanus, in sua officina. Anno MDLVII., Cal. Jan.' &4 & The form of printing the Bible in verses, with numerals, now became established. It appeared in 1556 in Hamelin"s French version. It found its way the next year into the Geneva New Tes- tament (English), printed by Conrad Badius, of which a beautiful fac-simile has lately issued from the press of Mr. Bagster. It was adopted, by marking every fifth verse with a Hebrew nu- meral, into the Hebrew Pentateuch, printed this same year (1557) at Sabionetta [Scripture, Holy]. In 1559 Hentenius introduced Ste- phens's division and figures* into his correct * ' Biblia, etc., in quibus capita singula ita VERSE. VERSE. 913 Antwerp edition of the Vulgate ; which was fol- lowed by that of Plantin in 1569-1572, and passed into the Antwerp Polyglott (1569). The Sixtine edition of the Vulgate (1590) hav- ing adopted this division, it was continued in the Clementine (1592), and has been ever since used in all editions and translations in the Roman Catholic Church. Hentenius, however, having printed the text continuously, with the figures in the margin, and a mark (thus, acra, 1811, vol. i. p. 354) conceives the omission of the verses to be a defect in Lachmann's edition; but Lachmann has inserted Stephens's figures in the body of the text, and has properly discarded the use of capitals, except at the commencement of a period. 914 VERSE. introducing it, must be the result of an investiga- tion which we cannot now enter upon. Stephens, it is true, never once refers to Pagninus' system ; but we could hardly suppose that he was unac- quainted with it, even had we no evidence to this effect. The evidence, however, does exist, for we discovered, after ihe greater portion of this article was written, that Stephens, in 1556, had in his possession two copies of Pagninus' Bible. The preface to his edition of 1557 contains the follow- ing words : ' In exteriori autem parte interpreta- tionem Sanctis Pagnini (quam potissimum, ut maxime fidam, omnes uno ore lauilant), crassio- ribus litteris excusam damns : sed banc quidem certe multis parti bus ea quam in aliis editionibus habes, meliorem. Nacti etiim sumus duo ex prima illius editione ezemplaria, in quibus non solum typographica errata non pauca, nee levia, maim propria ipse author correxerat, sed multos etiam locos diligentius et accuratius quam antea examinatos, recognoverat.' Croius (Observat.) states that he had seen very ancient Latin MSS. containing Stephens's divi- sion, with the first letter of each verse rubri- cated, but he does not designate his MSS. We believe this was a biassed assertion. We have ourselves seen Latin MSS. with periods so marked ; but they are not the same with Stephens' verses. There is in the British Museum also a MS. of part of the Sept. (Harl. 5021), dated in 1647, which is versiculated throughout, and marked with figures ; but the verses are much longer than those of Stephens's. Latin MSS. are found divided in the same manner as the Greek, one of which is the Cod. Bezae, which was collated by Stephens for his edition of 1550. Dr. Laurence's book of Enoch is divided into verses, with numbers attached, as well as into chapters called Kef el. Dr. Laurence says that these divisions into verses are arbitrary, and vary in the different Ethiopic MSS. of Enoch. The numbers, we presume, were added by the translator. By a letter from Dr. Bandinel, keeper of the Bodleian Library, we learn that that Library possesses an Ethiopic MS. of the New Testament divided into sections and paragraphs entirely different from ours, not numbered, but separated by a peculiar mark. The verses in the Gospel of the Templars [Gospels, Spurious], instead of spaces or figures, are separated by a horizontal line [ — ] (Thilo, Cod. Apoc). The MS. of the Syriac New Testament in the British Museum (No. 7157), written at Beth- kuko, a.d. 768 (see Wright's Seiler, p. 651, note), contains a numerical division in the Gospels, with the numbers in rubric inserted by a coeval hand into the body of the text. Attached to each number is another in green, referring to a canon of parallel passages on the plan of that of Eusebius, but placed at the foot of each page. The sections, which are called versi- culi in the Catalogue, and have been mistaken for verses, are more numerous than the Am- monian, Mathew containing 426, Mark 290, Luke 402, and John 271. There is a complete capitulation also throughout all the books, the chapters being separated in the text by a pecu- liar ornament, with the number in the margin : of these chapters Matthew has 22, Mark 13, Luke 22, John 20, Acts 25; of the Catholic Epistles, James 1, and [i.] John 6, and the Pau- line have 54. After the first Gospel there is a VERSIONS. double number, by which the former are reca- pitulated, and a treble number from the Acts to the end. The numerical divisions into chapters and verses were first adapted to liturgical use in the Anglican Church — the chapters in Edward VI. "s first Book of Common Prayer (1549), and the verses in the Scotch Liturgy (1637), from whence thevwere adopted into the last revision (1662). — W. W. VERSIONS. In the present article we pro- pose to give some account of such versions as are not noticed in other places of this work. In doing so, it is not deemed necessary to mention all that ought to be adduced, were incomplete enumeration attempted. We shall first describe ancient ver- sions ; and, secondly, modern English versions of the Bible. 1. Greek versions. — 1. Aquila. — Aquila was a Jew of Pont us, who lived in the reign of Adrian, and undertook a Greek version of the Old Testa- ment about a.d. 160. It appears from Jerome (in Ezek. iii.) that there were two editions, of this version, the second more literal than the first. It was very highly prized by the Jews, and much preferred to the Septuagint, because the latter was employed as an authorized and genuine document by the early Christians in their disputations with the Hebrew opponents of the new religion. The very circumstance of its being adopted and valued by the Jews would tend to create a pre- judice against it among the Fathers, independently of all perversion of Messianic passages. Irenaeus, the earliest writer who mentions Aquila, pro- nounces an unfavourable opinion respecting his translation (Advers. Hares, iii. 24, p. 253, ed. Grabe). So also Eusebius (Ad Psalm, xc. 4) and Philastrius. Jerome speaks of him in va- rious parts of his writings, sometimes disparag- ingly, and again in terms of commendation : the former, in allusion to his doctrinal prepossessions ; the latter, in reference to his knowledge of the Hebrew language and exceeding carefulness in rendering one word by another. He was early accused of distorting several j)assages relating to the Messiah, and Kennicott, in modern times, has re-echoed the censure. There is some ground for the charge, but certainly not so mucli as Ken- nicott imagines. A polemic tendency may be detected in the work, but not to a greater degree than in most translations. The version before us is extremely, and even unintelligibly, literal. It adheres most rigidly to the original. So highly did the Jews esteem it, that they called it the Hebreto verity. Its use in criticism is considerable, but in interpretation it is comparatively worthless. 2. Sym?nachus. — Symmachus appears to have been an Ebionite (Ruseh, Hist. Eccles. vi. 17 ; De- monstr. Evany, vii. 1, Jerome, Praf. in Ezram ; Assemani, Bibl. Orient, ii. 278 ; iii. 1,17). His Greek version of the Old Testament was made after thatof Theodotion, as may be inferred from the silence of Irenaeus, and the language of Jerome in his commentary on the xxxviii. chapter of Isaiah. The style of the work is good, and the diction perspicuous, pure, and elegant (Thieme, De puri- tate Symmachi ; Hody, De Bibl. text. Original.'). It is of less benefit in criticism than that of Aquila, but of greater advantage in interpreta- tion. It would seem from Jerome, that there VERSIONS. was a second edition of it {Comment in Jerem. xxxii. ; in Nah. iii.). 3. Theodotion. — Theodotion, likeSymmachus, was an Ebionite. Irenseus states (Advers. Hares. iii. 24) that he belonged to Ephesus, and was a Jewish proselyte. His Greek version of the Old Testament appeared during the first half of the second century, and is first inentioned hy Ire- naeus. He follows the Sepfnagirit very closely, so that he appears to have intended to make a re- vision of its text, rather than a new version. He is not so scrupulously literal as Aquila, nor so free as Symmachus. He was certainly not well acquainted with Hebrew, as the numerous errors into which he has fallen demonstrate. It is pro- bable, if credit can he given to Jernme, that there were two editions of the translation (in Jerem. xxix. 17). His translation of Daniel was very early adopted by the Christians in place of that belong- ing to the Septuagint. The Jews do not seem to have had much regard for this castigated edition of the Seventy, although Von Lengerke inclines to the opposite opinion. 4, 5, 6. When Origen travelled into Eastern countries collecting materials for his Polyglotf, he discovered three other Greek versions not extend- ing to the entire Old Testament, but only to several books. These are usually designated the fifth, sixth, and seventh. The authors were unknown to Origen himself. As far as we can judge, they appear to have translated the original somewhat freely and paraphrastically. The fifth compre- hended the Pentateuch, Psalms, Song of Solomon, and the twelve Minor Prophets, besides the books of Kings. Jerome says that the author was a Jew, meaning probably a Jewish Christian. The sixth version contained the same books as the filth, except those of the Kings. The author ap- pears to have been a Jewish Christian also. This inference has been drawn from his rendering of Habak. iii. 13. The seventh embraced the Psalms and minor prophets. Perhaps the author was a Jew. The three translations in question were made subsequently to those of Aquila, Sym- machus, and Theodotion. Very few fragments of them remain. (See Epiphanius, De Pond, et Mens. cap. 17; Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. vi. 16; Jerome, Comment, in Tit. cap. 3; Apoloq. contra Rvfin. ii. 34 ; Hody, p. 590, et sq.) 4. Grceco-Veneta. — In a MS. belonging to St. Mark's Library at Venice, there is a Greek version of several Old Testament books. Its in- ternal character proves that the translation was made directly from the Hebrew. It is more literal than any other ancient version, even that of Aquila, adhering with slavish scrupulosity to the original words. In the Chaldee portions of Daniel, the Attic dialect is changed for the Doric. The style, however, is a singular compound. Attic elegancies occur along with barbarous expres- sions; high-sounding words used by the best Greek writers, by the side of others contrary to the genius of the Greek language. The origin of the version cannot be placed higher than the ninth century; the MS. itself was written in the fourteenth. It is uncertain whether the author was a Jew or a Christian. Gesenius ad- duces several particulars in favour of the former supposition (Geschichtc der Heb. Sprache). It is probable that it was made at Byzantium for private use. The text seldom differs from the VERSIONS. 915 Masoretic, and the translator consulted the Sen- tuagint and other Greek versions, besides ad- hering, as he generally does, to the current exe- getical tradition of the Jews. Criticism can never derive much use from this version. Extracts from it are given in Holmes's edition of the Sep- tuagint. The Pentateuch was published by Am- nion, in three volumes, at Erlangen, in the years 1790-91. Different parts of the Pentateuch had been previously published, along with Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Lamentations, Daniel, and Canticles, by Villoison, at Strasburg, 1784. (See Eichhorn's Allrjem. Biblioth. iii. p. 371, et sq. : v. p. 743, et sq. ; vii. p. 193, et sq. ; Dahler, Ani- madverss. in versionem Grcecam Proverbb., Ar- gentor. 1786; the Introductions of Eichhorn Bertholdt, De Wette, and Havemick; and Da- vidson's Lectures on Bib. Crit.) 11. Egyptian versions. — After the death of Alexander the Great, the Greeks multiplied in Egypt, and obtained important places of trust near the throne of the Ptolemies. The Greek language accordingly began to diffuse itself from the court among the people, so that the proper language of the country was either forced to adapt itself to the Greek, as well in construction as in the adoption of new words, or was entirely supplanted. In this way originated the Coptic, compounded of the old Egyptian and the Greek. Tliere is aversion in the dialect of Lower Egypt usually called the Coptic, or better the Mcm- phitic version ; and there is another in the dialect of Upper Egypt, termed the Sahidic, and some- times the Thebaic. 1. The Memphitic version of the Bible. — The Old Testament in this version has been taken from the Septuagint, and not the original Hebrew. It would appear from Miinter (Specim. verss. Dan. Coptic. Romae, 1786), that the original was the Hesychian recension of the Seventy, then current in the country. There is little doubt that all the Old Testament books were trans- lated into the Coptic dialect, although many of them have not yet been discovered. The Penta- teuch was published by Wilkins (London, 1731, 4to.); the Psalms at Rome (1744 and 1749) by the Propaganda Society. A small part of Jere- miah (ix. 1 7, to xiii.) was published by Mingarelli at Bologna (1785), and the ninth chapter of Daniel, in Milliter's work already quoted. Gre- gory Bar Hebrsus quotes the version in the book of Psalms ; and it seems to have been well known to tho Syrians. (Wiseman's Hor]) by veavis, not only in Ps. lxviii. 26 ; Gen. xxxiv. 43 ; Exod. ii. 8 ; Prov. xxx. 19 (in which they agree with the Sept.), but also in Isa. vii. 14. Justin Martyr {Dial, c. Tryph.) complains of the partiality of the Greek translators in rendering PUj?}? here by veavis (a term which does not necessarily include the idea of virginity), accusing these Jewish writers of wishing to neutralize the ap- plication to the Messiah of this passage, which the Jews of his time referred to Hezekiah. Gese- nius (Comm.in Isa.) maintains, notwithstanding, that veavis, not TrapBevos, is the correct ren- dering in Isa. vii. 14, while he at the same time agrees with Justin that the prediction cannot possibly refer to Hezekiah, who was born nine years before its delivery. Fiirst (Concordance) explains T\u7V by puella, virgo, nubilis ilia vel nupta, tenera et florens setate, valens ac vegeta ; but Hengstenberg (Christology), although admit- ting that !"lu?y does not necessarily mean a vir- gin (which he conceives is plain from Prov. xxx. 19), maintains that it is always applied. in Scrip- ture to an unmarried woman. St. Matthew (i. 23), who cites from the Seventy, applies the pas- sage (Isa. vii. 14) to the miraculous birth of Jesus from the blessed Virgin. Professor Robin- son (Gr. and Eng. Lexicon) considers TrapBevos here to signify a bride, or newly married woman, as in Homer (II. ii. 514) : OSs Teicev'A(TTv6xv> • • • • TrapBevos CtlBolvf (' Them bore Astyoche, a virgin pure ' Cowper) ; and considering it to refer apparently to the youthful spouse of the prophet (see Isa. viii. 3, 4 ; vii. 3, 10, 21), holds that the sense in Matt. i. 23 would then be: Tims was fulfilled in a strict and literal sense that which the prophet spoke in a wider sense and on a different occasion. Jerome says that thePunic for virgo is a/ww, although the word HD?y is but twice so rendered in the Vulgate. * In Rose's edition of Parkhurst's Lexicon of the New Testament (18o9), TrapBevos is said to ' answer to T\U7]} in several passages in the Sept.' We can discover but these two instances. There are four passages cited in the same edition and in its reprint in 1845 (Gen. xxiv. 14, 16 ; xxxv. 3; and Isa. vii. 4 [14?]), in not one of which does the word 7\u?V occur. In the three first it is rnya. vow. 921 The early Christians contended also for the per- petuol virginity of Mary against the Jews, who objected the use of the term ews (until, Matt, i. 25) as implying the contrary ; but the Fathers triumphantly appealed against the Jewish inter- pretation to Scripture usage, according to which this term frequently included the notion of per- petuity (comp. Ps. ex. 1 ; Gen. viii. 7 ; Isa. xlvi. 4; Ps. lxi. 7; Matt, xxviii. 20 ; and see Suicer's Tnesaurus, and Pearson, On the Creed, Art. iii.). Although there is no proof from Scrip- ture that Mary had other children [James ; Jl'de], the Christian Fathers did not consider that there was any impiety iu the supposition that she had (Suicer, ut supra). But, although not an article of faith, the perpetual virginity of Mary was a constant tradition of both the Eastern and Western church. The most distinguished Protestant theologians have also adopted this belief, and Dr. Lardner (Credibility) considered the evidence in its favour so strong as to deserve that assent which he himself yielded to it. The word TrapBevos, virgin, occurs in Matt, i. ; xxv. ; Luke i. ; Acts xxi. ; 1 Cor. vii. ; 2 Cor. xi. 2 ; and Apoc. xiv. 14. In 1 Cor. and Apoc. it is applied to both sexes, as it frequently is by the Fathers, who use it in the sense of Ca- lebs. It is sometimes metaphorically used in the Old Testament for a country, and in the New to denote a high state of moral purity. — w.w. VOW ("OH) is represented by a Hebrew word which signifies to 'promise,' and may therefore be defined as a religions undertaking, either, 1. Po- sitive, to do or perform ; 2. or Negative, to ab- stain from doing or performing a certain thing. The morality of vows we shall not here discuss, but merely remark that vows were quite in place in a system of religion which so largely consisted of doing or not doing certain outward acts, with a view of pleasing Jehovah and gaining his fa- vour* The Israelite, who had been taught by per- formances of daily recurrence to consider par- ticular ceremonies as essential to his possessing the divine favour, may easily have been led to the conviction which existed probably in the pri- mitive ages of the world, that voluntary oblations and self-imposed sacrifices had a special value in the sight, of God. And when once this conviction had led to corresponding practice, it could not be otherwise than of the highest consequence that these sacred promises, which in sanctity differed little from oaths, should be religiously anil scru- pulously observed. Before a vow is taken there may be strong reasons why it should not be made ; but when it is once assumed, a new obli- gation is contracted, which has the greater force because of its voluntary nature : a new element is introduced, which strongly requires the ob- servance of the vow, if the bonds of morality are not to be seriously relaxed. The writer may be of opinion that total abstinence is in itself not a virtue nor of general obligation, but he cannot doubt that ' breaking the pledge,' when once taken, is an act of immorality that cannot be repeated without undermining the very founda- tions of character: whence n obviously appears that caution should be observed, not only in keep- ing, but also in leading men to make, pledges, vows, and promises. 922 VULGATE. Vows, which rest on a human view of religious obligations, assuming as they do that a kind of recompense is to be made to God for good en- joyed, or consideration offered for good deside- rated, or a gratuity presented to buy off an im- pending or threatened ill, are found in -existence in the antiquities of all nations, and present themselves in the earliest Biblical periods (Gen. xxviii. 20 ; Judg. xi. 30 ; 1 Sam. i. 11 ; 2 Sam. xv. 8). With great propriety the performance of these voluntary undertakings was accounted a highly religious duty (Judg. xi. 35 ; Eccles. v. 4, 5). The words of the last vow are too emphatic, and in the present day too important, not to be cited : ' Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay' (comp. Ps. lxvi. 13, sq. ; lxxvi. 11; cxvi. 18). The views which guided the Mosaic legislation were not dissimilar to those just expounded. Like a wise lawgiver, Moses, in this and in other par- ticulars, did not attempt to sunder the line of continuity between the past and the present He found vows in practice; he aimed to regulate what it would have been folly to try to root out (Deut. xxiii. 21, sq.)- The words in the 22ud verse are clearly in agreement with our remarks : 4 If thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee.'— J. R. B. VULGATE (Vulgata; Koivfi), the name ge- nerally given to the Latin translation of the Bible used in the Western Church. Old Testament Version. There have been Latin translations of the Bible from the first ages of the Christian Church. Of these Augustine ob- serves (De Doct. Christ, ii. 11) : * Those who have translated the Bible into Greek can be numbered, but not so the Latin versions. For in the first ages of the Church, whoever could get. hold of a Greek codex ventured to translate it into Latin, however slight his knowledge of either language.' Of these he prefers the Itala, as the most literal. Bentley (see his Life by Monk) supposed that Itala was an error for ilia, others (as Bishop Potter) for usitata. But there seems no sufficient reason for rejecting the common reading (Saba- tier's Preface, lit inf.). Augustine wrote to Jerome (Ep. 88) to acquaint him that he would confer a great benefit by translating the version of the Seventy, inasmuch as the readings of the Latin manuscripts were so various that it was doubted if any thing could be proved by them, observing that 'there are as many texts as there are copies.' Eichhom is of opinion that all the quotations of writers before Jerome belong to the same text, which he conceives to have been made in the first, century, and in Africa. He founds this opinion chiefly on the badness of the Latin, as well as on the fact that Greek was too well understood in Italy to render a Latin version necessary. In this view he has been followed by Dr. Wiseman (Letters on 1 John v. 7), and by Lachmann (Preface to his edition of the New Testament). De VVette, however, is of opinion that 'there is no proof of the African origin of this version. Some frag- ments of it still exist, which show it to have been most literal, and made from the noivi), or the text of the Septuagint which existed before Origen's Hexapla, whose defects it preserves, agreeing very closely with the Cod. Vaticanus. It is therefore of the greatest use towards restoring the text ef the Seventy* The parts extant are the Psalms, VULGATE. Job, Ecclesiastes, and Tobit, with fragments of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Hosea. These fragments are found in citations from the Fathers, in ancient manuscripts, and in psalters, missals, and breviaries, from which they have been col- lected with much care bv Flaminius Nobilius (Vet. Text. esc. LXX. Lot. redd., 1588), who has endeavoured to supply the omissions; Sa- batier (Bibl. Sac. Lat. verss. antiq. 1749).; Jac. Faber Stapulensis (Psalterium Quincuplex, 1509) [Verse] ; Blanchini (Psalter. Duplex, ex insigni Cod. Grceco-Lat. Veron. uncial, ante 1m. sac); and Miinter (Fragm. Antehieron. e cod. rescript. Wirceburg. Hafn. 1809). In the year 382 Jerome undertook a revision of this text. He first corrected the Psalms, producing what is called the Roman Psalter, which is still used in the church of the Vatican, and in St. Mark's at Venice.* Afterwards, finding this work corrupted by transcribers, he undertook a second revision. This is the Gallican Psalter, and is that contained in the Vulgate, and used generally in the Church since its introduction by Pope Paul IV. Jerome made this correction with the aid of Origen"s Hexapla, adding aste- risks, obelisks, commas, and colons [Verse], From the obelisk or asterisk, to the colon was con- tained something added from the Hebrew by Theodotion, and the same with the comma denoted that the Septuagint contained here more than Jerome's Version. He afterwards revised in the same way the rest of the OldTestament. * Rejoice,' he says, ' that you receive the blessed Job safe and sound, who formerly, among the Latins, lay prostrate in filth and worms ; and as after his trial and triumph all his possessions were restored to him double, I have, in our own language, restored to him what he had lost.' The book of Chronicles he corrected with the help of a learned Jew of Tiberias. To these he added Proverbs, Ecclesi- astes, and Canticles : the rest of his labours perished by fraud. Of this work the only parts printed are the two Psalters and the book of Job. It acquired Jerome great fame and not a little obloquy, especially on the part of his quondam friend Rnfinus. Jerome next, at the request of his friends, un- dertook a new version from the Hebrew, between, the years 385 and 405. This version was occa- sioned by the controversies with the Jews, who constantly appealed to the original, which the early Christians did not understand. Jerome commenced with Samuel, then proceeded to the Psalms, the books of Solomon, Ezra, and Nehe- miah, the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and Chronicles — together with Tobit and Judith from the Chaldee. He afterwards translated Daniel, Esther, and Jeremiah, with their apocryphal additions. It is to be lamented that he used too much haste in some parts of his work, hav- ing finished Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Can- ticles in three days, and Tobit in one. Notwith- standing this, and his own observation that his * There is a Psalter different from both, used in Milan. Mr. Bagster's Hexaplar Psalter con- tains the Roman and the Gallican Psalter3, together with Jerome's version from the Hebrew, that of the Seventy, the original Hebrew, and the two authorized versions of the Anglican Church. , VULGATE. work would have been superfluous but for the corruptions of the Septuagint, he produced the best and noblest work of the kind of which an- tiquity can boast. He proceeded on the soundest principles, and studied the Hebrew language under some learned Jews. ' From the reading of Quinctilian and Cicero,' he acquaints us, ' I en- tered upon the irksome task of shutting myself up in the mill of the Hebrew language, and en- deavouring to pronounce its panting and creaking 60unds ; when, at length, like one walking in a dungeon, I discerned a faint light glimmering from above.' His Hebrew copy was procured from the Synagogue. His labours now procured him only the most cutting railleries from his friends. His teacher's name being Barhanina, he was accused of having been taught by Barab- bas« He did not translate too literally, lest he should not convey the sense, and occasionally made use of other versions, when they did not materially differ from the Hebrew, lest he should alarm his readers by too much novelty ; but he adhered to it in general very closely, lest, contrary to his conscience, he should ' fbrsake the founda- tion of tiuth, and follow the streamlets of opi- nions.' His work at first met with no flattering recep- tion. It was by many condemned as heretical, and even his friend Augustine feared to make use of it, lest it might offend by its novelty, introduce variety between the Greek and Latin Churches, and distract the minds of Christians who hid received the Septuagint from the Apostles. In one instance, where an Africvi. bishop caused the book of Jonah to be read in church in this version, the people were panic-struck at hearing the word hedera (Jon. iv. 6, 9) in place of the old reading cucurbita. Augustine afterwards enter- tained a more favourable opinion of it, although he has not cited it in any of his acknowledged works [John, Epistles of]. About two hundred years after Jerome's death his work had acquired an equal degree of respect with the ancient Vulgate, and in the year 604 we have the testimony of Gregory the Great to the fact, that ' the Apostolic see made use of both versions.' It afterwards became by degrees the only received version, and this by its intrinsic merits, for it received no official sanction before the Council of Trent. Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, and Maccabees, were retained from the old version. Jerome's version soon experienced the fate of its predecessor; it became sadly corrupted by a mixture with the old version, and by the un- critical carelessness of half-learned ecclesiastics, as well as by interpolations from liturgical writings and from glosses. In fact the old and new versions were blended into one, and thus was formed the Vulgate of the middle ages. In the ninth century an attempt was made, but not on the soundest principles, to correct the Vul- gate. This was done by command of Charle- magne, who intrusted the task to Alcuin. The amended Vulgate was now introduced by royal authority into all the churches of France. It is still doubtful whether the correction was made from t lie Hebrew original, or from ancient copies of the Vulgate. In the eleventh century a new revision was un- dertaken by Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, VULGATE. 923 and another in the succeeding century (at which period Roger Bacon says that it was horribly cor- rupted), by Cardinal Nicolaus the Deacon, a good Hebrew scholar. About the same period appeared in France the Epanorthotce, or Correctoria Bib- lica, which were attempts to establish the true text on the part of Abbot Stephen, Cardinal Hugo, and others. From these corrections, however, it appears that the corruptions were so numerous as to render it almost vain to expect to recover the true text. ' Every reader and preacher,' says Roger Bacon (Epist. to Clem. IV.'), 'changes what he does not understand : their correction is the worst of corruptions, arid God's word is de- stroyed.' This was the state of the text at the time of the invention of printing, by which its variations were more clearly brought to light, and critical attempts made to amend it. The earliest printed editions are without a date. The first which has a date was published at Mayntz in 1462, by Fust and Schoiffher. It was afterwards printed in 1471, 1475, and 1476. Critical editions appeared in 1496, 1497, 1501, 1504, 1506,1511, and 1517— the. last that of the Complutensian Polyglott, done with great care. This was followed by the Antwerp Polyglott, and the critical editions of Colinaeus, Rudel, Benoist, Isidore Clarius, and Robert Stephens. The variations of the text now appeared more plainly than ever. Isidore Clarius (1542) cor- rected more than 8000 errors (which some have exaggerated into 80,000). Stephens' beautifully executed and amended text (1527) was con- demned to be burned. This learned printer after- wards collated several manuscripts, and pub- lished editions in 1532, 1533, and 1540. This last (the 4th) is called by Father Simon a master-piece. Stephens' edition of 1545 (the nonpareil) con- tained a new version, that of the Old Testament being made by Leo Judah, Bibliander, and Peter Cholin. This is one of those called Vatable's Bibles. The translator of De Wette's Einleitung observes that Stephens's sixth and seventh editions (1546 and 1555) contain no important improve- ments. The accurate De Wette, however, was aware that the seventh edition contained the di- vision into verses. Benoist (1541) made an unsuc- cessful attempt to restore Jerome's text. Stephens's eighth and last edition has been already noticed [Verse] . In the mean time the Council of Trent passed its famous decree (a.d; 1 546, Sess. 4, Decret. 2) re- specting the Vulgate : ' The most holy Synod, con- sidering that no small advantage will accrue to the church of God, if from all the Latin editions of the sacred books which are in circulation, it should determine which is to be received as authentic, decrees and declares that the ancient Vulgate version, which has been approved in the church by the use of so many ages, should be used in public readings, disputations, sermons, and expositions, as authentic, and that none is to presume to reject it under any pretence whatsoever.' De Wette (Ein/cilung) conceives that this decree shuts the door against any exegetical inquiry into the doc- trines of the church. Moehler (Symbolik, p. 1, ch. v. § xlii.), however, maintains that there could be no such thing as an exegetical in- quiry into the doctrines of the church, which declares her dogmas by her infallible authority independently of Scripture, although she may 924 VULGATE. VULGATE. apply and even misapply testimonies from Scripture to this purpose, being infallible in the former case, but not in the latter.* The most ' learned Roman Catholics differ mate- rially as to the sense of the word authentic, some considering, as Morinus (Exercit. Bibl.), that the Vulgate is hereby pronounced to be an inspired version, others (as Suarez) that the version is placed above all existing texts of the originals. Many contend that it was only meant to give it a preference to any other Latin version then in use (Bellarmin, f De Verbo Dei ; Calmet's Dis- sert. ; Jahn's and Hug*s Introdd.). Some of the Roman theologians hold it to be infallible only so far as faith and morals are concerned (Dens, Theologia). Hug considers the meaning of the decree to be, that ' as in civil affairs an authentic instrument is valid evidence, so in public religious matters the Vulgate is a document from which valid arguments may be drawn, without prejudice, however, to other documents [viz. the originals] ; but this is not a prescription of doctrine, and from its nature it could not be ; it is a temporary decree of discipline.' In fact few Roman Catho- lics have maintained its exemption from error, and the most learned and judicious Protestants (Mill, Proleg. ; Bengel, Apparatus ; Lachmann, Preface) justly conspire in holding it in a high degree of veneration. Jalm observes that the Oriental Christians in communion with Rome still use their own versions, the Greek, Armenian, Syriac, and Arabic. The Council of Trent not having declared any particular manuscript or edition to contain the true text of the Vulgate, a committee of six was appointed to prepare a new edition, but the pope prevented them from proceeding. The Louvain theologians, seeing the confusion which prevailed in the printed editions, as well as the persecutions to which Robert Stephens was exposed for his laudable undertakings, now undertook to correct the text, and Hentenius was chosen to prepare an edition. For this purpose he collated several of the former ones, including Stephens's of 1540, and about twenty manuscripts, the most modern of which was of the fourteenth century. His edition appeared in 1547, and after his death a still more valuable one was prepared by the same theolo- gians under the care of Lucas Brugensis and others, which was printed by Plantin in 1573. The papal chair now resolved on an edition, and thus the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles, the va- riations between which amounted to above 2000, gave rise to the well-known attack of James (Bellum Papale). Sixtus laboured on his own edition, which was founded on the principle, that wherever the most ancient manuscripts and * ' Even a Scriptural proof in favour of a de- cree held to be infallible, is not itself infallible, but only the dogma as defined.' f Bellarmin defends the use of the Vulgate, from the ignorance of the original languages which prevailed in the Church, instancing the Council of Ariminum, where, out of 400 bishops, not one knew the meaning of 6p.oovcnos, all ex- claiming ' not Homoousios, but Christ.' Mr. Scri- vener (lit infra') agrees with those who maintain that the Council of Trent 'raised the Vulgate to that paramount authority which only belongs to the original text.' printed editions agreed, their reading should be preferred. It appeared in 1590. By the decree of Sixtus, whoever approved of any other edition, if of the degree of a bishop, was to be excluded from entering a church ; if of inferior rank, was to be excommunicated — with other more dreadful anathemas. Notwithstanding this, Pope Urban VII. found it so inaccurate that he attempted to suppress it. His successor, Gregory XIV., prepared a new revision, with the aid of some eminent scholars, including Bellarmin and Fla- minius Nobiiius. This was first issued under the papacy of Clement VIII. in 1592, and al- though more modestly put forth, was founded on much better principles than the former. But there was a great difficulty to be overcome in attempt- ing to reconcile the discrepancies of the two editions with the authority of the papal chair. 'In this dilemma Bellarmin is said to have found a middle course, by proposing that all the blame should be laid upon the printer' (Hug's Tntrod.). In the preface Bellarmin states, that ' Sixtus, having perceived the errors which had crept into the press, ordered the edition to be cancelled,' (an assertion which Van Ess, Pragmatisch- Geschicht. der Vu/gat, declares to be false), ' but from the execution of this order both Sixtus and his succes- sors, Urban VTI. and Innocent IX. were prevented by death.' It is further stated that ' although in this revision no small labour was employed in collating manuscripts of the Hebrew and Greek, and the writings of the Fathers, some things are nevertheless designedly altered, and others, which seemed to require alteration, designedly left un- changed.' This preface is said to have led to Bellarmin's beatification (Hug, lit sup.). The Clementine edition is the basis of all subsequent ones, from those of Plantin, 1599-1650, to that of Leander van Ess, published by authority of Leo XII. in 1826. The present printed Vulgate of the Old Testament is thus a mixed text, con- sisting partly of the old Latin, partly of Jerome's revision of the same, and partly of his new version from the Hebrew. Descendants of the Vulgate. There is still extant an Anglo-Saxon version, published by Thwaites (Heptateuchi/s, 1698), of the Penta- teuch, Joshua, Job, and a fragment of Judith. This was the work of .ZElfric, in the tenth cen- tury, and was formerly thought, but on insuffi- cient grounds, to have been done from the Sept. ^lfric also translated Esther, Maccabees, and Kings. There was an earlier translation by Ad- helm, in the beginning of the eighth century (Lingard's Anglo-Saxon Church). Bede is said to have translated the entire Bible about the same period. At the close of the thirteenth century it was again translated by some one whose name has not reached us. Wickliffe's translation appeared in 1380 [Versions]. The New Testament. The old Latin version was made immediately from the Greek, and its dead literality is such as to render it in some places quite barbarous, as where, for instance, the Greek Sri is ' almost uniformly, in defiance of grammar and common sense, rendered quia or quoniam' (e.g. magister, scimus quia verax es, Matt, xxii, 16; see Campbell, On the Gospels). Camp- bell refers to the phrase panem nostrum super- substantialem, in the Lord's Prayer, as an in- stance of an etymological barbarism. These VULGATE. VULGATE. 925 remarks include the Old Testament as well as the New. Manuscripts and editions of the Italic, There are some very ancient manuscripts of the old Latin version of the New Testament still extant, which are described by Blanchini (ut supra) ; Iricus, Milan, 1749: Dobrowsky {Fragments of St. Mark's Autograph, Prag. 1798); Alter (Gold and silver purple MSS. in the Imperial Library, containing fragments of Luke and Mark) ; Fleck (Wissensch. Reise); Matthsei (Nov. Test.); and Sabatier (Evang. Quadr.). The oldest of these is probably the Cod. Vercellensis, published by Sa- batier, supposed to have been written by the hand of Eusebius. This version is also contained in the Grscco-Latin MSS., the most ancient of which is the Cod. Bezm [Manuscripts]. The Codex Boer- nerianus, (G) published by Matthaei, at Meissen, in 1791 (reprinted 1818), is a Graeco-Latin MS. of the ninth century, preserved at Dresden, and was first used by Bengel. It contains St. Paul's Epistles (omitting Hebrews). The interlinear Latin is written in what some have supposed to be the Anglo-Saxon, but is in reality that modification of the Latin called the Irish cha- racter. It has been often desired by critics that some Irishman would explain the words at the bottom of fol. 23. We have therefore endeavoured to decipher them (with the assistance of our friend Mr. J. O'Donovan), and here present an attempt at a translation of what appears to be a fragment of a religious poem : — > cejcrjc &o TtoW) ")6rt rA]ho. bejc coribAj. Wn] chonbAisj. r). rjjporr. rnAnjrnberiA L\rc tjj F*5bty. SJ)ori bAir, t»o\i bA]!e trjori coll ce^lle njori trnne o Uir A]n cherm ceichr bo ecA]b. beicl) fx> eco]l mafc. rnAjrie. Coming to Rome, great wisdom, little profit ; THe King your Saviour you will not rind, un- less you take him with you. Great folly, great madness, great breach of sense, great phrenzy, When you set out to meet death, To be under the displeasure of the Son of Mary. From the notes in the margin it appears that this manuscript had been in the possession of Johannes Scotus of Ireland, for whom it was probably written [Verse]. The Cod. Sangal- lonsis of the Gospels, of the same age and cha- racter, (A) has been also published by Rettig, Turici, 183(5. The editions are those by Sabatier (ut sup. vol. iii.) and Blanchini (Evang. Quadr.). Martianay (Opp. Hieron.) gives the Gospel of St. Matthew and the Epistle of St. James only. The only de- scendant of this version is the Anglo-Saxon, which is probably older than the translation of the Old Testament. Jerome's recension. Jerome did not translate the New Testament from the Greek, but at the request of Damasus, bishop of Rome, he amended the old Latin, by comparing its corruptions and various readings with the best Greek manuscripts, making, however, no alteration, unless the sense absolutely required it; but in his Commentary he often departs from this text. The Vidgate of the New Testament generally agrees with the oldest MSS. of the Italic, and is one of the best critical helps towards restoring the true text of the Greek. The text has undergone the same fate, and suffered the same corruption as that of the Old Testament, and the various readings, though numerous (Michaelis speaks of 80,000) are of the same character with those of the Greek, having crept in through the negligence of tran- scribers, and ' very few of them bearing the marks of having been made to serve a purpose " (Pre- face to Mr. Bagster's Hexapla). Dr. Camp- bell (On the Gospels) considers that as the last part of the Vulgate was completed 1400 years ago, and from MSS. older probably than any now extant, and at a time when there was no bias from party zeal, at a time too when the modern contro- versies were unknown, the Council of Trent acted rightly in giving the preference to this, which he designates 'a good and faithful version, re- markable for purity and perspicuity, and by no means calculated to support Roman views ;' but valuable as this text is, it is to be lamented that the ambiguity of the phrase 'authentic" should have furnished an occasion to some Roman pole- mics of the last century, when criticism was not so well understood as at present, to depreciate the original text. What, however, an accomplished Roman Catholic divine has said respecting Col- lins (see Scripture, Holy) may be equally ap- plied here: 'he took advantage of the dif- ferences between Mill and Whitby about some passages, and about the value of various readings in general, to conclude that the entire New Testament was thereby rendered doubtful. He was soon, however, chastised by the heavy lash of Bentley, who thoroughly exposed the fallacy of Collins's assertions, and vindicated the con- dition of the inspired text Nothing has been discovered, not one single various read- ing which can throw doubt upon any passage before considered certain, or decisive in favour of any important doctrine.' (Wiseman, Lectures, Lect. x.) A pure text of the Vulgate is a great deside- ratum. Lucas Brugensis (Letter to Bellarmin) pointed out no less than 4000 mistakes in the Clementine edition. An edition of this text, in the New Testament, was published in 1840 by F. F. Fleck, who has added to it the various readings of the Florentine uncial stichometrical MS. of the sixth century, containing the Old and New Testaments. This MS. was used by the Clementine editors, but they differ from it in many instances, one of which is 1 John v. 7, which is not in the Florentine. Lachmann, also, in his recent, edition of the New Testament, has furnished the text of the Vulgate from the oldest MSS. written before the tenth century, es- pecially the Fulda MS. But it can serve no critical use to correct the entire of the Greek text by conforming to the Vulgate, as has been re- cently done, at the request of the Archbishop of Paris, by Tischendorf (Nov. Test., Gr. et Lat, Paris, 1842), wherever a single MS., however worthless or modern, was found to support the reading. (See The Book of Revelation in Greek, by Samuel Prideaux, Tregelles, 1844.) Manuscripts. For an account of the MSS. of the Vulgate, we must refer the reader to Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, as well as to the various editions already named. We shall here only notice the most ancient in the British Islands, 926 VULGATE. There is a mutilated Latin MS. of the Gospels in Ireland, described by Mr. Petri e in the 19th vol. of the Transactions of the Royal Irish Aca- demy, which that able antiquary assigns to the fifth century. The Kells MS. of the Gospels, preserved in Trinity College, Dublin, the writing and illuminations of whicli are of incomparable beauty, was written in Ireland in the sixth cen- tury. This has been confounded by Dr. O' Co- nor (Rerum Hib. Script.) with the Book of Dur- row, preserved in the same College. The beautiful Lindisfarne book of the Gospels (Nero D. 4) is a sticbometrical uncial MS. of the seventh cen- tury, with an interlinear Anglo-Saxon version by Aldred in the tenth. There are two MSS. of the Gospels (the same to which allusion is made in the Life of St. Augustine, by the Rev. F. Oake- ley) said to have been brought, to England by St. Augustine. One of these is preserved in C. C. College, Cambridge, and the other in the Bodleian Library. To these is to be added St. Cuthbert's MS. of St. John's Gospel, and the gospels of St. Mullin, Dimma, Mac Durnan, Mac Regol, and St. Chad. The Codex Armachanus, written by an Irish scribe in the eighth century, now in pri- vate hands, contains the entire New Testament, with Pelagius's prefaces. This MS. wants 1 John v. 7. The Cod. Augiens. (F), a Graeco- Latin MS. containing St. Paul's Epistles (that to the Hebrews in Latin only) now in Trin. Coll. Cambridge, is probably an Irish MS. of the ninth century (see Dr. O'Conor's Rer. Hib. Script. ; Sir W. Betham's Antiq. Researches ; Petrie"s Essay on the Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Ire- land; O'Donovan's Irish Grammar ; and West- wood's PalcBog. Sac. Pictorid). Modem versions of the Vulgate. The versions used in the Church of Rome have been all made from the Vulgate, of which the first German translation was printed in 1466, the Spanish in 1478, and the Italian in 1471. Our limits will allow us only to refer to that in use in this country, of which the Old Testament was printed at Douai in 1609, and the New at Rheims in 1582. This is greatly inferior in strength and elegance of expression to the Authorized Version of 1611, but is highly commendable for its scru- pulous accuracy and fidelity, which cannot be predicated of all translations from the Vulgate in other languages. It was altered and modern- ized by Bishop Challoner in 1749, when the text was conformed to that of the Clementine editioti. It has since undergone various alterations under the care of the Irish Roman-catholic hierarchy, and has been in some respects conformed to the Authorized Version, even in passages which con- troversialists of a bygone age had stigmatized as heretical. But this has been done without any departure from the text. The original transla- tors, however, adhered so servilely to this, as to employ such barbarous words and phrases as sin- don (Mark xv. 46), zealators (Acts xx. 20), prae- finition (Eph. iii. 11), contristate (iv. 30), agnition (Philem. 16), repropitiate (Heb. ii. 17), with such hosts God is promerited (xiii. 16), &c. 'Yet in justice it must be observed, that no case of wilful perversion of Scripture has ever been brought home to the Rhemish translators'* (Scriveners * Some grave accusations against the Rhemish version, which appeared in the seventh edition of VULGATE. Supplement to the Authorized Version). Mr. Scrivener adds that ' the Rhemish divines [who were evidently men of learning and ability], may occasionally do us good service by furnish- ing some happy phrase or form of expression which had eluded the diligence of their more reputable predecessors,' (ib ) The translators observe in their preface, that they religiously keep the phrases word for word, ' for fear of missing or restraining the sense of the Holy Ghost to the fantasie;' in proof of which they refer to such phrases as ri 4/j.ol Kal cro), yvvaL (John ii. 4), which they render, ' What to me and thee, woman ?' explaining it in the note by the phrase, ' What hast thou to do with me ?' But in some of the modern editions of the Rhemish version this rule has been departed from, and the text altered into, ' What is that to me or thee?" (Dublin ed. 1791, 1824), or. ' W'hat is it to me and thee?' (Dublin, 1820); a reading inconsis- tent with the translation of the same words in Luke viii. 28. The interpolation has been removed in Dr. Murray's edition of 1 825. In the ' Neio Version of the Four Gospels, by a Catholic' [Dr. Lingard], the words are rendered, ' W7hat hast thou to do with me?' The whole passage is thus rendered and commented on by Tittmann (Meletemata Sacra) : ' Mission me fac, o mea, " Leave that to my care, good mother." It is not the lan- guage of reproof or refusal, but rather of con- solation and promise. This appears from the words which follow, " mine hour is not yet come." For in these words he promises his mother that at the proper time he will gratify her wish But our Lord purposely delayed his assistance, that the greatness of the miracle might be the better known to all. The appellation yvvcu, which was employed by our Lord on other occasions also (John xix. 26 ; xx. 15), was very honourable among the Greeks, who were accustomed to call their queens by this title, and may be rendered " my beloved." ' Professor Moses Stuart (Commentary on the Apocahjpse, vol. i. p. 119) conceives that, ' in the translation of fieravoeTre by agite p>cenitentiam (Matt. iii. 2), the same spirit was operating which led one part of the Church in modern times to translate /xsTavoeTre by do penance.' But the Latin phrase ' agere pcenitentiam,' which is also found in the old Italic, is evidently synonymous with fxeravoeiv, ' to repent.' ' Agite pcenitentiam,' says Campbell, ' was not originally a mistrans- lation of the Greek ^eTaj/oerre.' Dr. Lingard (ut supra) renders it ' repent.' We shall refer to one passage more, often ob- jected to as proving that the Vulgate was altered to serve a purpose. In Heb. xi. 21, the Vul- gate reads, as the translation of irpocreicvi'7](rev tin to aitpov tws paSoov awTov : adoravit fastigium virgae ejus : ' worshipped the top of his (Joseph's) rod.' If the present pointing of the Hebrew !"!t3J3 (Gen. xlvii. 31) be correct, the Seventy, who read it HtSD, 'a staff' or 'sceptre,' must have been Mr. Home's Introduction on the authority of an anonymous writer (Brief Hist. Dublin, 1830), were shown to be without foundation (see Wright's translation of Seller's Hermeneutics, pp. 404- 407) ; they are omitted in Mr. Home's eighth edition. VULTURE. in an error, wherein tliey were followed by the Syriac. Tholuck (Comm. on Hebr.) is of opi- nion that the Latin translators did not (as some suppose) overlook eVi, ' upon,' and he con- siders that this preposition with the accusative might easily lead to the acceptation in which it is taken by the Vulgate, which is also that adopted by Chrysostom and Theodoret, who ex- plain, the passage as if Jacob had foreseen Joseph's sovereignty, and gave a proof of his belief in it by the act of adoration in the direction of his sceptre. This is in Tholuck's opinion further confirmed by the generally spread reading avrov (his), not avrov (his own), and he doubts if the inspired writer of the epistle did not himself so understand the passage iu the Sept., as being the more signifi- cant. But should it be admitted,, with Tholuck, that ' the Protestant controversialists have very unjustly designated this passage of the Vulgate as one of the most palpable of its errors,' it must be borne in mind that Onkelos, Jonathan, Symmachus, and Aquila, follow the present read- ing; to which Jerome also gives a decided prefer- ence, observing (on Gen. xlvii. 31), ' In this pas- sage some vainly assert that Jacob adored the top of Joseph's sceptre ; . . . for in the Hebrew the reading is quite different. Israel adored at the head of the bed (adoravit Israel ad caput lec- tuli).' It has been erroneously assumed that the trans- lators of the English Bible followed invariably Beza's third edition. They acted independently, sometimes following Stephens where his text dif- fered from Beza's, and sometimes the Vulgate in opposition to both (Scrivener, ut supra). The translators of King James's Bible have been sometimes reproached with having adopted read- ings in opposition to the authority of all texts, and of the former English translations, as in 1 Cor. xi. 27, where the translation is,, ' whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup,' &c, while the Greek text reads tf, ' or drink.' But they were here preceded by the Geneva trans- lators, who have 'and,' and this was supported not only by some copies of the Vulgate, but by the Syriac version (published in 1555), and by the Clermont MS. (E) which lias Kal, as well as by Clemens Alexandriuus, Cassiodorus, and others. This reading had at. a subsequent period the additional testimony of the Cod. Alexandriuus. Bengel, also, whom all unite with Dr. Wiseman in considering •' an amiable and profound scholar,' and whom Dr. Wiseman himself calls 'a noble model of the principles in action which he has been striving to inculcate through the course of his Lectures ' (Wiseman, Lectures, ut supra), was so satisfied of the truth of this reading, that he would have introduced it into the text, but. for his canon above referred to [Scripture, Holy]. The reading ij, ' or,' however, being supported by the best authority, has been retained by all other editors, including Beza, Griesbach, Scholz, Lach- mann, Teschendorf, and Schott, while the last named writer, svith many others, still considers ' and ' to be the true rendering. — W. W. VULTURE (ntn, daah). Notwithstanding the assignation of the Hebrew daah to ' glede ' and ' black kite,' it is clear that in various texts ntn, nN"l, rVN, and m, also translated 'merlin,' all indicate raptorial birds of inferior VULTURE. 957 powers, that have been mixed up with notions strictly belonging to the vulture ; while the vulturidce in Egypt alone amount at least to three species, exclusive of peres (the bearded vulture), and racham (the white carrion vulture, or neophron) ; and in other passages, again, we find neser (eagle) under circumstances leading to a belief that vultures are meant, or, at least, are not excluded. This intermixture of the distinc- tive attributes of genera, which by scientific clas- sification can now be readily discriminated, was far from being understood by the ancients, and is still incomprehensible to Oriental writers, who, as well as the ancient Greeks, were so unac- quainted with these characters, that they notice as ' a terrible species of eagle' a bird which is now believed to be nothing more than tetrao urogallus. ' the cock of the woods," or caper- kalsie. Late Western commentators, anxious to distinguish eagles from vultures, have assumed that the first mentioned never feed on carcasses -T and judging the whole family of vultures by the group of carrion-eaters alone, have insinuated that the latter do not attack a living prey. In both cases they are in error : with some excep- tions, eagles follow armies, though not so abun- dantly as vultures; and vultures attack living prey provided with small means of defence or of little weight; but their, talons having no means of grasping with energy, or of seriously wounding with the claws, they devour their prey on the spot, while the eagle carries it aloft, and thence is more liable to be stung by a serpent not entirely disabled, than the vul- ture, who crushes the head of all reptiles it preys upon. The species ofvulture, properly so called, have the head naked or downy, the crop external, and very long wings; they have all an offensive smell, and we know of none that even the scavenger-ants will eat. When deadfhey lie-on the ground un- touched till the sun has dried them into mum- mies- Those found in and about the Egyptian territory are I'ultur fulvus, V. gyps (Savigny), V. JEgyptius (Savigny), V. monachus (Arabian vult.iue), V. ciuereus, V. Xub'icus, and a black species, which is often figured on Egyptian monu- ments as the bird of victory, hovering over the head of a national hero in battle, ami sometimes with a banner in each talon. It is perhaps the gypaetus barbatus (peres), or Jammer gey cr, by the Arabs called nesr ; for though neither a vul- ture nor an eagle, it is the largest bird of prey of the old continent, and is armed like the eagle with formidable claws. The head is wholly feathered ; its courage is equal to its powers, and it has- a strength of wing probably superior to all raptorians, excepting the condor; it is con- sequently found with little or no difference from Norway to the Cape of Good. Hope, and from the Pyrenees to Japan. Most, of the above-named species are occasionally seen in the north of Europe; The voice varies in different species, but those of Egypt, frequenting the Pyramids, are known to bark in the night like dogs. Except- ing the perenopterine or carrion vultures, all the other species are of large size ; some superior in bulk to the swan, and others a little less. The Nubian species has been figured in Kilto's Pa- lestine ; xhej'iifrus in Harris's Diet, of the Nat. Hist, of the Bible. 928 WAGES. W. WAGES. The word rendered in the English Version by this term, signifies primarily ' to pur- chase,' to obtain by some consideration on the part of the purchaser ; thence to obtain on the part of the seller some consideration for something given or done, and hence to hire, to pay, or receive wages. Wages, then, according to the earliest usages of mankind, are a return made by a pur- chaser for something of value- — specifically for work performed. And thus labour is recognised as property ; and wages as the price paid or ob- tained in exchange for such property. In this relation there is obviously nothing impro- per or humiliating on the side either of the buyer or the seller. They have each a certain thing which the other wants, and in the exchange which they in consequence make, both parties are alike served. In these few words lies the theory, and also the justification of all service. The en- tire commerce of life is barter. In hire, then, there is nothing improper or discreditable. It is only a hireling, that is, a mercenary, a mean sor- did spirit, that is wrong. So long as a human being has anything to give which another human being wants, so long has he something of value in the great market of life ; and whatever that some- thing may be, provided it does not contribute to evil passions or evil deeds, he is a truly respect- able capitalist, and a useful member of the social community. The Scriptural usage in applying the term translated ' wages ' to sacred subjects — thus the Almighty himself says to Abraham (Gen. xv. 1), ' I am thy exceeding great re- ward ' — tends to confirm these views, and to sug- gest the observance of caution in the employ- ment of the words ' hire ' and ' hireling,' which have acquired an offensive meaning by no means originally inherent in themselves, or in the He- brew words for which they stand (Gen. xxx. 18, 32, 33). Property, in all ages, has in practice disowned the truth, that it has its duties as well as its tights. This Jacob found in his dealings with Laban. But in the iron age of the Jewish state, injustice towards those who had no property but such as their labour supplied, became very com- mon, and conduced, with other crimes, to call down the divine wrath — 'I will be a swift wit- ness against those that oppress the hireling in his wages ' (Mai. iii. 5). — J. 11. B. WAGGON. [Cart.] WAIL. [Mourning.] WALLS. [Fortifications ; Towns.] WANDERING. In our office of tracing the steps of the Israelites from Goshen to Palestine, we have conducted them across the Red Sea to their first great station on its eastern bank, and thence onward along the shore and over the cliffs of that sea till, following them up Wady Hebron, we placed and left them before Mount Horeb, in the capacious plain Rahah, which, having its WANDERING. widest part in the immediate froti t of that im- mense mass of rock, extends as if with two arms, one towards the north-west, the other towards the north-east. The review of the plain by so compe- tent a person as Robinson, is of great consequence for the interests of scientific geography and the yet more important interests of religious truth; the rather because a belief prevailed, even among the best informed, that there was no spot in the Sinaitic district whicli answered to the demands of the Scriptural narrative. Even the accurate Winer (Real-Wort, in art. 'Sinai,' not 'Horeb' as referred to by Robinson, i. 17; ii. 550) says, 'Which- ever mountain may be considered as the place for the promulgation of the law, the common repre- sentation still remains false — that at the foot of the hill there spreads out a great plain, on which the people of Israel might assemble ' (comp. Ro- senmiiller, Alterth. iii. 129). We shall therefore transcribe Robinson's words in-extenso: 'We came to Sinai with some incredulity, wishing to investigate the point, whether there was any pro- bable ground, beyond monkish tradition, for fix- ing upon the present supposed site. We were led to the conviction that the plain er Rahah is the probable spot where the congregation of Israel were assembled ; and that the mountain im- pending over it, the present Horeb, was the scene of the awful phenomena in which the law was given. We were surprised as well as gratified to find here in the inmost recesses of these dark granite cliffs, this fine plain spread out before the mountain, and I know not where I have felt a thrill of stronger emotion than when, in first cross- ing the plain, the dark precipices of Horeb rising in solemn grandeur before us, we became aware of the entire adaptedness of the scene to the purposes for which it was chosen by the great Hebrew legislator. Moses, doubtless, during the forty years in which he kept the flocks of Jethro, had often wandered over these mountains, and was well acquainted with their valleys and deep re- cesses, like the Arabs of the present day. At any rate, he knew and had visited the spot to which he was to conduct his people — this adytum in the midst of the great circular granite region ; a secret holy place, shut out from the world amid lone and desolate mountains ' (i. 175, sq.). We subjoin what Robinson reports of the climate: ' The weather, during our residence at the convent (of Sinai), as, indeed, during all our journey through the peninsula (March and April), was very tine. At the convent tne thermometer ranged only between 47° and 67° F. But the winter nights are said here to be cold ; water freezes as late as February ; and snow often falls upon the mountains. But the air is exceedingly pure, and the climate healthy, as is testified by the great age and vigour of many of the monks. And if in general few of the Arabs attain to so great an age, the cause is doubtless to be sought in the scantiness of their fare, and their exposure to pri- vations, and not. to any injurious influence of the climate' (p. 175). After having been about a year in the midst of this mountainous region, the Israelites broke up their encampment and began their journey in the order of their tribes, Judah leading the way with the ark of the covenant, under the guidance of - the directing cloud (Num. ix. 15, sq. ; x. 11, sq.). They proceeded down Wady Seikh, having ' ' WANDERING. tbe wilderness of Paran before them, in a north- westerly direction ; but having come to a gorge in the mountains they struck in a nortb-north-east- erly direction across a sandy plain, and then over the Jebel et-Tih, and came down Wady Zulakah, to the stal ion Taberah. It took the army three days to reach this station. Whatever name the place bore before, it now received that of Taberah (fire), from a supernatural fire with which mur- murers, in the extreme parts of the camp, were destroyed as a punishment for their guilt. Here, too, the mixed multitude that was among the Israel- ites not only fell a-lusting themselves, but also excited the Hebrews to remember Egyptian fish and vegetables with srrong desire, and to com- plain of the divinely supplied manna. The dis- content was intense and widely spread. Moses became aware of it, and forthwith felt his spirit misgive him. He brings the matter before Jeho- vah, and receives divine aid by the appointment of seventy elders to assist him in the important and perilous office of governing the gross, sensuous, and self-willed myriads whom he had to lead to Canaan. Moreover, an abundance of flesh meat was given in a most profuse supply of quails. It appears that there were now 600,000 footmen in the congregation. The next station was Kibroth-hattaavah, near which there are fine springs and excellent pastur- age. This spot, the name of which signifies ' graves of lust,' was so denominated from a plague inflicted on the people in punishment of their rebellious disposition (Num. xi. 33 ; 1 Cor. x, 6). Thence they journeyed to Hazeroth, which Robinson, after Burckhardt, finds in el-Hud- hera, where is a fountain, together with palm- trees. ' The determination of this point,' says Robinson, ' is perhaps of more importance in Bib- lical history than would at first appear ; for if this position be adopted for Hazeroth, it settles at once the question as to the whole route of the Israelites between Sinai and Kadesh. It shows that they must have followed the route upon which we now were to the sea, and so along the coast to Akabah (at the head of the eastern arm of the Red Sea), and thence, probably, through the great Wady el-'Arabah to Kadesh. Indeed, such is the nature of the country, that having once arrived at this fountain, they could not well have varied their course so as to have kept aloof from the sea, and continued along the high plateau of the western desert ' (i. 223). At Hazeroth, where the people seem to have remained a short time, there arose a family dissension to increase the difficulties of Moses. Aaron, apparently led on by his sister Miriam, who may have been actuated by some feminine pique or jealousy, complained of Moses on the ground that he had married a Cushite, that, is, an Arab wife, and the malcontents went so far as to set up their own claims to authority as not less valid than those of Moses. An appeal is made to Jehovah, who vindicates Moses, rebukes Aaron, and punishes Miriam (Num. xii.). 'And afterward the people removed from Haze- roth, and pitched in the wilderness of Paran,' at Kadesh (Num. xii. HI; xiii. 26). In Dent. i. 19-21, we read, 'And when we departed from Horeb we went through all that, great and terrible wilderness which ye saw by the way of the moun- tain of the Amorites, -as the Lord our God com- manded us; and we came to Kadesh- barnea. VOL. II. WANDERING. 929 And I said unto you, Ye are come unto the mountain of the Amorites, which the Lord our God doth give unto us. Behold, the Lord thy God hath set the land before thee : go up and possess it; fear not, neither be discouraged.' Accordingly, here it was that twelve men (spies) were sent into Canaan to survey the country, who went up from the wilderness of Zin (Num. xiii. 21) to Hebron ; and returning after forty days brought back a very alarming account of what they had seen. Let it, however, be remarked that the Scriptures here supply several local data to this effect : Kadesh-barnea lay not far from Canaan, near the mountain of the Amorites, in the wilderness of Zin, in the wilderness of Paran. It is evident that there is here a great lacuna, which some have attempted to fill up by turning the route a little to the west to Rithmah, on the borders of Idumaea, and then conducting it with a sudden bend to the west and the south, into what is considered the wilderness of Paran (Re- lievo Map of Arabia Petrcea, published by Dobbs, London). ' In this view, however, we cannot concur. Both Robinson and Raumer are of a different opinion. At the same time it must be admitted that so great a gap in the itinerary is extraordinary. If, however, we find ourselves in regard to the journey from Horeb to Kadesh pos- sessed of fewer and less definite materials of information, we have also the satisfaction of feel- ing that no great Scriptural fact or doctrine is concerned. It is certain that the narrative in the early part of Numbers goes at once from Hazeroth to Kadesh ; and although the second account (in Num. xxxiii.) supplies other places, these seem to belong properly to a second route and a second visit to Kadesh. The history in the book of Numbers is not, indeed, a consecutive narra- tive ; for after the defeat of the Israelites in their foolish attempt to force an entrance into Canaan contrary to the will of God (Num. xiv. 45), it breaks suddenly oil', and leaving the journeyings and the doings of the camp, proceeds to recite certain laws. Yet it offers, as we think, a clear intimation of a second visit to the wilderness of Zin and to Kadesh. Without having said a word as to the removal of the Israelites southward, and therefore leaving them in the wilderness of Zin, at Kadesh, it records in the twentieth chapter (ve'r. 1), 'Then came tbe children of Israel, the whole congregation, into the desert of Zin, in the first mouth, and the people abode in Kadesh.' And this view appears confirmed by the fact that the writer immediately proceeds to narrate the passage of the Israelites hence on by Mount Hor south- ward to Gilgal and Canaan. Robinson's remarks (ii. 611) on this point have much force: 'I have thus far assumed that the Israelites were twice at Kadesh ; and this appears from a comparison of (lie various accounts. They broke up from Sinai on the twentieth day of the second month in the i year of their departure out of Egypt, correspond- ing to the early part, of May ; they came into the desert of Paran, whence spies were sent up the mountain info Palestine, " in the time of the first ripe grapes ;" and these returned after forty days to the camp at. Kadesh. As grapes begin to ripen on the mountains of Judah in July, the return of the spies is to be placed in August or Septem- ber. The people now murmured at the report of the spies, and receivwl the seuleuce from Jehovah 3o 930 WANDERING. that their carcasses should fall in the wilderness, and their children wander in the desert forty years. They were ordered to turn back into the desert " by the way of the Red Sea,1' although it appears that tbey abode "many" days in Kadesh. The next notice of the Israelites is, that in the first month they came into the desert of Zin and abode again at Kadesh ; here Miriam dies ; Moses and Aaron bring water from the rock; a passage is demanded through the land of Edom, and refused ; and they then journeyed from Kadesh to Mount Hor, where Aaron dies in the fortieth year of the departure ■from Egypt, in the first day of the fifth month, corresponding to a part of August and September. Here, then, between August of the second year and August of the fortieth yeai-, we have an in- terval of thirty-eight years of wandering in the desert. With this coincides another account. From Mount Hor they proceeded to Elath on the Red Sea, and so around the land of Edom to the brook Zered, on the border of Moab ; and from the time of their departure from Kadesh (mean- ing, of course, their first departure) until they thus came to the brook Zered, there is said to have been an interval of thirty-eight years. In this way the Scriptural account of the jour- neyings of the Israelites becomes perfectly har- monious and intelligible. The eighteen stations mentioned only in the general list in the book of Numbers as preceding the arrival at Kadesh, are then apparently to be referred to this eight and thirty years of wandering, during which the people at last approached Ezion-geber, and afterwards returned northwards a second time to Kadesh, in the hope of passing directly througn the land of Edom. Their wanderings extended, doubtless, over the western desert ; although the stations named are probably only those head-quarters where the tabernacle was pitched, and where Moses and the elders and priests encamped ; while the main body of the people was scattered in various directions. Where, then, was Kadesh ? Clearly, on the borders of Palestine. We agree with Robinson and Raumer in placing it nearly at. the top of the Wady Arabah, where, indeed, it is fixed by Scrip- ture, for in Numbers xii. 16 we read, 'Kadesh, a city in the uttermost of thy (Edom) border.' The precise spot it may be difficult to ascertain, but here, in the wilderness of Zin, which lay in the more comprehensive district of Paran, is Kadesh to be placed. Raumer, however, has attempted to fix the locality, and in his views Robinson and Schubert generally concur. Kaumer places it south from the Dead Sea, in the low lands be- tween the mountain of the Edomites and that of the Amorites. The country gradually descends from the mountains of Judah southward, and where the descent terminates Raumer sets Ka- desh. With this view the words of Moses entirely correspond, when, at Kadesh, he said to the spies, ' Get you up southward, and go up into the moun- tain ' (Num. xiii. 17). The ascent may have been made up the pass es-Sufah ; up this the self- willed Hebrews went, and were driven back by the Canaanites as far as to Hermah, then called Zeplath (Num. xiii. 17; xiv. 40-45; Judg. i. 17). The spot where Kadesh lay Robinson finds in the present Ain el-Weibeh. But Raumer pre- fers a spot to the north of this place — that where the road mounts by Wady el-Khurar to the pass WANDERING. Sufah. It ought, he thinks, to be fixed on a spot where the Israelites would be near the pass, and where the pass would lie before their eyes. This is not the case, according to Schubert, at Ain el- Weibeh. Raumer, therefore, inclines to fix on Ain Hash, which lies near Ain el Khurar. This is probably Kadesh. The distance from the pass Sufah to Ain Hash is little more than half the length of that from the same pass to Ain el-Wei- beh. According to the Arabs, there is at Ain Hasb a copious fountain of sweet water, sur- rounded by verdure and traces of ruins, which must be of considerable magnitude, as they were seen by Robinson at a distance of some miles. These may be the ruins of Kadesh ; but at Ain el-Weibeh there are no ruins. By what, route, then, did the Israelites come from Hazeroth to Kadesh ? We are here sup- plied with scarcely any information. The entire distance, which is considerable, is passed by the historian in silence. Nothing more remains than the direction of the two places, the general features of the country, and one or two allusions. The option seems to lie between two routes. From Hazeroth, pursuing a direction to the north- east, they would come upon the sea-coast, along which they might go till they came to the top of the Bahr Akabar, and thence up Wady Arabah to Kadesh, nearly at its extremity. Or they might have taken a north-western course and crossed the mountain Jebel et-Tih. If so, they must still have avoided the western side of Mount Araif, otherwise they would have been carried to Beer-sheba, which lay far to the west of Kadesh. Robinson prefers the first route ; Raumer, the second. ' I,' says the latter, ' am of opinion that Israel went through the desert et-Tih, then down Jebel Araif, but not along Wady Arabah.' This view is supported by the words found in Deut. i. 1-9, ' When we departed from Horeb we went through all that great and terrible toilderness which ye saw by the way of the mountain of the Amorites, and we came to Kadesh-barnea.' This journey from Horeb to Kadesb-barnea took the Hebrews eleven days (Deut. i. 2). At the direct command of Jehovah the Hebrews left Kadesh, came down the Wady Arabah, and entered the wilderness by the way of the Red Sea (Num. xiv. 25). In this wilderness they wan- dered eight and thirty years, but little can be set forth respecting the course of their march. It may in general be observed that their route would not resemble that of a regular modern army. They were a disciplined horde of nomades, and would follow nomade customs. It is also clear that their stations as well as their course would necessarily be determined by the nature of the country, and its natural supplies of the necessaries of life. Hence regularity of movement is not to be expected. How, except by a constant miracle, two millions of people were supported for forty years in the peninsula of Sinai, must, under the actual circumstances of the case, ever remain inexplicable : nor do we conceive that such scanty supplies as an occasional well or a chance oasis do much to relieve the difficulty. In the absence of detailed information, any attempt to lay down the path pursued by the Israelites after their emerging from Arabah can be little better than conjectural. Some authorities carry them quite over to the eastern bank of the Red Sea ; but the WANDERING. expression 'by the way of the Red Sea' denotes nothing more than the western wilderness, or the wilderness in the direction of the Red Sea. The stations over which the Israelites passed are set down in Num. xxxiii. 18, sq. (comp. Deut. x. 6, 7), and little beyond the bare record can be given. Only it seems extraordinary, and is much to be regretted, that for so long a period as eight and thirty years our information should be so exceedingly small. Raumer, indeed, makes an effort (Beitrage, p. 11) to fix the direction in which some of the stations lay to each other, but we cannot find satisfaction in his efforts, and do not, therefore, bring them before the reader. It may be of more service to them to subjoin the following table of the stations of the Israelites, from the time of their leaving Egypt, which we take from Robinson's Researches in Palestine (ii. 678, 679). 1. From Egypt to Sinai. Exodus xii.-xix. Numbers xxxiii. From Rameses, xii. 37. From Rameses, ver. 3. 1. Succoth, xii. 37 Succoth, ver. 5 WANDERING. 931 2. Etham, xiii. 20 3. Pi-hahiroth, xiv. 2 4. Passage through the Red Sea, xiv. 22; and three days' march into the desert of Shur, xv. 22 5. Murab, xv. 23 6. Elim, xv. 27 7. 8. Desert of Sin, xvi. 1 9. 10. 11. Rephidim, xvii. 1 12. Desert of Sinai, xix. 1 Etham, ver. 6 Pi-hahiroth, ver. 7 Passage through the Red Sea, and three days' march in the desert of Etham, ver. 8 Marah, ver. 8 Elim, ver. 9. Encampment by the Red Sea, ver. 10 Desert of Sin, ver. 11 Dophkah, ver. 12 Alush, ver. 13 Rephidim, ver. 14 Desert of Sinai, ver. 15 2. From Sinai to Kadesh the second time. Numbers x.-xx. From the Desert of Sinai, x. 12. 13. Taberah, xi. 3; Deut. ix. 22 14. Ki broth- hattaavah, xi. 34 15. Hazerotb, xi. 35 16. Kadesh, in the desert of Paran, xii. 16 ; xiii. 26 ; Deut. i. 2, 19. Hence they turn back and wan- der for 38 years. Num. xiv. 25, seq. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Numbers xxxiii. From the Desert of Sinai, ver. 16. Ki broth -hattaavah, ver. 16 Hazeroth, ver. 17 Rithmab, ver. 18 Rimmon-parez, ver. 19 Libnah, ver. 20 Rissah, ver. 21 Kehelatliah, ver. 22 Mount Sbapher. ver. 23 Haradah, ver. 24 Makhelofh, ver. 25 Tahath, ver. 26 Tarah, ver. 27 Mithcah, ver. 28 Hashmonah, ver. 29 Moseroth, ver. 30 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. Return to Kadesh, Num. xx. 1 Bene-jaakan, ver. 31 Hor-hagidgad, ver. 32 Jotbathah, ver. 33 Ebronab, ver. 34 Ezion-gaber, ver. 35 Kadesh, ver. 36 Numbers xxxiii. From Kadesh, ver. 37. Mount Hor, ver. 37 3. From Kadesh to the Jordan Num. xx., xxi. Deut. i. ii. x. From Kadesh, Num. xx. 22. 36. Beerofh Bene-jaa- kan, Deut. x. 6 37. Mount Hor, Num. xx. 22 ; or Mosera, Deut. x. 6, where Aaron died 38. Gudgodah, Deut. x. 7 39. Jothath, Deut. x. 7 40. Way of the Red Sea, Num. xxi. 4 ; by Elath and Ezion- gaber, Deut. ii. 8 41. 42. 43. Oboth, Num. xxi. 10 44. Ije abarim, Num. xxi. 11 45. The brook Zered, Num. xxi. 12 ; Deut. ii. 13, 14 46. The brook Anion, Num. xxi. 13 ; Deut. ii. 24 Zalmonah, ver. 41 Punon, ver. 42 Oboth, ver. 43 Ije-abarim, or Jim, ver. 44,45 47. Dibon-gad, ver. 45, now Dhibau Al mon-diblathaim, ver. 46 Mountains of Abarim, near to Nebo, ver. 47 Plains of Moab by Jor- dan, near Jericho, ver. 48 48. 49. Beer (well) in the desert, Num. xxi. 16, 18 50. Mattanah, xxi. 18 51. Nahaliel, xxi. 19 52. Bamoth, xxi. 19 53. Pisgah, put fur the range of Abarim, of which Pisgah was part, xxi. 20 51. By the way of Bashan to the plains of Moab by Jordan, near Jericho, Num. xxi. 33; xxii. 1 There are a few events which must be recorded in order to preserve, in a measure, the uniformity of the narrative designed to trace the passage of the Hebrews from the laud of bondage to the Promised Land. When we begin to take up the thread of the story at. the second visit to Kadesh. we find time had, in the interval, been busy al its destructive woik, and we thus gain confirmation of the view which has been taken of such second visit. No sooner has the sacred historian told us of the return of the Israelites to Kadesh, than he records the death aud burial of Miriam, anil has, ut no 3o2 932 WANDERING. WAR. great distance of time, to narrate that of Aaron and Moses. While still at Kadesh a rising against these leaders takes place, on the alleged ground of a want of water. Water is produced from the rock at a spot called hence Meribah (strife). But Moses and Aaron displeased God in this pro- ceeding, probably because they distrusted God's general providence and applied for extraordinary resources. On account of this displeasure it was announced to them that they should not enter Canaan. A similar transaction has been already spoken of as taking place in Rephidim (Exod. xvii. 1). The same name, Meribah, was occa- sioned in that as in this matter. Hence it has been thought that we have here two versions of the same story. But there is nothing surprising, un- der the circumstances, in the outbreak of discon- tent for want of water, which may well have happened even more than twice. The places are different, very wide apart ; the time is differ- ent ; and there is also the great variation arising out of the conduct and punishment of Moses and Aaron. On the whole, therefore, we judge the two records to speak of different transactions. Relying on the ties of blood (Gen. xxxii. 8) Moses sent to ask of the Edomites a passage through their territory into Canaan. The answer was a refusal, accompanied by a display of force. The Israelites, therefore, were compelled to turn their face southward, and making a turn round the end of the Elanitic gulf reached Mount Hor, near Petra, on the top of which Aaron died. Finding the country bad for travelling, and their food un- pleasant, Israel again broke out into rebellious discontent, and was punished by fiery serpents which bit the people, and much people died, when a remedy was provided in a serpent of brass set on a pole (Num. xxi. 4, sq.). Still going northward, and probably pursuing the caravan route from Damascus, they at length reached the valley of Zared (the brook), which may be the present Wady Kerek, that runs from the east into the Dead Sea. Hence they ' removed and pitched on the other side of Arnon, which is in the border of Moab, be- tween Moab and the Amorites ' (Num. xxi. 13). Beer (the well) was the next station, where, find- ing a plentiful supply of water, and being rejoiced at the prospect of the speedy termination of their journey, the people indulged in music and song, singing ' the song of the well ' (Num. xxi. 17, 18). The Amorites being requested, refused to give Israel a passage through their borders, and so the nation was again compelled to proceed still in a northerly course. At length having beaten the Amorites, and Og, king of Bashan, they reached the Jordan, and pitched their tents at a spot which lay opposite Jericho. Here Balak, king of the Moabites, alarmed at their numbers and their successful prowess, invited Balaam to curse Israel, in the hope of being thus aided to overcome them and drive them out. The in- tended curse proved a blessing in the prophet's mouth. While here the people gave way to the idolatrous practices of the Moabites, when a ter- rible punishment was inflicted, partly by a plague which took off 24,000, and partly by the avenging sword. Moses, being commanded to take the sum of the children of Israel, from twenty years upwards, found they amounted to 600,730, among whom there was not a man of them whom Moses and Aaron numbered in the wilderness of Sinai (Num. xxvi. 47, 64). Moses is now directed to ascend Abarim, to Mount Nebo, in the land of Moab, over against Jericho, in order that he might survey the land which Ire was not to enter on ac- count of his having rebelled against God's com- mandment in the desert of Zin (Num. xxvii. 12 ; Deut. xxxii. 49). Conformably with the divine command, Moses went up from the plains of Moab unto the mountain of Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, and there he died, at the age of 120 years : ' His eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated ' (Deut. xxxiv.). Under his successor, Joshua, the Hebrews were forthwith led across the Jordan, and established in the Land of Promise. Thus a journey, which they might have per- formed in a few months, they spent forty years in accomplishing, bringing on themselves unspeakable toil and trouble, and in the end. death, as a punishment for their gross and sensual appetites, and their unbending indocility to the divine will (Num. xiv. 23 ; xxvi. 65). Joshua, however, gained thereby a great advantage ; inas- much as it was with an entirely new generation that he laid the foundations of the civil and reli- gious institutions of the Mosaic polity in Pales- tine. This advantage assigns the reason why so long a period of years was spent in the wilder- ness. The following works are valuable : Paldstina und die Siidlich angrenzenden Lander ; German edition of Robinson's Biblical Researches in Pa- lestine ; Reise in das Morgenland in 1836-7, von Schubert ; Oommenlaire Geographijjue sur V Exode, par L. de Laborde, Paris, 1841 ; Maps Paldstina, von J. L. Grimm, Berlin, 1830; Karten zu Robinson's Paldstina, von Kiepert, 1840; Karte von Paldstina, von K. Ritter, 1 842 ; Wandkarte von Paldstina, von Volter, 1843; Louis Erbe, Relief Karte von Paldstina, 1842; Plan von Jerusalem, von Helmuth, 1843. — J, R. B. WAR. The Hebrew nation, so long as it con- tinued in Egyptian bondage, might be regarded as unacquainted with military affairs, since a jealous government would scarcely permit so numerous and dense a population as the pastoral families of Israel, which retained their seat in Goshen, certainly were, to be in possession of the means of resistance to authority ; but placed as this por- tion of the people was, with the wanderers of the wilderness to the south, and the mountain rob- bers of Edom to the east, some kind of defence must have been provided to protect its cattle, and in a measure to cover lower Egypt itself from foreign inroads. Probably the labouring popula- tion, scattered as bondsmen through the Delta, were alone destitute of weapons, while the shep- herds had the same kind of defensive arms which are still in use, and allowed to all classes in eastern countries, whatever be their condition. This mix-ed stat-e of their social position appears to be countenanced by the fact that, when sud- denly permitted to depart, the whole organization required for the movement of such a multitude was clearly in force ; yet not a word is said about physical means to resist the pursuing Egyptians, although at a subsequent period it does not ap- pear that they were wanting to invade Palestine, but that special causes prevented them from being immediately resorted to. The Israelites were, therefore, partly armed ; they had their bows and WAR. arrows, clubs and darts, wicker or ox-hide shields, and helmets (caps) of skins, or of woven rushes, made somewhat like our bee-hives. These inferences are borne out by the fact, that the Egyptian offensive weapons were but little better, and that the materials, being readily acces- sible and in constant, use, could be manufactured by the cattle-herds and dwellers in tents them- selves. From their familiar knowledge of the Egyptian institutions, the Israelites doubtless coj)ied their military organization, as soon as they were free from bondage, and became inured to a warlike life during their forty years' wandering in the desert ; but with this remarkable difference, that while Egypt reckoned her hundred thousands of regulars, either drawn from the provinces or nomes by a kind of conscription, such as is to he seen on the monuments, or from a military caste of hereditary soldiers, the Hebrew people, having preserved the patriarchal institution of nomades, were embodied by families and tribes, as is plainly proved by the order of march which was pre- served during their pilgrimage to the Land of Promise. That order likewise reveals a military circumstance which seems to attest that the dis- tribution of the greatest and most warlike masses was not on the left of the order of movement, that is, towards their immediate enemies, but always to the front and right, as if even then the most serious opposition might be expected from the east and north-east — possibly from a reminiscence of past invasions of the giant races, and of the first conquerors, furnished with cavalry and cha- riots, having come from those directions. At the time of the departure of ' Israel, horses were not yet abundant in Egypt, for the pursuing army had only 600 chariots, and the shepherd people were even prohibited from breeding or possessing them. The Hebrews were enjoined to trust, under Divine protection, to the energies of infantry alone, their future country being chiefly within ihe basin of high mountains, and the march thilher over a district of Arabia where to this day horses are not in use. We may infer that the inspired lawgiver rejected horses because they were already known to be less fit for defence at home than for distant expeditions of conquest, in which it was not intended that the chosen people should engage. Where such exact order and instruction ex- isted, it may not be doubted' that in military affairs, upon which in the first years of emanci- pation so much of future power and success was to depend, measures no less appropriate were taken, and that, with the Egyptian model univer- sally known, similar institutions or others equally efficient were adopted by the Israelites. Great tribal ensigns they had, and thence we may infer the existence of others for subordinate divisions. Like (he Egyptians, they could move in columns and form well ordered ranks in deep fronts of haitle, and they acteil upon the best suggestions of human ingenuity united with physical daring, except when expressly ordered to trust to Divine interposition. The force of circumstances caused in time modifications of importance to be made, where doctrine had interfered with what was felt to hinge on political necessities; but even then they were lung and urgently wanted before they took place, although the people in religion were constantly disregarding the most important points, WAR. 933 and forsaking that God who, they all knew and believed, had taken them out of bondage to make them a great nation. Thus, although from the time the tribes of Reuben and Manasseh received their allotment east of the Jordan, the possession of horses became in some measure necessary to defend their frontier, still the people persisted for ages in abstaining from them, and even in the time of David would not use them when they were ac- tually captured ; but when the policy of Solomon had made extensive conquests, the injunction was set aside, because horses became all-important ; and from the captivity till after the destruction of Jerusalem, the remnant of the eastern tribes were in part warlike equestrian nomades, who struck terror into the heart of the formidable Persian cavalry, won great battles, and even captured Parthian kings. When both the kingdoms of Judah and Israel were again confined to the mountains, they reduced their cavalry to a small body ; because, it may be, the nature of the soil within the basin of the Libanus was, as it still is, unfavourable to breeding horses. Another in- stance of unwillingness to violate ancient insti- tutions is found in the Hebrews abstaining from active war on the Sabbath until the time of the Maccabees. There are, however, indications in their military transactions, from the time Assyrian and Persian conquerors pressed upon the Israelite states, and still more after the captivity, which show the influ- ence of Asiatic military ideas, according to which the masses do not act with ordered unity, but trust to the more adventurous in the van to decide the' fate of battle. Later still, under the Maccabees, the systematic discipline of Macedonian importation can be observed, even though in Asia the Greek method of training, founded on mathematical principles, had never been fully complied with, or had been modified by the existence of new circumstances and new elements of destruction ; such, for example, as the use of great bodies of light cavalry, showering millions of arrows upon their enemies, and righting elephants introduced by the Ptolemies. But all these practices became again modified in Western Asia when Roman dominion had su- perseded the Greek kingdoms. Even the Jews, as is evident from Josephus, modelled their military force on the Imperial plan ; t heir infantry became armed, and was manoeuvred in accordance with that system which every where gave victory by means of ihe firmness and mobility which it im- parted. The masses were composed of cohorts or their equivalents, consisting of centuriae and decurise, or subdivisions into hundreds, fifties, and fens, similar to modern battalions, com- panies, and squads; and the commanders were of like grades and numbers. Thus the people of Israel, and the nations around them, cannot be ac- curately considered, in a military view, without taking into account the successive changes here noticed ; for they had the same influence which military innovations had in Europe between the eras of Charlemagne and Ihe Emperor Charles \ ., including the use of cannon — thai invention for a long time making no greater alteration in the constitution of armies, loan the perfection of war machines produced upon the military institutions of arxtiquityi The army of Israel was chiefly composed of 934 WAR. infanti.y, as before remarked, formed into a trained body of spearmen, and, in greater numbers, of slingers and archers, with horses and chariots in small proportion, excepting during the periods when the kingdom extended over the desert to the Red Sea. The irregulars were drawn from the families and tribes, particularly Ephraim and Benjamin, but the heavy armed derived their chief strength from Judah, and were, it _ appears, collected by a kind of conscription, by tribes, like the earlier Roman armies ; not through the in- strumentality of selected officers, but by genealo- gists of each tribe, under the superintendence of the princes. Of those returned on the rolls, a pro- portion greater or less was selected, according to the exigency of the time ; and the whole male po- pulation might be called out on extraordinary oc- casions. When kings had rendered the system of government better organised, there was an officer denominated "iDlt^n hashoter, a sort of muster- master, who had returns of the effective force, or number of soldiers ready for service, but who was subordinate to the IDlbn hasopher, or scribe, a kind of secretary of state. These officers, or the Qi"lt3^ sfioterim, struck out, or excused from service : — 1st, those who had built a house with- out having yet inhabited it ; 2nd, those who had planted an olive or vineyard, and had not tasted the fruit — which gave leave of absence for five years ; 3rd, those who were betrothed, or had been married less than one year ; 4th, the faint- hearted, which may mean the constitutionally delicate, rather than the cowardly, as that quality is seldom owned without personal inconvenience, arid where it is no longer a shame, the rule would destroy every levy. The levies were drilled to march in ranks (1 Chron. xii. 38), and in column by fives (D^DII, chamushim*) abreast (Exod. xiii. 18); hence it may be inferred that they borrowed from the Egyptian system a decimal formation, two fifties in each division making a solid square, equal in rank and file : for twice fen in rank and five in tile being told off by right hand and left hand files, a command to the left hand files to face about and march six or eight paces to the rear, then to front and take one step to the right would make the hundred a solid square, with only the additional distance between the right hand or unmoved tiles necessary to use the shield and spear without hindrance ; while the depth being again reduced to five files, they could face to the right or left, and march firmly in column, passing every kind of ground without breaking or lengthening their order. The Pentastichous f system, or arrangement of five men in depth, was effected by the simple evolution just mentioned, to its own condensation to double number, and at * If this term could be satisfactorily shown to mean fifty, it would still contain the decimal system, and equally necessitate the above forma- tion ; but no army, except for a short manoeuvre before battle, could march in column with a front of fifty, though" the companies were of fifty men; they must always have been doubled for sim- plifying every efficient manoeuvre. There was thus also an officer to command the front, and another the rear. f Taking arlxos in its confined sense of a file or row of men arranged behind each other. WAR. « the same time afforded the necessary space be- tween the standing files of spearmen or light in- fantry for handling their weapons without ob- stacle, always a primary object, in every ancient system of training. Between the fifth and sixth rank there was thus space made for the ensign bearer, who, as he then stood precisely between the companies of fifty each, had probably some additional width to enable his ensign being sta- tioned between the four middlemost men in the square, having five men in file and five in rank before, behind, and on each side ; there he was the regulator of their order, coming to the front in advancing, and to the rear in retreating ; and this may explain why gt[x°Si a file, au(l the Hebrew deghel and nes, an ensign, are in many cases re- garded as synonymous. Although neither the Egyptian depth of formation, if we may judge from their pictured monuments, nor the Greek phalanx, nor the Roman legion, was constructed upon decimal principles, yet the former was no doubt so in its origin, since it was the model of the Israelites, and the tetrastichal system, which after- wards succeeded, shows that it was not the ori- ginal, since even in the phalanx, where the files formed, broke, and doubled by fours, eights, six- teens, and thirty-twos, there remained names of sections which indicated the first-mentioned divi- sion : such was the pentacontarchy, denoting some arrangement of fifty, while in reality it consisted of sixty-four, and the decany and decurio, though derived from a decimal order, signified an entire file or a compact line in the phalanx, without re- ference to number. With centuries thus arranged in masses, both moveable and solid, a front of battle could be formed in simple decimal progression to a thou- sand, ten thousand, and to an army at all times formidable by its depth, and by the facility it afforded for the light troops, chariots of war, and cavalry, to rally behind and to issue from thence to the front. Archers and slingers could ply their missiles from the rear, which would be more cer- tain to reach an enemy in close conflict, than was to be found the case with the Greek phalanx, because from the great depth of that body mis- siles from behind were liable to fall among its own front ranks. These divisions were commanded, it seems, by D^¥p keisinim, officers in charge of one thousand, who, in the first ages, may have been the heads of houses, but in the time of the kings were appointed by the crown, and had a seat in the councils of war ; but the commander of the host frOVn ?i? "W sar hat-tzaba, such as Joab, Abner, Benaiah, &c, was either the judge, or under the judge or king, the supreme head of the army, and one of the highest officers in the state. He, as well as the king, had an armour-bearer, whose duty was not only to bear his shield, spear, or bow, and to carry orders, but above all, to be at the chiefs side in the hour of battle (Judg. ix. 54 ; 1 Sam. xiv. 6 ; xxxi. 4, 5). Beside the royal guards, there was, as early at least as the time of David, a select troop of heroes, who appear to have had an institution very similar in principle to our modern orders of knighthood, and may have originated the dis- tinctive marks already pointed out as used by the Romans ; for it seems they strewed their hair with gold dust [Arms.]. In military operations, such as marches in WAR. qaest of, or in the presence of, an enemy, and in order of battle, the forces were formed into three divisions, each commanded by a chief cap- tain or commander of a corps, or third part, Ifc^vS? or i&?& shelish, as was also the case with other armies of the east ; these constituted the centre, and right and left wing, and during a march formed the van, centre, and rear. The great camp in the wilderness was composed of four of these triple bodies disposed in a quad- rangle, each front having a tribal great central standard, and another tribal one in each wing. The war cry of the Hebrews was not intonated by the ensign bearers, as in the West, but by a Levite; for priests had likewise charge of the trumpets, and the sounding of signals ; and one of them, called • the anointed for war,' who is said to have had the charge of animating the army to action by an oration, may have been appointed to utter the cry of battle (Deut. xx. 2). It was a mere shout (1 Sam. xvii. 20), or, as in later ages, Halelujah ! while the so-called mottoes of the central banners of the four great sides of the square of Judah, Reuben, Ephraim, and Dan, were more likely the battle-songs which each of the fronts of the mighty army had sung on com- mencing the march or advancing to do battle (Num. x. 34, 35, 36 ; Deut. vi. 4). These verses may have been sung even before the two books wherein they are now found were written, and in- deed the sense of the text indicates a past tense. It was to these we think Jeboshaphat addressed himself when about to engage the Moabites : he ordered ' the singers before the Lord ' to chant the response (2 Chron. xx. 21), ' Praise the Lord, for his mercy endureth for ever.' With regard to the pass-word, the sign of mutual recognition occurs in Judg. vii. 18, when, after the men had blown their trumpets and shown light, they cried * The sword of the Lord and of Gideon ' — a re- petition of the very words overheard by that chief whde watching the hostile army. Before an engagement, the Hebrew soldiers were spared fatigue as much as possible, and food was distributed to them; their arms were enjoined to be in the best order, and they formed a line, as before described, of solid squares of hundreds, each square being ten deep, and as many in breadth, with sufficient intervals be- tween the files to allow of facility in the move- ments, the management of the arms, and the passage to the front or rear of slingers and archers. These last occupied posts according to circumstances, on the flanks, or in advance, but in the heat of battle were sheltered behind the squares of spearmen ; the slingers were always stationed in the rear, until they were ordered forward to cover the front, impede an hostile approach, or commence an engagement, some- what in the manner of modern skirmishers. Meantime, the king, or his representative, ap- peared clad in holy ornaments, t£Hp ^YlH, hadri kodesh (in our version rendered ' the beauties of holiness,' Ps. ex. 3 ; 2 Chron. xx. 21), and proceeded to make the final dispositions for battle, in the middle of his chosen braves, and attended by priests, who, by their exhortations, animated the ranks within hearing, while tlie trum- pets waited to sound the signal. It was now, with the enemy at hand, we may suppose, that the WAR. 935 slinge'itf would be ordered to pass forward be- tween the intervals of the line, and, opening their order, would let fly their stone or leaden missiles, until, by the gradual approach of the opposing fronts, they would be hemmed in and recalled to the rear, or ordered to take an appro- priate position. Then was the time when the trumpet-bearing priests received command to sound the charge, and when the shout of battle burst forth from the ranks. The signal being given, the heavy infantry would press forward under cover of their shields, with the PIO") rotnach protruded direct upon the front of the enemy : the rear ranks might then, when so armed, cast their darts, and the archers, behind them all, shoot high, so as to pitch their arrows over the lines before them, into the dense masses of the enemy beyond. If the opposing forces broke through the line, we may imagine a body of charioteers reserve, rushing from their post, and charging in among the disjointed ranks of the enemy, before they could reconstruct their order; or wheeling round a flank, fall upon the rear ; or being en- countered by a similar manoeuvre, and perhaps repulsed, or rescued by Hebrew cavalry. The king, meanwhile, surrounded by his princes, posted close to the rear of his line of battle, and in the middle of showered missiles, would watch the enemy and strive to remedy every disorder. Thus it was that several! of the sovereigns of Judah were slain (2 Chron. xviii. 33; xxxv. 23), and that such an enormous, waste of human life took place ; for two hostile lines of masses, at least ten in depth, advancing under the confi- dence of breastplate and shield, when once en^ gaged hand to hand, had difficulties of no ordi- nary nature to retreat; because the hindermost ranks not being exposed personally to the first slaughter, would not, and the foremost could not, fall back ; neither could the commanders disen- gage the line without a certainty of being routed. The fate of the day was therefore no longer within the control of the chief, and nothing but obstinate valour was left to decide the victory. Hence, with the stubborn character of the Jews, battles fought among themselves were particularly san- guinary; such, for example, as that in which Jeroboam king of Israel was defeated by Abijah of Judah (2 Chron. xiii. 3-17), wherein, if there be no error of copyists, there was a greater slaugh- ter than in ten such battles as that of Leipsic, although on that occasion three hundred and fifty thousand combatants were engaged for three suc- cessive days, provided with all the implements of modern destruction in full activity. Under such circumstances defeat led to irretrievable confusion, and where either parly possessed supe- riority in cavalry and chariots of war it would be materially increased ; but where the infantry alone had principally to pursue a broken enemy, that force, loaded with shields and preserving order, could overtake very few who chose to abandon their defensive armour, unless they were hemmed in by the locality. Sometimes a part of the army was posted in ambush, but this manoeuvre was most, commonly practised against the garrisons of cities (^losh. viii. 12; Judg. xx. 38). In the case of Abraham (Gen. xiv. 15), when he led a small body of his own people, suddenly collected, and falling upon the guard of the captives, released them, and recovered 936 WASHING OF FEET. the booty, it was a surprise, not an ambusli ; nor is it necessary to suppose that he fell in with the main army of the enemy. At a later period there is no doubt the Hebrews formed their ar- mies, in imitation of the Romans, into more than one line of masses, and modelled their military in- stitutions as near as possible upon the same system. Such were the instruments and the institutions of war, which the Hebrew people, as well as the nations which surrounded them, appear to have adopted; but in the conquest of the promised land, as regarded their enemies, the laws of war prescribed to them were, for purposes which we cannot now fully appreciate, more severe than in other cases. All the nations of antiquity were cruel to the vanquished, perhaps the Romans most of all : even the Egyptians, in ttie sculptures of their monuments, attest the same disposition — the males being very generally slaughtered, and the women and children sold for slaves. With regard to the spoil, except in the special case just referred to, the Hebrews divided it in part with those who remained at home, and with the Levit.es, and a portion was set apart as an obla- tion to the Lord (Num. xxxi. 50). This right of spoil and prey was a necessary consequence of military institutions where the army received no pay. ??&> shcdal, that is, the armour, clothes, money, and furniture, and i"l1p7D malkoch, prey, consisting of the captives and live stock, were collected into one general mass, and then distri- buted as stated above ; or, in the time of the kings, were shared in great part by the crown, which then, no doubt, took care to subsist the army and grant -military rewards. [Arms; Armour; Encampment; Engines; Forti- fications ; Standards] — C. H. S. WARS OF THE LORD. [Scp.ipture.] WASHING. [Ablution.] WASHING OF FEET. The custom of washing the feet held, in ancient times, a place among the duties of hospitality, being regarded as a mark of respect to the guest, and a token of humble and affectionate attention on the part of the entertainer. It had its origin in circumstances for the most part peculiar to the East. In general, in warm Oriental climes, cleanliness is of the highest consequence, particularly as a safeguard against the leprosy. The East knows nothing of the factitious distinctions which prevail in these countries between sanatory regulations and religious duties; but the one, as much as the other, is considered a part of that great system of obligations under which man lies towards God. What, therefore, the health demands, religion is at hand to sanction. Cleanliness is in conse- quence not next to godliness, but a part of godli- ness itself. As in this Oriental view may be found the origin and reason of much of what the Mosaic law lavs down touching clean and'unclean, so the practice of feet-washing in particular, which considerations of purity and personal propriety recommended, hospitality adopted and religion sanctioned. In temperate climes bathing is far too much neglected ; but in the East the heat of the atmos- phere and the dryness of the soil would render the ablution of the body peculiarly desirable, and make feet-washing no less grateful than salutary WASHING OF FEET. to the weary traveller. The foot, too, was lest protected than with us. In the earliest ages it probably had no covering; and the sandal worn in later times was little else than the sole of our shoe bound under the foot. Even this defence, however, was ordinarily laid aside on entering a house, in which the inmates were either barefoot or wore nothing but slippers. The washing of the feet is among the most ancient, as well as the most obligatory, of the rites of Eastern hospitality. From Gen. xviii. 4, xix. 2, it appears to have existed as early as the days of the patriarch Abraham. In Gen. xxiv. 32, also, ' Abraham's servant ' is provided with water to wash his feet, and the men's feet that were with him. The same custom is mentioned in Judg. xix. 21. From 1 Sam. xxv. 41, it appears that the rite was sometimes performed by servants and sons, as their appropriate duty, regarded as of a humble character. Hence, in addition to its being a token of affectionate regard, it was a sign of humility. The most remarkable instance is found in the 13th chapter of John's Gospel, where our Saviour is represented as washing the feet of his disciples, with whom he had taken supper. Minute parti- culars are given in the sacred narrative, which should be carefully studied, as presenting a true Oriental picture. From ver. 12, sq., it is clear that the act was of a symbolical nature; designed to teach, a fortiori, brotherly humility and good- will. If the master had performed for his scholars an act at once so lowly yet so needful, how much more were the disciples themselves bound to con- sider any Christian service whatever as a duty which each was to perform for the other. The principle involved in the particular act is, that love dignifies any service; that all high and proud thoughts are no less unchristian than selfish ; and that the sole ground of honour in the church of Christ is meek, gentle, and self-forgetting bene- volence. It was specially customary in the days of our Lord to wash before eating (Matt. xv. 2 ; Luke xi. 38). This was also the practice with the ancient Greeks, as may be seen in Iliad, x. 577. From Martial (Epig. iii. 50, 3, Deposui soleas), we see it was usual to lay aside the shoes, lest they should soil the linen. The usage is still found among the Orientals (Niebuhr, b. 51; Shaw, p. 202). But Jesus did not pay a scrupulous regard to the practice, and hence drew blame upon him- self from the Pharisees (Luke xi. 3S). In this our Lord was probably influenced by the supersti- tious abuses and foolish misinterpretations con- nected with washing before meat. For the same reason he may purposely have postponed the act of washing his disciples' feet till after supper, lest, while he was teaching a new lesson of humility, he might add a sanction to current and baneful errors [Ablution], Vessels of no great value appear to have been ordinarily kept and appropriated to the purpose. These vessels would gain nothing in estimation from the lowly, if not mean, office for which they were employed. Hence, probably, the explanation of Ps. lx. 8, ' Moab is my wash-pot.' Slaves, moreover, were commonly employed in washing the feet of guests. The passage, then, in effect declares the Moabites to be the meanest of God'fl instruments. WATCH. The union of affectionate attention and lowly Bervice is found indicated by feet-washing in 1 Tim. v. 10, where, among the signs of the widows that were to be honoured — supported, that is, at the expense of the church — this is given, if any one ' have washed the saints' feet.' Feet-washing (pedilavium) became, as might be expected, a part of the observances practised in the early Christian church. The real signification, however, was soon forgotten, or overloaded by su- perstitious feelings and mere outward practices. Traces of the practice abound in ecclesiastical history, and remnants of the abuse are still to be found, at least in the Romish church. The reader, who wishes to see an outline of these, may consult Siegel, Handbuch der ch. Alterthiimer, ii. 156, sq.— J. R. B. WATCH, in Hebrew •*1»B>, denoting 'to cnt into,' thence ' to impress on the mind,' ' to observe,' * to watch ;' or HID V, the original meaning of which is 'to look out,' thence 'to watch;' as in English? ' to keep a look out,' is a nautical phrase for ' to watch.' Watching must have been coeval with danger, and danger arose as soon as man became the enemy of man, or had to guard against the attacks of wild animals. Accordingly we find traces of the practice of watching in early portions of the Hebrew annals. Watching must have been carried to some degree of completeness in Egypt, for we learn from Exod. xiv. 24, that the practice had, at the time of the Exodus, caused the night to be divided into different watches or portions, mention being made of the 'morning watch.' Compare 1 Sam. xi. 11. In the days of the Judges (vii. 19) we find 'the middle watch' mentioned. See Luke xii. 38. At a later period Isaiah plainly intimates (xxi. 5, 6), that there was a watch-tower in Jerusalem, and that it was customary on extraordinary occasions to set a watchman. Watchmen were, however, even at an earlier day, customarily employed in the metropolis, and their post was at the gates (2 Sam. xviii. 24, sq. ; 2 Kings ix. 17, sq. ; Ps. cxxvii. 1; Prov. viii. 31), where they gave signals and information, either by their voice or with the aid of a trumpet (Jer. vi. 17; Ezek. xxxiii. 6). At night watchmen were accustomed to perambulate the city (Cant. iii. 3; v. 7). In the New Testament we find mention made of the second, the third, and the fourth watch (Luke xii. 38; Matt. xiv. 25). The space of the na- tural night, from the setting to the rising of the sun, the ancient Jews divided into three equal parts of four hours each. But the Romans, imi- tating the Greeks, divided the night into four watches (yigiliai\ and the Jews, from the time they came under subjection to the Romans, following this Roman custom, also divided the night into four watches, each of which consisted of thiee hours: these four periods Mark (xiii. 35) has distinguished by the terms ia, irpu'il Buxtorf, Lex. Talmud; Fis- cherus, Frolics, de Vitiis Lex. N. Test.'). The terms by which the old Hebrew division of the night was characterized are, 1. the first watcli, k^fO JTnOK'K, beginning of the watches (Lam. ii. 19); 2. 'the middle watch,' HJlSTin n"OJ>N (Judg. vii. 19); 3. 'the morning watcli,' mD'J'X ~\p2n (Deut. xiv. 21; 1 Sam. xi. 11). The WATER. 937 first extended from sun-set to our ten o'clock, the second from ten at night till two in the morn- ing, and the third from that hour till sun-rise (Ideler, Chronol. i. 486).— J. R. B. WATER. No one can read far in the sacred Scriptures without being reminded of the vast importance of water to the Hebrews in Palestine, and indeed in every country to which their history introduces us ; and more particularly in the deserts in which they wandered on leaving Egypt, as well as those into which they before or afterwards sent their flocks for pasture. A subject of such importance necessarily, therefore, claims considerable attention in a Biblical Cyclopaedia, The natural waters have already been disposed of in the articles Palestine and River ; and in Cistern and Jerusalem notice has been taken of some artificial collections. It now remains to complete the subject, under the present head, by the addition of such details as may not have been comprehended under the articles referred to. It has been shown that the absence of small rivers, through the want of rain in summer, renders the people of the settled country, as well as of the deserts, entirely dependent upon the water derived from wells, and that preserved in cisterns and reservoirs, during the summer and autumn ; and gives an importance unknown in our humid cli- mate to the limited supply thus secured, With respect to reservoirs, the articles to which reference has been made, will supply all the in- formation necessary, except that we may avail ourselves of this opportunity of noticing the so- called Pools of Solomon, near Bethlehem, which being supplied from fountains, furnish some cha- racteristics which distinguish them from cisterns, and deserve attention as ancient works of pro- bably Hebrew art. The tradition which ascribes them to Solomon seems to be founded on the passage in which the writer of Ecclesiastes (usu- ally supposed to be Solomon) speaks of his un- dertakings: ' I made me gardens and orchards, and I planted in them trees of all kinds of fruits; I made me pools of water, to water therewith the wood that bringeth forth trees' (Eccles. ii. 5, 6). To these allusion is also supposed to be made in Canticles (iv. 12): ' A garden en- closed is my sister, my spouse ; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed.' In short we have here a small secluded valley, obviously the site of an ancient garden, with reservoirs of water supplied by a ' shut up' fountain. Hence the valley itself goes among old travellers by the name of Hortus Conclusus. It is also conceived to be the spot mentioned by Josephus, who says: 'There was about fifty furlongs from Jerusalem a certain place called Etham, very pleasant in fine gardens, and abounding in rivulets of water, whither Solo- mon was wont to go forth in the morning, sitting on high in his chariot' (Antiq. 8. 7). Maundrell (p. 8i3) thinks that the pools were very probably made by Solomon ; but ' for the gardens." he says, ' one may safely affirm that if Solomon made them in the rocky ground which is now assigned for them, he demonstrated greater power and wealth in finishing his design, than he did wisdom in choosing the place for it.' But Hasselquist (p. 145), a better judge, says: 'The place will well admit that Solomon mighl have formed a garden here though it is not by nature an agreeable situ- ation, being in a bottom ; but j^rhaps this great 938 WATER, prince might choose to improve nature by art, as many other potentates have done.' The fact is, that a valley kept always verdant by the singular abundance of water, afforded peculiar advantages in this country for a pleasure-ground. Mariti re- marks (Voyage, ii. 388) : 'Nature has still pre- served its original fertility to the valley of Hortus Conclusus. Although but little cultivated, the soil still produces a tolerable quantity of cotton and various kinds of grain. There are also seen fine plantations of fruit-trees, affording the most juicy fruits of the country. Various flowers and many fragrant plants grow there naturally at all seasons, among which are thyme, rosemary, marjorum, sage, absinthium, persil, rue, ranun- culuses, and anemones.' De Breves (Voyage, ]s. IPO) long bore similar testimony, though he was there in the very unfavourable month of July; he describes the valley as ' always green," and, besides the plants just named, cultivated by nature's own kindly hand, he adds oranges, citrons, and pomegranates to the fruits which grow there. Zuallart (Voyage, iv. 3) says that several species of rare plants were found in the valley, and seems to insinuate the probability that they had been propagated from exotic plants which Solo- mon introduced into his gardens. Of the pools a very good description is given by Br. Wilde (Narrative, ii. 420) : 'At the ex- tremity of the valley we arrived at three enor- mous tanks, sunk in the side of a sloping ground, and which from time immemorial have been considered to be the workmanship of Solomon ; and certainly they are well worthy the man to whom tradition has assigned their construction. These reservoirs are each upon a distinct level, one above the other, and are capable of holding an immense body of water. They are so con- structed, both by conduits leading directly from one another, anil by what may be termed anas- tamosing branches, that when the water in the upper one has readied to a certain height, the surplus flows off into the one below it, and so on into the third. These passages were obstructed and the whole of the cisterns were out of repair when we visited them, so that there was hardly any water in the lowest, while the upper one was nearly full of good pure water. Small aqueducts lead from each of tliese cisterns to a main one that conducts the water to Jerusalem. They are all lined with a thick layer of hard whitish ce- ment, and a flight of steps leads to the bottom of each, similar to some of those in the holy city. Where the lowest cistern joins the valley of Etham it is formed by an embankment of earth, and has a sluice to draw off the water occasionally, A short distance from the upper pool I descended into a narrow stone chamber, through which the water passes from the neighbouring spring on its course to the cisterns. This likewise has a tra- ditionary tale to tell ; it is said to be the sealed fountain to which allusion is made in the 4th and 5th chapters of the Canticles. From an ex- amination of this place, it appeared to me that several springs empty themselves into these reser- voirs, which are partly cut out of the solid rock, and partly built with masonry. ' Nigh to the upper part there is a large square castle, apparently of an order of architecture be- longing to the Christian era ; and in all proba- bility so placed to guard these waterworks during WATER. the period of the holy war, for we know to what extremities some of the early crusaders were re- duced from the different wells being poisoned by the enemy upon their approach to Jerusalem. ' These fountains having been already de- scribed by Maundrell, Pococke, and others, I shall not dwell longer upon them, except to men- tion two circumstances, that it appears extraordi- nary they have not been adverted to by former travellers ; the first is, their great similarity to the fountains assigned to Solomon at Ras-el-Ain, near Tyre; and the fact of both being natural springs, that were pent up so as to raise the water they contained to the level of its final destination. The second is, that these springs were originally collected into one stream, which must then have formed a considerable rivulet, and running through this valley, finally discharged its waters into the Asphaltine lake. ' On our return to the city we followed the track of the aqueduct as far as Bethlehem, and after- wards crossed if in several places on the road. It is very small, but the water runs in it with con- siderable rapidity, as we could perceive by the open places left in it here and there. From the very tortuous course that tin's conduit takes in following the different sinuosities of the ground, being sometimes above and sometimes beneath the surface, it is difficult to persuade oneself that it does not run up hill, as many have sup- posed. Finally, it crosses over the valley of Re- phaim, on a series of arches, to the north of the lower pool of Gihon, and winding round the southern horn of Zion, is lost to view in the ruins of the city. It very probably supplied the pool of Bethesda, after having traversed a course of cer- tainly not less than from thirteen to fifteen miles.' To this very clear description we have only to add the measurements of Dr. Robinson (Bibl. Researches, ii. 165) : — Loioer Pool. — Length, 582 feet; breadth at the east end, 207 feet; at the west end, 148 feet; depth at the east end, 50 feet, of which 6 feet water (in the month of May). Middle Pool.— Distance above lower pool, 248 feet; length, 423 feet; breadth at the east end, '.250 feet; at the west end, 160 feet; depth at the east end, 39 feet, of which 14 feet water. Upper Pool. — Distance above middle pool, 160 feet; length, 380 feet; breadth at the east end, 236 feet ; at the west end, 229 feet ; depth at east end, 25 feet, of which 15 feet water. Lord Nugent (Lands Classical and Sacred, ii. 11) makes the pools a few feet larger each way, but admits that Robinson's measurement may probably have been more exact than his own. With respect to wells, their importance is very great, especially in the desert, where the means of forming them are deficient, as well as the sup- ply of labour necessary for such undertakings, which, after all, are not always rewarded by the discovery of a supply of water. Hence in such situations, and indeed in the settled countries also, the wellsare of the utmost value, and the wa- ter in most cases is very frugally used ( Num. xx. 17-19 ; Deut, ii. 6, 28 ; Job xxii. 7). It is, how- ever, not merely the value of the well itself, but certain other considerations that explain the con- tests about wells which we find in the histories of Abraham and Isaac (Gen. xxi. 25-31; xxvi. 15-22). Here we see that the people of the country WATER. strenuously contested the right of the patriarchs to the wells which they digged, and even went so far as to fill up again (instead of leaving open for their own use) the wells which Abiaham had opened. The fact is, however, that, at the present day, to dig a well at a station remote from a sup- ply of water, is the most difficult and arduous operation which the chief of a tribe or clan under- takes ; and the henefits of such a work are so highly appreciated, that the property in the well becomes vested in him and in his heirs for ever. While his clan is encamped near it, no persons not be- longing to it can draw water from the well without his ltave. This right exists, however, only on the understanding that the well is maintained in good condition ; for if it gets out of repair, or is choked up, and remains in this state for any length of time, the property in it lapses to the person or tribe by whom it is restored to a serviceable con- WATER. 939 dition. This is the law of the desert ; but as its application to the Scriptural questions respecting the property of wells is important, we may be al- lowed to introduce from the Pictorial History of Palestine (p. 61) a passage bearing strongly on the subject : ' Abraham had digged a well near his encampment, and of the use of this the " ser- vants " (probably the herdsmen) of Abimelech had violently deprived him. As men seldom act without some reason, or show of reason, which is deemed satisfactory to themselves, it may seem likely that Abimelech's people doubted the right of Abraham to apply the law of the desert to the common-lands of an appropriated territory, and to claim the exclusive possession of (he well lie had dug in such a land. If their view had been just, however, it could only have entitled them to a share of the water, and not have justified them in assuming that exclusive possession which they 538. [Solomon's Pools.] denied to the party at whose expense the benefit had been secured. But taking into account some transactions of rather later date, we incline to think that the cause of all the differences about wells which we read of in the history of Abraham and of Isaac, lay deeper than this account sup- poses, and must be sought in a country more similarly circumsianced. than the open deserts, to that in which the patriarch was at (his time so- journing. The best analogy is offered in Persia. There all waste lands — that is, all lands which are uncultivable from wanting the means of irrigation — are called ' God's lands ;' and although the king is regarded as the general proprietor of the soil, such lands are free fur any uses to which they can be applied ; and whoever procures (he means of irrigation becomes the proprietor of the land which he thus renders cultivable. Now, as among the Immemorially ancient usages of the East, none are more ancient than those which relate to the occupation of land, it is not too much to suppose that a similar usage to this existed in the time of Abraham; and, if so, it is easy to conclude that the anxiety of the Philistines about the wells dug by Abraham arose from the apprehension that by the formation of such wells he would he understood to create a lien on the lands in which they lay, and would acquire an indefeasible right of occu- pation, or rather of possession ; and it might seem to them inconvenient that so powerful a clan should acquire such a right in the sod of so small a territory as thai which belonged to them. Hence their care, when Abraham afterwards left their part of the country, to till up the wells which he had digged ; and hence, also, the renewed and more bitter strife with Isaac when he, on arriving there, proceeded to clear out those wells and to dig new ones himself. That Isaac also pursued cultiva- 940 WATER. tion to some extent in the lands for which he had thus secured the means of irrigation, is a remark- able corroboration of the view we now take, as he certainly might, in this way, but we know not how he could otherwise acquire such a proprietary right as could alone entitle him to cultivate the soil. 539. [Well and Bucket at Jaffa.] ' Abimelech, in reply to the complaint of Abra- ham respecting the well, declared that the con- duct of his servants had nut been sanctioned by him, and that, indeed, this was the first time he had heard anything of the matter ; and he made no objection to the proposal of Abraham, that the recognition of his (the patriarch's) right to the well should form a part of the proposed covenant.' This proposal, thus represented as the sole matter for which Abraham himself took care to provide in a solemn engagement with the king of the Philistines, is, perhaps, as striking an indication of the supreme importance of water in those Eastern countries as can anywhere be found. Both parties then swore to the covenant, the terms of which have thus been stated ; and as a memorial of the transaction, and in particular of his acknow- ledged right to the well, the patriarch gave it the name of Beer-sheba, the well of the oath. This imposition of commemorative names upon places was the principal of various methods which were resorted to in these earliest ages to perpetuate the memory of events and contracts, in the absence of those written documents which were afterwards found move suitable for such purposes.' It appears in Scripture that the wells were some- times owned by a number of persons in common, and that flocks were brought to them for watering on appointed days, in an order previou|ly arranged. A well was often covered with a great stone, which being removed, the person descended some steps to the surface of the water, and on his return poured into a trough that which he had brought up (Gen. xxiv. 11-15; xxix. 3-10 ; Exod. ii. 16; Judg. v. 11). There is, in fact, no intimation of any other way of drawing water from wells in Scripture. But as this could only be applicable in cases where the well was not deep, we must assume that they had the use of those contrivances which are still employed in the East, and some of which are known from the Egyptian monu- ments to have been very ancient. This conclusion is the more probable as the wells in Palestine are mostly deep (Prov. xx. 5 ; John iv. 11). Jacob's well near Shechem is said to be 120 feet deep, with only fifteen feet of water in it (Mauiidrell, Journey, March 24) : and the labour of drawing from so deep a well probably originated the first reluctance of the woman of Samaria to draw water for Jesus : 'Sir, 1hou hast nothing to draw with, and ihe well is deep.' From this deeper kind of well the water is drawn by hand in a leathern bucket not too WEASEL. heavy, sometimes by a windlass, but oftener, when the water is only of moderate depth, by the shadoof, which is the most common and simple of all the machines used in the East for raising water, whether from wells, reservoirs, or rivers. This consists of a tapering lever unequally balanced upon an upright body variously constructed, and from the smaller end of which is suspended the bucket by a rope. This when lowered into the well, is raised full of water by the weight of the heavier end. By this contrivance the manual power is applied in lowering the bucket into the "well, for it rises easily, and it is only necessary to regulate the ascent. This machine is in use under slight modifications from the Baltic to the Yellow Sea, and was so from the most remote ages to the present day. The specimen in the annexed wood- cut occurs in the neighbourhood of Jaffa. The water of wells, as well as of fountains, was by the Hebrews called 'living water,' translated ' running water,' and was highly esteemed (Lev. xiv. 5 ; Num. xix. 17). It was thus distinguished from, water preserved in cisterns and reservoirs. WEAPONS. [Arms.] WEASEL (1% choled). Although, under the head Mole, we have given choled as its He- brew synonyme, yet such is the vagueness of Oriental denominations, and the necessity of no- ticing certain species which, from their importance, cannot well be supposed to have been altogether disregarded in the Bible, that in this place a few words descriptive of the species of Viverridce and Mustelidce, known to reside in and near Pales- tine, and supposed to be collectively designated by the term tzigim, may not be irrelevant. They appear, both anciently and among our- selves, collected into a kind of group, under an impression that they belong to the feline family • nence we, like the ancients, still use the words civet- cat, tree-cat, pole-cat, &c. ; and, in reality, a consi- derable num ber of the species have partially retrac- tile claws, the pupils of the eyes being contractile like, those of cats, of which they even bear the spotted and streaked liveries. All such naturally have arboreal habits, and from their low lengthy forms are no less disposed to burrow ; but many of them, chiefly in other hemispheres, are excellent swimmers. One of these species, allied to, if not the same as, genetta barbara, is the Thela JElan, by Bochart described as having ' various colours, and as being spotted like a paid. In Syria it is called sephka, in Arabia zebzeb, and lives by hunting birds and shaphans. There are besides, in the same region, the nimse, ferret or pole- cat (p-utorius vulgaris), for these two are not specifically distinct; fert-el-heile, the Weasel (niustela vulgaris Africana), differing from ours chiefly in its superior size and darker colours. A paradoxurus, identical with or nearly allied to P. typus, occurs in Arabia ; for it seems these animals are found wherever there are palmiferx, the date-palm in particular being a favourite resi- dence of the species. Two or three varieties, or perhaps species, of nems occur in Egypt solely ; for the name is again generical in the Arabian dialects, and denotes the ichneumon. Arabia Proper has several other animals, not clearly distinguished, though belonging to the families here noticed ; but which of these are the sun- giab and the simur, or the alphanez of Iba WEAVING. WEIGHTS AND. MEASURES. 941 Omar-ben- Abdulbar, quoted by Bochart, is un- determined; albeit they evidently belong to the 540. [Paradoxurus Typus — the Palm-Martin.] tribes of vermin mammals of that region, ex- cepting as regards the last mentioned, now known to be a kind of miniature fox (niegalotis zerda, Ham. Smith), or fennec of Bruce, who never- theless confounded it with paradoxurus typus, or an allied species which equally frequents palm- trees : but \he fennec does not climb. It is equally impossible to point out the cats, tree-cats, and civet-cats noticed by the poet Nemesianus, who was of African birth ; or by the Arabian Damir, •who makes no further distinctive mention of them [Cat].— C. H. S. WEAVING is too necessary an art not to have existed in the early periods of the world. It ap- pears, indeed, to have in all nations come into existence with the first dawnings of civilization. The Egyptians had, as might be expected, already made considerable progress therein when the Israelites tarried amongst them ; and in this, as well as in many other of the arts of life, they became the instructors of that people. Textures of cotton and of flax were woven by them ; .whence we read of the ' vestures of fine linen ' with which Pharaoh arrayed Joseph (Gen. xli. 42) ; terms which show that the art of fabricating cloth had been success- fully cultivated. Indeed Egypt was celebrated among the Hebrews for its manufacturing skill. Thus Isaiah (xix. 9) speaks of ' them that work in fine flax, and them that weave net-works.' That these fabrics displayed taste as well as skill, may be inferred from Ezekiel xxvii. 7, ' Fine linen with broidered work from Egypt.' So in Prov. vii. 16, ' I have decked my couch witli coverings of tapestry, with fine linen of Egypt.' If, how- ever, the Hebrews learnt the art of weaving in Egypt, they appear to have made progress therein from their own resources, even before they entered Palestine ; for having before them the prospect of a national establishment in that, land, they would naturally turn their attention to the arts of life, and had leisure, as well as occasion, during their sojourn of forty years in the wilderness, for prac- tising those arts ; and certainly we cannot but un- derstand the words of Moses to imply that the skill spoken of in Exod. xxxv. 30, sq., came from a Hebrew, and not a foreign impulse. Among the Israelites, weaving, together with spinning, was for the most, part in the hands of females (Prov. xxxi. 13, 19) ; nor did persons of rank and dis- tinction consider the occupation mean (Exod. xxxv. 25 ; 2 Kings xx.iii. 7). But as in Egypt males exclusively, so in Palestine men conjointly with women, wove (Exod. xxxv. 35). From 1 Chron. iv. 21, it may be inferred, that there were in Israel a class of master-manufacturers. The loom, as was generally the case in the an- cient world, was high, requiring the weaver to stand at his employment. Connected with the loom, are 1. J~IX, the shut- tle (Job vii. 6) ; 2. DTlN "l^D, the weaver's beam (1 Sam. xvii. 7; 2 Sam. xxi. 19); 3. 3"lXn HJV, a weaver's pin (Judg. xvi. 14). The degree of skill to which the Hebrews attained, it is difficult to measure; probably, as Egypt and Babylon already supplied the finer specimens of workmanship, the Hebrews would content them- selves with a secondary degree of excellence ; but many passages conduce to prove that art presidne piece throughout so as to need no making, were held in high repute: whence the Jews have a tradition, that no needle was employed on the clothing of the high- priest, each piece of which was of one continued texture. This notion throws light on the. language used by John xix. 23 — ' the coat was without seam,' — words that are ox- plained by those which follow, and which Wet- stein regards as a gloss — 'woven from the lop throughout.' This seamless coat, ^itojv '6.ppa, weight in the ab- stract, the usual weight among not only the Hebrews, but the Persians also — cn/cAos. It varies in its import, and is rendered shekel by our trans- lators, who have thus merely preserved the ori- ginal word. 4. J?p2, i a. bekah' (Exod. xxxviii. 26), is from a root which signifies ' to divide ;' hence a moiety or half, 'half a shekel ' (Gen. xxiv. 22). The word in this application is found only in the Pentateuch. 5. i°n3, properly a grain, or, in par- ticular, the bean, or St. John's bread, carob ; hence, the smallest weight. The word i3 retained in the English translation ; thus in Exod. xxx. 12, ' a shekel is twenty gerahs.' It is obvious that no determinate and satisfactory unit in a system of weights can be gained from a changeable object like a grain. This difficulty, however, is not peculiar to the Hebrews. We have our grains, and the Greeks had their oboli. In order to determine the relations which the ~D3, talent, bore to the smaller weights and coins, we may have recourse to those passages which speak of the formation of the sanctuary. Ac- cording to Exod. xxx. 13, every Israelite above twenty years of age had to pay the poll-tax of half a shekel as a contribution to the sanctuary. Exod. xxxviii. 26, tells us that this tax had to be paid by 603,550 men. The sum amounted to 100 talents and 1775 sacred shekels (Exod. xxxviii. 25), which are equal to 6U3,5oO half, or 301,775 sacred shekels. Accordingly the talent contained 3000 sacred shekels ; for by deducting from 301,775 shekels 1,775 shekels 1 50 1 100 2 1 1000 20 10 we get 300,000 shekels to be divided among 100 talents, making each talent equal to 3000 sacred sjiekels. The value of the sacred shekel in regard to the gerah is determined by Exod. xxx. 13 ; Lev. xxvii. 25 ; Num. iii. 47 ; Ezek. xlv. 20, to be twenty gerahs; the half-shekel, bekah, is equal to ten gerahs. The determination of the relative value of the WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. hianeh is not easy, for it depends on a passage which in the Hebrew cannot be understood (Ezek. xlv. 12), 'Twenty shekels, five and twenty shekels, fifteen shekels shall be your maneh,' but which in the Septuagint (Cod. Alex.) seems to state that a maneh was equal to fifty sacred shekels. Thus there ensues this table : — Kikkar 1 Maneh 60 Shekel 3000 Bekah 6000 Gerah 60,000 1000 20 10 1 The use of the precious metals as a medium of exchange in commerce, dates back at a very early period of history. A common, recognised, and invariable standard of value, by means of which goods, instead of being exchanged in barter, might be bought and sold, is indispensable in any but a primitive state of trade. Accordingly Abraham buys a field by the intervention of silver. But this silver or gold must have an acknowledged value, else it cannot answer its purposes ; there must also be a means of ascertaining easily that the professed and ostensible is the real value of any particular portion. Hence coins which bear 'the image and superscription of Caesar,' or some token to assure traders that the piece of money is right both in quality and in quantity. In early periods these tokens would obviously be imperfect. The quantity was ascertained by weight, the quality by inspection. If now we inquire how soon the Hebrews possessed money of a fixed value, we find Abraham himself buying a field for ' four hundred shekels of silver current with the mer- chant,' which value was ascertained by weight. Here the shekel is a recognised ordinary unit. This, at least, is clear. The passage may also imply that the purchase money was paid, not in silver bars, but in silver pieces, shekels ; the weighing being intended to ascertain that the shekels were of the proper value, which was not guaranteed by the fixed and invariable characters of a coin. If we pass on to the time of Moses, we find pieces of money of a fixed and recognised value in circulation among the Israelites, and are led to see that the amount of the circulating me- dium must have been very considerable. In the historical and prophetic writings of a later period mention is made of the shekel and of other pieces of money, so that their use in commerce before the Babylonish captivity is placed beyond a doubt. To term these pieces of money coin might be to mislead, since the word coin refers the mind to the operations of a government mint; but it is clear that as pieces of money of a fixed and recognised value they must have been of a certain size, and borne some distinctive marks. Hence ihe only difference between those pieces of money and coin lies in the quarter whence they came — private or public, — and in the sanction and authority which they accordingly carried with them. The Talmud refers coin, strictly so called, to the ante-exilian period. What the cir- culating medium among the Hebrews was made uj) of, may be inferred from what has gone before : there was the shekel ; also the sacred shekel, if this latter is to be distinguished from the former; then the half-shekel, or bekah, which may be a name for the ordinary shekel ; there was also a quarter-shekel, 'the fourth part of a shekel of WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. silver' (1 Sam. ix. 8) ; and, finally, the smallest silver coin, namely the gerah. From the passage in Samuel just cited it apppars clear that those jrieces of money were used in the ordinary com- merce of life, and we have previously seen that money was demanded in the service of religion. In 1 Sam. ii. 36, a word occurs (miW) dis- guised in the English Version, under the phrase 'a piece of silver,' which may have been the current name for the coin (hat, from its weight, was called a gerah. It is thus evident that there prevailed among the Hebrews at an early period, a very considerable and much employed metallic circulating medium. Of these coins the shekel is worth twenty gerahs ; but there are three shekels mentioned in the Old Testament — the ordinary shekel, the shekel of the sanctuary (Exod. xxx. 13), and the shekel after the king's weight (2 Sam. xiv. 26). Are these three different kinds? or are they different descriptions for the same coin ? — thus, is the first, shekel, the common name? the second, sacred shekel, the coin according to the ecclesiastical standard? the third, king's shekel, the same according to the regal standard, the function having passed from the priests to the monarch? No satisfactory answer to these questions presents itself, and our space forbids more discussion. But how are we to gain a unit for estimating the worth of the ante-exilian coins, of which not one has come down to us? Let us notice one or two facts connected with the Jewish post-exiliau coins. During the exile the Israelites became intimately acquainted with the money-system which prevailed in Babylon. Afrer their return home, and during the Persian dominion, we find, mention made of a Persian coin, }1J3D~n, the darick (Ezra ii. 69 ; viii. 27 ; Neh. vii. 70), which is Englished by 'drachm,' in the Greek dpax^V- The coin was so named after Darius, son of Hys- taspes. These coins were made according to a foot, which was nearly the same as the Attic, and the standard weight of each was 1644 Parisian grains. In the Greek period, under the Plole- mies and Seleucidse, the Jews used the coins of these princes (1 Mace. xv. 5, G) ; but when they gained a short national independence under the Maccabees, they coined many of their own, as, for instance, in the first year of Simon Maccabaeus. Coins of Simon and his followers are in existence, and have been carefully studied. Confining our remarks to the coins of Simon Maccaba?us, we mention the following ascertained facts : they bear the old Hebrew or Samaritan characters, and not the square letter of the modern Hebrew, which is derived from the former under the in- fluence of tachygraphy and calligraphy. These coins are exclusively of silver. The shekels aud half-shekels belong to the first and second years of Simon's reign. Doubts prevail as to the genuine- ness of ihe coins bearing date the third and fourth years of his rule, but the shekels of his third year are admitted to be genuine. The coins of the first year bear the inscription Ht^lp DX'1*V, ' Holy Jerusalem.' The weight of the shekel varies some- what. The heaviest weighs 271^ Parisian grains; the greater part from 266 to 268 Parisian grains. The standard may approximatively be taken at 274 Parisian grains, to whicli Bbckli is led by com- parison with other systems. Here, then, we have WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. 943 the weight of the shekel ; though we cannot say with certainty that it remained the same in every period of the earlier history, yet this become very probable when the retentiveness of customs which characterizes the East is taken^nto account. Be- sides, the change introduced by the Maccabees was a restoration of the old constitution under in- fluences which would cause the past to be rigidly reproduced. The shekel in the Pentateuch and Ezekiel is found equal to twenty gerahs. What shekel? The inscription ' Holy Jerusalem' makes it likely that it was the sacred shekel. We thus, then, arrive at these conclusions : — Gerah 13'7 Par. grains. Bekah, or common shekel , , 137 Sacred shekel , , 274 Maneh , , 13,700 Talent , , 822,000 These conclusions find corroboration by being compared with the weights of other Eastern na- tions, and the whole inquiry authorizes the in- ference that, one general system prevailed in the more civilized nations, being propagated from the East, from an early period of history. In the New Testament (Matt. xvii. 24) the Temple-tax is a didrachm ; from other sources we know that this ' tribute" was half a shekel ; aud in verse 27 the stater is- payment of this tax for two> persons. Now the stater — a very common silver Attic coin, the tetradrachm — weighed 328-S Pa- risian grains : thus not considerably surpassing the sacred shekel ("274 Parisian grains). Are we, then, to hold the stater of the New Testament for an Attic tetradraclrm ? If so, its agreement with the- sacred shekel is striking. There is reason in tl>e passage of Matthew and in early writers for regarding the two as the same. And the Attic tetradrachm sank from its original weight of 328"8 to 308 and 304. This approximation must have gone on increasing, for under the empire a drachm was equal to a Roman denarius, which in the time of Tiberius weighed 69-8 Parisian grains. Four denarii were equal to 279 Parisian grains; so that, if the denarius is regarded as an Attic drachm, the sacred shekel may be correctly termed a tetradrachm. Y\ im this Josephns agrees (Antiq. iii. 8. 2), who says that the shekel (ctikAos), a Hebrew coin, contains four Attic drachms. Names of measures of length are for the most part taken from members of the human body, which offered themselves, so to say, naturally for the purpose, and have generally been used in all times and places in instances where minute accuracy was not demanded. And though, within certain limits, these measures have ap- proached to sameness — for the human fool, to take it as an example, may have been slightly over or somewhat under twelve inches, while it never in any generation extended to twenty-four inches — yet was there scope also for considerable latitude and diversity, and nothing like a system of normal measures can hence be gained, unless means are found for determining the average length of any one of these measures, or tor fixing the length which it was intended to represent. At the basis of the Hebrew system of measures of length lies i"lDN, cubit, the fore arm, or the distance from the point of the elbow to the tip of the third linger. This is a word supplied by no 944 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. Hebrew root, but derived from the Egyptian Mahe, signifying ' cubit,' which, with the same meaning, is found in the Coptic in the form Mahi, and with the prefix, Ammahi. A longer measui-p, applied in measuring build- ings, was the H2p (Ezek. xli. 8; Apoc. xxi. 15), rendered in the common version ' reed,' more pro- perly 'rod.' In Judg. iii. 16, Ehud's sword (not ' dagger') is said to have been in length TDJ. As he wore this weapon under his mantle, the length of this measure may be approximatively conjectured. Smaller measures of length were, 1. fi"lT, from a root meaning to expand (the hand), hence a 'span.' This word is found in the Egyptian, which seems to have borrowed it from the Shemitic. 2. nSD, the breadth of the hand (1 Kings vii. 26 ; Exod. xxv. 25). 3. jmft, the finger (Jerem. Iii. 21), the denomination of the smallest measure of length. Thus we have the breadth of the finger, of the hand, of the span — the length from the tip of the little finger to the point of the thumb, — and the cubit. In order to ascertain the length of these, we take the cubit as our standard. The longer measure, reed or rod, consists, in Ezelc. xli. 8, of six great cubits, that is, of six such cubits as were a hand's breadth longer than the common cubit (Ezek. xl. 5 ; xliii. 13). The relation of zeretb, span; tepach, hand's breadth : and ezba, finger, is not given in the Old Testament. By com- paring together Exod. xxv. 10, with Josephus (Antiq. iii. 6. 5), we find the span equal to half a cubit, for the length, which Moses terms two cubits and a half, Josephus designates five spans. The relation of tepach (hand's breadth) and ezba (finger) to ammah (cubit) appears from their several names and their import in other systems. The hand's breadth is four fingers ; the span contains three times the breadth of the hand, or twelve fingers. This is the view which the Rabbins uniformly take. We find a similar system among the Greeks, who reckoned in the cubit twenty-four fingers, six hands' breadths, and two spans. The same was the case with the Egyptians. But the ammah itself is not a fixed unit, for in Ezekiel we have found a cubit which was a hand's breadth longer than the common cubit. The subject has been amply discussed, and opi- nions are various [Cubit]. We may conclude that there were two cubits, the sacred of seven, the common of six hands' breadth ; and thus these two cubits were to each other as seven to six, that is, the sacred cubit held seven hands' breadths of the ordinary cubit of six hands' breadth. There is no reason, however, to think that the sacred cubit was divided into seven parts. It was the older, and would be divided according to the duodecimal method which pre- vails in this matter, and accordingly would contain six palms and twenty-four fingers, only that its fingers and palms were greater than those of the ordinary cubit. This is proved by the express statements of the Talmud, according to which the sacred, as well as the common cubit, contained six hands' breadths. As we have no unit of measure given us in the Scriptures, nor preserved to us in the remains of any Hebrew building, and as neither the Rabbins nor Josephus afford the information we want, WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. we have no resource but to apply for information to the measures of length used in other countries. We go to the Egyptians. The longer Egyptian cubit contained about 234*333 Parisian lines, the shorter about 204-8. According to this, the Hebrew measures of length were these : — Sacred cubit . 234*333 Parisian lines. The span . . 117-166 ,, The palm . . 39-055 ,, The finger . . 9-7637 ,, Common cubit 204-8 ,, The span . . 102-4 ,, The palm . . 34-133 ,, The finger . . 8-533 ,, The two sets of measures, one for dry, another for liquid things, rest on the same system, as appears from the equality of the standard for dry goods, namely the ephah, with that for liquids, namely bath. The difference in the names is merely accidental. ItSR (homer), denoting a heap, is the name for the largest measure of dry goods (Lev. xxvii. 16; Num. xi. 32; Ezek. xl v. 11). In later times the homer was replaced by the cor (Ezek. xlv. 14), which is found among the Hellenists in the form itopos. In Hosea iii. 2, the "]]")?, ' half homer,' is mentioned, which the Seventy render by ri/xioKopos, and the Vulgate by ' corus dimidius.' Another measure is HB^N, which comes from an Egyptian root denoting ' to measure.' HND, found in the Septuagint, the New Testament, and Josephus, under the form (toltov, is of uncertain origin. The Seventy trans- late it sometimes by simply /xeTpof, 'measure' (Gen. xviii. 6), and the dual form by 81/j.erpov (2 Kings vii. 1). 11D]), in its derivation and meaning resembles "lion, but denotes a much smaller mass. 3p (cab), the hollow, the bowl, was adopted by the Greeks as kg/Dos. These are measures for dry goods. We now pass on to liquid measures. 1. ]"Q, is from a root which denotes ' to determine,' ' to measure.' It is put in relation to the homer in Ezek. xlv. 11, 14; whence we learn that the bath was applied to fluids. 2. JTl, is retained by the Seventy in the forms efy, Xv, vv. The word is of Egyptian origin. 3. jp Q°g\ is a word found only in the Mosaic law regarding the cleansing of the leper (Lev. xv. 12, 'the log of oil'). It is refer- able to an Arabic root which denotes 'to press into.' The feminine form is found in the Syriac, with the meaning of bowl. Log had the same import as cab. In order to determine the relations between these measures, we take the ephah and bath, which, in Ezek. xlv. 11, are declared to be of one measure. They each contained the tenth part of a homer (Ezek. xlv. 11, 14); thus the relation of the homer to the bath and the ephah belongs to a decimal division (Exod. xvi. 3&). The Seah, pirpov : the translation given by the Septuagint of the Hebrew in Exod. xvi. 36, is as follows : — rb Be yop.bp rb SeKaroy tGiv rpioiiv /xerpu;/ rfv, — ' the homer is the tenth part of three measures' (-fe). With the Septuagint and the Targum the ephah was equal to three seahs (comp. Matt. xiii. 33, crdra rpia, with Gen. xviii. 6, and Jerome on the former place). The same relation is derived from a passage in Josephus {Antiq. ix. 4. 5), where the contents of the seah are WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. given as one Italian modius and a half, for the modius held sixteen sextarii, and the ephah, ac- cording to Josephus, twenty-two sexfarii ; a modius and a half is, therefore, the third part of the ephah. The Rabbins entirely concur in these views. The cab, according to Josephus (Antiq. ix. 4. 4; comp. 2 Kings vi. 25), is equal to four xestse, for one-fourth of a cab be translates by £ecrT?jy, seventy-two of which make a fj.^rp-r]-rr]t, a measure ; eighteen cabs then make an ephah, and six a seah. In the same way the Rabbins determine the proportion of the cab to the seah (comp. the passage in Leusden, Phil, Mixius, p. 205). There remain the hin and the log. The hin, according to Josephus (Antiq. iii. 9. 4), is an old Hebrew mass, which contained two Attic x^esi °f which twelve went to the Attic metretes ; therefore the hin is the sixth part of the bath. The log, according to the Rabbins, is the twenty-fourth part of the seah, consequently the seventy-second part of the bath, and the twelfth part of the hin (comp. Leusden, Phil. Mixius, p. 207). There are two divisional systems found in these measures : 1. A decimal ; and 2. A duo- decimal, thus : — Homer . . 1 Bath and ephah 10 1 Gomer . . 100 10 1 By putting together the measures for dry and those for liquid articles, we obtain the duodecimal division : — Ephah or Bath 1 Seah ..31 Hin . „ . 6 2 1 Cab ... 18 6 3 1 Log . . . 72 24 12 4 1 Here all the numbers are divisible either by twelve or by multiples of twelve. Such a duo- decimal arrangement is found in the cubic mea- sures of the Greeks and Romans. Hence the three systems give and receive supj>ort. We will now exhibit all these measures in re- lation to the greatest, the homer : — Homer ... 1 Bath and Ephah 10 1 Seali ... 30 3 I Hin ... 60 6 2 1 Gomer . . . 100 10 3$ If 1 Cab ... ISO IS 6 3 -1§ 1 Log * . . . 720 72 24 12 ?f 4 1 The duodecimal is the original principle, tl>e decimal system being introduced only to bring the two methods into harmony. The homer did not at first form a part of the Hebrew system (fizek. xlv. 11). For the actual size of these measures we must refer to Josephus, of whom Theodoret (In ExocL xxix.) says : mo~TevTeov Se h> rourois t£ 'Xoc-iittco aicpLJSuis rod kOvovs ra/xerpc iirLO'Tafj.ivu, — ' follow in these things Josephus, who well understood the measures of the nation' (comp. Antiq. viii. 3. 8). To the homer or cor Josephus ascribes {Antiq. xv. 9. 2) twelve Attic medimni, where the reading should be metretse. Bath and Ephah are the same. Josephus (Antiq. viii. 2. 9) de- termines each at seventy-two xesta?, and makes them equal to an Attic metretes. The saton is VOL. 11. WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. 945 twenty-four sextarii ; the hin is twelve sextarii ; the gomer, the tenth part of the ephah, must hold seven and one-fifth sextarii ; the cab is equal to four xestae. On the log Josephus gives no information ; as the fourth part of the cab, it held a xestes. The Attic metretes, which corresponded with the Hebrew bath and ephah, contains 739,800 Parisian grains of rain-water, which would fill a space of about 1985 Parisian cubic inches. Thus we come to the following table : — Size. Weight in Water. Par. cub. in. Par. gr. - Homer 19857-7 7398000 . Ephah 1985-77 739800 Seah 681-92 246600 Hin 330-96 123300 Gomer 198-577 73980 Cab 110-32 41100 Log 27-58 10275 Bockh has proved that it is in Babylon we are to look for the foundations of the metrological systems of the ancient world ; for the entire system of measures, both eastern and western, must be referred to the Babylonish foot as to its basis. Here is the root of the original system, and of the individual systems which sprang from the ori- ginal one. This important fact, ascertained and established by Bijckb, has been investigated and confirmed by an independent inquirer of the highest authority, namely, K. O. Midler. Not only the metrological system, but with it other knowledge went westward from Babylon. This metrological system bears traces of having pro- ceeded from the hands of Babylonian astrono- mers. The ancient world was dependent for its astronomy on Babylon. Herodotus (ii. 101) says that the Greeks borrowed the division of the day into twelve parts from the Babylonians, calling to mind the duodecimal division which we have spoken of. The Zodiac too is of Asiatic, Idekr holds of Babylonian origin; but recent investigations have shown a striking agree- ment between the astronomy of the Babylonians and the Chinese, to say nothing of other nations in the farther east(Ideler, Ueberdie Zeitrechnung der Chinesen, &c, Berlin, 1839 ; Bibt, Journal des Savons, Dec. 1839, Jan. and May, 1810 ; Goltingen Gel. Anzeigen, 1840, p. 201, sq.). Of this common knowledge several considerations concur in referring the origin, not to the Chinese, but to the Babylonians. Hence Babylon appears as the land which was the teacher of the east and the west in astronomical and mathematical know- ledge, standing as it were in the middle of the ancient world, and sending forth rays of light from her two extended hands. Palestine could not be closed against these illuminations, which in their progress westward must have enlightened its inhabitants, who appear to have owed their highest earthly culture to the Babylonians and the Egyptians. The following works may be consulted : — J. D. Michaelis, Sujapkm. ad Lex. Hebr., p. 1521 ; Hussey, Essay on the Ancient Weights, Money, Sac, Oxford, 1S36 ; F. P. Bayer, De Nummis Hebreeo-Sa/uaritanis, ValentisB Ede- tanorum, 1781, written in reply to Die UnUcht- heit der Jiid. MUnzen, Biitznw. 1779; Hupfeld, Betrachtung dunkler Stcllung der A. T. Textge- scMchtc, in the Studien wtd Kritiken, 1830 3p 946 WEST. 2nd heft, pp. 247-301 ; G. Seyffarth, Beitrage zur Kenntniss der Literatur, Kunst, Mythol. und Gesch. des alten Aegypten; see especially Bertheau, Zur Geschickte der Israeliten, Got- tingen, 1842; Cumberland, Essay on Weights and Measures ; Arbuthnot, Tables of Ancient Coins, &c. Hussey's work, referred to above, labours under the disadvantage of having been compiled apart from any acquaintance with the best German writers ; and though it is a merito- rious survey of much that has been written in English and Latin on the subject, yet for want of comprising the views of Bbckh — as glanced over in this article — it has little scholarlike value. A thorough work on the subject in the English language, embracing what has been recently ac- complished on the Continent, is a desideratum. — . J. R. B. WELL. [Water.] west oii-iN, b», vwn Kia, -nyo). The Shemite, in speaking of the quarters of the heavens, &c, supposes his face turned towards the east; so that the east is before him, Dip, strictly what is before, or in front ; the south on his right hand,.JjDTl, strictly what lies to the right ; the north on his left hand, ^Kftb, the left side; and the west behind him, TlRtf, literally the hinder side. The latter Hebrew word, though never translated 'west' in our version, means so : as in Isa. ix. 12, ' the Philistines behind,' opposed to the Syrians, Dip ; Sept. a.-, rubuit, quod triticum rubello sit colore ' (Hierobot. ii. 113). The translator of the Biblical Botany of Rosen- muller justly observes that ' the similarity in sound between the Hebrew word chittah and the English wheat is obvious. Be it remembered that the ch here is identical in sound with the Gaelic 3 p2 948 WHEAT. WIND. guttural, or the Spanish x. It is further remark- able, that the Hebrew term is etymologically cognate with the words for wheat used by every- one of the Teutonic and Scandinavian nations (thus we have in Islandic hveiti, Danish hvede, Swedish hvete, Msesogoth. hwaite,German weizeii) • and that, in this instance, there is no resemblance between the Scandinavian and Teutonic terms, and the Greek, Latin, and Slavonic (for the Greek word is irvpos, the Latin frumentum or triticum, the Russian psienitsa, Polish pszenica) ; and yet the general resemblance between the Slavonic, the Thracian, and the Gothic lan- guages is so strong, that no philologist now doubts their identity of origin ' (£. c. p. 75). 541 . [Triticum compositum — Egyptian Wheat.] Rosenmiiller further remarks that in Egypt and in Barbary ^>/*J kamich is the usual name for wheat (quoting Descrip. de I'Egypto, t. xix. p. 45 ; Host's Account of Maroko and Fez, p. 309) ; and also, that in Hebrew, T\Op kemaeh denotes the flour of wheat (Gen. xviii. 6; Num. v. 15). This, it is curious to observe, is not very unlike the Indian name of wheat, kunuk. All these names indicate communication between the nations of antiquity, as well as point to a common origin of wheat. Thus in his Hima- layan Botany, the author of this article has stated : ' Wheat having been one of the earliest cul- tivated grains, is most probably of Asiatic origin, as no doubt Asia was the earliest civilized, as well as the first peopled, country. It is known to the Arabs under the name of hinteh, to the Per- sians as gundoom, Hindu gehoon and kunuk. The species of barley cultivated in the plains of India and known by tire Hindu and Persian name juo, Arabic shaeer, is houmd hexaer- stiehum. As both wheat and barley are culti- vated in the plains of India in the winter months, where none of the species of these genera are in- digenous, it is probable that both have been in- troduced into India from the north, that is, from the Persian, and perhaps from the Tartarian region, where these and other species of barley are most successfully and abundantly cultivated' (p. 419). Different species of wheat were no doubt cultivated by the ancients, as triticum compositum in Egypt, T. he two latter passages, he observes that the word » equivalent to poiver, &c. The commotions of , as D-|J?DK1 (Zech. vii. 14, &c), and answering to the Greek word ave- p.6cpdopos (see Sept. of Gen. xli. 6, 23). Our metaphorical use of the word storm comes nearest. The phrase m}?D IT)"!, ' stormy wind,' irvevfia KaTaiyiSos, spiritus procellce, occurs in Ps. evil. 25 ; cxlviii. 8. It is metaphorically used for the divine judgments (Ezek. xiii. 1], 13). The word mj?D is usually translated ' whirl- wind ;' it means, however, more properly a storm (2 Kings ii. 1,11; Job xxxviii. 1 ; xl. 6 ; Zech. ix. 14; Sept. a,vo-aeia,fj.6s, AtxiXaty, vetyos', Vulg. turbo; Ecclus. xliii. 17; owrpo(f>7/ Trvev- fxaros, xlviii. 9 ; \ai\airi irvpos. The Hebrew word is used metaphorically for the divine judg- ments (Isa. xl. 24; xli. 16); and to describe them as sudden and irresistible (Jer. xxiii. 19; xxv. 32; xxx. 23). 'A whirlwind out of the north' (Ezek. i. 4) denotes the invasion from Babylon. Another word, HS'lD, is also trans- lated ' whirlwind,' and properly so. It occurs in Job xxxvii. 9 ; Isa. xxi. 1. It is used as a simile for complete and sudden destruction (Prov. i.27); and for the most rapid motion, 'wheels of war- chariots like a whirlwind' (Isa. v. 28 ; Jer. iv. 13). Total del'eat is often compared to 'chaff scattered by a whirlwind' (Isa. xvii. 13). It de- notes the rapidity and irresistibleness of the divine judgments (Isa. Ixvi. 5). The phrase 'to reap the whirlwind ' denotes useless labour (Hos. viii. 7); 'the day of the whirlwind,' destruction by war- (Amos i. 14). 'The Lord hath his way in the whirlwind,' is probably an allusion to Sinai (Nahum i. 3). A beautiful comparison occurs in Prov. x. 25 : ' As the whirlwind passetb, so is the wicked no more : but the righteous is an everlast- ing foundation.' — J. F. D. WINDOW. [House.] WINE. The Bible furnishes the earliest au- thentic account concerning wine (Gen. ix. 21 ; xix. 32). The instances of its use by the patri- archs Noah and Lot, with its deplorable eflects, have given rise to numerous conjectures from the earliest periods; and both the Rabbins and the Christian Fathers indulge in much apologetic cri- ticism on these points. Theodoret alleged that the drunkenness of Noah came from inexperience, for, being the first who pressed grapes, he was ignorant of its properties, having been used for 600 years to drink water only (Qtiast. § 65). This seems to be the most probable opinion, and is adopted and elucidated by the contributor of the article Noah, p. 426 of this volume. The WINE. difficulty presented in the case of Lot is well stated by an old writer. ' Whilst the daughters sinned in giving him wine unto drunkenness, what is to be thought of him for drinking so libe- rally thereof? Some conjecture that it was mingled with something apt to make him drunk- en, although he took but a little, and so excuse him ' (Dr. Mayer's Comment. Lond. 1653, vol. i. p. 246). This conjecture is well illustrated by a narrative of adulterous intercourse, recorded by Linschoten (1584), and effected by means of drugged wine administered to the husband : — * They had caused him to drinke of a certaine wine that was mingled with the hearbe deutroa [datura], thereby to bereave poore Francis of his wittes, and so to effect their accursed device ' (Voyages, b. i. p. 158). That the incest of Lot was performed in an unconscious state, such as is induced by many species of drugged drinks, may be inferred from the repetition of the act. In another part, again referring to such as had drunk of this drugged wine, Linschoten says, that ' when the time cometh that he reviveth out of his transe, he knoweth nothing what was done, but thinketh that hee had slept' (p. 109). On no point is the remark of the Ericyclopcedia Britannica concerning the Authorized Version of the Bible more just than in reference to wine : — * One of its greatest faults is, that the translation of the same original word is often improperly va- ried at the expense of perspicuity ; while, on the other hand, ambiguity is sometimes occasioned by the rendering of two original words in the same sentence by only one English word, which, how- ever, is used in different meanings ' (vol. iv. p. 619). Not only two, but thirteen distinct Hebrew and Greek terms, are translated by the word 'wine,' either with or without the adjectives ' new,' 'sweet,1 ' mixed,' and 'strong.' If the first rule for a translation, as laid down by Dr. George Campbell, be correct — that 'the translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original ' — the common version must, on this point, be deemed exceedingly defective. We pro- pose, therefore, in the present article, to attempt an elucidation of the various Biblical terms translated ' wine,' and to indicate what we regard as their most probable meanings and distinctions. !• \\- yayi>h oivos, wine, occurs in 141 in- stances ; 21 times in connection with *13£> shechar [Drink, Strong]. Its root was pro- bably \V yavan, or yanali, the primary idea of both being that of turbidness, or boiling up, so characteristic of the appearance of the grape-juice as it rushes foaming into the wine-vat. The able writer of the article ' Wine ' in the Penny Cyclo- pcedia, observes, that ' the juice of grapes, or ve- getable juices in general, become turbid when in contact with air, before fermentation commences, and (his turbidity is owing to the formation of an insoluble precipitate of the same nature as ferment' (vol. xxvii. p. 455). Yayin, in Bible use, is a very general term, including every spe- cies of wine made from grapes (olms a/xirfXii/os), though in later ages it became extended in its application to wine made from other substances, (a.) It is frequently used in the same compre- hensive sense as the vinum of the Latins. Cato {Z)e Be Rustica, cxlvii.) speaks of the hanging wine (vinum pendens). So in Num. vi. 4, WINE. 951 yayin stands for vine — the grape-vine. In Deut. xxviii. 39, it is ranked amongst things to be suck- ed, gathered, or eaten. In Isa. xvi. 10, it is used for the grapes to be trodden. In Isa. Iv. 1, it probably signifies thick grape-syrup, or honey (see Isa. vii. 22). The word syrup, it may be here remarked, is derived from an Oriental term for wine ; hence, in Turkey, shirab-jee signifies ' wine-seller ' (see Turkey and the Turks, p. 197"). This species of wine is still called ' honey ' in the East, and it is by the prophet appropriately con- nected with milk, as a thing to be eaten. Yayin is also used for ' grapes,' or for ' wine in the clus- ter,' in Jer. xl. 10, 12 ; xlviii. 33; and probably also in Deut. xiv. 26. In this sense Josephus (De Bell. Jud. vii.) employs the Greek equivalent, when he enumerates amongst the stores in the fortress of Massada, cr?ros, olvos, and eAatov, and adds, that the Romans found the remains of these fruits (rhu KapirSv) uncorrupted. (6.) Yayin signifies also ' the blood of the grape' freshly ex- pressed, as in Gen. xlix. 2 (comp. with Isa. Ixiii. 1-3), reference being there had to the juice of the claret grape — ' His eyes shall be more beau- tiful than'wine, and his teeth whiter than milk.' In this sense yayin denoted what the Greeks spe- cifically called yXevKos (sweet wine), the term used by Josephus in speaking of the grape-juice expressed into Pharaoh's cup (Gen. xl. 11). In Cant. v. 1 (compared with vii. 9), it seems to refer to a sweet innocent wine of this sort, which might be drunk abundantly. In Ps. civ. 15, as illustrated by Judg. ix. 13 ; Exod. xxii. 29 (28), yayin probably designates the first ' droppings ' or tears of the gathered grapes, which were to be offered fresh — without ' delay.' (c.) In Prov. ix. 2, 5, yayin refers to a boiled wine, or syrup, the thickness of which rendered it necessary to mingle water with it previously to drinking. Wine pre- t served in this way was sometimes introduced into the offerings for the use of the priests (Num. xviii. 11), as appears from this passage in the Mishna : — ' Wine of the heave-offering must not be boiled, because it lessens it' (Tr. Teroomah, perek xi.). Bartenora, in a note, says, ' because people drink less of boiled wine ' — which is true of it when drunk unmingled, since boiling renders the wine more rich and cloying. But the Mishna adds — ' Rabbi Yehuda permits it, because it im- proves it.' Such a wine Wisdom is aptly repre- sented as mingling for her feast, because such was esteemed the richest and the best wine, (t/.) Yayin also comprehends a mixed wine of a very different character ; a wine made strong and in- ebriating by the addition of drugs, such as myrrh, mandragora, and opiates. 'Such,' observes Bishop Lowth, 'were the exhilarating, or rather, stupe- fying ingredients which Helen mixed in the bowl together with the wine for her guests op- pressed with grief, to raise their spirits; the com- position of which she had learned in Egypt.' (Horn. Odyss. iv. 220.) And how much the Eastern people to this day deal in artificial liquors of prodigious strength, may be seen in a curious chapter of Kempfer upon that subject (Aman. Exot. Fasc. iii. obs. 15). Tims the drunkard is properly described (Prov. xxiii. 30) as one ' that seeketh mixed wine,' and is ' mighty to mingle strong drink ' (Isa. v. 22). And hence the Psalmist took that highly poetical and sublime image of the cup of God's wrath, called by Isaiah 952 WINE. (li. 17) 'the cup of trembling,' causing intoxica- tion and stupefaction (see Chappelow's note on Hariri, p. 33) ; containing, as St. John (Rev. xiv. 10) expresses in Greek this Hebrew idea with the utmost precision, though with a seeming con- tradiction in terms, KeKepacr/xet'ov aitparov, merum mixtum' (Comment, on Isa. i. "22). (e.) Fay in also includes every species of fermented grape- wine. The characteristics of fermentation are well marked in Prov. xxiii. 31, where the wine is first described as appearing turbid, in consequence of the subsidence of the gluten ; that, absorbing air, becomes ferment, or yeast, communicating its own decay to the sugar of the grape, and which is then converted into carbonic acid gas and alcohol, the former rising up as a bubble or ' eye,' and thus producing an upward movement of the liquid. ' Look not thou upon the wine when it is turbid, When it giveth its bubble in the cup, moving itself upward : At the last it biteth like a serpent, And stingeth like a basilisk.' Yayin, then, is a general term for ' all sorts of wine' (Neh. v. 18). 2. D^DJ? ausis, occurs only in five texts; Cant. viii. 2 ; Isa. xlix. 26 ; Joel i. 5; iii. (iv.) 18; Amos ix. 13. The name is derived from DDJ? asas, ' to tread down,' and denotes the ex- pressed juice of the grape or other fruit. By the Greeks it is called yAevicos, by the Latins mus- tum, from the Hebrew f¥D, ' fresh,' 'sweet,' 'pure,' by transposition of letters, as stum from must. 3. &3D s°bhe or saba, from K2D sabJio, 'to drink freely,' because the inspissated wine which it denoted was enticing, and might be freely drunk when mingled with water. The term oc- curs but thrice, probably because this sort of wine is often expressed by the general term ' yayin,' or by ' debhash' [Honey]. It is the Latin sapa, and the French sabe, ' vin cult,' baked or boiled wine. Syreon, hepsema. and defrutum, ac- cording to Pliny, were species of it (Hist. Nat. xiv. 9) : indeed, syreon, cripivos olvos, and seria, 'a wine-jar,' most likely derived their name from the syr or caldron of the Jews (Nahum i. 10),. in which the sobhe was prepared. As boiling would confer an additional sweetness on the juices of fruits, the syr has probably some con- nection with the Oriental term shir or sir, ex- pressing 'sweet juice,' and from which the words sherab, sirob, and syrup are derived. The process of boiling appears to have been employed for the preservation of vegetable juices, from the earliest times, and is founded on a correct che- mical principle. ' The property of organic sub- stances,' says Liebig, ' to pass into a state of decay, is annihilated in all cases by heating to the boiling point ' (Lett, on Chemistry, ii. lett. xi.). We have shown above, that it was under- stood by the ancient Jews, and it is yet very ex- tensively practised in the East in the preparation of sherob, or'ro&of grapes.* Baron Tavernier, speaking of Shiraz, says — ' Of the wine there are many vessels full, which are burnt for the benefit of the poor travellers and carriers, who find it a great refreshment to drink it with water ' (Persian Travels, h. v. c. xxi. p. 248, Lond. 1681). The same traveller, speaking of the Christians of St. John around Basrah, affirms, that ' in the Eu- WINE. charist they make use of meal kneaded up with wine and oil. To make this wine they take grapes dried in the sun, which they call in their language zebibes \zaha or saba], and casting water upon them let them steep for so long a time' (b. ii. c. viii. p. 91). This raisin-wine was the passum of the Romans.* The three texts in which sobhe occurs, answer to the preceding description of it. In Isa. i. 22, we read—' Thy silver is become dross, thy sobhe (or boiled wine, is become) a thin wine mingled with water.' Professor Stuart justly observes, that ma/tool, ' here rendered mixed, means cut, cut round, circumcised.* Varro uses a phrase exactly parallel, applying to wine of the second pressing the term ' circumcised wine' which, being mixed with water, yields lora, the drink of the labourer in winter (Dv Re Rust. i. 54). Hence the force of the text is this : — ' Thy silver is be- come like dross ; thy sobhe (the rich drink of thy nobles) is become like mahool, even as circum- cised wine mixt with water, common lora, the drink of a peasant.' Rabbi D. Kimchi has this comment — ' The current coin was adulterated with brass, tin, and other metals, and yet circu- lated as good money. The wine also was adul- terated with water in the taverns, and sold, not- withstanding, for pure wine.' In Hosea iv. 18, it is said, 'Their sobhe is sour.' As this wine was valued for its sweetness, it was of course spoilt by acquiring acidity. But inspissated wines are peculiarly liable to this de- generacy. ' Defrutum] says Columella, ' how- ever carefully made, is liable to grow acid ' (xii. 20). Nahum i. 10, referring to the enemies of Je- hovah, we should read as follows : — ' Like thorns they are woven together, and like their boiled wine the drunkard shall be devoured, (even) as stubble fully dry,' — the first metaphor referring to thorns heaped up together for fuel, tlje second to the burning of the sobhe in the syr or caldron from neglect, and the third to the combustion of stubble (comp. Ezek. xxiv. 6-14). 4. *lDn chemer, occurs twice as a descrip- tive ; but in Isa. xxvii. 2, where it is applied to the vineyard, some copies read 112f\ ' fruitful.' Chemer and chamar are derived from the verb 1Dn chamar, ' to foam,' ' boil up,' ' froth,' or ' fer- ment'(the latter term signifying no more originally than the former), and are used in reference to waters and to the waves, as well as to leaven, wine, &c. In Deut. xxxii. 14, chemer is applied to 'the blood of the grape,' — as expressive of the juice fresh and foaming from the vat, in its pure but turbid state ; and we perceive no reason for re- sorting to the very secondary sense of ' red wine/ *TDn chamar, the verb, in Ps. lxxv. 8 (9), is applied to pure wine, unmixed wine filled with * ' ■Nebeedh, prepared from raisins,' says E. W. Lane, ' is commonly sold in Arab towns, under the name zebeeb, which signifies raisins. This I have often drunk in Cairo, but never could per- ceive that it was in the slightest degree fermented. Other beverages, to which the name of nebeedh has been applied — though, like zebeeb, no longer called by that name — are also sold in Arab towns ' (Notes to Arabian Nights, vol. i. ch. iii. p. 215, 1841). WINE. mixture, which exactly answers to the phrase of St. John, 'the mixed unmixed' (Rev. xiv. 10). 5. K"lfc?n chamra, used by Daniel (v. 1, 2, 4, 23), and'lJDn chemar, by Ezra (vi. 9 ; vii. 22), are Chaldee terms. Chemar we regard as used for pure wine, in its fresh, foaming condition; but chamra may have denoted some rich and royal drink, made strong by the addition of drugs. Tavernier refers to a drink of this sort, used by the luxurious Grand Seignior on visiting the seraglio, which seems to illustrate Daniel v. 23. He says it is 'a sort purposely prepared for the Grand Seignior himself, called Miiscavy,' but that ' the principal persons about the court send for it secretly to the halvagi-bachi (Eel. of the G. S. Seraglio, vol. iii. p. 26, Loud. 1684). Such, probably, was the wine which Belshazzar, with his lords, wives, and concubines, drank in the holy vessels, and which Daniel would not touch. — The compilers of the Talmud considered khamra as a ' sweet wine.' It is a question, ' What is Carcenam f Rabbi Abhoo explains that khamroa (viuum dulce) is so called, which is brought hither from Asia.' 6. "|D19 mesech, once translated ' mixture ' (Ps. lxxv. 8 (9) ), once ' mixed wine ' (Prov. xxiii. 30), and once ' the drink-offering ' (Isa. Ixv. 11), is derived from masach, 'to mingle;' whence miscere and mix. In the first text four terms occur which are elsewhere all rendered 'wine' — viz. yayin, khamar, meaech, shemurim. It should be read — ' There is a cup in the hand of Jehovah, and the unmrxed (or pure) wine is full of mixture ; and he poureth out this, but all the wicked of the earth shall wring and suck out the dregs of it.' An inebriating and disgusting mixture seems to be denoted here. The second text refers to drugged wine; either pure wine made inebriating, or fermented wine made stronger by the addition of spices and drugs. This custom has prevailed from the ear- liest ages, and is still extant in the East. Bishop Southgate states 'the reason why the Persians adulterate their wines; because, in their natural state Ihey are too weak to produce the desired effect ' (Narrative of a Tour, &c. vol. ii. p. 320, Lond. 1810). 'Hence,' says he, 'it has been the custom in Persia to fortify the wines by an infusion of nux vomica and lime, in order to in- crease that inebriating power which a hard- drinking Persian is apt to esteem ' (p. 325). In the third text the idol-worshippers are really said to ' fill out a mixture to Meni ;' the heathen- ish custom of pouring out mixed wine to their gods being contrasted with the worshippers of Jehovah on his ' holy mountain,' who were en- joined not to delay the presentation of their first- fruits and liquors, but to pour out 'the pure blood of the grape ' as their drink-offering. When designed for the use of the priests, however, boiled wine, as we have seen, was sometimes presented. Though, in the three texts we have examined, mesech refers to some reprobated or offensive mixture, we must not therefore conclude that, all mixed wine was pernicious or improper. We have already seen that there were two very oppo- site purposes sought, by the mixture of drinks; one mixture was for the purpose of sensuality, the other for that of sobriety or use. While the wicked sought out a drugged mixture (Prov. xxiii. WINE. 953 30), and was 'mighty to mingle sweet drink* (Isa. v. 22), Wisdom, on the contrary, ' mingled her wine1 with water, or with milk (Prov. ix. 2, 5), merely to dilute it and make it properly drinkable. Of the latter mixture Wisdom in- vites the people to drink freely ; but on the use of the former an emphatic woe is pronounced. 1. "Dti* shechar, ' sweet drink,' once translated 'strong wine ' (Num. xxviii. 7). It seems to have formed an independent subject of offering. Shechar is a generic term, including palm-wine and other saccharine beverages, except those pre- pared from the vine. That shechar was made in- ebriating by being mingled with potent drugs we have just seen : but, it may be asked, how shall we explain Prov. xxxi. 6.7 ? — ' Give shechar unto him who is ready to perish.' The Rabbins have generally referred this apparent command to the stupefying cup administered to criminals with the merciful intent of allaying their pains and fears. But can we associate so barbarous a cus- tom with Divine inspiration? The example of the Redeemer is at least opposed to such a notion, and the Spirit of Christ was the Spirit of Pro- phecy also, and they ought therefore to harmonize. Nevertheless, when 'they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh ' (Mark xv. 23), ' he received it, not.' Besides, this supposition does not account for the language of the seventh verse. The writer of a series of elaborate articles on ' the Wines of Scripture,' in an English periodical, contends that the advice is . given ironically. Lemuel's mother warns her royal son against the deceitful influences of inebriating beverages, and represents them as being esj)ecially injurious in their operation on the personal and official cha- racter sf kings; and then, in a strain of evident irony, points to the wretch who vainly dreams the Lethean draught, will rid him of the burden of , anxiety and sorrow which his own profligacy and intemperance have imposed (Truth - Seeker, 1815-6). A third view of this difficult passage is given in the present work, in the article Drink, Strong, to which the reader is referred for a full discussion of the whole subject, 8. WXV7\ tirosh, ' vintage fruit.' The usual definition of this term is absurd, viz. that be- cause it, is derived from W yarash, 'to possess,' 'to inherit,' it signifies 'a strong wine which is able to get possession of a man, and drive him out of himself!' Willi Bythner, in his Lyra Prop&eticci, we would adopt the simple deriva- tion vi' tirosh from its passive quality of being pos- sessed, but apply it rather to ' vintage-fruit," than to any liquid whatever. Consult article Fiuir. 9. D'HCD' shemarim, ' preserves,' or 'jellies,' derived from the verb sliamar, 'to preserve.' It is translated 'wines on the lees,' in Isa. xxv. (i ; but in the three other passages in which it occurs, by 'dregs' or 'lees' alone. Dregs of wine, however, can form no part of a delicious least; while in the East various species of ' preserves ' are highly esteemed. Mr. Buckingham records that at Adjeloon he was treated with vrine-eqAes (Tray, among the Arab Tribes, p. 187). Our older translators so understood the word. Cover- dale renders the passage ' sweet and ntosl pure things;' the bishops' Bible (1568), -delicate things,' and • mosf pleasant dishes' | Sbbharih j. A passage from T.ivemier's curious RelatUM 954 WINE. of the Grand Seignior's Seraglio serves to show what an important place in Eastern entertain- ments preserves and confections occupy : ' The offices where the conserves and sweetmeats are made (there being six or seven of them) are above the kitchens, and served by four hundred Hel- vagis. They are perpetually at work in those seven offices, and there they prepare all sorts of conserves, dry and liquid, and several sorts of syrups' ' In the same offices they also prepare the ordinary drink of the Turks, which they call sherbet, and it is made several ways.' ' They make also another sort of drink which they call magion \el-majoo7i\, composed of several drugs, whereby it is made hot ' (Lond. 1684, chap. hi. p. 26). 10. nt^fc^ eshishah, once translated ' flagon ' only ; in three passages ' flagon of wine f and once ' flagon ' with grapes joined to it in the ori- ginal, as noticed in the margin (Hosea iii. 1). The Sept. renders it in four different ways, viz. Xa.yo.vov airb rwycivov, ' a cake from the frying- pan' (2 Sam. vi. 19); in another part, which narrates the same fact, a/xopiTriv aprov, ' a sweet cake of fine flour and honey ' (1 Chron. xvi. 3); Treu^iara fj.era. o-racpib'os,1 a cake made with raisins ' (Hos. iii. 1), ' raisins ' here corresponding to ' grapes ' in the Hebrew ; and by one copy d.fj.vpois, ' sweet cakes ' (Cant. ii. 5) ; but in others /j.vpois, ' unguents.' In the Targum to the Hebrew DTPQ^ tzwppikhith, t in Exod. xvi. 31, the Chaldee term is fBS'^K'K eshishan, ' a cake,' ren- dered iu our version by ' wafers.' Eshishah has been supposed to be connected with EJ>N ash, ' fire,' and to denote some sort of ' sweet cake ' prepared with fire ; but the second part of the word has not been hitherto explained. Perhaps the following extract from Olearius (1637) may throw light on the kind of prepara- tions denoted by shemarim and eshishah : ' The Persians are permitted to make a sirrup-of sweet wine, which they boyl till it be reduc'd to a sixth part, and be grown as thick as oyl. They call this drug duschab [debhasK], and when they would take of it, they dissolve it with water.' ' Sometimes they boyl the duschab so long that they reduce it into a paste, for the convenience of travellers, who cut it with a knife, and dissolve it in water. At Tabris they make a certain con- serve of it, which they call hehca [el-magifi], mixing therewith beaten almonds, flour, &c. They put this mixture into a long and narrow bag, and having set it under the press, they make of it a paste, which grows so hard that a man must have a hatchet to cut it. They make also a kind of conserve of it, much like a pudding, which they call zutzuch, thrusting through the middle of it a small cotton thread to keep the paste together' (Ambassador's Travels, b. vi. p. 311). The Tartars consumed a similar pre- paration : ' They have certain calces made of meal, rice, and millet, fry"d in oil or honey ' (b. iv. p. 173). Amongst the presents received by the ambassadors there is enumerated ' a bottle of scherab [syrup] or Persian wine ' (p. 175). This zutzuch is but a harsh corruption of the Hebrew eshishah, and is by others called hashish and achicha. Even this substance, in course of time, was converted into a medium of intoxication by means of drugs. ' Hemp is cultivated and used as a narcotic over all Arabia. The flowers, when WINE. mixed with tobacco, are called hashish. The higher classes eat it (hemp) in a jelly or paste called maoj'oun [el-magin~\, mixed with honey, or other sweet drugs' (Crichton's Arabia, vol. ii. p. 413). Lempriere says — 'Instead of the in- dulgence of opium by the Moors, they substitute the achicha, a species of flax' (Tour to Morocco, 1794, p. 300). The leaves of the garden hemp (shahddnaj"), says El-Kazweenee, are the benj (bange), which, when eaten, disorders the reason. De Sacy and Lane derive the name of the Eastern sect of 'Assassins' (Hashshdsheeii), 'hemp- eaters,' from their practice of using shahdanaj to fit them for their dreadful work. El-Idreesee, indeed, applies the term Hasheesheeyeh to the ' Assassins.' 11. ytir\ chometz, o^os [Leaven], rendered 'vinegar' (i. e. sick or sour wine) in the common version. The modern Jews still employ this phrase to denote wine spoiled by acidity. It seems, however, in its general use, to have sig- nified anciently a thin acidulated beverage, as well as to comprehend ' vinegar,' in the modern sense of the word. In Ruth ii. 14, it is named as the drink of the reapers of Boaz, and probably corresponded to the posca (from post-escam) given to the Roman legions. A very small wine, called pesca and sera (from seor, 'sour'), is still used by the harvesters in Italy and the Penin- sula. This term is employed by the Psalmist in lxix. 21, 'They gave me also gall for my meat ; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink,' — a prediction actually fulfilled at the Cru- cifixion of the Messiah. Thus the o£os mingled with gall (Matt, xxvii. 34) is the same as the olvos mingled with myrrh (Mark xv. 23), a bitter substance [Rosh] . 12. Olvos, the Greek generic term for wine, from the Hebrew yayin. It comprehended new wine (olvos vios), luscious wine (yXevnos), pure or unmingled wine (dnparov), and a thin sour wine (oijos). The adjective vios distinguished olvos from TraXaws, old wine (Matt. ix. 17; Mark ii. 22 ; Luke v. 37). Florentinus, in the Geoponica, counsels the husbandman often to taste both his new and his old wine, so that the slightest sign of acidity might be detected at its commencement (lib. vii. cap. 7). In Luke v. 37-8, ' No man putteth vios olvos into old bottles, else the vios olvos will burst the bottles and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish ; but vios olvos must be put into new bottles, and both are preserved,' — the allusion is to the large skin bottles of the East, into which the fresh grape- juice (mustum or yXevnos) was frequently put for preservation. Job affectingly refers to this custom, when he says, ' I am as wine which hath no vent — ready to burst, like new bottles :' his heart was full to bursting, so that the bodily frame could hardly resist the internal workings of the afflicted spirit. If, however, the bottle happened to be old, the wine would commence fermentation, and the bottle would actually burst, and both would perish. ' The force of ferment- ing wine is very great ; being able, if closely stopped up, to burst through the strongest cask ' (Chambers' Cyclopaedia, vol. ii. art.' Wine,' 1750). The phenomena referred to have been fully ex- plained by the chemical researches of Liebig. Fermentation depends upon the access of air WINE. to the grape-juice, the gluten of which absorbs oxygen and becomes ferment or yeast, communi- cating its own decomposition to the saccharine matter of the grape, which becomes transformed into alcohol and carbonic acid gas. It is the ex- pansion of the gas thus liberated which bursts the bottles, when the fermentation has once fairly started. Old bottles would have portions of the sediment of former wine adhering to their sides, which must have absorbed oxygen, and thus have become converted into fermenting matter. From age and exposure to the heat, old bottles would become dry and full of cracks and minute crevices, which would give admission to the air. Thus, as Burckhardt informs us, speaking of the Beyrouk honey of the Syrians, ' They use it in rubbing their water-skins, in order to exclude the air' (Travels in Syria, p. 129). Hence our Lord, adverting to the difficulty of young dis- ciples bearing all at once his new doctrines and commandments, intimates that the earthly or fleshly vessel was not yet titted for their full re- ception ; that their minds must be first cleansed from the remnants and leaven of the old doctrine, and gradually renewed by the power of the truth. 13. r\euKos, must, in common usage, 'sweet' or 'new wine.' It only occurs once in the New Testament (Acts ii. 13). Josephus applies the term to the wine represented as being pressed out of the bunch of grapes, by the Archi-oino-choos, into the cup of the royal Pharaoh. It seems to have been applied to wine in its sweetest state. Its derivation, indeed, denotes ' lusciousness :' hence Homer (Odyss. xx. 68) applies a word of kindred origin, yAvnepos, 'luscious,' to honey, but, in the same line, t]5vs, 'sweet,', to wine. The writers of the Geoponica constantly use yAevicos in the sense of must. Diophanes, who was a good Latinist, puts mustum into a Grecian dress, in order the better to express his meaning. See Geoponica (ix. 20), where he says, yAevicovs, tout6hat, although the grammatical construc- tion rather requires ere* rw i-nrl rov Evepyerov to refer to the age of the monarch's reign, Euer- getes the Second was the king in whose reign the translation was made, as the canon could not have been yet closed under the reign of the first Euergetes, as implied in the preface, — ' the law, the prophets, and the other books.' The ' thirty- eighth year of his reign,' although not applicable to the first Euergetes, may refer to the second, if his regency be included. According to this, which De Wette conceives the most probable hypothesis, the translator lived b.c. 130, and the author b.c. 180. Church Authority of Ecclesiasticus. — Rufinus (in Symb.) observes that ' The Wisdom of the' Son of Sirach is called in Latin Ecclesiasticus, which signifies not the name of the author, but the qua- lity of the writing,' and that it, with the other ecclesiastical books, including the Shepherd of Hermas, was read in the Church, but not. em- ployed to confirm the authority of the faith.' Calmet (Preface) concludes that it was called Ecclesiasticus from its supposed resemblance to Ecclesiastes, as well as to denote its inferior authority before it was finally received into the canon. Jerome, although rejecting it from the canon, cites it as divine Scripture : 'Divina Scrip- tura loquitur : musica in luctu in fempestivanar- ratio' (Ecclus. xxii. G). It is cited in the Epistle of Barnabas : ' Let not thine hand be stretched out to receive,' &c. (Ecclus. iv. 31), in the first Epistle of Clement, and by Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Tertullian, and most of the fathers. Augustine (De Doct. Christ, c. 8) says that se- veral of the fathers cite it under the name of Solomon, not because it was his, but from a cer- tain resemblance to his writings. Allusions to this book have been supposed to be not unfre- quently discernible in the New Testament. Com- pare, especially, Ecclus. xxxiii. 13 ; Rom. ix. 21 ; xi. 19; Luke xii. 19, 20; v. 11; James i. 19, &c. ; xxiv. 17, 18; Matt. xi. 28-9; John iv. 13, 14; vi. 35, &c. We may observe, in conclusion, that all which applies to the authority of this book is equally applicable to the other books of the second canon. In the early ages of the Church, the protocanunical books, or those received by the Jews, and preserved in Hebrew, were alone con- sidered as canonical, at least until the time of Augustine, when the term ' canonical ' seems to have acquired a new meaning. But some of the most distinguished teachers of the same period considered all the books in the Alexandrian ver- sion, if not canonical, as inspired, and cite them as authorities. At the period of the Reformation the Protestants reverted to the Jewish canon. Learned Roman Catholics, even since the decision of the Council of Trent, have considered them- selves at liberty to make a distinction between the books of the first and second canon, and to WITCH. hold the latter as of inferior authority ; whilst in recent times there have not been wanting voices raised in the Reformed Church in favour even of their inspiration (Cellerier, ut sup.). Mr. Robin- Eon, the translator of Moehler's Symbolik, is mis- taken in his statement (§ xlji., note) that the Anglican Church agrees in the canon of Scripture with the French Protestants. The Church of England, as has been already seen [Deutero- canonicai.], has adhered, in respect to the Old Testament, to the only canon which was known to the Church before the Council of Hippo ; and while she excludes the Greek books from the canon, has passed no definitive judgment respect- ing their authority or inspiration. In (he Libri Symbolici Ecclesiez Orientalis, Jena, 1843, there are two canons given, one in the Confession of Faith of Cyril Lucaris, patriarch of Constantinople, 1631, comprehending only (he twenty-two books of the Old Testament from the canon of Laodicea, and rejecting the ' Apocry- phal,' so called, because they have not received the same authority and approbation from the i Holy Spirit with those properly and beyond con- troversy accounted canonical ;' the other, that of Dositheus, patriarch of Jerusalem, who presided at the synod held in that city in 1672, which charges Cyril with applying the term apocryphal foolishly and ignoranlly, or rather maliciously, to the Wisdom of Solomon, Judith, Tobit, the history of the Dragon, and of Susanna, the Mac- cabees, and (he Wisdom of Sirach, which, although they do not perhaps seem to be included by all, the Council of Jerusalem holds, notwithstanding, to be genuine and integral pails of the same Scriptures. Versions of Ecclesiasticus. — We have already seen (bat Jerome did not, translate this book. The old Latin version frecuiently differs from (he Greek, and has several additions, besides some- times reversing the order of the text. Athanasius, or the author of the Synopsis Scriptural, considers, but without sufficient grounds, the titty-first chap- ter to have proceeded from the Greek translator. The Greek MSS. differ considerably from each other. The Authorized English version is taken from the same text with that in the London Poly- glott, which is not so pure as the Vatican text. The Syriac version, contained in the same Poly- glot t, differs also in many places from the Greek ; and Bendsen (Exercit. Crit.) maintains that it is derived immediately from the Hebrew. The Arabic in the same work seems to be a descendant from the Syriac. The Sentences of Ben Sirach, cited in the Talmud (Scrnhed. Gem. xi. 42 ; Bereschith Rabba, viii. f. 10 ; Baba Kama, f. 92, c. 2), and published in Latin by Paul Fagius (1542), and in Hebrew, Chaldee, and Latin, by Drusius (1597), though sometimes similar to those in Ecclesiasticus, are upon the whole a different work (Eichhorn's and Bertholdt's Intro- ductions').— W. W. WITCH. The fern. HQEbO (a sorceress), is found inExod. xxii. 18 ; Sept. (ptxp/xaicus ; Vulg. ma/efca ; the mas. Fjt^OD (a sorcerer or magi- cian), in Exod. vii. 11; Deut. xviii. 10; Dan. ii. 2; Mai. iii. 5; Sept. e Leg. lib. 11). Divi- nation of all kinds had fallen into contempt in the time of Cicero : ' Dubium non est quin hasc disciplina et ars augurum evanuerit jam et ve- . WITCHCRAFTS. tustate et negligentia' {T)e Legibus, ii. 13), Josephus declares that he laughed at - the very idea of witchcraft ( Vet. § 31). For the very early writers who maintained that the wonders of the magicians were not supernatural, see Universal Hist. (vol. iii. p. 374, 8vo. ed.). It seems safe to conclude from the Septuagint renderings, and their identity with the terms used by classical writers, that the pretended exercise of this art in ancient times was accompanied with the use of drugs, or fumigations made of them. No doubt the skilful use of certain chemicals, if restricted to the knowledge of a few persons, might, in ages unenlightened by science, along with other resources of natural magic, be made the means of extensive imposture. The natural gases, exhala- tions, &c, would contribute their share, as ap- pears from the ancient account of the origin of the oracle at Delphi. The real mischiefs ever effected by the professors of magic on mankind, &c, may be safely ascribed to the actual administration of poison. Josephus states a case of poisoning under the form of a philtre or love-potion, and says that the Arabian women were reported to be skilful in making such potions (Antiq. xvii. 4. 1). Such means doubtless constitute the real pernicious- ness of the African species of witchcraft called Obi, the similarity of which word to the Hebrew y\H> inflation, is remarkable. Among the Sand- wich Islanders, some, who had professed witch- craft, confessed, after_ their conversion to Chris- tianity, that they had poisoned their victims. The death of Sir Thomas Overbury is cited as an instance in this country, by Sir Walter Scott, (ut supra). There was, indeed, a wide scope for the production of very fantastic effects, short of death, by such means. The story of ' the witch of Endor,' as she is commonly but improperly called, is, under the article Saul, referred to witchcraft. She indeed belongs to another class of pretenders to supernatural powers [Divina- tion]. She was a necromancer, or one of (hose persons who pretended to call up the spirits of the dead to converse with the living (see Isa. viii. 19; xxix. 4; Ixv. 3). A full account is given of such persons by Lucan (vi. 591, &c), and by Tibullus (i. 2. v. 45), where the preten- sions of the sorceress are thus described — Heec cantu finditque solum, Manesque sepulchris Elicit, et tepido devocat ossa rogo. Of much the same character is the Sibyl in the 6th book of Virgil's JEneid. It is related as the last and crowning act of Saul's rebellion against God, that he consulted 'a woman who had a familiar spirit' (1 Sam. xxviii. 7), literally 'a mistress of the OS,' — an act forbidden by the divine law (Lev. xx. 6), which sentenced the jirerenders to such a power to death (ver. 27), and which law Saul himself had recently enforced (1 Sam. xxviii. 3, 9), because, it is supposed, they had freely predicted his approaching ruin ; al- though after the well-known prophecies of Sa- muel to that effect, the disasters Saul had already encountered, and the growing influence of David, there ' needed no ghost to come from the grave to tell them this.' Various explanations of this story have been offered. It has been attempted to resolve the whole into imposture and collusion. Saul, who was naturally a weak and excitable WITCHCRAFTS. man, had become, through a long series of vexa- tions and anxieties, absolutely ' delirious.' as Patrick observes : ' he was afraid and his heart greatly trembled,' says the sacred writer. In this state of mind, and upon the very eve of his last battle, he commissions his oicn servants to seek him a woman that had a familiar spirit, and, attended by two of them, he comes to her ' by night,' the most favourable time for imposi- tion. He converses with her alone, his two attendants, whether his secret enemies or real friends, being absent, somewhere, yet, however, close at hand. Might not one of these, or some one else, have agreed with the woman to per- sonate Samuel in another room ? — for it appears that Saul, though he spoke with, did not see the ghost (ver. 13, 14) : who, it should be ob- served, told him nothing but what his own at- tendants could have told him, with the exception of those words, ' to-morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me' (ver. 19) ; to which, however, it is replied, that Saul's death did not occur upon the morrow, and that the word so trans- lated is sufficiently ambiguous, for though "inO means ' to-morrow ' in some passages, it means the future, indefinitely, in others (Exod. xiii. 14, and see the margin ; Josh. iv. 6. 21 ; comp. Matt. vi. 34). It is further urged, that her ' crying with a loud voice,' and her telling Saul, at the same time, thatshe knew him, were the well-timed arts of the sorceress, intended to magnify her pre- tended skill. It is, however, objected against this, or any other hypothesis of collusion, that the sacred writer not only represents the Pytho- ness as affirming, but also himself affirms, that she saw Samuel, and that Samuel spoke to Saul, nor does he drop the least hint that it was not the real Samuel of whom he was speaking. The same objections apply equally to the theory of ventriloquism, which has been grounded upon the word used by the Sept., iyyaaTp'ijj.v6os. Others have given a literal interpretation of the story, and have maintained that Samuel aciually appeared to Saul. Justin Martyr maintains this theory, and in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, urges this incident in proof of the immortality of the soul (p. 333). The same view is taken in the additions to the Sept. in 1 Chron. x. 13, kou a.-rre- Kpivaro dv7

ort the general re- mark of Bishop Lowtli, upSB the English transla- tion, ' that in respect of the sense, and accuracy of interpretation, the improvements of which it is capable are great and numberless' {Preliminary 3« G62 WITNESS. Dissertation to Isaiah, ad finem). Some other mis-translations occur in reference to this subject. In 1 Sam. xv. 23, ' rebellion is as the sin of witch- crafr,' should be of 'divination.' In Deut. xviii. 10, the word f|K>DJD does not mean 'witch,' but, being mascul ne, ' a sorcerer.1 In Acts viii. 9, the translation is exceedingly apt to mislead the mere English reader : ' Simon used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria' — *2,iixcai> irpovirrfp- X*v ev ttj r.6\ei fj.a.yevcoi' leal i^iaruv rb eQvos rrfs Sci.uapeias — i. e. ' Simon had been pursuing magic, and perplexing (or astonishing) the people,' &c. See also ver. 11, and comp. the use of the word itforrjfu, Matt. xii. 23. In Gal. iii. 1, ' Foolish Galatians,' rls v/xas efidcricave, 'who hath fasci- nated you ? ' (For the use of the words pacrKavia and cpapfiaKeia in magic, among the Greeks, see Potter's Archceologia Greeca, vol. i. ch. xviii. p. 356, &c, Lond., 1775.) It is considered by some, that the word ' witchcraft ' is used meta- phorically, for the allurements of pleasure, Nah. iii. 4 ; Rev. xviii. 23, and that the ' sorcerers ' mentioned in ch.xxi.8, may mean sophisticators of the truth. The kindred word is used by metonymy, as signifying 'to charm,' 'to persuade by flattery,' &c. (Plato, Sympos. § 17), 'to give a temper to metals' (Odyss. ix. 393). The last named theory conc«rning the narrative of Samuel's appearance to Saul is maintained with much learning and ingenuity by Hugh Farmer (Disser- tation on Miracles, p. 472, &c. Lond. 1771). Jt is adopted by Dr. Waterland (Sermons, vol. ii. p. 267), and Dr. Delaney in his Life of David ; but is combated by Dr. Chandler with objections, which are, however, answered or obviated by Farmer. On the general subject see Michaelis's Laws of Moses, by Dr. A. Smith, London, 1314, vol. iv. pp. 83-93 ; Banier's History of Mythology, lib. iv. ; Winer's Biblisches Real- Worterbuch, art. ' Zauberei.' — J. F. D. WITNESS. It is intended in the present article to notice some of the leading and peculiar senses of this voluminous word. It occurs, 1st, in the sense of a person who deposes to the occur- rence of any fact, a witness of any event, *iy, Sept. ixdprvs or fxaprvp; Vulg. testis. The Hebrew word is derived from Tiy, to repeat. The Greek is usually derived from fxeipw, to ' divide,' ' decide,' &c, because a witness decides contro- versies (Heb. vi. 16) ; but Damm (Lex. Horn. col. 1495) derives it from the old word p.dpr\, ' the hand,' because witnesses anciently held up their hands in giving evidence. This custom among the ancient Hebrews, is referred to in Gen. xiv. 22; among the heathens, by Homer (II. x. 321), and by Virgil (JEn. xii. 196). God himself is represented as swearing in this manner (Deut. xxxii. 40 ; Ezek. xx. 5, 6, 15 ; comp. Num. xiv. 30). So also the heathen gods (Pindar, Olymp. vii. 119, 120). These Hebrew and Greek words, with their various derivations, pervade the entire subject. They are applied to a judicial witness in Exod. xxiii. 1 ; Lev. v. 1 ; Num. v. 13; xxxv. 30 (comp. Deut. xvii. 6; xix. 15; Matt, xviii. 16; 2 Cor. xiii. 1); Prov. xiv. 5; xxiv. 28; Matt. xxvi. 65; Acts vi. 13 ; 1 Tim. v. 19 ; Heb. x. 28. They are applied, generally, to a person who certifies, or is able to certify, to any fact which has come under his cognizance (Josh. xxiv. 22 ; Isa. viii. 2 ; Luke xxiv. 48 ; WITNESS. Acts i. 8, 22; 1 Thess. ii. 10 ; 1 Tim. vi. 12; 2 Tim. ii. 2; 1 Pet. i. 5). So in allusion to those who witness the public games (Heb. xii. 1). They are also applied to any one who testifies to the world what God reveals through him (Rev. xi. 3). In the latter sense the Greek word is applied to our Lord (Rev. i. 5 ; iii. 14). It is further used in the ecclesiastical sense of martyr [Martyr]. Both the Hebrew and Greek words are also applied to God (Gen. xxxi. 50 ; 1 Sam. xii. 5 ; Jer. xlii. 5 ; Rom. i. 9 ; Phil. i. 8 ; 1 Thess. ii. 5) ; to ina- nimate things (Gen. xxxi. 52 ; Ps. lxxxix. 37). The supernatural means whereby the deficiency of witnesses was compensated under the theo- cracy, have been already considered under the ar- ticles Adultery, Trial of ; Urim and Thtjh- mim. For the punishment of false witness and the suppression of evidence, see Punishment. For the forms of adjuration (2 Chron. xviii. 15), see Adjuration. Opinions differ as to what is meant by 'the faithful witness in heaven' (Ps. lxxxix. 37). Some suppose it to mean the moon (comp. Ps. lxxii. 5, 7; Jer. xxxi. 35, 36 ; xxxiii. 20, 21 ; Ecclus. xliii. 6) ; others, the rainbow (Gen. ix. 12-17). — 2. The witness or testimony itself borne to any fact is expressed by 1^ ; /jiaprvpla ; testimonium. They are used of judicial testimony (Prov. xxv. 18; Mark xiv. 56, 59). In ver. 55, Schleusuer takes the word /xapTvpia for /xdprvp, the abstract for the concrete (Luke xxii. 71 ; John viii. 17 ; Joseph. Antiq. iv. 8. 15). It denotes the testimony to the truth of anything generally (John i. 7, 19; xix. 35); that of a poet (Tit. i. 13). It occurs in Josephus (Cont. Apion. 1. 21). In John iii. 11, 32, Schleusner understands the doctrine, the thing professed ; in v. 32, 36, the proofs given by God of our Saviour's mission ; comp. v. 9. In viii. 13, 14, both he and Bretschneider assign to the word the sense of praise. In Acts xxii. 18, the former translates it teaching or instruction. In Rev. i. 9, it denotes the constant prof ession of Christianity, or testimony to the truth of the Gospel (comp. i. 2 ; vi. 9). In 1 Tim. iii. 7, f*.o.prvpia.v KcOvt\v means a good character (comp. 3 Ep. John 12; Ecclus. xxxi. 34; Joseph. Antiq. vi. 10. 1). In Ps. xix. 7, ' The testimony of the Lord is sure ' probably signifies the ordinances, institutions, &c. (comp. cxix. 22, 24, &c.) Those ambiguous words, 'He that believeth in the Son of God hath the witness in himself' (1 John v. 10), which have given rise to a variety of fanatical meanings, are easily understood, by explaining the word e%ei,, ' receives,' ' retains,' &c, i. e. the foregoing testi- mony which God hath given of his Son, whereas the unbeliever rejects it. The whole passage is obscured in the English translation by neglecting the uniformity of the Greek, and introducing the word ' record,' contrary to the profession of our translators in their Preface to the Reader (ad finem). The Hebrew word, with fxaprvpiov, occurs in the sense of monument, evidence, &c. (Gen. xxi. 30; xxxi. 44; Deut. iv. 45; xxxi. 26; Josh. xxiL 27; Ruth iv. 7; Matt. viii. 4; Mark vi. 11 ; Luke xxi. 13; James v. 3). In 2 Cor. i. 12, Schleusner explains fiaprvpiov, commendation. In Prov. xxix. 14 and Amos i. 11, iy? is pointed to mean perpetually, for ever, but the Septuagint gives els p.aprvptov ; Aquila els ert; Symmachus els del; Vulg. in WOLF. WOLF. 963 leternum. In Acts vii. 41 and Rev. xv. 5, we find fj a\, under the denomination of canis lu- paster, and also, it seems, of lupus Syriacus : they describe it as resembling the wolf, but smaller, with a white tip on the tail, &c. ; and give for its syno- nyme canis anthus, and the wolf of Egypt, that is, the \vkos of Aristotle, and thoes anthus of Ham.' Smith. This species, found in the mummy state at. Lycopolis, though high in proportion to its bulk, measures only eighteen inches at the shoulder, and in weight is scarcely more than one-third of that of a true wolf, whose stature rises to thirty and thirty-two inches. It is not gregarious, does not howl, cannot carry off a lamb or sheep, nor kill men, nor make the shepherd flee; in short, it is not the true wolf of Europe or Asia Minor, and is not possessed of the qualities ascribed to the species in the Bible. The next in Hemprich and Ehren- berg's description bears the same Arabic name ; it is scientifically called canis sacer, and is the pi- seonch of the Copts. This species is, however, still smaller, and thus cannot, be the wolf in ques- tion. It may be, as there are no forests to the south of Libanus, that these ravenous beasts, who never willingly range at. a distance from cover, have forsaken the more open country ; or else, that the derbonn, now only indistinctly known as a species of black wolf in Arabia and southern Syria, is the species or variety which anciently represented the wolf in Syria: an appellation fully deserved, if it be the same as the black species of the Pyre- nees, which, though surmised to be a wild dog, is even more fierce than the common wolf, and is equally powerful. The Arabs are said to eat the derbonn as game, though it must be rare, since no European traveller lias described a specimen from personal observation. Therefore, either the true wolf, or the derbonn. was anciently more abundant in Palestine, or the ravenous powers of those animals, equally belonging to the hywna and to a great wild dog, caused several species to be included in the .name [Dooj. — C. H. S. s q a 964 WOMAN. WOMAN, in Hebrew HK^, which is the femi- nine form of E^X, as among the ancient. Romans vira (found still in virago) from vir ; and in Greek avdpls from avftp : like our own term wo- man, the Hebrew is used of married and unmar ried females. The derivation of the word thus shows that according to the conception of the ancient Israelites woman was man in a modified form — one of the same race, the same genus, as man; a kind of female man. How slightly modified that form is, how little in original struc- ture woman differs from man, physiology has made abundantly clear. Different in make as man and woman are, they differ still more in character ; and yet the great features of their hearts and minds so closely resemble each other, that it re- quires no depth of vision to see that these twain are one ! This most important fact is character- istically set forth in the Bible in the account, given of the formation of woman out of one of Adam's ribs : a representation to which currency may have the more easily been given, from the apparent space there is between the lowest rib and the bones on which the trunk is supported. ' And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh : she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man.1 An immediate and natural inference is forthwith made touching the intimacy of the marriage-bond : ' Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh ' (Gen. ii. 21-24). Those who have been pleased to make free with this simple narrative, may well be required to show how a rude age could more effec- tually have been taught the essential unity of man and woman— a unity of nature which demands, and is perfected only in, a unity of soul. The conception of the Biblical writer goes beyond even this, but does not extend farther than science and experience unite to justify. There was solid reason why it was not good for Adam ' to be alone.' Without an help meet he would have been an imperfect being. The genus homo con- sists of man and woman. Both are necessary to the idea of man. The one supplements the qua- lities of the other. They are not two, but one flesh, and as one body so one soul. The entire aim, then, of the narrative in Genesis was, by setting forth certain great physical facts, to show the essential unity of man and woman, yet the dependance of the latter on the former ; and so to encourage and foster the tenderest and most considerate love between the two, founded on the peculiar qualities of each — pre-eminence, strength, intellectual power, and wisdom on the one side ; reliance, softness, grace, and beauty on the other, — at the same time that the one set of excellences lose all their worth unless as existing in the possession of the other. It will at once be seen that under th« influence of a religion, at the bottom of which lay those ideas concerning the relations of the sexes one to another, slavery on the part of the woman was impossible. This fact is the more noticeable, and it speaks the more loudly in favour of the divine origin of the religion of the Bible, because the East has in all times, down to the present day, kept woman everywhere, save in those places in which Judaism and Christianity have prevailed, in a state of low, even if in some cases gilded, WOMAN. bondage, making her the mere toy, plaything- and instrument of man. Nothing can be more painful to contemplate than the humiliating con- dition in which Islamism still holds its so-called free women — a condition of perpetual childhood — childhood of mind, while the passions receive constant incense; leaving the fine endowments of woman's soul undeveloped and inert, or crushing them when in any case they may happen to ger- minate ; and converting man into a self-willed haughty idol, for whose will and pleasure the other sex lives and suffers. It will assist the reader in forming a just con- ception of Hebrew women in the Biblical periods, if we add a few details respecting the actual condition of women in Syria. Mr. Bartlett {Walks about Jerusalem, p. 291, sq.) visited the house of a rich Jew in the metropolis of the holy land. We give the substance of his observations : ' On entering his dwelling we found him seated on the low divan, fondling his youngest child ; and on our expressing a wish to draw the costume of the female members of his family, he com- manded their attendance, but it was some time before they would come forward ; when however they did present, themselves, it was with no sort of reserve whatever. Their costume is chastely elegant. The prominent figure in the room was the married daughter, whose little husband, a boy of fourteen or fifteen as he seemed, wanted nearly a head of the stature of his wife, but was already chargeable with the onerous duties of a father. >An oval head dress of peculiar shape, from which was slung a long veil of embroidered muslin, admirably set off the brow and eyes : the neck was ornamented with bracelets, and the bosom with a profusion of gold coins, partly concealed by folds of muslin ; a graceful robe of striped silk, with long open sleeves, half-laced under the bosom, invested the whole person, over which is worn a jacket of green silk with short sleeves, leaving the white arm and braceleted hand at liberty. An elderly person sat on the sofa, the mother, whose dress was more grave, her tur- ban less oval, and of blue shawl, and the breast covered entirely to the neck, with a kind of orna- mented gold tissue; aud over all was seen a jacket of fur; she was engaged in knitting, while her younger daughter bent over her in conversa- tion; her dress was similar to that of her sister, but with no gold coins, or light muslin folds, and instead of large ear-rings, the vermilion blossom of the pomegranate formed an exquisite pendant, reflecting its glow upon the dazzling whiteness of her skin. We were surprised at the fairness and delicacy of their complexion, and the vivacity of their manner. Unlike the wives of Oriental Christians, who respectfully attend at a distance till invited to approach, these pretty Jewesses seemed on a perfect footing of equality, and chatted and laughed away without intermission. Many of the daughters of Judah, here and at Hebron, are remarkable for their attractions. Mr. Wolff describes one of them with enthu- siasm, and no small unconscious poetry — " the beautiful Sarah," whom bis lady met at a " wed- ding-feast." ' She was scarcely seated when she felt a hand upon hers, and heard a kind greeting. She turned to the voice and saw a most beautiful Jewess, whom I also afterwards saw, and I never beheld a more beautiful and well-behaved lady WOMAN. in my life, except the beautiful girl in the valley of Cashmere ; she looked like a queen in Israel. A lovely lady she was ; tall, of a fair com- plexion and blue eyes, and around her forehead and cheeks she wore several roses. No queen had a finer deportment than that Jewess had.1 WOMAN. 9G5 544. [Syro-Arabian costume. Indoor dress.] Mr. Bartlett was also admitted into the abode of a Christian family in Jerusalem, of whom he thus speaks (pp. 205-6) : — ' The interior of their houses is similar to those of the Jews. In our intercourse with them we were received with more ceremony than among the former. The mistress of the family is in attendance with her children and servants, and besides pipes and coffee, the guest is presented with, saucers of sweetmeats and small glasses of aniseed ; "which, when done with, are taken from him by his fair hostess or her servant, who kiss his hand as they receive them. They are more reserved, often standing during the visit. Their dress is more gorgeous than that of the Jewish women, but not so chastely elegant ; it suits well with the languor of their air, their dusky complexion, and large black eyes. The head-dress has a fantastic air, 545. [Garden dress.] like that of a May-day queen in England, and the bust is a little in the style of " Beauties by Sir Peter Lely, Whose drapery hints we may admire freely." A heavy shawl is gracefully wreathed round the figure, and the dress, when open, displays long loose trowsers of muslin and small slippers. The ensemble, it must be admitted, is very fasci- nating, when its wearer is young and lovely.' We now pass to the peasantry, and take from Lamartine a sketch of the Syrian women as seen by him at the foot of Lebanon, on a Sunday, after having with their families attended divine service, when the families 'return to their houses to enjoy a repast somewhat more sumptuous than on ordinary days : the women and girls, adorned in their richest clothes, their hair plaited, and all strewed with orange-flowers, scarlet wall- flowers, and carnations, seat themselves on mats before the doors of their dwellings, with their friends and neighbours. It is impossible to de- scribe with the pen the groups so redolent, of the picturesque, from the richness of their costume and their beauty, which these females then com- pose in the landscape. I see amongst them daily such countenances as Raphael had not beheld, even in his dreams as an artist. It is more than the Italian or Greek beauty ; there is the nicety of shape, the delicacy of outline, in a word, all that Greek and Roman art has left us as the most finished model ; but it is rendered more bewitching still, by a primitive artlessness of ex- pression, by a serene and voluptuous languor, by a heavenly clearness, which the glances from the blue eyes, fringed with black eyelids, cast over the features, and by a smiling archness, a harmony of proportions, a rich whiteness of skin, an indescribable transparency of tint, a metallic gloss upon the hair, a gracefulness of movement, a novelty in the attitudes, and a vibrating silvery tone of voice, which render the young Syrian girl the very houri of the visual paradise. Such ad- mirable and varied beauty is also very common ; I never go into the country for an hour without meeting several such females going to the foun- tains or returning, with their Etruscan urns upon their shoulders, and their naked legs clasped with rings of silver.' The ordinary dress of the women of Palestine is not perhaps much fitted to enhance their natu- ral charms, and yet it admits of ease and dignity in the carriage. Dr. Olin thus describes the customary appearance of both male and female : ' The people wear neither hats, bonnets, nor stockings; both sexes appear in loose flowing dresses, and red or yellow slippers; the men wear red caps with or without turbans, the women are concealed by white veils, with the exception of the eyes' (vol. ii. p. 137). The singular beauty of the Hebrew women, and the natural warmth of their affections, have conspired to throw gems of domestic loveliness over the pages of the Bible. In no history can there be found an equal number of charming female portraits. From Hagar down (^ Mary and Martha, the Eible presents pictures of wo- manly beauty, that are unsurpassed and rarely paralleled. But we should t present in these general remarks the formative influence of the female character as seen in the Bible, did not we refer these amiable traits of character to the original conceptions of which we have spoken, and to the pure and lofty reli- gious ideas which the Biblical books in general present. If woman there appears as the com- panion and friend of man, if she rises above the 966 WOMAN. condition of being a bearer of children to that noble position which is held by the mother of a family, she owes her elevation in the main to the religion of Moses and to that of Jesus. The first system — as a preparatory one — did not and could not complete the emancipation of woman. 546. [Young lady in full dress.] The Oriental influence modified the religious so materially, as to keep women generally in some considerable subjection. Yet the placing of the fondest desires and the glowing hopes of the na- tion on some child that was to be born, some son that was to be given, as it made every matron's heart beat high with expectation, raised the tone of self-respect among the women of Israel, and caused them to be regarded by the other sex with lively interest, deep regard, and a sentiment which was akin to reverence. There was, how- ever, needed the finishing touch which the Great Teacher put to the Mosaic view of the relations between the sexes. Recognising the fundamental truths which were as old as the creation of man, Jesus proceeded to restrain the much-abused fa- cility of divorce, leaving only one cause why the marriage-bond should be broken, and at the same time teaching that as the origin of wedlock was divine, so its severance ought not to be the work of man. Still further — bringing to bear on the domestic ties his own doctrine of immortality, he made the bond co-existent with the undying soul, only teaching that the connection would be refined with the refinement of our affections and our liberation from these tenements of clay in which we now dwell (Matt. v. 32 ; xix. 3, sq. ; xxii. 23, sq.). With views so elevated as these, and with affections of the tenderest benignity, the Saviour may well have won the warm and gentle hearts of Jewish women. Accordingly, the purest and richest human light that lies on the pages of the New Testament, comes from the band of high-minded, faithful, and affectionate women, who are found in connection with Christ from his cradle to his cross, his tomb, and his re- surrection. These ennobling influences have operated on society with equal benefit and power. Woman, in the better portions of society, is now a new being. And yet her angelic career is only just begun. She sees what she may, and what under the Gospel she ought to be ; and ere very long, we trust, a way will be found to employ in WOMAN. purposes of good, energies of the finest nature which now waste away from want of scope, in the ease and refinements of affluence, if not in the degradations of luxury — a most precious offering made to the Moloch of fashion, but which ought to be consecrated to the service of that God who gave these endowments, and of that Saviour who has brought to light the rich capabilities, and exhibited the high and holy vo- cation, of the female sex. — J. R. B. Women appear to have enjoyed considerably more freedom among the Jews than is now allowed them in western Asia, although in other respects their condition and employments seem to have been not dissimilar. At. present, women of all ranks are much confined to their own houses, and never see the men who visit their husbands or fathers ; and in towns they never go abroad with- out their persons and faces being completely shrouded : they also take their meals apart from the males, even of their own family. But in the rural districts they enjoy more freedom, and often go about unveiled. Among the Jews, women were somewhat less restrained in their intercourse with men, and did not generally conceal their faces when they went abroad. Only one instance occurs in Scripture of women eating-with men (Ruth ii. 14) ; but that was at a simple refection, and only illustrates the greater freedom of rural manners. The employments of the women were very various, and sufficiently engrossing. In the earlier, or patriarchal state of society, the daughters of men of substance tended their fathers' flocks (Gen. xxix. 9 ; Exod. ii. 16). In ordinary circumstances, the first labour of the day was to grind corn and bake bread, as already noticed. The other cares of the family occupied the rest of the day. The women of the peasantry and of the poor consumed much time in collect- ing fuel, and in going to the wells for water. The wells were usually outside the towns, and the labour of drawing water from them was by no means confined to poor women. This was usually, but not always, the labour of the even- ing ; and the water was carried in earthen vessels borne upon the shoulder (Gen. xxiv. 15-20; John iv. 7, 28). Working with the needle also occupied much of their time, as it would seem that not only their own clothes but those of the men were made by the women. Some of the needlework was very fine, and much valued (Exod. xxvi. 36 ; xxviii. 39 ; Judg. v. 30 ; Ps. xlv. 14). The women appear to have spun the yarn for all the cloth that was in use (Exod. xxxv. 25; Prov. xxxi. 19); and much of the weaving seems also to have been executed by them (Judg. xvi. 13, 14; Prov. xxxi. 22). The tapestries for bed-coverings, mentioned in the last-cited text, were probably produced in the loom, and appear to have been much valued (Prov. vii. 16). We have no certain information regarding the dress of the women among the poorer classes ; but it was probably coarse and simple, and not mate- rially different from that which we now see among the Bedouin women, and the female peasantry of Syria. This consists of drawers, and a long and loose gown of coarse blue linen, with some ornamental bordering wrought with the WOMAN. needle, in another colour, about the neck and bosom. The head is covered with a kind of WOMAN. 967 V£j»S«. 547. [Matron in full dress.] turban, connected with which, behind, is a veil, which covers the neck, back, and bosom [Veil]. We may presume, with still greater certainty, that women of superior condition wore, over their inner dress a frock or tunic like that, of the men, but more closely fitting the person, with a girdle formed by an unfolded kerchief. Their head- dress was a kind of turban, with different sorts of veils and wrappers used under various circum- stances. The hair was worn long, and, as now, was braided into numerous tresses, with trinkets and ribands (1 Cor. xi. 15 ; 1 Tim. ii. 9 ; 1 Pet. iii. 3). With the head-dress the principal orna- ments appear to have been connected, such as a jewel for the forehead, and rows of pearls (Sol. Song i. 10; Ezek. xvi. 12). Ear-rings were also 548. [Nose-jewel.] worn (Isa. iii. 20 ; Ezek. xvi. 12), as well as a nose-jewel, consisting, no doubt, as now, either of a ring inserted in the cartilage of the nose, or an ornament like a button attached to it. The nose- jewel was of gold or silver, and sometimes set with jewels (Gen. xxiv. 47 ; Isa. iii. 21). Brace- lets were also generally worn (Isa. iii. 19 ; Ezek. xvi. 11), and anklets, which, as now, were pro- bably more like fetters than ornaments (Isa. iii. 16, 20). The Jewish women possessed the art of stain- ing their eye-lids black, for efiect and expression (2 Kings ix. 30; Jer. iv. 30; Ezek. xxiii. 40); and it is more than probable that they had the present practice of staining the nails, and the palms of their hands and soles of their feet, of an iron-rust colour, by means of a paste made from the plant called hernia {Lawsonia inermis). This plant appears to be mentioned in Sol. Song i. 14, and its present use is probably referred to in Deut. xxi. 12; 2 Sam. xix. 24. The customs concerning marriage, and the cir- cumstances which the relation of wife and mother involved, have been described in the article Mar- riage. The Israelites eagerly desired children, and especially sons. Hence the messenger who first brought to the father the news that a son was born, was well rewarded (Job iii. 3 ; Jer. xx. 15). The event was celebrated with music ; and the father, when the child was presented to him, pressed it to his bosom, by which act he was understood to acknowledge it as his own (Gen. 1. 23 ; Job iii. 12 ; Ps. xxii. 10). On the eighth day from the birth the child was circumcised (Gen. xvii. 10) ; at which time also a name was given to it (Luke i. 59). The first-born son was highly esteemed, and had many distinguishing privileges. He had a double portion of the estate (Deut. xxi. 17) ; he exercised a sort of parental authority over his younger brothers (Gen. xxv. 23, &c. ; xxvii. 29 ; Exod. xii. 29 ; 2 Chron. xxi. 3); and before the institution of the Levitical priesthood he acted as the priest of the family (Num. iii. 12, 13; viii. 18). The patriarchs exercised the power of taking these privileges from the first-born, and giving them to any other son, or of distributing them among different sons; but this practice was overruled by the Mosaical law (Deut. xxi. 15-17). The child continued about three years at the breast of the mother, and a great festival was given at the weaning (Gen. xxi. 8 ; 1 Sam. i. 22-24; 2 Chron. xxxi. 6 ; Matt. xxi. 16). He remained two years longer in charge of the wo- men ; after which he was taken under the especial care of the father, with a view to his proper train- ing (Deut. vi. 20-25 ; xi. 19). It appears that those who wished lor their sons' better instruction than they were themselves able or willing to give, employed a private teacher, or else sent them to a priest or Levite, who had perhaps several others under his care. The principal object was, that they should be well acquainted with the law of Moses; and reading and writing were taught in subservience to this leading object. The authority of a father was very great among the Israelites, and extended not only to his sons, but to his grandsons — indeed to all who were de- scended from him. His power had no recognised limit, and even if lie put his son or grandson to death, there was, at first, no law by which he could be brought to account (^Gen. .\.\i. 14; xxxviil. 21). But Moses circumscribed thii WORD OF GOD. WORD OF GOD. power, by ordering that when a father judged his son worthy of death, he should bring him before the public tribunals. If, however, he bad struck or cursed his father or mother, or was refractory or disobedient, he was still liable to capital pu- nishment (Exod. xxi. 15, 17; Lev. xx. 9 ; Deut. xxi. 18-21).— Ed. WOOL. [Sheep.] WORD OF GOD. The mystical dogma of emanations is at once the most universal and most venerable of traditions ; so ancient that its source is hidden in the grey mists of extreme an- tiquity ; so universal that traces of it may be found throughout the whole world. Under every form, Persian or Egyptian, Greek or Roman, whether half hidden in the mythological folds of ancient fables, or more clearly expressed in the speculations of philosophers, whether blended with the law of Moses in the Cabbala and by Philo, or with the Gospel of Christ by the Gnos- tics and the Manichseans, in all forms and lan- guages the mystic dogma of emanations intimates the same great truth — that the many proceeded from the one, or, in plainer language, that every- thing good and fair, the universal frame of things and all that it contains, material and cor- poral, intellectual, moral, and spiritual, all pro- ceed from One Divine Mind, and are a manifest- ation of His power, wisdom, and goodness. This venerable dogma teaches us further, that of the Divine Essence we can know nothing (for how can the finite comprehend the infinite '(); but that of the power, wisdom, and goodness, and also of the will of God, sufficiently plain indications are made to us in the works and plan of creation. Such is the meaning of the dogma of emanation in every form. But this venerable tradition has unhappily been blended with contradictory at- tempts 1o account for the origin of evil. Our extracts from Professor Burton's Lectures on the Heresies of the Apostolic Age (in our articles on Gnosticism and Logos) have exhibited but a small part of the mass of presumption, supersti- tion, and error, which have arisen from this source, pouring a muddy and unwholesome stream, not only into mythology and mysticism, but into the language of philosophy. Let us add, that Professor Burton has treated the mys- tical dogma of emanations (its meaning, origin, progress, and developments, together with its bearings on the more mysterious doctrines of Christianity) with a learning, moderation, and fairness, which must make Iris work a storehouse both of valuable information and judicious criti- cism, equally deserving the attention of the scholar, philosopher, and divine. From this whole body of evidence it appears that a constant tradition had come down from the most remote antiquity ; that long before the time of the Gnostics, of Plato, or even of the Egyp- tians, this venerable tradition had its origin, and that a term expressive of tins tradition was ap- plied to Christ by the earliest converts to Chris- tianity, and was afterwards adopted by St.. John. In what sense and for what object the term logos was admitted by the apostle into Christianity, may be made matter of inquiry ; but the fact of its having been so derived and so applied is esta- blished by the text, the notes, and the scriptural quotations in Professor Burton's work, beyond the possibility of doubt. Both the fact itself and the object of the apustle are briefly stated by Professor Burton in the following words: — ' St. John was as far as possible from being the first to apply the term logos to Christ. I suppose him to have found it so universally applied (that is, both by Gnostics and Christians) that he did not attempt to stop the current of popular language, but only kept it in its proper channel, and guarded it from ex- traneous corruptions' (see Inquiries, p. 220). What those corruptions were may be seen in our article on Gnosticism, and in the works of Cudworth, Mosheim, Brucker, Beausobre, Matter, and Professor Burton, and in the remarks of Michaelis on the Gospel of St. John. Professor Burton's facts and inferences respecting the logos in St. John's Gospel are summed up in his seventh lecture, and in a series of valuable notes, . and, we may add, that the conclusion at which the learned author arrives respecting the logos of St. John is borne out by the following passage in Bishop Burnet's work upon the articles of our church. ' There are indeed points of a very ancient tra- dition in the world, of three in the Deity, called the Word or the Wisdom, and the Spirit or the Love, besides the fountain of both these, God : this was believed by those from whom the most ancient philosophers had their doctrines.- The author of the Book of Wisdom, Philo, and the Chaldee Paraphrasts, have many things that show that they had received these traditions from the former ages ; but it is not easy to determine what gave the first rise to them' (see Burnet, On the Articles, p. 47). If these views are correct, the term logos, as applied to Christ, represents one of the most an- cient, universal, and venerable of traditions. Professor Burton argues that if St. Paul, when he saw at Athens ' altars to the unknown God,' might fairly take occasion to reprove the Athe- nians as too much given to superstition, and im- mediately added, 'Him whom ye ignorantly worship declare I unto you,' there seems no reason why a similar course might not be taken by St. John with the Gnostic, as if he had in effect said, that Word or Wisdom of God whom you ignorantly seek declare I unto you. Thus also the Christian missionary in India might take as his text the opening verses of St. John's Gospel, and might preach to them ' Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.' Now can there be a doubt, were the word of God preached thus to the Indian, with a zeal according to know- ledge, that he would in deed and in truth find the words of the Apostle verified, 'As many as receive him, to them gave he power to becosae the sons of God, even to them that believe in his name.' And if it is thus with the Indian con- vert to Christianity in our own day, so also was it in the case of converts from the 'endless genea- logies' of Gnostic mysticism to 'the only begotten Son of God.' And when we ourselves view the more mysterious articles of our faith in relation to the primary objects, the primary means, and the primary effects of Christianity, many doubts and difficulties which have been raised respecting the character, history, and doctrines of Christ, will be obviated or removed, so that having ob- tained a more perfect understanding of the mean- ing and spirit of the Scriptures, we shall be less WORD OF GOD. WORLD. 969 likely to find objections to the expression and the letter, when we read, ' And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt amongst us (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth.' The conclusion to which we are brought by the series of remarks which are embodied in our ar- ticles Gnosticism, Logos, and Greek Philo- sophy, is, that an inquiry into the primary objects and effects of Christianity not only esta- blishes a large body of evidence respecting the benefits wrought out by Christianity, to wit, the removal of the three great evils, heathen sensualism, Gnoslic mysticism, and Jewish cere- monialism, throwing much light en the means by which this was effected, that is, upon the cha- racter, history, and doctrines of Christ, but that such knowledge tends to draw attention to the yet only in part accomplished objects of Chris- tianity, and to the means by which they are still to be carried out. Such inquiries tend also to prevent our mistaking means for ends, and warn us against that greatest of errors, which would introduce the very evils Christianity was intended to cure (sensualism, mysticism, and ceremonial- ism) under the disguise of remedies. Lastly, an inquiry into the primary objects, primary means, and primary effects of Christianity, draws our attention to whatever was in its nature peculiar to those times, and which requires to be so treated whenever its application to our own times is considered. It is, we repeat, by inquiring, in the first place, what were the evils for which Christianity was primarily and immediately in- tended to be the cure, that we shall best discover what are the evils for which Christianity is still the remedy ; and it is by inquiring what were the means by which Christianity overcame those evils, that we may hope to understand more clearly what are the means which Christianity possesses for resisting and overcoming like evils in the present times ; and it will be found that by adopting this mode of treatment, division, and order, we are most likely to remove from our own minds, and from the minds of others, diffi- culties and doubts respecting the character, the history, and the doctrines of Christ. To refer once more to the work of the learned theologian to whose labours we have been so much indebted. Assuredly there is nothing in Dr. Burton's theory respecting the application of the term logos to Christ to astonisli the scholar, or to perplex the divine, or to alarm the Chris- tian. Doubtless, to repeat a remark which can- not be too often insisted on, there is an absolute meaning in each of the texts of Scripture quoted by Dr. Burton, which is as true now as it was true then ; but in order to get at this absolute meaning we must attend to the relative meaning of each text, as it applied to the opinions, prac- tices, and persons to whom and to which it pri- marily related. If this is confessedly true re- specting the texts of Scripture which are con- nected with Judaism, why should it not be true in the case of texts which relate to Gnosticism V And why should not a knowledge of the history, philosophy, and language of the gentile converts to Christianity be useful to the scholar, divine, and Christian, in explaining all the texts of Scripture which Dr. Burton has illustrated with equal learning, moderation, and respect for the articles of our creed? It is thus that we may hope to obtain a better understanding of the meaning, and a fuller conviction of the truth, of the text which has so often been misunderstood and misapplied: 'After that in the wisdom of God, the world by wisd-om knew not God ; it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.' — J. P. P. WORLD is the English term by which our translators have rendered four Hebrew words : 1. 7*in, which is erroneously supposed by some to have arisen by transposition of letters from 1?n, comes from a root which signifies ' to rest,' to ' dis- continue,' and hence ' to cease from life,' ' to be at rest ;' and as a noun, ' the place of rest,' ' the grave.' The word occurs in the complaint uttered by He- zekiah when in prospect of dissolution, and when he contemplates his state among the inhabitants, notof the upper, but the lower world (Isa. xxxviii. 11) ; thus combining with many other passages to show that the Hebrews, probably borrowing the idea from the Egyptian tombs, had a vague con- ception of some shadowy state where the manes of their departed friends lay at rest in their ashes, re- taining only an indefinable personality in a land of darkness and ' the shadow of death ' (Job x. 21, 22). 2. "1711 means 'to conceal,' and deriva- tively 'any hidden thing,' hence 'age,' 'anti- quit)',' ' remote and hidden ages ;' also ' the world,' as the hidden or unknown thing (Ps. xlix. 1) ; in a similar manner, 3. D?iy (in the New Testament, aidv), the root-signification of which is •' to hide,' denotes a very remote, indefinite, and therefore unknown period in time past or time to come, which metaphysicians call eternity a parte ante, and eternity a parte post. In Ps. Ixxiii. 12, it is rendered ' world ;' but in this and in the previous instance, it may be questioned whether the natural creation is really meant, and not rather ' the woild ' in our metaphorical use of the term, as denoting the intelligent world, the ra- tional inhabitants of the earth, and still more specifically that portion of them with which we are immediately concerned. 4. 73T1 comes from a radix that signifies 'to flow,' and as water is the unfailing cause of fertility in the East, it denotes 'to be productive,' 'to bear fruit;' and as a noun, ' the fruit-bearer,' that is, the earth. This word is frequently rendered 'world' in the common version, but if more was intended than the earth on which we dwell, it may be doubted if the pas- sages in which it occurs will justify the trans- lators. In truth, the Hebrews had no word which com- prised the entire visible universe. When they wanted to speak comprehensively of God's crea- tion, they joined two words together and used the phrase ' heaven and earth ' (Gen. i. 1). We have already seen that they had an idea of an under world ; the meaning of their ordinary term for earth, j"")X, which signifies the Mower,' shows that they also regarded the earth as beneath the sun ; while the term for heaven; DSD'J'. denoting' what is elevated,' indicates that their view was that the heavens, or the heights, were above. Above, below, and under — these three relations of space comprehend their conception of the world. 070 WORM. WORM (n©")., lh)T\ ; Sept. ■aia&X.vt, Ta-n-pia, tr^4"sj Vulg vermis, putredo, tinea. No distinc- tion is observed in the use of the Hebrew words. For instance, HDI is applied to the creature bred in the manna (Exod. xvi. 24); to that which preys on human flesh (Job vii. 5; xvii. 14; xxi. 26; xxiv. 20 ; Isa. xiv. 11); and y?in, to the creature bred in the manna (Exod. xvi. 20j; to that which preys on human flesh (Isa. xiv. 11 ; lxvi. 24); on vegetables, as on the gourd of Jonah (iv. 7) ; and Olivines (Deut. xxviii. 39). The ancient Hebrews applied these words as indeterminately as the common people now do the words 'worm,' 'fly,' &e. The only distinction occurring in the Bible is l|JK> ny^in, the insect which furnished the crimson dye [Purple]. Similar indeterminateness at tends the Septuagint and Vulgate renderings. Aristotle also applies the word \t]£ to the larva of any insect — rUrei oe TTavra aK'JiKrjKa, ' all Insects produce a worm ' (Hist. Nat. v. 1 9). The insect which the manna is said to have 'bred, when kept till the morning;' HD"), J/?1])"!, ktkcoAti^, vermis (Exod. xvi. 20, 21), whatever it was, must be considered as miraculously pro- duced as a punishment for disobedience, since the substance now understood to be the same, keeps good for weeks and months, nor did the specimen laid up in the ark breed worms [Manna]. An insect is alluded to as in- juring vines and grapes (Deut. xxviii. 39) ; J??in, ctkwA.77|, vermis. The Greeks had a dis- tinct name for this insect, and probably as early as the Septuagint translation of Exodus was made, ver. fy and ?£ (Theophrastus, De Causis, iii. 27). It was called by the Latins invol- volus, convolvulus, and volvox (Plautus, Cis- tell. Act iv. Sc. 2; Pliny, Hist. Nat. xvii. 28). Rosenmiiller thinks it to have been the scarabceus hirtellus, or the scarabesus muticus hirtus testaceo-nigricans of Linnaeus (Syst. Nat. torn, i., pt. iv. p. 1577). Forskal calls it the pyralis vitana, or pyralis fasciana. A species of beetle, lethrus cephalotes, is injurious to the vines of Hungary ; other species of beetles do similar mischief (rynchites, bacckus, cumolpus). Vine-leaves in France are frequently destroyed by the larva of a moth, tortrix vitana,. In Germany another species does great injury to the young branches, preventing their expansion by the webs in which it involves them ; and a third species, tortrix fasciana, makes the grapes them- selves its food (Kirby and Spence, Introduction to Entomology, vol. i. p. 205, London, 1 828). It may serve as an illustration of the looseness of popular diction respecting insects, to remark, that what the farmers call ' the fly ' in the turnip, is in reality a small species of jumping beetle, for which turnip-flea would be a more appropriate name. In Job vii. 5, the patriarch complains that his ' flesh is clothed with worms and clods of dust,' HD1, aairpla yol- '• p- 84). Allusion is made in various passages to ' worms ' preying upon the dead. Thus Job, in the anticipation of death, says, ' I have said to the worm, Thou art my mother, and my sister' (Job xvii. 14 ; comp. xxi. 26 ; xxiv. 20 ; Isa. xiv. 1 1 ; lxvi. 24; Ecclus. x. 11 ; xix. 3 ; 1 Mac. ii. 62). In one apparent instance of this nature (Job xix. 26), ' though after my skin worms destroy this body,' the word ' worms' is supplied by our translators. These passages, and especially the latter, have contributed to the po- pular impression in this country, that the humarc body, when buried in the grave, is consumed by worms. The Oriental method of burial in wrap- pers, and of depositing the corpse in caves, &c, would no doubt often afford the spectacle of the human body devoured by the larvae of different insects ; but the allusions in Scripture to such sights do not apply to burial in this country, ex- cept where the body, as was the case in London till lately, is buried in a wooden coffin only, in vaults which have communications with the ex- ternal air, when even in the centre of the metropo- lis, the writer has found swarms of a species of fly, of a cimex aspect, which insinuates itself between the lid and lower part of the coffin, and whose lar- vae battened in the corpse within, while the adult insect sported in the lurid atmosphere of the vault. The ' gourd ' of Jonah is said to have been de- stroyed by ' a worm' (Jon. iv. 7) ; ]"lJJ?in, ck&jAtj^; Vulg. vermis ligno ; which words have nothing corresponding to them in the present Hebrew text (see Vulgate of 2 Kings xxiii. 8). The word ' worm ' occurs metaphorically (Job xxv. 6), ' how much less man that is a worm ' (i"1D~), cravpia, putredo), ' and the son of man which is a worm ;' ny?in, (tkwXt]^, vermis (Ps. xxii. 6 ; Isa. xli. 14). Homer also compares a man of inferior con- sequence to a worm, Sxrre ovcoiA^I 67rl yairj Ktiro radus (II. xiii. 654). It is possible that the word y?in was also given as a proper name ; thus ' Tola ' occurs among the descendants of Issachar (Gen. xlvi. 13), and was also the name of a person of the same tribe (Judg. x. 1). Bochart conjec- tures that the name was given to these children by their parents because the tribe of Issachar was one of the meanest, and they were themselves in needy circumstances, or that these were very sickly children when bom. He remarks, how- ever, that the first Tola became a great man, WORMWOOD, STAR OF. the head of the Tolaites (Num. xxvi. 23), who, in the days of David, amounted to 22,600 (1 Chron. vii. 2) ; and that the latter judged Israel twenty years ( Judg. x. 1, 2). ' Worm' occurs in the New Testament in a figurative sense only (Mark ix. 44, 4G, 48), ' Their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched ;' words borrowed from Isa. lxvi. 24, which originally relate to a temporal state of tilings, but which had also become, in our Lord's time, the popular repre- sentation of future punishment (Judith xvi.' 17 ; Ecclus. vii. 17) [Soul ; Tophet]. Origen here understands ' worm' in a metaphorical sense, as denoting the accusation of conscience; but Austin, Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Theo- phylacr, &c, contend that the word should be understood literally. Several mistranslations occur. In Isa. li. 8, ' and the worm shall eat them like wool,' the word DD, means a species of moth [Moth]. In Mic. vii. 17, the words, ' like worms of the earth, ^"IK vnT2, literally, ' creepers in the dust,' ' serpents ;' V ulg, reptilia tense (comp. Deut. xxxii. 24). In 1 Mace. ii. 62, ' Fear not the words of a sinful man, for his glory shall be dung and worms;' instead of KOizp'ia, ' dung,' should be read cra-rrpia, ' rottenness,' as in the Sept. of Job vii. 5 ; xxv. 6. So also in Ecclus. xix. 3, ' Moths and worms shall have him that cleavet.h to harlots,' instead of cnjTes, ' moths,' read vrfir<\, ' rottenness.' Bochart {Hierozoicon, ed. Rosenmiiller, Lips. 1793-1796, vol. iii. ; De Vermibus). — J. F. D. WORMWOOD, STAR OF (Rev. viii. 10, 11), the Apocalyptic appellation for the national demon of Egypt, set forth in the vision of Patmos as a luminous idol presiding over ' the third part of the waters.' The vocation of this star was to destroy by poison, not by fire, sword, or famine ; hence the Talmudic phrase ' poison in Egypt ' is put in opposition to food or 'corn in Ephraim' as the symbol of blasphemy and idolatry {Dab. Talmud in Menacoth, fol. 85. 1). Philo also, speaking of Helicon, ' the scorpion-like slave,' represents him as having cast up rhv PdyvizT taicbv ihv, ' the Egyptian venom,' against the dwellers in Palestine {De Legal, p. 102, ed. Turneb.). Daniel gives a clear intimation of his acquaint- ance with the prevalent belief that, like Persia, Greece, and Judaea, every nation had a celestial prince or patron, "ItS* sar, or sire (Dan. x. 21). This sar lame-ala, ' prince on high,' of the Rab- bins had also a representative image in the ma- terial firmament (Rabbi Salomon on Dan. xi. 1), some (Tv^n he/el) glittering son of the morning (Isa. xiv. 12), or 'light of lights' {more reo) among the splendid stars or intercessors above {M-litzim; Ezek. xxxii. 7, 8), who were 'dark- ened ' when Pharaoh was extinguished. Eusebius {Dcmonstr. Evangelic, iv. 8. 10) and Tamblichus {De JEgyptiorum Mysteriis, § v. c. 25) both men- tion ' the angels who preside over the nations ;' and Rabbi Solomon, the chief of the Gallican synagogue in his day, affirms that ' before God wreaks his vengeance on a people he punishes their prince, because it is written, " The Lord shall punish the host of the high ones on high," and then follows "and the kings of the earth upon the earth ;" and, moreover, it is written, " How art thou fallen, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" ' {Comment, on Isa. xiii. 13). Hence, as the WRITING. 971 literal fulfilment of Isa. xxiv. 21, the Jews yet anticipate ' the extirpation of all the Gentiles, with their princes on high and their [pretended] Gods ' {Nizzehon, p. 255, in Wagenseil's Tela, Jgnea). St. John seems to employ this symbol of Egyptian poison and bitterness, as (he prototype of a great Anti-Christian Power, which would poison and embitter the pure waters of Christian life and doctrine, converting them into ' worm- wood,' mitzraim being a figure of apostasy and rebellion.— F. R. L. WRESTLING. [Games.] WRITING is an art by which facts or ideas are communicated from one person to another by means of given signs, such as symbols or letters. It has been a generally received and popular opinion that writing was first used and imparted to mankind when God wrote the Ten Command- ments on the tables of stone ; but the silence of Scripture upon the subject would rather suggest that so necessary an art had been known long before that time, or otherwise the sacred historian would probably have added this extraordinary and divine revelation to the other parts of his information respecting the transactions on Mount Sinai. After the gift of language (which was indis- pensable to rational creatures), it would seem that writing was the most highly beneficial and im- portant boon which could be conferred on men possessed of intellect and understanding, who from their circumstances must divide and spread over the whole earth, and yet be forced from various necessities to maintain intercourse with each other. In the earliest times families must have sepa- rated : the pastoral life required much room for flocks and herds ; and as the wealth of each house- hold increased, the space between them must have become greater, and every year would compel more distant migrations from these unfailing causes (Gen. xiii.). But even in the first ages of the world it would be requisite not only to preserve unimpaired the knowledge of God, but it would be desirable to have some method of transmitting and receiving intelligence from the scattered communities, of a more certain nature than verbal messages ever can be ; nor is it probable that events which were destined to act upon all time should be left to float upon the uncertain stream of tradition, when by the art of writing they might be accurately conveyed without addition or diminution to the latest posterity. It is scarcely possible that the wondrous gift of writing was withheld until the world had been twice repeopled, and 2513 years had rolled by. The working in iron and the construction of musical instruments are recorded in Gen. iv. 21, 22 ; whilst neither before nor after that period is the origin or discovery of writing any more alluded to than is the origin of language itself. Is it then too much to believe that God by revelation imme- diately imparted to mankind the power of writing ? For it does not appear that any person ever in- vented an alphabet who had not previously heard of or seen one; and every nation which possessed the art always professed to have derived its know- ledge from a God. Without writing, no informa* tion could have been conveyed to remote nations with accuracy. Few persons repeat a thing ii the precise words in which a detail was given to them, 972 WRITING. and the most trifling change in an expression may- throw the whole into error and confusion, or en- tirely destroy the sense. But such cannot be the case if writing be the means of communication, for whatever is thus . definitely stated may be equally well understood by those to whom it is addressed as by those who write it. God never works unnecessary miracles ; but that must have been the case if, for upwards of two thousand years, the memory and speech of various men were alone the depositaries of His dealings with mankind. It was a matter of the utmost consequence that the most exact accounts should have been pre- served of the creation, the fall of man, and many prophecies of deepest interest to unborn genera- tions. The ages and genealogies of the patriarchs; the measures of the ark ; the first kingly govern- ment in Assyria ; the history of Abraham and his descendants for 430 years, including minute cir- cumstances, changes, and conversations, in many different countries ; could scarcely have been per- fectly preserved by oral descent for twenty cen- turies, unless the antediluvians and their imme- diate posterity did not partake of the failings of Christians in the defects of forgetfulness and exaggeration ; but allowing the art of writing to have been given icith language, there is no diffi- culty, and it becomes obvious that each transac- tion would be recorded and kept exactly as it was either revealed or happened. It is not a vain thing to suppose that the his- tory of creation, and all following events, as briefly related by Moses, were taken from ancient documents in the possession of the Israelites : this opinion is maintained by Calmet (fJommen- taire Litteral, vol. i. part i. p. 13). The gifts of inspiration, like those of nature, are never superfluous. When God had once revealed to the Patriarchs what was ' in the beginning,' there was no further need for a new revelation ; and the Hebrew historian might compile from pre- vious records, what was sufficient for mankind to know respecting the origin of ' things which are seen.' In the fifth chapter of Genesis it is said, ' This is the book of the generations.' If there had been merely a traditionary recollection of ' the genera- tions of Adam,' preserved only by transmis- sion from one memory to another for more than a thousand years, the term book would have been most inapplicable, and could not have been used; and to suppose that a written document had been referred to, cannot be deemed as forcing the con- struction of the word in this instance, more than when it is also believed that ' the book of the generation of Jesus Christ' (Matt. i. 1) was like- wise copied from a national register, and not given by a new revelation or old tradition, for the genealogies in the New Testament were not of less importance than those of the sons of Shem (Gen. xi.), and yet the former were taken from public records. Why, then, should a miracle have been wrought to preserve the latter? The book of Job is considered to be the most ancient written document extant, and is deemed an authentic narrative and' not an imaginative poem (James v. 11). By some persons it is thought to be the work of Moses (see Mason Good's Diss, to Translation of Job); but this is de- nied by Bishop Lowth (Lectures on Hebrew Poetry). Lightfoot and others think Elihu was WRITING. the author. This is the more credible opinion ; for it is scarcely possible to believe that long con- versations between several j3ersons in the land of Uz should have been orally preserved for perhaps several centuries, and theu recorded with minute accuracy by an individual who spoke a different language, and who received it from the lips of strangers and foreigners. Hales asserts that Job lived at most two hun- dred years before the Exode. Our version of the Scriptures fixes the time of Job at b.c. 1520, which allows but twenty-nine years between his era and that of the departure of the Israelites from Egypt. Be that as it may, the declarations of Job prove that letters and books were known to him and Ills countrymen, who were a people quite distinct from the Hebrews. In the nineteenth chapter of Job (ver. 23, 24) it is said, ' Oh, that my words were now written ! Oh, that they were printed in a book ! that they were graven with an iron pen ." Also Job xxxi. 35, ' mine adversary had written a book.' Such ex- pressions could not have been used, and would have had no meaning, if the art of writing had been unknown ; nor could there have been such terms as book and pen, if the things themselves had not existed. If, then, it be granted that the Book of Job was written, and such expressions were cuTrent before the Exode, it becomes evident from sacred history, that writing was not only in use before ' the law was given on Mount Sinai, but that it was also known amongst other patriarchal tribes than the children of Israel. The supposed writer, Elihu, the son of Barachel theBuzite (Job xxxii. 2), was a descendant of Nahor, the brother of Abraham (Gen. xxii. 20, 21), and might thus be possessed of whatever arts the family of Terah had inherited from Noah. Another singular phrase is found in Job : ' My days are swifter than a post' (ix. 25). This would imply the re- gular transmission of intelligence by appointed messengers from place to place ; and although it does not follow as a necessary consequence that such a person on all occasions carried letters, it is more than probable that such a mode of con- veying important communications was established in civilized countries, where books, liens, and writing were known. Before the law was given by God to Moses, he had been commanded to write the important trans- actions which occurred during the progress of the Israelites from Egypt to Canaan : for in Exod. xvii. 14, it is recorded, 'And the Lord said unto Moses, write this for a memorial in a book.' An account of the discomfiture of the Amalekites is the first thing said to have been written by Moses. This battle was fought ere the people left Rephi- dim (Exod. xvii. 13), from whence they departed into the wilderness of Sinai (Exod. xix. 2); and, therefore, that writing was drawn up before the events on the mount took place. The law was 'written by the finger of God' (Exod. xxxi. 18), B.C. 1491, and since that time there is no question as to the existence of the art of writing. The com- mandments were written on two tables of stone (Exod. xxxiv. 1); but immediately afterwards, when Moses was interceding with God for the sinning idolaters, he says, ' Blot me out of thy book which thou has written' (Exod. xxxii. 32). If writing in alphabetical characters had been WRITING. seen by Moses for the first time on the 'tables of stone,' he could not from these have had the faintest conception of a book, which is a thing composed of leaves or rolls, and of which the stones or slates could have given him no idea. Forty years after the law was written, the Israelites took possession of the land of Canaan, where the 'cities were walled and very great' (Num. xiii. 28). Amongst other places which were conquered was one called by them Debir, but whose original name was Xirjath-sepher, or the City of Books, or Kirjath-sannah, the City of Letters (Jos. xv. 49 ; Judges i. 1 1). The Canaan- ites could not have gained their knowledge of letters or of books from the Hebrews, with whom they were entirely unacquainted or at war, and must, therefore, have derived them from other sources. The Canaanites being the descendants of Canaan, a son of Ham, had probably preserved and cultivated the same arts and sciences which Misraim, another son of Ham, carried into Egypt (Gen. x. 6). ' The Book of Jasher' (Josh. x. 13), is men- tioned by Joshua, but whether as a chronicle of the past or present is uncertain. Books and writing must have been familiar to Moses, 'who was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians' (Acts vii. 22), for at the time of his birth that people had arrived at a high pitch of civilization. Since the penetration of Dr. Young discovered the key by which the hitherto mysterious hieroglyphics can be deciphered, it has been found that from the earliest era Egypt possessed a knowledge of writing. Without, cre- diting the very distant, period given by some chronologists, which fixes the beginning of the first regal dynasty there 5SG7 years B.C., or as M. Prisse, the learned hieroglyphist, says, in his private accounts, ' unnumbered ages before the erection of the pyramids,' it is not presuming too much to think that the chronology adopted by Usher is too short to include many Scriptural transactions. Chronology is a matter of opinion, founded on data supplied by various sources of information, and not an article of faith: it may therefore be altered and improved in conformity witli well-ascertained facts and legitimate evidence. Hales, agreeing with Josephus, says that Menes, the first king of the first Egyptian dynast)7, began his reign b.c. 2412 years {Chronology) ; but previous to his assuming the royal dignity, Egypt had been long ruled by a succession of priests, and in their theocracy Thoth or Hermes, a god, was considered by them to be the inventor of letters (the Egyptians never acknowledged demi-go&s) ; and in no instance is the discovery of. the art of writing ever attributed to men (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, v. 2). There were three kinds of writing practised in Egypt: — 1st. The hicroglyphical, or sacred sculp- tured characters ; 2d. The hieratic, or sacerdotal, which was abbreviated ; 3rd. The demotic, or enchorial, which became the hand in general use. Leipsius, in The Annals of Arclucological Cor- respondence, Rome, 1S37, maintains that the Egyptians had two colloquial dialects in use, which were very distinct ; the classical or sacer- dotal, and the popular. The sacred, or hiero- glyphic writing, as well as the hieratic of all ages, presents the former, whilst the demotic pre- sents the common dialect. Wilkinson thinks WRITING. 973 the hieroglyphical was the sole mode of writing in the more ancient times, yet allows the hieratic to have been employed in remote ages ; but if M. Prisse"s discovery be true, of a papyrus said to be written in the reign of an hitherto unknown king in the first Memphite dynasty, and in the hieratic character, its extreme antiquity will be found coeval with the hieroglyphical. 549. [Ancient Writing materials.] If there be no enchorial writing found (for monuments or tombs which were sacred could not have common characters upon them) until about B.c. 600, that circumstance does not prove that such a mode of writing was unknown in the earliest times ; for from the account of the burial of Jacob (Gen. 1. 9), and from the Song of Moses (Exod. xv. 1, and xiv. 26), it is clear that horsemen were a part of the Egyptian army, and yet there is but one solitary specimen of a man on horse- back amongst the infinite variety of sculptured representations of their manners and customs (Wilkinson, vol. i. p. 289). The priestly rulers of Egypt had continued, like the framers of caste in India, to bind down by certain definite and established laws (even to the meagre delineation of the human body in painting) every mode of action, and from that circumstance it may be inferred that the manner in which trials before the judges were carried on, was not an innovation of later times. There were royal and priestly scribes, but there must have been a different grade, employed by other classes, as in their law-courts the complainant always stated his case in writing, and the defendant also replied in writing; from which circumstance (were there none other) it may be inferred that there was some common popular writing for such purposes, besides that of the sacred hieroglyphics, or sacerdotal mode. In the paintings which represent the judgment after death, Thoth, who is called the 'Secretary of Jus- tice,' is always portrayed with his tablet and style, just, beginning to write. The Memnonium is said to have been built about the time of Moses (h.c. 1571); over the entrance gateway to the library was inscribed, ' Remedy, or Balsam for Souls.' Over the moul- dering door which led to the bibliotlietical reposi- tory, Champollion read, written over the beads of Thoth and Safkh (who were the male and female deities of arts, sciences, and literature), the re- markably appropriate titles of ' President of the Library,' and ' Lady of Letters.' In the Sanc- tuary at Luxor, erected 200 years before the birth 974 WRITING. WRITING. of Moses, tbere is an inscription over Thoth, which begins, ' Discourse of the Lord of the Divine Writings.' The number of works ascribed to Thoth is stated to have been 36,525. The great Pyramid is supposed to have been erected at least 2123 years n.c. ; in a.d. 1837. Col. Howard Vyse found in the low chamber the name of Suphis (Cheops) scored in red ochre on the rough stones behind the front facing of the room (see Ancient Egypt, by G. R. Gliddon, Vice-consul at Cairo ; Boston, U.S. 1844). ' In Egypt nothing was done without writing. Scribes were employed on all occasions, whether to settle public or private questions, and no bar- gain of any consequence was made without the voucher of a written document1 (Wilkinson, vol. i. p. 183). On a tomb said to have been built about the time the Pyramids were erected, is seen the representation of a steward giving an account of the number of his master's flocks and herds (vol. iv. p. 131). The scribes and stewards, who were employed in domestic suits, conveyancing, and farming, could not have used the sacred characters for their affairs, nor could they have been understood by the people gene- rally if they had ; it may therefore be concluded that the enchorial writing was that in popular practice. Pliny is in error in saying that papyrus was not used for paper before the time of Alexander the Great, for papyri of the most remote Pharaonic period are found with the same mode of writing as that of the age of Cheops (Wilkinson, vol. iii. p. 150). A papyrus now in Europe, of the date of Cheops, establishes the early use of written documents, and the antiquity of paper made of the byblus, long before the time of Abraham {Ancient Egypt, p. 13). As papyrus was ex- pensive, few documents of that material are found, and these are generally rituals, sales of estates, and official papers (papyrus was used until about the seventh century of our era). A soldier's leave of absence has been discovered written upon a piece of broken earthenware. No one can dispute the extreme antiquity of Egypt as a nation, nor that, at the time of Moses, its inhabitants were in a state of advanced civil- ization. From the researches of travellers and hieroglyphists in late years, it is proved beyond doubt that many of the hieroglyphical inscrip- tions were written before the Exodus of the He- brews, and that writing must therefore have been in use at or before that period ; but it yet remains to be said from whence the art was derived. ' The earliest and surest data' (respecting al- phabetical language) ' are found in the genuine palfflographical monuments of the Phoenicians.' ' Amongst the most ancient coins yet known is one supposed to be b.c. 394 ' [Alphabet] ; but these ancient specimens of engraving or writing prove nothing as to the origin of the thing itself. It is possible that written characters can be traced no higher than from a Phoenician stock, for they were the immediate posterity of Noah's family. The argument here stated, as to the credible sup- position that writing was given with language, is not at all invalidated by gems or coins which exhibit the oldest or most primitive form of writ- ten characters known. The Hindoos and Chinese profess to have had amongst them the art of writing from time imme- morial ; but although they cannot establish the truth of their endless chronologies, yet it is highly probable that they have been acquainted with that mode of communicating and transmitting ideas from remote ages. Eight Chinese bottles have been found in different tombs at Thebes; on five of them is written the same inscription, ' The flower opens, and lo ! another year.' In China writing is still symbolical, there being 80,000 characters, to which there are 214 radical keys. Letters are generally allowed to have been intro- duced into Europe from Phoenicia, and to have been brought from thence by Cadmus into Greece, about fifteen centuries before Christ, which time coincides with the eighteenth Egyptian dynasty; but whilst none may deny such to have been the origin of European alphabetical characters, it does not prove the Phoenicians to have been the inventors of writing. That people occupied Phoenicia in very early times after the Deluge, and if the patriarch and his sons possessed the knowledge of letters, their posterity would doubt- less preserve the remembrance and practice of such an invaluable bequest, which would be con- veyed by their colonists into Greece and Africa. In the New World it was found that the Peru- vians had no system of writing, whilst the Mex- icans had made great advances in hieroglyphical paintings. The Aztecs, who preceded the Mexicans, had attained much proficiency in the art, such as was adequate to the wants of a people in an imperfect state of civilization. ' By means of it were re- corded all their laws, and even their regulations for domestic economy ; their tribute rolls, speci- fying the imposts of the various towns ; their mythology, rituals, and calendars, and their po- litical annals carried back to a period long be- fore the foundation of the city. They digested a complete system of chronology, and could spe- cify with accuracy the dates of the most important events in their history, the year being inscribed on the margin against the particular circumstances recorded ' (Prescott's Conquest of Mexico, i. 8S). A Mexican MS. usually looks like a collec- tion of pictures, each forming a separate study. Their materials for writing were various. Cotton cloth, or prepared skins, were used, but generally a fine fabric made from the leaves of the aloe {Agave Americana'), from which a sort of paper was prepared, somewhat resembling Egyptian papyrus, which could be made more soft and beautiful than parchment. When written, the documents were either made up into rolls or else into volumes, in which the paper was shut up like a folding screen, which gave the appearance of a book. When the Spaniards arrived in Mexico, great quantities of these MSS. were in the coun- try ; but the first Christian archbishop, Zurmar- raga, caused them to be collected from every part of the country, and had the whole burnt ! (Prescott). In later times there have been two instances in which persons in semi-barbarous countries have constructed an alphabet, from having heard that by such means ideas were communicated in many lands. A man of the Greybo tribe, on the African coast, and a Cherokee, are said to have formed a series of letters adapted to their respective lan- guages ; but in neither case was it the result of intuitive genius (Gliddon, p. 17). YANSHUPH. YANSHUPH. 975 Various have been the materials and imple- ments used for writing. As was before observed, paper made from the papyrus is now in existence which was fabricated 2000 years B.C. Moses hewed out of the rock two tables of* stone on which the Commandments were written (Exod. xxxiv. 1). After that time the Jews used rolls of skins for their sacred writings. They also en- graved writing upon gems or gold plates (Exod. xxxix. 30). Before the discovery of paper the Chinese wrote upon thin boards with a sharp tool. Reeds and canes are still used as writing implements amongst the Tartars ; and the Persians and other Orientals write for temporary purposes on leaves, or smooth sand, or the bark of trees. The Arabs in ancient times wrote their poetry upon the shoulder-blades of sheep. The Greeks occasionally engraved their laws on tables of brass. Even before the days of Homer table-books were used, made of wood, cut in thin slices, which were painted and polished, and the pen was an iron instrument called a style. In later limes these surfaces were waxed over, that the writing might be obliterated for further use. Table-books were not discontinued till the four- teenth century of the Christian era. At length the superior preparations of paper, parchment, and vellum, became general, and superseded other materials in many, and all en- tirely civilized, nations. The European mode of writing, with its perfect and complete apparatus of pen, ink, and paper, is too well known to need description in these pages, and would be irrelevant in an article like the present. — S. P. Y. YANSHUPH (M^J'j Lev. ii. 17; Dent, xiv. 16 ; Isa. xxxiv. 11). In the Septuagint and Vulgate it is translated 'Ibis,' but in our version 'Owl;' which last Bochart supports, deriving the name from S]K>3 nesheph, ' twilight ' [Owl]. It may be remarked that 'Ibis' in Europe, and even in mediaeval and modern Egypt, was a very indefinite name, until Bruce first pointed out, and Cuvier afterwards proved, what we are to understand by that denomination. All reason- ing therefore upon the question by interpreters of the Hebrew anterior to the establishment of this fact must of necessity be inconclusive; and though Parkhurst asserts that in Coptic Yan- suph was rendered by HIP and IP, his inference remains without force so long as he and the Copts are ignorant what bird these names really in- dicate. It. is not, as the older commentators believed, a great bird of the heron or stork tribes (Ardca of Linn, and Hasselquist) ; nor, as was subsequently the opinion, a Tantalus, though correct in its former definition. The real bird is not the Tantalus Ibis of Linnams, or Abu-ba- Rara, but one of smaller dimensions, probably the Abou-bannes of Bruce, and certainly the Ibis.religiosa of Cuvier, who discovered speci- mens in the mummy state, such as are now not uncommon in museums, and, by comparison, proved them to be identical with his sacred ibis. This species is in size somewhat les3 than a fowl, has the head and neck bare, and a curved bill resembling that of a curlew, all black; the feet and quill-feathers the same ; and from the rump there are projected over the tail a number of black, delicate, unbarbed feathers, giving a. marked character to the biid, which in all the rest of its plumage is white. The species is no- where abundant ; it. occurs, in the season, on the Upper Nile, a few in company, seldom coming down into Lower Egypt, but extending over central Africa to the Senegal. A bird so rare about Memphis, and totally unknown in Pales- tine, could not be the Yanshuph of the Penta- teuch, nor could the black ibis which appears about Damietta, nor any species, strictly tenants of hot and watery regions, be well taken for it. Bochart and others, who refer the name to a species of owl, appear to disregard two other names ascribed to owls in the 16th verse of the same chapter of Leviticus. I f, therefore, an owl was here again intended^ it would have been placed in the former verse,, or near to it. In this diffi- culty, considering that the Seventy were not entirely without some grounds for referring the Hebrew Yanshuph to a wader ; that the older commentators took it for a species of ardea; and that the root of the name may refer to twilight, indicating a crepuscular bird ; we are inclined n> select the night heron, as the only one that unites these several qualities. It is a bird smaller than the common heron, distinguished by two or three white plumes hanging out of the black-capped nape of the male. In habit it is partially noc- turnal. The Arabian Abou-onk ?, if not the idea- 550. [Night Heron of Arabia.] tical, is a close congener of the species, found in every portion of the temperate and warmer cli- mates of the earth : it is an inhabitant of Syria, and altogether is free from the principal objections made to the ibis and the owl. The Linnacan single Ardca ni/cticorax is now typical of a genus of that name, and includes several species of night herons. They fly abroad at dusk, frequent the sea shore, marshes, and rivers, feeding on mol- lusca, Crustacea, and worms, and have aery of a most disagreeable nature. This bird has beea confounded with the night hawk, which is a goat- sucker (caprimulgus), not a hawk. — C. H. S. 976 YEAR. YEAR (n3K>). The Hebrew year consisted of twelve unequal months, which, previously to the exile, were lunar, as may be seen from the names of the moon, EHn and m\, which sig- nify respectively a month (so with us moon from month, German mond) ; though Credner, relying too much on hypothesis, especially on the as- sumption of the late origin of the Pentateuch, has S endeavoured to show that, until the eighth cen- - tury before Christ, the Israelites reckoned by solar years. The twelve solar months made up only 354 days, constituting a year too short by no fewer than eleven days. This deficiency would have soon inverted the year, and could not have existed even for a short period of time without occasioning derangements and serious inconvenience to the Hebrews, whose year was so full of festivals. At an early day then we may well believe a remedy was provided for this evil. The course which the ancients pursued is un- known, but Ideler (Chronol. i. 490) may be con- sulted for an ingenious conjecture on the subject. The later Jews intercalated a month every two, or every three years, taking care, however, to avoid making the seventh an intercalated year. The supplementary month was added at the termina- tion of the sacred year, the twelfth month (Fe- bruary and March), and as this month bore the name of Adar, so the interposed month was called Veadar (11^1), or Adar the Second. The year, as appears from the ordinary reckoning of the months (Lev. xxiii. 34; xxv. 9; Num. ix. 11; 2 Kings xxv. 8 ; Jer. xxxix. 2 ; comp. 1 Mace, iv. 52; x. 21), began with the month Nisan (Esth. iii. 7), agreeably to an express direction given by- Moses (Exod. xii. 2; Num. ix. 1). This com- mencement is generally thought to be that of merely the ecclesiastical year ; and most Jewish, and many Christian authorities, hold that the civil year originally began, as now, with the month Tisri ; the Rabbins conjecturally assigning as the reason that this was the month in which the creation took place. Josephus' statement is as follows : ' Moses appointed that Nisan should be the first month for their festivals, because he brought them (the Israelites) out of Egypt in that month ; so that this month began the year, as to all the solemnities they observed to the honour of God, although he preserved the original order of the months as to selling and buying and other ordinary affairs {Antiq. i. 3. 3). Wirier, however, is of opinion that the commencement of the yrear with Tisri, together with the beginning of the sacred year in Nisan, is probably a post-exilian arrangement, designed to commemorate the first step of the return to the native soil of Palestine (Esth. iii. 1 ; Neh. vii. 73 ; viii. 1, sq.) ; an idea, however, to which they only can give assent who hold that the changes introduced on the return from Babylon were of a constructive rather than a restoratory nature — a class of authorities with which the writer has few bonds of connection. The reader should consult Exod. xxiii. 16 ; xxxiv. 22. But the commencement of the civil year with Tisri, at whatever period it originated, had after the exile this advantage, — that it ac- corded with the era of the Seleucidaa, which began in October. The ancient Hebrews possessed no such thing as a formal and recognised era. Their year and their months were determined and regu- YSOP. lated, not by any systematic rules of astronomy, but by the first view or appearance of the moon. In a similar manner they dated from great national events, as the departure from Egypt (Exod. xix. 1 ; Num. xxxiii. 38; 1 Kings vi. 1); from the ascension of monarchs, as in the books of Kings and Chronicles ; or from the erection of Solo- mon's temple (1 Kings viii. 1 ; ix. 10); and at a later period, from the commencement of the Babylonish captivity (Ezek. xxxiii. 21 ; xl. 1). When they became subjects of the Graco-Syriau empire they adopted the Seleucid era, which began with the year B.C. 312, when Seleucus conquered Babylon. — J. R. B. YSOP or HYSSOP. Reference was from Hyssop to the German form of the name, as the author was engaged in a course of investigation, which he hoped would lead to some satisfactory information. The result he communicated in a paper read before the Royal Asiatic Society, and published in their Journal for November, 1844. From the passages in which esobh and hyssop are mentioned in the Old and New Testaments, and which are enumerated in the article Hyssop, (he author inferred that any plant answering to all that was required should, in the first place, be found in every one of the places and situations where it is mentioned as existing in Scripture. Thus it should be found in Lower Egypt (Exod. xii. 22) ; in the desert of Sinai (Lev. xiv. 4, 6, and 52; Num. xix. 6, 18) ; in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem (John xix. 29) ; secondly, that it should be a plant growing on walls or rocky situations (1 Kings iv. 33): and, finally, that it should be possessed of some cleansing properties (Ps. li. 7) ; though it is probable that in tfiis passage it. is used in a figurative sense. It should also be large enough to yield a stick, and it ought, moreover, to have a name in the Arabic or cognate languages, similar to the Hebrew name. This, we have before seen, is written Esob and Esobh, also Esof; and in the Chaldee version it is Esofa. The author stated that his attention had been drawn to the subject when collating the list of drugs in his MS. catalogue, mentioned vol. i. p. 6, with that in the great work, entitled Con- tinns, of Rhages, by finding that the Arab author described two kinds of hyssop, one of them grow- ing on the mountain of the temple, that is, of Jerusalem. Celsius, indeed (Hierobot. i. 407), mentions the same plant — Hyssopus in montibxis Hierosolymoj-um, or in Arabic Zoofa bujebal al kuds. Jerusalem is now called by the Arabs El Kuds, 'the Holy,' and by Arabian writers Beit-el-MuIidis, or Beit-al-Mukuddus, ' the Sanctuary.' In connection with this the author observed, that Burckhardt had described a plant, called alsef, which he had met with in several wadeys about Mount Sinai, creeping up the mountain side like a parasitic plant, its branches covered with small thorns. From the name and description the author inferred that this must be the caper plant {capparis spinosa of botanists), or some closely allied species. For he found on investigation, that though kabir is the ordinary Arabic name of the caper, it is also called asaf, as may be seen in the Alfag. TJdwich, translated by Mr. Gladwin. So ha the Kamus, asub is al kubbus ; in Freytag's lexicon Arabico-Latinum, asaf is translated capparis, &c. The similarity in name being sufficiently great, the author pro- ZABAD. ceeds to show that the caper bush corresponds in nearly every thing that is required. Thus the caper plant is well known to be indi- genous in Lower Egypt, as mentioned by De Lile, Forskal, and Prosper Alpitms, &c. Bove says, ' Le Mont Sainte Catherine est au sud-sud-ouest du Mont Sinai. Dans les deserts qui environ- nent ces montagnes j'ai trouve capparis spinosa.' He also found it among the ruins near Jerusalem, as Belon and Rauwoli' had done previously. That' it grows upon walls is sufficiently well known. De Candolle says it is found 'in muris et rupestribus Europae Australis et Orientis.' That it possessed, or was supposed to possess, cleansing or detergent properties, may be seen in the various accounts of it from the time of Hip- pocrates. Pliny remarks especially, that if is use- ful in a skin disease nearly allied to leprosy. It is not a little remarkable, that it was in the cere- monies of purification from this disease that esof was employed by the Israelites. It remains only to see whether the caper plant would yield a stick long enough for a man with his outstretched arm to be able to raise the sponge dipped in vi- negar to the lips of our Saviour. The cross, to be sufficiently strong, could not have been very lofty, to admit being borne along ; and therefore an ordinary sized stick would be long enough for the purpose. Such a stick a shrub like the caper plant, growing in a congenial climate, would sup- ply. Pliny describes the capparis as a shrub of a hard and woody substance. The term calamus was, however, used in a much more general sense than is generally supposed [Kaneh], and Pliny employs the phrase ' imprimere calamum,' to sig- nify grafting ; as ' kalm lugana ' is used in the pre- sent day in India. Besides this, every part of the caper plant was preserved in vinegar in ancient times (Pliny) ; which may explain the pre- sence of the vessel full of vinegar ; and a reed may have been employed in collecting the flowei buds, or fruit of the caper bush, growing on walls or the sides of rocks. If such a stick were em- ployed, it would naturally be called the caper, or hyssop stick. Hence the author concludes, that as the caper plant has an Arabic name, asuf, similar to the Hebrew esob or esof, as it is found in Lower Egypt, in the deserts of Sinai, and in New Jerusalem ; as if. grows upon rocks and 'walls, was always supposed to be possessed of cleansing qualities, is large enough to yield a stick ; and as its different parts used to be preserved in vinegar, as its buds now are ; he is warranted, from the union of all these properties in this plant, corre- sponding so closely to those of the original esof, in considering it as proved that the caper plant is the hyssop of Scripture. — J. F. R. 1. ZABAD (13T, God-given ; Sept. Za/Se'5), a person of the tribe of Judah, mentioned in 1 Chron. ii. 3(>, among the descendants of Sheshan, by the marriage of his daughter with an Egyptian servant [Jarua; SheshanJ. 2. ZABAD, a grandson of Ephraim, who, with others of the family, was killed during the life- VOL. II. ZACCHEUS. 977 time of Ephraim, by the men of Gath, in an attempt which the Hebrews seem to have made to drive oft" their cattle (1 Chron. vii. 21). [See Ephraim.] 3. ZABAD, son of an Ammonitess named Shi- meath, who, in conjunction with Jehozabad, the son (if a Moabitess, slew King Joash, to whom they were both household officers, in his bed (2 Kings xii.21; 2 Chron. xxiv. 25, 26). In the first of these texts he is called Jozarhar. The sacred historian does not appear to record the mongrel parentage of these men as suggesting a reason for their being more easily led to this act, but as indi- cating the sense which was entertained of the enormity of Joash's conduct, that even they, though servants to the king, and though only half Jews by birth, were led to conspire against him ' for the blood of the sons of Jehoiada the priest.' It would seem that their murderous act was not abhorred by the people; for Amaziah, the son of Joash, did not venture to call them to account till he felt, himself well established on the throne, when they were both put to death (2 Kings xiv. 5, 6 ; 2 Chron. xxv. 3, 4). 4. ZABAD, one of the persons who, at the in- stance of Ezra, put away the foreign wives they had taken after the return from captivity (Ezra x. 27). ZABUD 0-13T, bestowed; Sept. Zafrovff), a son of Nathan the prophet, who held under Solo- mon the important place of 'king's friend.' or favourite (1 Kings iv. 5), which Hushai had held under David (1 Chron. xxvii. 33), and which a person named Elkanah held under Ahaz (2 Chron. xxviii. 7). Azariah, another son of Nathan, was 'over all the (household) officers' of king Solomon ; and their advancement may doubt- less be ascribed not only to the young king's re- spect for the venerable prophet, who had been his instructor, but to the friendship he had contracted with his sons during the course of education. The ' office, or rather honour, of ' friend of the king,' we find in all the despotic governments of the East. It gives high power, without the public responsibility which the holding of a regular office in the state necessarily imposes. It implies the possession of the utmost confidence of, and familiar intercourse with, the monarch, to whose person 'the friend' at all times has access, and whose influence is therefore often far greater, even in matters of state, than that of the recognised mi- nisters of government. ZABULUN. [Zebui.un.] ZACCHEUS 0K3J1; Z*i7V ; Sept. 2eA/*oiv), a moun- tain in Samaria near to Shechem (Judg. ix. 48). Many suppose this to be the same with the Zal- mon of Ps. lxviii. 15: 'where the Almighty scattered kings in it (the land), there was snow as in Zalmon;' i. e. the fields were whitened with the bones of the slain. So Gesenius : but Ro- binson says ' The only high mountains around Shechem are Ebal and Gerizim, and these would be first covered with snow.' True: but may not Zalmon lie another name for either Ebal or Gerizim ? ZALMUNNA. [Zebah and Zai.munna.] ZAMZUMMIMS (D^TOT ; Sept. ZoXowlv\ a race of giants dwelling anciently hi the territory 3k3 9S0 ZANOAH. afterwards occupied by the Ammonites, but ex- tinct before the time of Moses (Deut. ii. 20). ZANOAH (ITI3T, marsh, bog), one of the towns of Judah ' in the valley ' (Josh. xv. 34) ; which Jerome identifies with a village called in his time Zanua, on the borders of Eleutheropolis, on the road to Jerusalem (Onomast. s. v. ' Zano- hua'). The name of Zanua is still connected with a site on the slope of a low hill not far east of Ain Shems (Beth-shemesh). ZAPHNATH-PAANEAH (JJJVJb f\3|3?, Sept. yovQoixtyavhx), an Egyptian name given by Pharaoh to Joseph in reference to his public office. The genuine Egyptian form of the word is supposed to have been more nearly preserved by the Sept. translator, as above ; in which both Jablonsky (Optcsc. c. 207-216) and Rosellini (Mon. Storici, i. 185) recognise the Egyptian PsOtmfeneh, ' the salvation,' or ' saviour of the age;' which corresponds nearly enough with Jerome's interpretation, ' Salvator mundi.' Ge- senius and others incline, however, rather to regard its Egyptian form as Psontmfeneh, ' sustainer of the age,' which certainly is a better meaning. This, in Hebrew letters, would pro- bably be represented by nj?33 riJVQ, Paznath- Paaneah ; but in the name as it now stands the letters ^?Q are transposed, in order to bring it nearer to the Hebrew analogy. Concerning the Egyptian root snt, sustentare, tueri, see Champol- lion, Gramm. p. 380 ; Pezron, Lex. Copt. p. 207. ZAREPHATH. [Sarepta.] ZEALOTS. The followers of Judas the Gau- lonite or Galilean [Judas]. Josephus speaks of them as forming the ' fourth sect of Jewish philo- sophy,1 and as distinguished from the Pharisees chiefly by a quenchless love of liberty and a con- tempt of death. Their leading tenet was the unlawfulness of paying tribute to the Romans, as being a violation of the theocratic constitution. This principle, which they maintained by force of arms against the Roman government, was soon converted into a pretext for deeds of violence against their own countrymen; and during the last days of the Jewish polity, the Zealots were lawless brigands or guerrillas, the pest and terror of the land. After the death of Judas, and of his two sons, Jacob and Simon (who suffered cruci- fixion), they were headed by Eleazar, one of his descendants, and were often denominated Sicarii, from the use of a weapon resembling the Roman Sica (Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 1 ; De Bell. Jtid. iv. 1-6 ; vii. 8 ; Lardner's Credibility, pt. i. b. i. ch. 6, 9; Kitto's Palestine, pp. 741, 751).— J. E. R. ZEBAH AND ZALMUNNA, chiefs of the Midianites, whom Gideon defeated and slew [Gideon]. ZEBEDEE (ZejSeScuos; in Hebrew, m? Zabdi, nl,*T2T) Jehovah's gift), husband of Sa- lome, and father of the apostles James and John (Matt. x. 2 ; xx.. 20 ; xxvi. 37 ; xxvii. 56 ; Mark iii. 17 ; x. 35 ; John xxi. 2). He was the owner of a fishing boat on the lake of Gennesaret, and, with his sons, followed the business of a fisher- man. He was present, mending the nets with them, when Jesus called James and John to fol- low him (Matt. iv. 21 ; Marki. 19 ; Luke v. 10) ; and as he offered no obstacle to their obedience, but remained alone without murmuring in the ZECHARIAH. vessel, it is supposed that he had been previously a disciple of John the Baptist, and, as such, knew Jesus to be the Messiah. At any rate, he must have known this from his sons, who were certainly disciples of the Baptist. It is very doubtful whether Zebedee and his sons were of that very abject condition of life which is usually ascribed to them. They seem to have been in good circum- stances, and were certainly not poor. Zebedee was the owner of a ' ship,' or fishing smack, as we should call it — and, perhaps, of more than one ; he had labourers under him (Mark i. 20) ; his wife was one of those pious women whom the Lord allowed ' to minister unto him of their sub- stance ;' and the fact that Jesus recommended his mother to the care of John, implies that he had the means of providing for her; whilst a still further proof that Zebedee's family was not alto- gether mean, may be found, perhaps, in the fact, that John was personally known to the high-priest (John xviii. 16). 1. ZEBOIM (D*jny ; Sept. ZaPl/i), a valley and town in the tribe of Benjamin (1 Sam. xiii. 18; Neh. xi. 34). 2. ZEBOIM (D^NhX; Sept. ^e/W^), a city in the vale of Siddim, destroyed along with Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. x. 19; xiv. 2; Hos. xi. 8). [Jsodom.] ZEBUL (?3f, a dwelling ; Sept. ZefiovX), an officer whom Abimelech left in command at Shechem in his own absence ; and who dis- charged with fidelity and discretion the difficult trust confided to him (Judg. ix. 29-41). See the particulars in Abimelech. ZEBULUN (J^IT, habitation; Sept. Za- fiovXdiv), the sixth and last son of Jacob by Leah (Gen. xxx. 19, seq.; xxxv. 23), who, in the order of birth, followed his brother Issachar, with whom, in history, as in the promised land, he was closely connected (Deut. xxxiii. 18). Zebulun was the founder of the tribe which bore his name (Gen. xlvi. 14), and which, while yet in the wilderness, was respectable for numbers (Num. i. 30 ; xxvi. 26). Zebulun obtained its lot in north Palestine between Naphtali on the north and Issachar on the south, while Asher stretched along both it and Naphtali on the west (Josh. xix. 10, seq.). The country of the Zebulonites bordered towards the east on the south-western side of the lake of Tiberias, and was connected with the Mediterranean by means of Carmel (Gen. xlix. 13). Its inhabitants in consequence took part in seafaring concerns (Joseph. Antiq. v. 1. 22). They failed to expel all the native race, but made those of them that remained tributaries (Judg. i. 30). One of the judges of Israel, Elon, was a Zebulonite (Judg. xii. 11). A city lying on the borders of Asher also bore the name of Zebulun (Josh. xix. 27). — J. R. B. ZECHARIAH (HnST, whom Jehovah re- members; Sept. and N. T. Zaxaptas), a very common name among the Jews, borne bv the following persons mentioned in Scripture. I. Zechariah, son of Jeroboam II., and four- teenth king of Israel. He ascended the throne in B.C. 772, and reigned six months. It has been shown in the article Israel, that from undue deference to a probably corrupted number, which ZECHARIAH. ZECHAR.AH. 981 ascribes 41 years fo the reign of Jeroboam II., chronologers have found it necessary to suppose anarchy or an interregnum of 11 years, during which his son Zechariah was kept from the throne. .But there is no appearance of this in the sacred narrative, and it was not likely to follow a reign so prosperous as Jeroboam's. The few months of Zechariah's reign just sufficed to evince his inclination to follow the bad course of his predecessors; and he was then slain by Shallum, who usurped the crown. With his life ended the dynasty of Jehu (2 Kings xiv. 29; xv, 8-12). 2. Zechariah, high priest in the time of Joash, king of Judah. He was son, or perhaps grandson, of Jehoiada and Jehosheba ; the latter was the aunt of the king, who owed to her his crown, as he did his education and throne to her husband [Joash]. Zechariah could not bear to see the evil courses into which the monarch even- tually fell, and by which the return of the people to their old idolatries was facilitated, if not en- couraged. Therefore, when the people were as- sembled at one of the solemn festivals, he took the opportunity of lifting up his voice against the growing corruptions. This was in the presence of the king, in the court of the tempore. The people were enraged at his honest boldness, and with the connivance of the king, if not by a di- rect intimation from him, they seized the pontiff, and stoned him to death, even in that holy spot, ' between the temple and the altar.' His dying cry was not that of the first Christian martyr, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge' (Acts vii. 60), but ' The Lord look upon it, and require it ' (2 Chron. xxiv. 20-22). It is to this dreadful affair that our Lord alludes in Matt, xxiii. 35; Luke xi. 51. At least, this is the opinion of the best, interpreters, and that which has most proba- bility in its favour. The only difficulty arises from his being called the son of Barachias, and not of Jehoiada : but this admits of two explanations — either that Zechariah, though called the 'son' of Jehoiada in the Old Testament, was really his grandson, and son of Barachias, who perhaps died before his father ; or else that, as was not uncom- mon among the Jews, Jehoiada had two names, and Jesus called him by that by which he was usually distinguished in his time, when the Jews had acquired a reluctance to pronounce those names which, like that of Jehoiada, contained the sacred name of Jehovah. See Doddridge, Le Clerc, Kuinoel, Wetstein, and others, on Matt, xxiii. 35. 3. Zechariah, described as one 'who had un- derstanding in the visions of God' (2 Chron. x.wi. 7). It is doubtful whether this eulogium indicates a prophet, or simply describes one emi- nent for his piety and faith. During his lifetime Uz/.iah, king of Judah, was guided by his coun- sels, and prospered : but went, wrong when death had deprived him of his wise guidance. Nothing is known of this Zechariah's history. It is possible that he may be the same whose daughter became the wife of Ahaz, and mother of Hezekiah (2 Kings xvi. 1, 2; 2 Chron. xxix. 1). 1. Zechariah, son of Jeberechiah, a person whom, together with Uiijah the high priest, Isaiah took as a legal witness of his marriage witli ' the prophetess1 (Isa. viii. 2). This was in the reign of Aha/., and the choice of the prophet shows that Zechariah was a person of consequence. Some confound him with the preceding ; but the dis- tance of time will not admit their identity. He may, however, have been the descendant of Asaph, named in 2 Chron. xxix. 13. 5. Zechariah, the eleventh in order of the minor prophets, was ' the son of Berechiah, the son of lddo, the prophet.' The meaning of the word nj)"J3 has been disputed, some affirm- ing that lddo was not the grandfather, as the formula seems to indicate, but the father of Zechariah, and thus rendering the clause with Jerome, 'filium Barachiae. filium Addo,' or with some MSS. of the Septuagint, ruv rov Bapaxiov, vibv 'ASdw. Jerome likewise refers fo his pecu- liar rendering in his notes. Others of the fathers also adopted it, such as Cyril of Alexandria, who attempts to solve the difficulty created by it by maintaining that the one was the natural, the other the spiritual parent, of the prophet — Berechiah being his father Kara ryv (rdpica, and lddo the prophet, Kara TryeDfia. Others have jus- tified this translation by assigning both names to Zechariah's father, as if he had worn them succes- sively at. different periods of his life, or as if one of them had been a cognomen. But the version of Jerome and the Seventy is a false one. Analogy declares against it, and its origin is' to be traced to Ezra v. 1, and vi. 14, where the prophet is named only ' Zechariah the son of lddo.' The words Ntiy Q denote merely ' grandson of lddo ' (Gesenius, Thesaur. p. 216), and the paternal name may have been omitted, because of its com- parative obscurity, while the grand-paternal name is inserted, because of its national popularity. Jt was a very foolish mistake of Jerome to confound the lddo named in connection with this prophet as his ancestor with lddo the seer, who flourished some centuries before under Jeroboam, first king of Israel (Hieronym. Comment, ad Zach.). The term N'QJ in the first verse belongs, not to lddo, but to Zechariah, as the Septuagint and Vulgate properly render it, or as it. appears in Henderson's version — ' The word of Jehovah was communi- cated to Zechariah (the son of Berechiah, the son of lddo) the prophet.' The probability is, that lddo is the person mentioned in Nehemiah xii. 4, as one of the sacerdotal prophets, who had re- turned from Babylon with Joshua and Zerubbabel. Berechiah, son of lddo, and father of Zechariah, seems to have died young, for in Nehemiah xii. 16, Zechariah is said lobelddo's successor, under Joiakim, son of Joshua. Thus the prophet's de- scent is, in Ezra, traced at once from his grand- father. Compare Gen. xxix. 5, anil xxxi. 28 — 55. Should this theory be correct, Zechariah exercised the priestly as well as the prophetical office. The name signifies one whom Jehovah remembers — a name very common among the Jews (three others bearing it seem also to have been prophets), and not therefore specially given to this inspired agent, as Jerome thought, because in his days fivrjfeli Kvpiov, remembrance of God and of his kindness prevailed intensely among the returned exiles. Zechariah seems to have entered upon his office in early youth (Zech. ii. 4). The period of his introduction to it is Bpeoitied as the eighth month of the second year of Darius, a very short thrie later than the prophet Haggaa, The mission of Zechariah had especial reference to the affairs 9S2 ZECHARIAH. of the nation that had been restored to its terri- tory. The second edict, granting permission to rebuild the temple, had been issued, and the office of Zechariah was to incite the flagging zeal of the people, in order that the auspicious" period might he a season of religious revival, as well as of ec- clesiastical re-organization; and that the theo- cratic spirit might resume its former tone and energy in Ihe breasts of all who were engaged in the work of restoring the ' holy and beautiful house,' where their fathers had praised Jehovah. The prophet assures them of success in the work of re-erecting the sacred edifice, despite of every combination against them ; for Zerubbabel 'should bring forth the head stone with shouting, Grace, grace unto it — comforts them with a solemn pledge that, amidst fearful revolutions and conquests by which other nations were to be swept away, they should remain uninjured ; for, says Jehovah, ' He that toucheth you toucheth the apple of mine eye' — sketches in a few vivid touches the bless- ings and glory of the advent of Messiah — im- parts consolation to those who were mourning over their unworthiness, and pronounces a heavy doom on the selfish and disobedient, and on such as in a remote age, imbibing their spirit, ' should fall after the same example of unbelief.' The pseudo-Epipihanius record's some prodigies wrought by Zechariah in the land of Chaldaa, and some wondrous oracles which he delivered ; and he and Dorotheus both agree in declaring that the prophet died in Judaa in a good old age, and was buried beside his colleague Haggai. Book. — The book of Zechariah consists of four general divisions. I. The introduction or inaugural discourse (ch. i. 1-16). II. A series of nine visions, extending onwards to ch. vii., communicated to the prophet in the third month after his installation. These visions were, 1. A rider on a roan horse among the myrtle- trees, with his equestrian attendants, who report to him the peace of the world, symbolizing the fit- ness of the time for the fulfilment of the promises of God, his people's protector. 2. Four horns, symbols of the oppressive ene- mies by which Judah had been on all sides sur- rounded, and four carpenters, by whom these horns are broken, emblems of the destruction of these anti-theocratic powers. 3. A man with a measuring-line describing a wider circumference for the site of Jerusalem, as its population was to receive a vast increase, fore- showing that many more Jews would return from Babylon and join their countrymen, and indi- cating the conversion of heathen nations under the Messiah, when out of Zion should go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. 4. The high-priest Joshua before the angel of the Lord', with Satan at his right hand to oppose him. The sacerdotal representative of the people, clad in the filthy garments in which he had re- turned from captivity, seems to be a type of the guilt and degradation of his country ; while for- giveness and restoration are the blessings which the pontiff symbolically receives from Jehovah, when he is reclad in holy apparel and crowned with a spotless turban, the vision at the same time stretching into far futurity, and including the advent of Jehovah's servant the Branch. ZECHARIAH. 5. A golden lamp-stand fed from two olive- trees, one growing on each side, an image of the value and divine glory of the theocracy as now seen in the restored Jewish church, supported, not ' by might nor by power, but by the Spirit of Jehovah,' and of the spiritual development of the old theocracy in the Christian church, which en- lightens the world through the continuous influ- ence of the Holy Ghost. (Dr. Stouard, in his Commentary on ZecJiariah, without foundation supposes thai this candelabrum had twice seven lamps, seven on each side, emblematizing the church of God in both dispensations, Jewish and Christian.) 6. A flying roll, the breadth of the temple- porch, containing, on its one side curses against the ungodly, and on its other anathemas against the immoral, denoting that the head of the theo- cracy, the Lord of the temple, would from his place punish those who violated either the first or the second table of his law (Hengstenberg's Christol. ii. 45). 7. A woman in an ephah (at length pressed down into it by a sheet of lead laid over its mouth), borne along in the air by two female figures with storks' wings, representing the sin and punishment of the nation. The fury, whose name is WicKEnNEss, is repressed, and trans- ported to the land of Shinar; i. e. idolatry, in the persons of the captive Jews, was for ever removed at that period from the Holy Land, and, as it were, taken to Babylon, the home of image-wor- ship (for another meaning, see Jahn's Introduc- tion, Turner's translation, p. 428). 8. Four chariots issuing from two copper mountains and drawn respectively by red, black, white, and spotted horses, the vehicles of the four winds of heaven, a hieroglyph of the swiftness and extent of divine judgments against the former oppressors of the covenant people. Judgments seem issuing from God's holy habitation in the midst of the ' mountains which are round about Jerusalem,' or from between those two hills, the ravine dividing which forms the valley of Jeho- shaphat, directly under the temple mountain, where dwelt the head of the theocracy. 9. The last scene is not properly a vision, but an oracle in connection with the preceding visions, and in reference to a future symbolical act to be performed by the prophet. In presence of a de- portation of Jews from Babylon, the prophet was charged to place a crown on the head of Joshua the high-priest, a symbol which, whatever was its "immediate signification, was designed to prefigure the royal and sacerdotal dignity of the man whose name is Branch, who should sit as 'a priest upon his throne.' The meaning of all the preceding varied images and scenes is explained to the prophet by an at tendant angelus interpres. III. A collection of four oracles delivered at various times in the fourth year of Darius, and partly occasioned by a request of the nation to be divinely informed, whether, now on their happy return to their fatherland, the month of Jerusa- lem's overthrow should be registered in their sacred calendar as a season of fasting and humiliation. The prophet declares that these times should in future ages be observed as festive solemnities. IV. The 8th, 9th, 10th, and 1 1th chapters con- tain a variety of prophecies unfolding the fortunes ZECHARIAH. ZECHARIAH. 983 of the people, their safety in the midst of Alexan- der's expedition, and their victories under the Maccabaean chieftains, including the fate of many of the surrounding nations, Hadrach (Persia), Damascus, Tyre, and Philistia. V. The remaining three chapters graphically portray the future condition of the people, espe- cially in Messianic times, and contain allusions to the siege of the city, the means of escape by the cleaving of the Mount of Olives, with a sym- bol of twilight breaking into day, and living water issuing from Jerusalem, concluding with a blissful vision of the enlarged prosperity and holiness of the theocratic metropolis, when upon the bells of the horses shall be inscribed ' holiness unto the Lord.' Integrity. — The genuineness of the latter por- tion of Zechariah, from ch. ix. to xv., has been disputed. Among the first to suggest doubt on this subject was Joseph Mede, who referred chaps. ix., x., and xi. to an earlier date, and ascribed them to Jeremiah. Remarking on Matt, xxvii. 9, 1 0, he says : ' It may seem the Evangelist would inform us that those latter chapters ascribed to Zachary, namely, the ninth, tenth, eleventh, &c, are indeed the prophecies of Jeremy, and that the Jews had not rightly attributed them. Certainly, if a man weigh the contents of some of them, they should in likelihood be of an elder dale than the time of Zachary, namely, before the capti- vity ; for the subjects of some of them were scarce ill being after that time As for their being joined to the prophecies of Zachary, that proves no more they are his than the like adjoining of Agur's proverbs to Solomon's proves that they are therefore Solomon's, or that all the psalms are David's because joined in one volume with Da- vid's psalms' (Epist. xxxi.). His opinion was adopted in England by Hammond, Kidder, N'ew- come, Whiston, and Seeker, and has been fol- lowed, with variations, on the continent by Flugge (Die Weissagung, D. p. Zach. ubersetzt, &c, 1784); by Bertholdt (Einleit. p. 1701); by Rosenmiiller in his Scholia, though in the first edition he defended the genuineness of these chapters; by Eichhorn (Einleit.) ; Corrodi (Be- leuchtung des Bibelcano?is, i. 1 07) ; and De Wette, in the earlier editions of his Einleitung, though in the last edition he says in the preface, ' I feel constrained to adhere to Koester's opinion of the second part of Zechariah ;' Hitzig (Stud, und Krit, 1830); Credner (Joel, (37); Knobel (Der Prophetism, &c. Th. ii. s. 284); Forberg (Com- ment, in Zach. Vaticin., pars i.). Pye Smith (Principles of Interpretation applied to the Pro- phecies, p. 65), and Davidson (Sacred Herme- neutics), also deny these later chapters to be the production of Zechariah. On the other hand, the integrity of this portion of Zechariah has been defended by Jahn (Intro- duction, pt. ii. § 161), Carpzov (Critica Sacra, p. 848), fieckhaus (Integritiit d. Proph. Schrif- ten, p. 337), Koester (Meletemata Crit. et Exeget. in Zach. part. post. p. 10), Hengstenberg (d. In- tegritiit d. Sacharjah, in his Beitrage, i. 361), and Blayney (Minor Proph. p. 362). The theory of Mede was suggested by the difficulty arising lrom the quotation in Matthew, and, rejecting other hypotheses, he says : — ' It is certain that Jeremiah's prophecies are digested in no order, but only as it seems they came to light in the scribes' hands. Hence sometimes all is ended with Zedekiah, then we are brought back to Jehoiakim, then to Zedekiah again, &c. Where- by it seems they came not to light to be enrolled secundum ordinem temporis, nor all together, but as it happened in so distracted a time. And why might not some not be found til 1 the return from captivity, and be approved by Zechariah, and so put to his volume according to the time of their finding and approbation by him, and after that some other prophecies yet added to his V (Epist. Ixi.) The others who deny the genuine- ness of these chapters are by no means agreed as to the real authorship of them. Eichhorn ascribes one portion to the time of Alexander, and the other sections to a period before the exile ; while Corrodi places the fourteenth chapter as low as the age of Antiochus Epiphanes. Bertholdt sup- poses the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters to be the production of Zechariah, the son of Jeberechiah, referred to in Isaiah viii. 2, and the remaining three to be the composition of an anonymous author who lived under Josiah, and of course before the captivity. Rosenmiiller is of opinion that the whole second part is the work of one author who lived under Uzziah. Flugge arbitrarily divides it into no less than nine sections, referring them to different times and authors, but yet ascribing the ninth chapter to the Zechariah spoken of in 2 Chron. xxvi. 5. Newcome places the first three chapters, as to date of authorship, before the overthrow of Israel, and the last three before the captivity of Judah. Hitzig and Cred- ner carry back the period of their authorship to the age of Ahaz, or before it. Knobel finds in them a diversity both of authors and times : and his opinion is partly adopted by Dr. Davidson. This great variety of opinion is proof that these conflicting views are the result of peculiar tastes aud fancies. Many of the arguments against the genuineness of this latter portion of Zechariah rest on peculiar interpretations of his language, making it refer to events that happened prior to the time when the prophet flourished. But this exegesis is not in all points correct. Ephraim is indeed spoken of, though that kingdom was overthrown lttG years before the return of the Jews from Babylon ; and it is inferred that the author of such oracles must have lived when Ephraim was an inde- pendent sovereignty. It may be said, in reply, that vast numbers of the ten tribes returned with their brethren of Judah from captivity; and we find (ch. xii. 1) Israel used as a name for all the tribes. In Malachi, too, we lind Israel used after the captivity in contrast to Jerusalem. Zecliariah never characterizes Ephraim as a separate poli- tical confederation ; nor, as Henderson remarks, ' is there any thing, but the contrary, to induce the conclusion that a king reigned in Judah in the days of the author.' The predictions in this latter part, supposed by some to refer to past events, are most correctly interpreted to refer to the Egyptian expedition of Alexander, the sufferings of the Messiah, and the final overthrow of Jerusalem. The prophets before the Babylonian captivity threatened a deportation to Babylon; Zechariah, living after thai event, menaces a Roman invasion aud slavery. Little force can be placed in any argument based on an imagined difference of style in the former and latter chapters of this 984 ZECHARIAH. prophecy;. The introductory notices to the separate oracles recorded in the early portion of the book, are either not found in the last section, or are very different in form (comp. i. 1-7 ; iv. 8; vi. 9, with ix. 1 ; xi. 4). But we are too ignorant of many circumstances in the prophet's history to speculate on the causes of such change ; or if we are unable to discover any aesthetical or religions reasons for the alteration, it is surely rash to come on such grounds to a decision of diversity of authorship. Introductory formulae as different as those in Zechariah occur in other books, whose sameness of style is admitted as proof of identity of author- ship, as in Amos, where the application of the same principles of criticism would ' dismember it,' and assign its composition to three different authors. Noras the difference of style of the former and lat- ter portions of Zechariah greater than the different topics treated would lead us to expect. The difference of style is not very striking; and such difference is often a fallacious ground of judg- ment. Would the difference of style in such volumes as Ancient Christianity and the Na- tural History of Enthusiasm warrant us to de- clare them the works of different authors'? It is also a presumption in favour of the genuineness of this portion of Zechariah, that the arranger and editor of the Hebrew canon gave it the place which it now occupies; for it is also found in the Sejjtuagint, executed three centuries before the composition of Matthew's Gospel. The chief ar- gument against the genuineness of these chapters, and that which seems to have suggested all the varied hypercritical judgments on the text, is that expressed by Mede: 'There is no Scripture saith they are Zechariah's, but there is Scripture saith they are Jeremiah's ' (Works, p. 786). The ques- tion, then, resolves itself into the consideration of the passage in Matt, xxvii. 9, referred in our text to Jeremiah, but now found in Zechariah. We cannot accede to the supposition of Dopke (Hermeneutik, p. 212) and Kuinoel (Comm., in loc), that Matthew quoted some unpub- lished apocryphal Jeremiah, perhaps such a one as that to which Jerome refers, as having found it among the Nazarenes, and of which a por- tion containing analogous language is yet extant in a Sahidic lectionary in the Codex Hunting- tonianus, 5, in the Bodleian Library, and in the Coptic language in a MS. in the library of St. Germain in Paris. This passage, as given by Dr. Henderson, at once betrays itself to be a clumsy imitation, designed to solve the very dif- ficulty on which we are writing. We must also dismiss at once all the neplogical theories which rest on any supposed error of quotation made by the Evangelist, condemning utterly the remark of Fritzshe, that the discrepancy arose on the part of the Evangelist, 'per memoriae errorem' {Comment, in Matt.,\). 801). Nor is there any extrication from the difficulty in supposing, with Eisner, that the reference of the Evangelist is to the transaction recorded in Jer. xxxii. S, or in hinting, with Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. x. 4), that the oracle cited has been falsified by the Jews. Another conjecture without warrant is to affirm that the name Jeremiah was the technical ajipellation of the third great division of the Hebrew Scriptures, and that any quotation from the minor prophets may be referred to him, nut as its author, but as the title of that collection, from one of the books ZECHARIAH. of which it is taken (Lightfoot's Works, by Pit- man, vol. xi. p. 344). Such hypotheses plainly lead us to look for some corruption in the text. That there is a difference of reading was a fact ef.rly known. It may be that the proper name was omitted altogether, or rather not inserted at all by the Evangelist, that he only wrote 5ta tou ■rrpocpvTov. Augustine testifies that MSS. were found in his days wanting the word 'lepe/xiov. It is not found either in the most ancient and faith- ful version, the Syriac, nor in the Verona and Yercelli Latin MSS. It is wanting also in MSS. 33, 157, and in the Polyglott Persic, in the mo- dern Greek, and in a Latin MS. of Luc. Brug. Other codices and versions read Zaxapiov, such as MS. 22, and the Philoxenian Syriac in the margin — a reading which was approved of by Origen and Eusebius. Griesbach (Nov. Test., in loc), Dr. Henderson, and others, believing that Matthew wrote in Hebrew or Syro-Chaldaic, think the original was simply N^JH TO, ' by the prophet,' and that the Greek translator mis- taking the "I for "I in the word 1^3, read "1*3, and thinking it a contraction for TinQ~)'Q, rendered it Slo. 'l£pe/.uov rod Trpocprirov ; but this theory rests upon a foundation which we do not regard as te- nable, viz., that the original of Matthew was. com- posed in Aramaic, and that our present Gospel is only an anonymous translation. If the authority of MSS. be now in favour of the insertion of the name 'leps/u-lov, then the error may have arisen on the part of some early copyist meeting with the contracted form Zpiov, and mistaking it for Ipiou. The various opinions of the fathers and the differ- ent lections in MSS. and versions, seem to point to some such change and error in the course of early transcription. Or, lastly', we may refer to the theory of Hengstenberg (Christologie, ii. 189), who imagines that Matthew names Jeremiah, and not Zechariah, on purpose to turn the attention of his readers to the fact that Zechariah's prophecy was but a reiteration of a fearful oracle in Jer. xviii., xix., which was to be fulfilled in the utter destruction and abandonment of the Jewish people. It is not our province to enter into any exegesis of the passage, so as either to vindicate or refute the view of Hengstenberg ; only, to make it intelligible, we add, that in his opinion Jeremiah had already, by the breaking of a potter's vessel, portrayed the fearful ruin of the people in Nebuchadnezzar's invasion ; and as the oracle of Zechariah is a vir- tual repetition of this fearful commination to be inflicted again in Messianic times, and in conse- quence of the national rejection of the Son of God, so the evangelist wishes to remind his readers that the field of blood, now purchased by the ' reward of iniquity,' in the valley of Hinnom, had been long ago a scene of prophetic doom, in which awful disaster had been symbolically predicted ; that the present purchase of that field with the traitor's price renewed the prophecy and revived the curse — a curse pronounced of old by Jeremiah, and once fulfilled in the Babylonian siege, a curse reiterated by Zechariah, and again to be verified in the Roman desolation. Such a theory is at least preferable to that of such critics as Glassius and Frischmuth, who believed that the quotation in Matthew is made up of a mixture of oracles from Jeremiah and Zechariah, while Je- remiah only is named as the earlier aud more illustrious of the two. ZEDEKIAH. Style. — The language of Zechariah has not the purity and freshness of a former age. Some of its solecisms are noticed by De Wette {Einleit. §249). A slight tinge of Chaldaism pervades the composition. The symbols with which he abounds are obscure, and their prosaic structure is diffuse and unvaried. The rhythm of his poetry is unequal, and its parallelisms are inharmonious and disjointed. His language has in many phrases a close alliance with that of the other prophets, and occasional imitations of them, especially of Ezekiel, characterize his oracles. He is also pe- culiar in his introduction of spiritual beings into his prophetic scenes.. Commentaries. — Der Proph. Zach- Ausgelegt durch, Mart. Luthern. Vitemberg, 1528 ; Phil. Melanchthonis Comment. i?i Proph. Zach. 1553 ; J, J. Grynaei Comment, in Zach. Genevae, 1581 ; J. H. Ursini Comment, in Proph. Zach. 1652; C. Vitringa, Comment, ad lib. Proph. Zach. 1734; B. G. Flugge, Die Weissagungen welche bey den Schrift. des Proph. Zach. beygebogen sind, S[c. 1788 ; F. Venema, Sermones Academ. in lib. Proph. Zach. 1789; Koester, Meletemata Crit. §c. 1818; Forberg, Comm. Crit. et Exeget. in Zach. 1824; Rosenmiilleri Scholia,, pars sept. 1828 ; Hengstenberg's Christology, Keith's trans- lation, vol. ii. 1839 ; B. Blaney, New Translation of Zech. Oxf. 1797; W. Newcome, Minor Pro- phets, 1785; Comment, on the Vision of Zecha- riah the Proph. , by John Stouard, D.D., 1824; Rabbi David Kimchi, Comment, on the Proph. of Zech., translated, with Notes, &c, by A. M'Caul, A.M., 1837; Henderson, On the Minor Prophets, 1845.— J. E. 6. Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist. See John the Baptist. ZEDEKIAH, son of Josiah, the twentieth and last king of Judah, was, in place of his brother Jehoiakim, set on the throne by Nebuchadnezzar, who changed his name from Mattaniah to that by which he is ordinarily spoken of. As the vassal of the Babylonian monarch, he was com- pelled to take an oath of allegiance to him, which, however, he observed only till an oppor- tunity offered for throwing off his yoke. Suc- cess in such an undertaking was not likely to attend his efforts. His heart was not right be- fore God, and therefore was he left without di- vine succour. Corrupt and weak, he gave him- self up into the hands of his nobles, and lent an ear to false prophets; while the faithful lessons of Jeremiah were unwelcome, and repaid by in- carceration. Like all of his class, he was unable to follow good, and became the slave of wicked men, afraid alike of his own nobility and of bis foreign enemies. By his folly and wickedness he brought (he state to the brink of ruin. Yet the danger did not open his eyes. Instead of looking to Jehovah, he threw himself for support on Egypt, when the Chaldaean came into the land and laid siege to his capital. The siege was be- gun on the tenth day of the tenth month in the ninth year of his reign. For a year and a half did Jerusalem effectually withstand Nebuchad- nezzar. At the end of that time, however, the city was stormed and taken (b.c. 588), when Zedekiah, who had lied, was captured on the road to Jericho. Judgment was speedily executed : his sons were slain before his eye6, and he himself ZEMER. 985 was deprived of sight and sent in chains to Ba- bylon, where he died in prison (2 Kings xxiv. 17, seq. ; xxv. 1, seq.; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 10, sq. ; Jer. xxviii. ; xxxiv. ; xxxvii.; xxxviii. ; xxxix.; lii.; Ezek. xvii. 15).— J. R. B. ZELOPHEHAD, son of Hepher, a descendant of Joseph, who had no sons, but five daughters. These came to Moses and Eleazar when now at the edge of the promised land, to lay their case before them for adjudication. Their father had died in the wilderness, leaving no male child. The daughters thought themselves entitled to take their father's share of the land. Moses on this brought their cause before Jehovah, who ordered that they should receive their father's inheritance, taking occasion to establish the general rule : ' If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto bis daughter,' and failing daughters, to his next of kin (Num. xxvi. 33; xxvii. 1, sq. Compare Josh. xvii. 3, sq.) — J. R. B. ZEMER. In our version of Deut. xiv. 5, "IpT zemer, is rendered Chamois; Sept. Ka^Tj- Ao7rap5aA(s; Vulg. Camelopardalus ; Luther, in his German translation, adopts Elend, or ' Elk •' and the old Spanish version, from the Hebrew has ' Cabra montes.'* All, however, under- stand zemer to be a clean ruminant ; but it is plain that the Mosaic enumeration of clean ani- mals would not include such as were totally out of the reach of the Hebrew people, and at best only known to them from specimens seen in Egypt, consisting of presents sent from Nubia, or in pictures on the walls of temples. The Ca- melopardalis or Giraffe is exclusively an inha- bitant of Southern Africa, and therefore could not come in the way of the people of Israel. The same objection applies to the Elk, because that species of deer never appears further to the south than Northern Germany and Poland; and with regard to the Chamois, which has been adopted in our version, though it did exist in the mountains of Greece, and is still found in Central Asia, there is no vestige of its having at any time frequented Libanus or any other part of Syria. We may, therefore, witli more propriety refer to the rumi- nants indigenous in the regions which were in the contemplation of the sacred legislator, anil we may commence by observing that "VOX zemer is a term which, in the slightly altered form of zammer, is still used in Persia and India for any large species of ruminants, particularly those of the stag kind, which are commonly denomi- nated RuSa, a subgenus of deer established in Griffith's translation of Cuvier's ' Animal King- dom.' In the sacred text, however, the word zemer is not generical, but strictly specific. Ail, or 'stag,' is mentioned at the same time, and, as well as several Antilopidse, in the same verse: we must, therefore, look for an animal not hitherto noticed, and withal sufficiently important to merit being named in so important an ordinance. The only species that Beems to answer to the conditions required is a wild sheep, still not uncommon in the Mokattam rocks near Cairo, found in Sinai, and eastward in the broken ridg«s * Biblia en lengua Espafiola traducida par labia par palabra da la verdad Hebrayca poi muy excellentes letraUos, fol. jNo date. 98© ZENAS. of Stony Arabia, where it is known under the name of Kebsch, a slight mutation of the old Hebrew 3t*>D Cheseb, or rather C23 Chebes, which is applied indeed to a domestic sheep, one that grazed ; while Zemer appears to be derived from a root denoting ' to crop ' or ' feed on shrubs.' 552. [Kebsch. Ovis Tragelaphus.] This animal is frequently represented and hiero- glyphically named on Egyptian monuments, but we question if the denomination itself be phoneti- cally legible. The figures in colour leave no doubt that it is the same as the Kebsch of the modern Arabs, and a species or a variety of Ovis Trage- laphus, or bearded sheep, lately formed into a separate group by Mr. Blyth under the name of Ammotragus Barbatus. The Spanish version of the Hebrew text, before quoted, appears alone to •be admissible, for although the species is not strictly a goat, it is intermediate between that genus and the sheep. It is a fearless climber, and secure on its feet, among the sharpest and most elevated ridges. In stature the animal exceeds a large domestic sheep, though it is not more bulky of body. Instead of wool, it is covered with close fine rufous hair: from the throat to the breast, and on the upper arms above the knees, there is abundance of long loose reddish hair, forming a compact protection to the knees and brisket, and indicating that the habits of the species require extraordinary defence while sporting among the most rugged cliffs ; thus making the name Zemer, ' one that springeth,' if that in- terpretation be trustworthy, remarkably correct. The head and face are perfectly ovine, the eyes are bluish, and the horns, of a yellowish colour, are set on as in sheep ; they rise obliquely, and are directed backwards and outwards, with the points bending downwards. The tail, about nine inches long, is heavy and round. It is the Mouflon d'Afrique and Mouflon a Manchettes of French writers, probably identical with the Tragelaphus of Caius, whose specimen came from Barbary. See bearded Argali in Griffith's ' Animal King- dom' of Cuvier. We figure a specimen in the Paris Museum and one in Wilkinson's Egypt, vol. iii. p. 19.— C. H. S. ZENAS (Ziji/as), a disciple who visited Crete with Apollos, bearing seemingly the epistle to Titus, in which Paul recommends the two to his ZEPHANIAH. attentions (Tit. iii. 13). He is called 'the law- yer ;' and as his name is Greek, it seems doubtful whether he is so called as being, or having been, a doctor of the Jewish law, or as being a pleader at the Roman tribunals. The most probable opinion is, perhaps, tliat which makes him an Hellenistic Jew, and a doctor of the Mosaical law. ZEPHANIAH (n^?V ; Sept. Socjxw'as), the ninth in order of the minor prophets, both in the Hebrew and Greek copies of the Scriptures (Hieronym. Prolog, ad Paul, et Eustoch.), Author. — The name of this prophet has been \rariously explained. Disputes upon it arose as early as the time of Jerome, for in his Com- mentary on this book he says, ' Nomen Sophoniae, alii speculam, alii arcanum Dei, transtulerunt.' The word was thus derived either from i*IBlf, he saw beyond, or jQ¥, he hid, with the common affix TV. The old father made it a matter of indifference which etymon he adopted, as both, according to him, give virtually the same sense, — the commission of a prophet being virtually that of a watchman or seer, and the burden of his message, some secret revealed to him by God. Abarbanel (Prcef. in Ezek.') adheres to the latter mode of derivation, and the pseudo-Dorotheus, following the former, translates the prophet's- name by the Greek participle ffKonevwv. Hiller and Simonis diffe ralso in a similar way — Hiller, taking the term from ]SX, renders it ' abscondidit se, i. e. delituit Jehovah ' ( Onomast. sub voce), as if the name had contained a mystic reference to the character of the age in which the prophet lived, when God had withdrawn himself from his apostate people ; but Simonis ( Onomast. V. T.) gives the true signification, one sanctioned by Gesenius — ' abscondidit, i. e. custodivit Jehovah,' Jehovah hath guarded, the verb ]2^f being used of divine protection in Ps. xxvii. 5; and lxxxiii. 4. The name seems to have been a common one among the Jews. Contrary to usual custom the pedigree of the prophet is traced back for four generations — ' the son of Cushi, the son of Gedaliah, the son of Amariah, the son of Hizkiah.' This formal record of his lineage has led many to suppose that Zephaniah had sprung from a noble stock (Cyril, Prcef. ad Zeph.), and the occurrence of the highest name in the list, which in the Hebrew text is spelled and pointed in the same way as that rendered Hezekiah in the books of Kings and Chronicles, has induced some to identify it with that of the good king Hezekiah, and to pronounce the prophet a cadet of the royal house of Judah, Kimchi is very cautious in his opinion, and leaves the point undecided; but Aben-Ezra, ever ready to magnify his nation, at once concludes thai Zephaniah was descended from Hezekiah ; and his opinion has been followed by Huet (Demon- strat. Evangel. Propos. iv. 303), and partially by Eichhorn {Einleit. § 593). The conjecture has little else to recommend it than the mere occurrence of the royal name. But it was not a name confined to royalty ; and had it been the name of the pious monarch to which Zephaniah's genealogy is traced, certainly his official designa- tion, ' king.of Judah/ would have been subjoined, in order to prevent mistake. Such an addition is found in connection with his name in Prov. xxv. 1, and Isa. xxxviii. 9. It forms no objection to this ZEPHANIAH. statement to affirm that the phrase ' king of Judah ' is added to Josiah, and to avoid repetition may have heen omitted after Hizkiah, for such regard to euphony, such finical delicacy, is no feature of Hebrew composition. The argument of Carpzov (Introd. p. 414), copied by Rosenmuller (Prooe- mium in Zeph.), against the supposed connection of the prophet wilh the blood royal, is of no great weight. These critics say that from Hezekiah to Josiah, in whose reign Zephaniah flourished, are only three generations, while from Hezekiah to Zephaniah four are reckoned in the first verse of the prophecy. But as Hezekiah reigned twenty- nine years, and his successor sat on the throne no less than fifty-five years, there is room enough in sucli a period for the four specified descents ; and Amariah, though not heir to the crown, may have been much older than his youthful brother Ma- li asseh, who was crowned at the age of twelve. As there was at least another Zephaniah, a con- spicuous personage at the time of the captivity, the parentage of the prophet may have been recounted so minutely to prevent any reader from confounding the two individuals. The Jews absurdly reckon that here, as in other super- scriptions, the persons recorded as a prophet's ancestors were themselves endowed with the pro- phetic spirit. The so-called Epiphanius (De Vitis Prophet, cap. xix.) asserts that Zephaniah was of the tribe of Simeon, of the hill Sarabatha, arch upovs 'SapafiaQd. The existence of the pro- phet, is known only from his oracles, and these have no biographical sketches; so that our know- ledge of this man of God comprises only the fact and the results of his inspiration. It may be safely inferred, however, that he laboured with Josiah in the pious work of re-establishing the worship of Jehovah in the land. Age. — It is recorded (ch. i.) that the word of the Lord came to him ' in the days of Josiah, the son of Anion, king of Judah.' We have reason for supposing that he flourished during the earlier portion of Josiah 's reign. In the second chapter (vers. 13-15) lie foretells the doom of Nineveh, and the i'all of that ancieiU city happened about the eighteenth year of Josiah. In the commence- ment of his oracles also, he denounces various forms of idolatry, and specially the remnant of Baal. The reformation of Josiah began in the twelfth, and was completed in the eighteenth year of his reign. So thorough was his extirpation of the idolatrous rites and hierarchy which defiled his kingdom, that he burnt down the groves, dismissed the priesthood, threw down the altars, and made dust of the images of Baalim. Zepha- niah must have prophesied prior to this religious revolution, while some remains of Baal were yet secreted in the land, or between the twelfth and eighteenth years of the royal reformer. So Hitzig (Die 12 Klein Propliet.) and Movers (Chronih. p. 234) place him ; while Eichhorn, Bertholdt, and Jaeger, incline to give him a somewhat later date. At all events, he flourished between the years B.C. 642 and B.C. 611 ; and the portion of his prophecy which refers to the destruction of the Assyrian empire, must, have been delivered prior to the year B.C. 625, the year in which Nineveh fell (Henderson, On the Minor Prophets, p. 326). The publication of these oracles was, therefore, con- temporary with a portion of those of Jeremiah, for the word of the Lord carrje to him in the ZEPHANIAH. 987 thirteenth year of the reign of Josiah. Indeed, the Jewish tradition is, that Zephaniah had for his colleagues Jeremiah and the prophetess Huldah, the former fixing his sphere of labour in the tho- roughfares and market-places, the latter exer- cising her honourable vocation in the college in Jerusalem (Carpzov, Introd. p. 415). Koester {Die Propheten, iii.) endeavours to prove that Zephaniah was posterior to Habakkuk. His argu- ments from similarity of diction are very trivial, and the more so when v/e reflect that all circum- stances combine in inducing us to fix the period of Habakkuk in the reign of Jehoiakim [Habak- kuk], immediately before the Chaldaean invasion. Contents. — The book consists of only three chapters. In the first, the sins of the nation are severely reprimanded, and a day of fearful retri- bution is menaced. The circuit of reference is wider in the second chapter, and the ungodly and persecuting stales in the neighbourhood of Judaea are also doomed; but in the third section, while the prophet inveighs bitterly against Jerusalem and her magnates, he concludes with the cheering prospect of her ultimate settlement and blissful theocratic enjoyment. It has been disputed what the enemies are with whose desolating inroads he threatens Judah. The ordinary and most probable opinion is, that the foes whose period of invasion was ' a day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities and against the high towers ' (ch. i. 16), were the Chaldaeans. Hitzig especially, Cra- mer too, and Eichhorn, supposed the prophet to refer to a Scythian invasion, the history of which they imagine has been preserved by Herodotus (i. 105). But the general style of the oracle, and the sweeping vengeance which it menaces against Assyria, Philistia, Ammon, and Cush, as well as against Judah, by some great and un- named power, point to the Chaldaean expedition which, under Nebuchadnezzar, laid Jerusalem waste, and carried to Babylon its enslaved popu- lation. The contemporary prophecies of Jeremiah contemplate the musterings, onset, and devasta- tions of the same victorious hosts. The former part of Zephaniah's prediction is 'a day of clouds and of thick darkness,' but in the closing section of it light is sown for the righteous : ' The King of Israel, the Lord, is in the midst of thee ; He will rejoice over thee with joy ; He will rest in his love.' Style. — We cannot by any means award so low a character to Zephaniah's style as is done by De Wette (Enleit. § 215), who describes it as being often heavy and tedious. It has not the sustained majesty of Isaiah, or the sublime and original energy of Joel : it has no prominent fea- ture of distinction ; yet its delineations are gra- phic, and many of its touches are bold and striking. For example, in the first chapter the prophet groups together in his descriptions of the national idolatry several characteristic exhibition of its forms and worship. The verses are not tame and prosaic portraiture, but form a series of vivid sketches. The poet seizes on the more strange peculiarities of the heathen worship — ut- tering denunciations on the remnant oi' Baal, the worshippers of Chemarim — the star-adorers, the devotees of Malcham, the fanatics who clad themselves in strange apparel, and those who in some superstitious mummery leapt upon the threshold (Bochart, Ilicr. cap. 36). Not a few 988 ZEPHATH. ZERED. verses occur in the course of the prophecy which, in tone and dignity, are not unworthy to be as- sociated with the more distinguished effusions of the Hebrew bards. A few paronomasia occur (i. 15 and ii. 1-4); and occasionally there is a peculiar repetition of a leading word in the forma- tion of a climax (ii. 15). Jahn (Introd. § 132) and Eichhom assert that Zephaniah has borrowed to a considerable extent from the earlier prophets, especially from Isaiah; yet the similarity of such passages as Isa. xxxiv. 11 to Zeph. ii. 14, or Isa. xlvii. 8 to Zeph. ii. 15, or Isa. xviii. 1 to Zeph. iii. 10, or Isa. xvi. 6 to Zeph. ii. 8, is not sufficient evidence that Zephaniah was Isaiah's imitator. The clauses of resemblance are idiomatic in nature, and seem to have been of proverbial force and currency, so that both prophets may have taken them from the national usus loquendi. Coincidences of expression have also been noted between Zephaniah and some of his contemporaries, particularly Jeremiah (Eich. Einleit. § 595 ; Rosen. Procem. vi.) Between Zeph. i. 5 and Jer. viii. 2, we can perceive little similarity of language, though the same supersti- tious custom is referred to, and a comparison of Zeph. i. 12 with Jer. xlviii. 11, leads to such a conclusion as we have already stated, as the phrase common to both passages — ' settled on the lees' — must have been one in wide circulation in a wine country like Judaea. It was altogether ground- less, therefore, in some of the older critics, such as Isidore and Schmidius (Prolegom. in Sophon.'), to style Zephaniah the abbreviator of Jeremiah, Resemblances have also been traced between Zephaniah and Amos, and between him and his successor Ezekiel ; but to call these imitations, is rash indeed, if we reflect on the similarity of the topics discussed, the peculiar range of imagery and phraseology which is common to Hebrew pro- phetic poetry, and which was the stereotyped lan- guage of the inspired brotherhood. The language of Zephaniah is pure : it has not the classic ease and elegance of the earlier compositions, but it wants the degenerate feebleness and Aramaic corruption of the succeeding era. Zephaniah is not expressly quoted in the New Testament ; but clauses and expressions occur which seem to have been formed from his prophecy (Zeph. iii. 9 ; Rom. xv. 6, &c). He was, in fine, as Cyril of Alexandria terms him (Prcefat. in Soph. torn, iii.), ' a true prophet, and filled with the Holy Ghost, and bringing his oracles from the mouth of God.1 Commentaries. — Martini Lutheri Comment, in Sophon. Prophet. Opera Latina, t. iv. ; Mart. Buceri Sophoniee Explicatio, 1528 ; Noltenii Dissertatio Exeget Prcelim. in Proph. Zeph- 1719; Cramer, Scythische Denkmiiler in Palces- tina, 1777, contains a Comment on Zephaniah; Don A. Ccelln, Spicileg. Observat. Exeget. Critic, ad Zeph. Vaticinia, 1818 ; Maurer, Comment. Grammat. Hist. Crit. in Prophetas Minores, p. 373, 1840; Handbuch Exeget. z. A. T. die 12 kleinen Prophet, erklaert von F. Hitzig, 1838 ; Rosenmiilleri Scholia in Proph. Min. vol. iv. ; Dr. E. Henderson, On the Tioelve Minor Prophets, 1845.— J. E. ZEPHATH (HSV 5 Sept. 2etf»e'0), a Canaan- itish city, afterwards called Hormah (Judg. i. 17). The ancient designation is perhaps retained in the modern Sufab, the name of a difficult pass leading up from the Arabah to the south of Judah (Robinson, Bibl. Researches, ii. 592- 616). ZEPHATHAH (nnay ; Sept. Boppav Ma- prjcra), a valley at Mareshah, in the tribe of Judah (2 Chron. xiv. 10), where Asa defeated Zerah the Cushite. Mareshah was near Eleutheropolis {Onomast., s. v. ' Masera'), and Robinson thinks the valley may have been the broad wady which comes down from Beit .librin (Eleutheropolis) towards Tell es-Saifeh ; in which last name a trace of Zepliathah may perhaps be recognised (Robinson, Bibl. Researches, ii. 361). 1. ZERAH (flip a rising ; Sept. Zapd), son of Judah and Tamar, and younger but twin brother of Pharez (Gen. xxxviii. 30 ; Matt. i. 3). Geddes, in his Critical Remarks (pp. 126, 127), has some interesting medical testimony in illus- tration of the remarkable circumstances attending the birth of the twins. 2. ZERAH, son of Reuel and grandson of Esau (Gen. xxxvi. 13, 17). 3. ZERAH, son of Simeon and founder of a family in Israel (Num. xxvi. 13). He is called Zohar in Gen. xlvi. 10 : bis descendants ar.o called Zarhites in Num. xxvi. 13, 20. 4. ZERAH, the Cushite king or leader who invaded Judah in the tenth year of king Asa (b.c. 941), with an army of ' a thousand thousands' (i. e. very many thousands) of men, and three hundred chariots. Asa defeated them in the valley of Zepliathah at Mareshah, utterly routed them, pursued them to Gerar, and carried back much plunder from that neighbourhood. We are left uncertain as to the country from which Zerah came. The term Cushite or Ethiopian may imply that he was of Arabian Cush ; the principal objection to which is, that history affords no indication that Arabia had at that epoch, or from its system of government could well have, any king so powerful as Zerah. That he was of Abyssinia or African Ethiopia, is another con- jecture, which is resisted by the difficulty of seeing how this ' huge host' could have obtained a passage through Egypt, as it must have done to reach Judaea. If we could suppose, with Cham- jiollion {Precis, p. 257), whom Coquerel follows (Biog. Sacr. s. v.), that Zerah the Cushite was the then king of Egypt, of an Ethiopian dynasty, this difficulty would be satisfactorily met. In fact it is now often stated that he was the same with Osorkon I. (of whom there is a statue in the British Museum, No. 8), the son and successor of the Shishak who invaded Judaea twenty-five years before, in the time of Rehoboam. This is a tempting explanation, but cannot be received without question, and it is not deemed satisfac- tory by Rosellini, Wilkinson, Sharpe, and others. Jahn hazards an ingenious conjecture, that Zerah was king of Cush on both sides of the Red Sea, that is, of both the Arabian and African Ethiopia ; and thus provides him a sufficient power without subjecting him to the necessity of passing through Egypt. This also is not without serious difficulties. In fact no conclusion that can be relied upon has yet been exhibited. ZERED, the name of a valley (Num. xxi. 12) and of the stream flowing through it, east of the Dead Sea [River] ZEREDA. ZEREDA (iTTl.V ; Sept. 2apij8a0a), a city of Manasseh, near Beth-shan (1 Kings xi. 26 ; 2 Chron. iv. 17). This is, probably through an er- roneous reading, the Zererath (nriTlV) of Judg. vii. 22; and, perhaps, the Zaretan (jm^) of Josh. iii. 16; 1 Kings iv. 12; vii. 46). ZERESH(BhT; Pers. gold; Sept. Zoitrdpa), the wife of Haman (Esth. v. 10 ; vi. 13), and well worthy of him, if we may judge from the advice she gave him to prepare a gibbet and ask the king's leave to hang Mordecai thereon [Ha- man; Mordecai]. ZERUAH (ny™, leprous ; Sept. Sapip£), the widowed mother of Jeroboam (1 Kings xi. 26). ZERUBBABEL tfasnt, sown in Babylon ; Sept. Zopof3d/le\), called also ' Sheshbazzar, prince of Judah ' (Ezra i. 8), son (comp. 1 Chron; iii. 17) of Shealtiel, of the royal house of David (1 Chron. iii.), was the leader of the first colony of Jews that returned from captivity to their native land under the permission of Cyrus, car- rying with them the precious vessels belong- ing to the service of God. With the aid of Joshua and his body of priests, Zerubbabel pro- ceeded, on his arrival in Palestine, to rebuild the fallen city, beginning with the allar of burnt- oli'erings, in order that the daily services might be restored. The Samaritans, however, having been offended at being expressly excluded from a share in the land, did all they could to hinder the work, and even procured from the Persian court an ordei that, it should be stopped. Ac- cordingly, everything remained suspended till the second year of Darius Hystaspis (a.c. 521), when the restoration was resumed and carried to com- pletion, according to Josephus, owing to the in- ilueuce of Zerubbabel with the Persian monarch (Antiq. xi. 3 , Ezra; Haggai i. 1-14; ii. J.) —J. R. B. ZERUIAH (n^-IIV, wounded; Sept.Sapouia), daughter of Jesse, sister of David (1 Chron. ii. 16), and mother of Joab, Abishai, and Asahel (2 Sam. ii. 18: iii. 39 ; viii. 16; xvi. 9). ZIBA (K3% statue; Sept. 2(0a)> a servant of the house of Saul, of whom David inquired if there was any one left of the house of Saul to whom the monarch might show favour. Mephi- bosheth was in consequence found, and having been certified of David's friendship, Ziba, who was at the head of a large family, having fifteen sons and twenty slaves, was appointed to till the land for the prince, and generally to con- stitute his household and do him service (2 Sam. ix. 2-10). This position Ziba employed for his master's harm. When David had to fly from Jerusalem in consequence of the rebel- lion of Absalom, Ziba met the king with a large and acceptable present : — ' But where is Mephibosheth?' asked the fugitive monarch ; ' in Jerusalem,' was the answer ; ' for he said, To-day shall the house of Israel restore me the kingdom of my father.' Enraged at this, which looked like ingratitude as well as treachery, David thereupon gave to the faithless Ziba all the pro- perty of Mephibosheth (2 Sam. xvi. 1, sq.). On David's return to his metropolis an explanation took place, when Mephibosheth accused Ziba of having slandered him ; and David, apparently ZIKLAG. 889 not being perfectly satisfied with the defence, gave his final award, that the land should be divided between the master and his servant (2 Sam. xix. 24, sq.).— J- R. B. ZIBEON (flJQ?, dyed; Sept. ZePeycbv), a son of Seir, phvlarch or head of the Hivites (Gen. xxx vi. 2, 20, 24, 29). ZICHRI 013T, renowned; Sept. ZexpL), an Ephraimite, probably one of the chiefs of the tribe, and one of the generals of Pekah king of Israel. It has been supposed that he look advan- tage of the victory of this monarch over the army of Judah to penetrate into Jerusalem, where he slew one of the sons of Ahaz, the governor of the palace, and the king's chief minister or favourite. It is difficult without this supposition to explain 2 Chron. xxviii. 17. There is some probability in the conjecture, that he was the ' Tabael's son' whom Pekah and Rezin designed to set upon the throne of Judah [Tabael]. ZIDON (flTV; SiScir). 1. The eldest son of Canaan (Gen. x. 15). 2. One of the most ancient cities in Phoenicia. Justin derives the name from the Phoenician word for fish, ' piscem Phoenices sidon vocant' (xviii. 3) ; but Josephus, from the son of Canaan (Antiq. vi. 2). It had a very commodious harbour, which is now nearly choked up with sand (Strabo, xvi. p. 756 ; Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 10. 6) : it was distant one day's journey from the fountains of the Jordan (Joseph. Antiq. v. 3. 1), 400 stadia from Betytus, and 200 stadia from Tyre (Strabo, xvi. pp. 756, 757). It was situated in the allotment of the 1ribe of Asher, but never conquered (Judg. i. 31); on the contrary, it was sometimes a formidable enemy (Judg. x. 12). Even in Joshua's time it was called Tsidon-Rabba, or Great Zidon (Josh. xix. 28). It was noted in very early times for its extensive traffic (Isa. xxiii. 2 ; Ezek. xxvii. 8) and manufactures, particularly glass (Plin. v. 20 ; Strabo, xvi. 10). Frequent reference to it occurs in Homer (II. vi. 290 ; xxiii. 743 ; Odyss. xiii. 2S5 ; xv. 425). The best vessels in the licet of Xerxes were Sidonian (Herodotus, vii. 99. 12S). Its modern name is Saide. In Has- selquist's time (1750) its exports to France were considerable (Travels, p. 166); but at present its traffic is chiefly confined to the neighbouring towns; the population is about 15,000 (Man- nert's Geograplde,y\. 1, p. 291 ; Pictorial Bible, notes on Deut. xxxiii., Josh. xix.). — J. E. R. ZIF (IT ty'nri, bloom-month), an ante-Exilian name of the second Hebrew month (1 Kings vi. 1-37), corresponding with our April and May. This, the second month of the sacred, was the eighth of the civil year. The second mouth bore also the name Iyar. — J. R. B. ZIKLAG (-3?i?YV 5 Sept. SeweAa/c), a city be- longing to the tribe of Simeon (Josh. xv. 31 ; xix. 5), but at times subject to the Philistines of Gath, whose king, Achish, bestowed it upon David for a residence; after which it pertained to Judah (1 Sam. xxvii. 6; xxx. 1, 14,26; 2 Sum. i. 1 ; 1 Chron. iv. 30; Neh. xi. 2SJ. While David was absent with his men to join Achish, Ziklag was burned and plundered by the Amalekites; and on his return, after receiv- ing the spoil from them, he remained here till called to assume the crown after the death of 990 ZILLAH. ZIMRI. 553. [Zidon.J Saul. It was during his stay in this place that he was joined by many considerable and valiant persons, whose adhesion to his cause was of much importance to him, and who were ever after held in high esteem in his court and army. ZILLAH (itPi?, shade ; Sept. 2e\\a), one of the wives of Lamech, and mother of Tubal-cain (Gen. iv. 19) [Lamech]. ZILFAH (HS?*, a dropping ; Sept. ZeAcopis, and Ptolemy, according to the present reading, in that of 'A-rrcpovpel. At a later period it was called Dioca3sarea. Oi eV Aioicai- aaptia rrjs Tla\aictrivt)s 'lovSatoi Kara Vin^aaiuv 8nKa avr-qpow. ' The Jews of Dioccesarea in Palestine took up arms against the Romans » (Socrates, Hist. xi. 31). Sozomen (Hist. iv. 7) adds that Gallus Caesar, who was then at Antioch, destroyed Diocjesarea, dvaardroF €7ronj Reland, in his Paleestina, under Sepphoris, con- jectures that NeoKaiaapelas is an erratum for AioKtuo-apelas, which latter town is omitted in the above list of bishops, although we have clear proof that it was rebuilt, and had at a later pe- riod a bishop ; as we learn from the list of bi- shops in the Acta Concilii Hierosolymitani, a.d. 536, where mention is made of Kvpiaicbs Alo- Katcrapeias, but not of any bishop of Neocaesarea ; nor does there occur any ancient notice of such a town in Palestine. Hence we infer that Neo- cesarea is nothing but an etlitorial blunder, as well in the Acts quoted, as also in the Itinera- rium Antonini Martyris, where we read : De Tho- lomaide maritima venimus in fines Galilaeae in civitatem Neocesaream, in qua adoravimus prae veneratione molam et canistellum Sanctse Marias, in quo loco est cathedra in qua sedebat, quando ad earn venit Gabriel Archangelus : — 'From Ptolemais at the sea-coast we came into the borders of Galilee, to the town of Neocae- sarea, where we adored with veneration the mola, and the little basket of St. Mary. In that place ZIZ ANION. is also the chair in which she was seated when the Archangel Gabriel came to her.' We have re- tained here the word ?nola, since we would leave it uncertain whether Antoninus Martyr adured the hand-mill, molar tooth, or the jawbone, or even a more delicate part of the virgin. Mola dicitur in uteris mulierum massa cornea sine ossibus et visceribus, ex imperfecta conceptione concre- scens (Plin. Hist. Nat. vii. 15. 13). Let it be decided by others which object of adoration at Zipporis should be preferred. The Greek /xvAtj occurs in the same acceptation with mola. It is also remarkable that in the seventh cen- tury the place where Gabriel met St. Mary was shown at Nazareth ; but it is clear from the pro- gress of the journey that Antoninus, by the name Neocaesarea, meant Diocsesarea or Sepphoris, be- cause this was the first city on the road from Ptolemais into Galilee. We therefore read in Johanns Phocas (Descript. Falestince, §10): Upwros ovv Kara rrjv TiroAefjiaida icrrlv r\ ~Zep.- (pcopl, irokls rrjs Ta\i\alas i\avrri aoiKos crxedbf fj.rj5e Aelxpayov rrji Trpcbrjy aurrjs evSai/xovias e,u- (paivovcra: — ' After Ptolemais, one arrives first'at Semphori, a town of Galilee, which is now en- tirely uninhabited, and shows no remains of its former prosperity.' Some old coins are extant with the inscription 2En$nPHNnN. One of these, belonging to the reign of Domitian, is mentioned by Vaillant, (p. 23); and (p. 31) lie produces another with a similar inscription, belonging to the reign of Tra- jan, of which Patinus furnishes an engraving (Numm. , Z6yo- pa), a town originally called Bala, and one of the five cities of the plain of Siddim. It was doomed with the rest to destruction : but spared at the intercession of Lot as a place to which he might escape. He alleged the smallness of the city as a ground for asking this favour; and hence the place acquired the name of Znar. or ' smam.nbss ' (Gen. xiii. 10; xiv. 2, 8; xix. 20, 2:2, 30). It is only again mentioned in Deut. xxxiv. 3; Isa. xv. 5; Jer. xlviii. 34; which passages indicate that it belonged to the Moabites, and was a place of some consequence. Eusebius and Jerome describe it as having in their day '•;ar.y inhabitants, ami a Roman garrison [Onomast.,s. v. 'Bala'). Stephenof Byzantium calls it a large village and fortress (Riland, Palast. p. 10<>5). In the Ecclesiastical Norttia it is mentioned as the seat of a bishop of the Third Palestine, down to the centuries preceding the Crusades (Heland, pp. 217, 223, 220, 230). The Crusaders seem to have found it under the name of Segor, as in the Sept., and they describe the place as pleasantly situated, with many palm 3s 994 ZOBAH. ZUZIMS. trees (Will. Tyr. x. 8). Abulfeda repeatedly speaks of Zoghar as a place adjacent to the Dead Sea and the Ghor {Tab. Syr. pp. 8, 9, 11, 14S), and indeed calls the Dead Sea itself the Lake of Zoghar (pp. xii. 148, 156). This is the same name as "!]})£ ; the apparent difference in Ro- man types arising from the fact, that the letter V ain in the Hebrew word is treated as mute, but in Arabic is represented bv gh. Dr. Robinson {Bib. Researches, ii. 480, 481 ; 648—651) has much argument to show that Zoar must have lain on the east of the Dead Sea; which seems clear enough from its having been in the territory of Moab : and he thinks that Irby and Mangles have rightly fixed its position at the mouth of the Wady Kerak, at the point where the latter opens upon the isthmus of the long peninsula which stands out from the eastern shore of the lake towards its southern end. At this point Irby and Mangles discovered the remains of an ancient town. Here ' stones that have been used in building, though for the most part unknown, are strewed over a great surface of uneven ground, and mixed with bricks and pottery. This ap- pearance continues without interruption, during the space of at least half a mile, quite down to the plain, so that it would seem to have been a place of considerable extent. We noticed one column, and we found a pretty specimen of an- tique variegated glass. It. may possibly be the site of the antient Zoar' {Travels, p. 448). ZOBAH (nilX; Sept. 2ou/3a), a Syrian kingdom, whose king made war with Saul (1 Sam. xiv. 47), with David (2 Sam. viii. 3 ; x. 6), and with Solomon (2 Chrou. viii. 3). Re- specting its situation, see Aram. 1. ZOHAR OriX, whiteness ; Sept. 2adp), a son of Simeon [Zerah]. 2. ZOHAR, the father of Ephron the Hitt.ite (Gen. xxiii. 8 ; xxv. 9). 3. ZOHAR (in Keri; in Chetib -\f\)£\ Je- zoar), a descendant of Judah (1 Chron. iv. 7). ZOPHAR H3%, sparrow? Sept. Smjtip), one of Job's three friends and opponents in argu- ment (Job ii. 11 ; xi. 1 ; xx. 1 ; xlii. 9). He is called a Naamathite, or inhabitant of Naamah, a place whose situation is unknown, as it could not be the Naamah mentioned in Josh. xv. 41. Wemyss, in his Job and his Times (p. Ill), well characterizes this interlocutor : — ' Zophar exceeds the other two, if possible, in severity of censure ; ike is the most inveterate of the accusers, and speaks without feeling or pity. He does little more than repeat and exaggerate the arguments of Bildad. He unfeelingly alludes (ch. xi. 15) to the effects of Job's disease as appearing in his countenance. This is cruel and invidious. Yet in the same discourse how nobly does he treat of the Divine attributes, showing that any inquiry into them is far beyond the grasp of the human mind ! And though the hortatory part of the first discourse bears some resemblance to that of Eliphaz, yet it is diversified by the fine imagery which he employs. He seems to have had a full conviction of the providence of God, as regulat- ing and controlling the actions of men; but he limits all his reasonings to a present life, and makes no reference to a future world. This cir- cumstance alone accounts for the weakness and fallacy of these mens judgments. In his second discourse there is much poetical beauty in the selection of images, and the general doctrine is founded in truth ; its fallacy lies in its applica- tion to Job's peculiar case. The whole indicates great warmth of temper, inflamed by misappre- hension of its object and by mistaken zeal.' It is to be observed that Zophar has but two speeches, whereas the others have three each: When Job had replied (ch. xxvi.-xxxi.) to the short address of Bildad (ch. xxv.), a rejoinder might have been expected from Zophar ; but he said nothing, the three friends, by common -con- sent, then giving up the contest in despair (ch. xxxii. 1) [Jon]. ZORAH (ni?"l^, hornets' town ; Sept. %apa&), a town reckoned as in the plain of Judah (Josh. xv. 33), but inhabited by Danites (xix. 41), not far from Eshtaol, and chiefly celebrated as the birthplace of Samson (Judg. xiii. 2, 25 ; xviii. 2, 8, 11; comp. 2 Chron. xi. 12; Neh. xi. 29j. The site may still be recognised under the name of Surah, situated upon a spur of the mountains running into the plain north of Beth-shemesh (Robinson, ii. 339; iii. 18). ZURIEL (7SHlS, God is my rock; Sept. SoupnjA.), son of Abihail, and family chief or genesarch of the Merarites at the organization of the Levitical establishment (Num. iii. 35). It does not appear to which of the two great divi- sions of the Merarites he belonged. ZUZIMS (DH-ir ; Sept. HdvTi l> ^JP^S* "S" 2U ^-£^5i j^ w/" f^F ^P^^ U 1**W V^s^T* *v^JSfc! 8K^V^ ^ |S§* §R $ / I *^\:r iL.Z^ji^C rAi